Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

There is an interesting intention blog for 2009 ofPersonal-growth writer Steve Pavlina, author of Personal Development for Smart People.Steve is the first coach I heard about who publicly communicates such a decisvie step.

Pavlina announced his intention to begin a poly life in 2009, and this is getting widely noticed and commented upon.

Pavlina is treating it as a serious public experiment that he’ll be writing about.In addition to his articles so far, he and his wife have put up a long podcast about their — or rather his — poly intentions.

Re: Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

Thanks for sharing. Will be interesting to follow.

namaste

Re: Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

Yes..to make this highly controversial discussion transparent in such a personal way takes courage. Especially as Steve has big audiences who might be surprised in parts about this new chapter of his life.

This inititative deserves appreciation no matter how one thinks personally about this theme.

Re: Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

The man was very brave to make this admission.  Paricularly given his field.  However, after reading the rather long winded blog on the subject which amounted to attempts to justify and rationalize his decision, he made it obvious that he has missed the point of the sacred union of a man and woman altogether.  It is sad that he and his wife have two children.  I sound like I am judging him to be immoral.  No, I am not doing that.  I see him as greatly deluded and in love with one aspect of his life–himself. 

Re: Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

He may be deluded in many ways. Yes.
 
However he communicates publicly what very few dare doing.
 
The whole theme is embedded in minefileds. Lots of old mantras from the sixties and up to now are dusted.
 
An open-minded public discussion does not exist right now.
 
From time to time International Herad Tribune does heroic efforts to publish some scientific referencing to it.
 
What do women want?
 
As is true for musc in 60`s: it was and is ecellent and outstanding.
 
How to communicate these issues now? At beginning 21st century. free from ideology? And isms?
 
In the same free spirit but withoug outdated Utopian impetus? And integrating as much compexity as is needed? Liberating the rationale in it in an atmosphere of poltical, spiritual and sexual correctness?

Re: Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

Ideas regarding alternative life styles have nothing to do with finding one’s truth.  This is a sex obessed idea.  New Age rationales do not justify such a slanted and selfish view.  What do women want?  Every woman wants something different.  Give me a break. 

Re: Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

For me this article has nothing to do with new age.
And Truth always has lots of voices. Just compare the WHOLE spectrum here at Gaia alone. Not to mention hundreds of other forums and orbits.
 
Even finding ones truth has totally diverse colors. Just check the God Pod.
Every singele word, taken out of context is creating confusion and potentially disturbing. So I appreciate every single gesture to clear the fogs….

Re: Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

I agree, Truth has nothing to do with New Age.  I had taken your post to be making that assertion.  I did not intend to give that impression.  I agree, the world is full of many views and voices, many of them at Gaia, all of them equally true.  It is also filled with many that are not.  Sometimes there is no fog.  There is just erroneous thinking and living.  Notice, I did not say sinful or immoral–but indeed erroneous.  The guy is full of himself.  His dedication is to his own desires and he tries to justify it with mumble jumble about his growth and what another person can add to that.  Is it necessary to include a sexual liaision and polygymous relationship to one’s life to grow?  That is just plain bull.

Re: Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

Well..the world is great. We here in Europe have a more secular sight on the things. Especially Scandinavia and Netherlands.
 
This discussion would be another one if it happened in Europe. Even in France or Germany.
 
So I am pointing towards cultural specifics too.
 
Even in Buddhist or otherwise spiritual circles the positions are most diverse.
 
The new blog of Marc Gafni too discusses these in depth dimensions from point og Integral Kabbala.
 
www.marcgafni.com
 
Everybody can decide whats best for him or her.
 
We hear lots about unconditional love these day at  various Gaia Blogs. Would be interesting to refer this mindset to the themes of Steve Pavlina .

Re: Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

Good question - polyamory in the perspective of unconditional love. In my view unconditional love is all-encompassing and therefore not linkable to one specific person, meaning that polyamory is perfectly possible in a relationship fueled by unconditional love.

In my own relationship - at least for this moment - I/we choose monogamy. Simply because of the time and energy needed to nourish several simultanious relations. This may change at some time - Steve Pavlina has been married for almost ten more years than we.

