BY THE WAY (in re Esperanza): Eve

I realize I could have been clearer about how that "Esperanza/poly-marriage" post came to be written, and what I hoped to learn from it. Partly I was unclear because I was operating on intuition. I wanted to see what kinds of arguments would have to be made to support "polyamorous" marriage: What would you have to think marriage is? What would you have to think it is for? Which arguments would strike you as valid or invalid? My main thing is fiction writing, not journalism, so the easiest way to get at these questions, for me, was to create a persona, live in her skin for a while, and see what she'd say to the obvious questions. Where would she feel like she's really getting a raw deal? What would she think she's earned, and why?

I'd be really interested to see which of her premises and argument-strategies (argh, that sounds more Machiavellian than I mean--I just mean which arguments she thinks are valid and which aren't) people agree with, and which they reject. (For one easy example, I think the argument(s) she makes about sexual fidelity are just kinda lame. They're not even really arguments--they're a kind of rote, moralizing condescension.)

I do think comparing Esperanza's premises and strategies to one's own would be helpful in the same-sex marriage debate, but it's also at least as helpful--maybe more--in other marriage-related debates: for example, whether government and/or culture should promote marriage, and how. What would be promoted and why?

So anyway, that's what I was trying to do there. If people find it interesting, please jump on in, since I do think there's more to say here; if not, though, I will accept it and move on!
posted by Eve at 8:15 AM | link

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home