{Sexual Intercourse (& Dream Nakedness) [continued (4)]}[14th August 1988]

[Redbook5:281-282][19880814:1540e]{Sexual Intercourse (& Dream Nakedness) [continued (4)]}[14th August 1988]

.1540

[continued]

This view* of heterosexual intercourse as an outward expression of the inner marriage – of hemispheres, on the Inner Circle – exposes the essential sterility and self-serving nature of homosexual intercourse.** It also suggests why adultery is risky – because it creates one such symbolic marriage where another already exists, and in a form which is likely to be transient, thus debasing the experience. It does not necessarily follow from this that polygamy is wrong: after all, the ‘male’ side tends to be more singular, the ‘female’ side more plural or fragmented: it is arguable that one male side could be expected to ‘lead’ a multiplicity on the female side (but not vice versa! – this may suit the natural tendencies of female and male respectively).*** But adultery which risks breaking up an existing marriage of female and male ‘sides’ is wrong, on this analysis.

*[See last previous entry]

**[BUT Trans Gender?]

[These views on homosexuality are not in accordance with the writer’s later views, & might in any case refer only to a particular aspect of male homosexual practice: see [Redbook5:303-305][19880817:1703]{Sexual Love}[17th August 1988], fn***, ****, & seq.]

***I am rather pleased, if surprised, to have apparently come up with a justification for male-dominated polygamy!

[ie polygyny. It could surely just as easily be seen as a justification for polyandry, ie ‘single minded’ (males) wanting to focus on one woman,‘multi-tasking’ females happy to run more than one male at a time. As to adultery, these views didn’t stop the writer having two widely-separated (and unplanned) adulterous liaisons when his marriage had been under severe strain for some time; and see next entry re possible relationship of opinions to position on Circle.]

cf [[Redbook5:303-305][19880817:0000]{Sexual Love]}[17th August 1988], 303-4 (presumably) as page-numbering corrected from] 301-2

[continues]

[PostedBlogger26122018]