Even in Denmark (where I live) this would attract a lot of attention. But very few from the academic or spititual communities would condemn this way of living. We tend to avoid judging each others ways.

Re: Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

Unconditional love means you love someone despite everything that they may do that is wrong.  Rationalizing how one can have so much spiritual growth if they just can have sex with another woman and that they really owe it to themselves to allow this experience, when they have two young daughters and a wonderful wife, is a load of crap plain and simple.  Anyone with half a mind, unless they are also looking for a rationale for this way of life, could see that.  What is it, men need Steve to lay down the ideology behind it so that they too can justify it to themselves and their wives?  They are willing to upset their entire family dynamic just to have another woman to lay down with?  But, oh, this is okay because it isn’t about sex, it is about spiritual growth.  How self delusional!  It is really about control and feeling like they are king.  With one wife, they are on equal footing.  With two both catering to him, he is the one calling the shots.  It all revolves around the man of the house.  Bahooey!
 
Frankly, my view of polygomy is that it is practiced by very weak socio-pathic men and even weaker women.  It seems to be something to which men with confidence issues are drawn along with women with low self esteem.  This is an observation.  I don’t base my opinion on what is in the press about the polygamous ranches and sects and the other issues that have arisen in those communities.  That said, it does not mean that my heart does not go out to them (well to the women and children more so than the men).  People in pain will grab ahold to anything that may make them feel better or stronger.  Polygomy is just one extreme example of this.  I don’t care how many countries it may be practiced in.  A load of bull is a load of bull.

Re: Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

A kot of polyamory is narcissism. Yes.
 
However in the deep layers of collective unconscious something new is emerging. And needs inspection beyond any old mantras.
 
The work of Marc Gafni, David Deida and lots of others indicate that connecting shadow, spirituality and sex is a big project.
 
The relationship between public and private spheres, between intimacy and public spheres id changing.
 
No single gorm of sexuality and eroticism isnt per se sacrosanct on the one side or not allowed on the other side.
 
The human brain is plastic as research is founding out more and more. And the forms of sexuality were always fluid last 10.000 years.
 
So i expect these discusssions will increase next years.
 
And this is a good opportunity to inspect deeply ones own insides.
 
 

Re: Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

Both of the individuals you cite are controversial figures whose lives and work and life styles has been attacked as being, well, a bunch of hooey and predatory.  Sprituality has nothing to do with the physical.  Yes, sex has been linked by the some religions as an opportunity to experience a heightened spiritual experience.  However, this is between two married people and has not a darn thing to do with multiple partners and is not used or linked to a justification of such activities.  Jim Jones portrayed himself as having a higher calling as well and thousands of people accepted it as well.
 
Forms of sexuality were always fluid for the last 10,000 years?  Yeah, well, a lot of practices were seen as valid over the last 10,000 that are now seen as barbaric.  So, you want to go back to the days of the caveman?
 
A deep inspection of my own insides tells me that using spirituality to justify primal drives, yes, primal, is an excuse for bad and selfish behavior by a bunch of horn dogs–yes horn dogs  You want to do this, then do it outside of the institution of marriage and family.   If I sound judgmental it is because the whole idea of using that which is a process of evolving towards a higher purpose and being and portraying the participation in this activity as evidence of maintaining  a deeper understanding of life, love, and the nature of the divine to justify being lost in satisfying one’s selfish desires is downright juvenile. 
 
At the same time, I will not deny that those lost in this stupidity can make positive contributions to the world.  Most great men/women have great weaknesses.  This is the nature of being human. Their weaknesses do not take away from their contributions nor do they make their obsessions healthy or correct.  Do I hate those that choose to do this?  Certainly not!  It is the activity which I despise and the use of gaining greater mystical understanding as an excuse that I find inexcusable.  In his blog, Steve Pavlina sounds like a whining brat begging for acceptance of that which he knows, or else why all the rationalizing, to be wrong.  His relationship with his wife and all that he has gained and the manner in which it has caused him to grow was the impetus for him to bring another woman into the bedroom?  Please! 

Re: Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

If it sounds judgemental, maybe its because it is judgemental?  ;-)

Anyway, I think you are pointing at important issues for this debate. There is - and certainly has been - lots of gurus and spiritual teachers, who have polished their ego and manhood in the name of liberation, using naive and devoted disciples. This has been thoroughly debated in the communities, and this behavior is not acceptable.

However I cannot see Steve Pavlina and his wife is doing this. When I read Erins (his wifes) blog, she seems to be his equal in thinking and doing, so for me it looks like two equal partners who have made a common decision. I don’t know if Steve have found a second partner by now, maybe Erin will be the first to share herself with the world (so to speak…)? That would be kind of cool.

Re: Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

If it is judgmental to say that an individual is full of it, then so be it.  If it is judgmental to say that a particular philosophy is full of it, then so be it.  Justifying bringing another woman into a marriage by saying “oh this is so spritually fullfilling”, “aren’t I so deep”,  “I am expanding my view of self”, is a load of huey. I know what is expanding around their home and it doesn’t have a darn thing to do with spritiual growth.  It is that man’s ego.   I went to her blog and what I found is a woman who is not happy with her self image and intent on losing weight to the point that she published her diet in detail.  I looked in the face of the smiling woman and saw someone who is not happy with herself. Who feels lost.  I did not see one word regarding STEVE’s choice to become live a multiple wife/woman life style.  It could be there; but, I did not find it.
 
Words can be put togeher in all kinds of ways that make taking a particular action seem wise and justified.  The despots of the world that have successfully deluded thousands, at times, millions of people are evidence to this.  What rackles me is trying to tie this life-style to spiritual growth.  If you want to do something, do it.  Don’t link it to the divine love of the Creator.  In the deep collective of human conciousness, something new is emerging.  However, it is a positively charged love between mankind for one another.  One that is without selfish desires. 
 
You know what makes Steve’s argument so blatently bizzare?  Spirit in essence is without physicality.  So, if it is judgmental to say that Steve, and any other man, that tries to tell his wife that he needs to expand his personal quest towards greater growth by bringing another woman into their lives, the wife should tell him there is a way that can be done that will bring about the greater happiness of all of them, and that is a divorce court. 
 
Seriously, publically writing how he loves and loves and loves her and yet he has considered divorcing her and has discussed this with her quite openly and she sat there and just smiled her way through it, the woman has bought a line of bull.  I would like to bring a group of wise old sage women to her home to give her a “get real woman” lecture.  I would also love to represent her in her divorce.  So, yeah, I have made a judgment, and that is that the man is a pig!  I think that there are other words that are better applied, those being discretion and discernment.

Re: Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

Opening,
 
I am a convinced transatlanticist. Everybody who follwed my blog in the last three year, can see this.
 
However there are differences. I posted this and received 35 comments. What I am writing is no mere opinion. its based on hundreds of trustful and honest conversations with friends from North America and Europeans in the last 10 years.
 
Society without God
 
Europe has a more secular attitude to all of these themes. Nothing more. Nothing less.
 
Best,
 
Albert

Re: Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

Albert,
 
That you received 35 comments to a post, most of Europe is following your path, or what you may call it, the whole world could be following the same line of falsehoods, and that would not make it anything other than false.  I refer you again to Sodom and Gramora (spelling). 

Re: Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

This discussion about the Pavlina Blog is of course minefield. Touches lots of personal AND collective shadow.
 
Lots of background can be found at:
 
www.marcgafni.com
 
Connecting the 3S`-sexuality, shadow and spirituality is amost complex endevor.
 
For me its not about Steve beeing right or not.
 
its about dealing with blind spots, traps, iluusions and projections, co-depency in relaationships and eslewhere, in a more transparent public way.
 
Overcoming drama, dilemma and deficit thinking.
 
I see that “I love you” is exponentially more spoken in USA than in Europe. its a kind of language pattern which is mixed up with lots of shadow. Using words like God, friends in the same way.
 
So the blogging of Steve Pavlina can be a healthy process for the his 10.000 or more readers too. Opening windows, doors, gateways and new inspection of sexuality in context of personal growth and dynamics.
 
Deep cultural developments are beneath the surface of thes themes.
 
Evolutionary and integral spirituality is a long journey. The process of discussions regarding Pavlinas Poly Blog will be very hot.
 
It can be a good opportunity for lots of people.
 
 

Re: Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

I went back to her blog, read a little further and saw the image that you refer to, Opening. Could be a little sad.

I am somewhat biased towards polyamory. Im not in any way saying that it is the way for each and every one of us to gain enlightenment, but I think that polyamory - like monogamy and ceibacy - are tools that some of us may find usefull on the path.
For these tools to work efficiently, somebody have to show the world how to use them. I have friends that live in celibacy, serial monogamy, polyamory and monogamy, and they are showing me how and why to do it (or not). Steve and Erin will have a similar impact on their - much bigger - audience.

Re: Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

Albert,
 
“I see that “I love you” is exponentially more spoken in USA than in Europe. its a kind of language pattern which is mixed up with lots of shadow. Using words like God, friends in the same way.”
 
This quite simply is not true.  We in the US are aware of the differences between love of mankind, romantic love, love as a power, and love of God.  To generalize about Americans speaking in a manner that equates the love of friends to the love of God is way off base.  The love of one’s friends is also different than the love one would feel for mankind in general.  The love of mankind is type of love that is very much linked to love of God and the One that is all of creation.  This is the love that links one to spiritual growth and the divine.
 
If you believe this about Americans, you don’t understand the first thing about the American psyche.  “Language patterns mixed up with lots of shadow” is a ridiculous statement.  For one thing, the US is made up of a wide variety of dialects.  There are those from the South, those on Southern islands that are spoken only there, those from particular areas of the South like Lousiana, there are those of the Midwest, there are those in Texas, there are those on the West Coast, there are those that are particular to the East Coast.  Don’t generalize Americans in this manner. 
 
The attitudes towards religion or spiritualism also vary a great deal according the the region to some extent.  We even eat different foods depending on region.  Not to mention that America contains many, many diverse cultures from all over the world.  Even within one region there are great differences.  For instance, many in the Black communities here use the English language as a Romantic language as opposed to the Germanic language that it is.  
 
Do you know anything about the US?  Do you know anything about linguistics?  Maybe it is just the Americans that have come within your circle that speak in this manner or those that are attracted to immigrating to Germany.  What was it your former Prime Minister said to the people shortly before he died? 
 
Are you suggesting that the German culture is more progressive and expansive in its view of love?  There are loads of people all over the world that would differ with you on that sentiment. 
 
I stick to my statement that living within a marriage while “exploring” the ‘growth” one can achieve through the relationship with another woman, is a bunch of nonsense.  Any woman that has a husband that attempts to have her agree to this, is suffering from serious self image issues.  The purpose behind entering into the institution of marraige is directly opposed to this lifestyle.  Marriage is to serve the purpose of experiencing growth through dedication solely to one’s spouse and offspring.  The two become one.  If you do not understand this is the whole lesson to be learned when taking marriage vows and living up to those vows, don’t do it.
 
I also stick to my opinion that entering or experimenting with polygamy is a dangerous path.  I refer you to the verses in the Bible regarding Sodom and Gramora (my spelling here is probably way off).  Most people refer to this passage as a condemnation of homosexuality.  In my view, it is not.  I have never understood where folks get that from.  The passage serves as a warning regarding the misuse of sexuality in general and the exploitation and oppression of others in genral and through sex.  Sex is often used as a vehicle of control and power.  The passage condemns all behavior and appetites centered on selfisness, greed, and lust.   This can be true of all forms of sexuality.  There is much love within both homosexuality and heterosexuality.  There are those within both lifestyles that use it as a weapon.  Polygamy poses a risk of venturing into perversion of the spirit.  I guess it all depends on the natures of the spirit one seeks to invoke and live within in one’s life.  If you want to talk about living in the shadows, polygamy or swinging, and the sense of enpowerment it may give one, is definately a way to get there. 
 
But then, this is just my opinion.  Anyone that wants to do this is free to do so.  Just be careful and mindful in the process.  As for Steve, the man is a pig plain and simple.  Examing his post does open up discussions, I agree with that.  However, common decency and the manner in which one treats others that they share a highly PERSONAL relationship should have stopped him from publically releasing this decision making process.  Honor, appreciation, and valor, should have prevented him from annoucing this, and his discussions with his wife regarding this, for public consumption.  Here is a great word for you, “abuse”.  It is a prime example of emotional abuse.  Some things only require common sense to know and understand.  No great questions of spirituality here.  Just one man that puts himself before his wife and family and that thinks he is so important that he is being a leader or a guide for others in doing so.  Like I said before, great self-delusion going on.  Apparently, the fact that he has 10,000 readers has gone to his head.  He just is not that important.
 
 

Re: Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

Why do we argue? No one ever really convinces anyone of anything they are not already convinced of.
 
Besides, we are all polyamorous. The word literally means “many loves”. We may express that love differently depending on the relationship.
 
It’s the same with passion. The same passion which drives the urge to merge can also be expressed in creative, athletic or career pursuits.
 
We have individual brains so that we can come to our own conclusions. Even if we don’t agree with one another’s conclusions, we may still honor them, and honor one another’s paths, as well.
 
At least, that’s the way I see it. But, what do I know? I’m not an authority on what you “should” think. I just see divisiveness here where I would rather see unity. Guess it’s time to do some soul searching to see where I am divided.

Re: Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

Celebriticat,
 
I think that you are quite correct.  What drove me to post regarding this subject in the first place was the original thread which celebrates Steve Pavlina’s choice to reveal to the world that he has decided to live a polygamous life style.  Of course, that is his choice.  However, my heart and mind could not help but go out to his wife and children.  Sometimes, here at Gaia and out in the world of spiritual folks, there are those that will justify bad behavior by clothing it in a search for one’s self.  Yes, by labeling his behavior as bad I am making a judgment call.  The way in which it is depicted in his blog is as a uniateral decsion made by him for his growth despite the fact that he is married and has two daughters.  It was as if he believes he owes it to himself to transform his family in this manner.  It is all about HIS growth, HIS spritual conquest and the whole family is to join in HIS pursuit.  Nothing there about THEIR needs, THEIR wants, THEIR growth, THEIR stability. 
 
Further, he reveals his discussions with his wife in this process.  It was an exercise in selfishness.  Do I label all exploration into this alternative life style in this manner?  I don’t know.  I never felt a need to explore this as I am a highly monogamous person.  I couldn’t even date more than one guy at a time.  I tried, I couldn’t do it and I mean just going out on a date and going home alone.  If I determine a man was worthy of getting to know on all levels, I gave that person the full attention of that aspect of myself. 
 
However, when reading what Steve wrote, I found no reason to celebrate it as the original responders to this thread did.  I found nothing honorable or intriguiging in his behavior or the decision to make it public.  I found it to be quite sad.  To be honest, I had gone to his blog once a long time ago.  I went to his wife’s as well.  From them both, I picked up a level of insincerity.  Why?  Just my gut instinct.  So, I never went back to them. 
 
Now, to see what Steve has determined to do as a man, a husband, and a father, and that his wife, according to him, is smiling her way through it all the while working very hard to lose weight, the whole thing strikes me as quite sad.  To think that there are human beings that can’t parse the reality of this through their minds and instead say, “yeah, go Steve, if he can do it, well all can”, well, that strikes me is sad and frightening. 
 
This life style, I would think, can be approached with more responsibility and less selfishness.  However, when one is already in a marriage and has children, it seems like an irresponsible exercise into selfishness and lust, at least to me.  I do agree that one can experience a sense of self enpowerment through sexual experience.  However, I believe that is heightened when one has commited one’s self to giving the self over to another individual completely and exclusively.  This is what marriage is about–what  person pledges oneself to when taking marriage vows.  So, if you don’t think this and believe it with your whole being, why get married? 
 
If what you choose to do is a statement that the height of love, sex, commitment to expanding one’s view of one’s self cannot be done through an exclusive relationship, don’t enter into the institution of marriage.  Leave it alone and explore whatever you want.  But, don’t cheapen the state of marriage and your relationship to your family.  If you find yourself coming to the conclusion that a monogamous relationship just doesn’t do it for  you and you are married, get a divorce, because in following this path, you are in violation of the marriage contract.  This is a human and legal reality.  To say that it isn’t is self-delusion.
 
The spiritual path is all about living and how you live.  It shoud inform your decisions.  If it doesn’t, then you aren’t on a spiritual quest and are only playing mind games. 

Re: Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

I guess the reason I celebrate what Steve is saying comes from my own personal experience. He said that if he knew then what he knows now, he wouldn’t have gotten married. I feel the same way.
 
 
 
I spent more than 20 years in a marriage that did not nourish me at all, but depleted me. This marriage became a prison of my own making. It didn’t become apparent until after we married that we didn’t even want the same things in life. But by that time, I had two kids, and I was determined that my kids would have both parents in their day to day experience. The result of staying in a marriage that depleted me was that eventually, even my will to live ran low. Emotionally and physically, I barely survived. When there is little will to live, the body begins responding by breaking down.
 
 
 
The reason I would be reticent to get into marriage again is because of the entanglement that makes it difficult to go your separate ways, even when the situation is not nourishing you both. That’s why I celebrate openness.
 
 
 
I will not say I am sorry I married, because at the time, it was all I knew, and I will not say I am sorry that I married the particular person I married, because the two people I love most on the planet came from that union. Furthermore, he is not a bad person. He just doesn’t know how to love, and he resisted all efforts I made to draw him into love.
 
 
 
And I, too, have always been sexually monogamous. For me, the thought of managing more than one romantic relationship at a time feels overwhelming. However, after several years of trying unsuccessfully to relate to my husband (Is it really a relationship when there is no real “relating” going on?), I would have loved to feel free to give my love to someone who wanted it. But I didn’t. My conditioning led me to believe it would be “wrong”. I cheated myself, through my beliefs, out of what I needed most when I needed it most.
 
 
 
I think that it would be healthier for everyone if, instead of everybody having to go their separate ways when someone’s heart desires to love another or to love more expansively, that person could feel free to love without breaking up the family.
 
 
 
That is just my view, born out of my own pain and observation.
 
 
 
None of us really know what is best for everyone else. I say that in love, because I would have taken the same view as you a few years ago. I have found that when I judge others, life puts me in a similar position in order to awaken my understanding. That’s just my course of study in this life.
 
 
 
Another thing is, openness about a situation brings everything into the light. It is much easier to see whether something is being helpful or harmful in the light. Hiding desires and wearing masks throws a shadow over them, which creates an environment conducive to hurting one another.
 
 
 
So, yes, I am grateful for Steve’s openness. I hope he discovers exactly what he truly needs, and that his whole family receives exactly what they need. I don’t think they are mutually exclusive.

Re: Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

A failed marriage does not mean that the institution of marriage is faulty.  It has its purpose.  Your description of your husband reminded me of my first husband.  It was his failure, and my reactions to his behavior perhaps, not an indication that the system was at fault.  Do you really think that opening up the marriage to include another as a sex partner would have changed the outcome?  It this really the answer?  Do you really think he would have gone for that? 
 
 
 
Once again, I believe that when you examine the institution, it purpose, it is clear that bringing another into the marriage bed is not consistent with the role of marriage in developing oneself and evolving within a relationship.  It is counter to those purposes.  Therefore, why get married and do this? 

Re: Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

I have stated my viewpoint. You have stated yours.
 
 
 
I won’t argue with you. It’s pointless.
 
 
 
When people stop needing to be right and righteous, arguments and their counterparts, wars, will end.

Re: Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

See this is the thing, I have no need to be right or wrong.  I really don’t.  My “viewpoint” is not necessarily a condemnation of polygamy, even though I do find it an odd way to approach “love”.  However, there are definates of what is best and wise for the human experience.  Not because our society as it currently is oriented says this is right or wrong, but because there just is.  Folks want to think that all is “open” and all is acceptable if we “think” or believe it is or a mass of opinion sees it this way or that.  There are definate ways to live in a positive manner.  Yes, that will change depending on how the individual views positive or negative.  Humans have basic needs that seek to be fulfilled.  There are ways that are more geared towards positive evolution than others and what is positive and what is negative to the human condition does change, but the needs, the make up of what it is to be human does not change.  The nature of the forces on the Earth, good, bad, positive, negative, are just that. 
 
 
 
Today, no one in Germany would say that Hitler was correct in his thinking.  No one would say that Idie Amean (or however you spell it) was correct in his thinking, or any of the other despots of the world.  Yet, millions of people followed them.  Do I compare polygamy to their actions?  No, they were extremes.  They just serve to demonstrate a point.  The nature of a woman is the nature of a woman.  Sooner or later, having two women in one household serving the role of wife, is going to bring about tensions that would not otherwise be there.  Do these tensions help them grow into holding a more positive view of themselves and of their place within the world?  What about the children?  How does it benefit their view of themselves and their place? 
 
 
 
In polygamy, the drive is to serve the man and meet his needs and having more than one woman present to assure that he is always satisfied.  You can say it isn’t about this, but that simply is not the truth.  Now, I happen to hold the view of myself that says, there is no man so much greater than I that would allow me to believe that he is worthy of having myself and another woman there to uphold his view of himself and any man that needs this is suffering from some major weakness that no number of women will stengthen.  The fact that he may at any moment feel a particular need that I can walk off and look to another woman to handle as I don’t feel like doing it at that moment, will change the nature of my relationship with him that brought me to be living in a home with him in the first place.  Hey, maybe I am too selfish.  Maybe my concept of myself is too high to allow me to give (if you want to call it that) in this manner. 
 
 
 
Wars will never end until people learn to live to the highest calling for themselves as individuals and to give that in every moment to another.  I fail to see how polygamy, concentrating on the sexual drives within the individual will do this.  It is a juvenile concept.  Do I need to be right in this judgment?  Nope, it is what it is.  I brought up Sodom and Gramora to illustrate that this idea of polygamy is nothing new and is not a new concept of living.  It has been tried and the results of it are reported in the Bible.  It was judged by the hand of God.  So, go ahead, do as you please.  I will not say you are “wrong”.  If it feels right to you, it feels right to you.  That does not cheapen your value as a human being.  It does make a statement regarding your view of yourself to yourself more than anyone else.  Maybe in some way it will be benficial to your development.  But, it is not “marriage” and I don’t understand why those inclined to do this insist on calling it that.  Maybe it is an attempt to legitimize it to themselves.  Not my saying it needs to be made legitimate.  I am saying those that are doing it feel this need. 
 
 
 
But, there are “rights” and “wrongs” and this cannot be denied.  I am not right or righteous and really truly have no need for you or anyone else to see me in this manner.  I just know that what Steve did was selfish.  Justify it all you want.  There are absolutes.  Failure to see this will bring on more wars not free mankind from them.

Re: Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

((((((((((((Opening))))))))))))

Re: Steve Pavlina And A New 2009 Intention

More from Steve Pavlina about his:

Adventures in Polyamory

The theme is discussed increasingly in public spheres in Europe too. For sure in German speaking media in Internet and conventional TV and Print. Osciallating between fascination, ignorance, humor and ultra-conservative and ultra liberal positions.

So Steve seems to show-once again. a certain instinct of unseen things in the air. Of communication in the crossover between private and public spheres.

Here a short excerpt from his Mar 30 blog entry:

“…

Biggest Challenges



The biggest polyamory challenge I’m facing may be somewhat unique to my situation. It has to do with privacy issues.



Erin and I have shared many details of our lives publicly. As I mentioned in the article Share Your Shame, I think it’s good to share your biggest mistakes with the world. It’s okay to be human and to accept yourself as you are. If you try to put on a false front, people can tell you’re being inauthentic. So just be real, and learn to live with the consequences.



Even though I’m a big fan of openness and honesty, I’ve had to accept that other people are not nearly as comfortable with the level of openness that I take for granted. Being so open about my life can create barriers to intimacy with others. My lifestyle demands a lot from potential relationship partners.



I can’t hide my public life from others – I’m too much of an open book. Some people may see this as a good thing, but for other people, it can be a scary prospect. I can’t go into details, but this has already been a problem in at least one instance…”

read more..