I hope it's monogamy.

we don't have to reinvent the wheel. There are a number of models to draw on...in particular look to the French and Italian approach and British aristocracy. There has to be a very deep commitment to the marriage, and marriage itself, for this to work.

where I fall now is that whatever shennanigans you or your spouse get into, sexual infidelity should not be grounds for divorce. Throw some plates around, but don't break up the family nor end the friendship.

If I was giving advice to a married couple, I would suggest that they lay out some ground rules for this early on.

If I was a female in a young marriage, I would divorce-proof the marriage by telling my husband that hookers are fine after age forty, if its an issue, but just don't get emotionally entangled with anyone of same social class, which would be threat to the family and friendship. I can't imagine any guy walking out on that deal.

For me this means strict limits on female associations, and the younger and more attractive they are, the more the distance. Certainly, never one on one coffee or heaven forbid, lunch. Fidelity is not a struggle for me as I married late (recommended for males), and got all that out of my system before settling down - and I have a very active imagination as to how such things can go wrong, or can damage the other person.

_________________
Does this PMR make my butt look big?

Wow! Short leash!

Multiple partners especially high risk partners equal higher chance of sexually transmitted diseases. I don't want my husband giving me chlamydia, AIDS, herpes, etc. It is part of the feedback system.

Heh heh! That takes Pre-nup to a new level! If only young newly weds could be so worldly in their foresight! ;)

the ruleset would have to constrain against specific behaviors that would involve these risks

_________________
Does this PMR make my butt look big?

Safest sex ever = NPMR sex. It should be promoted. Why risk it in PMR when you can do it in NPMR :)

What ruleset constrain are you talking about Randy?

Clau

_________________
"Every moment can be as good as you want it to be."
"Experience is the ultimate teacher."

> http://soprano.com <

well, you are either committed to the constraint or you are not - the leash is self imposed based on experimentation, feedback, and observation.

almost any association with the other sex within reason (conventional situation) begins the process of R-complex bonding which leads to sexual curiosity, and ultimately obsession.

Its just easier (less entropic) to nip it in the bud.

_________________
Does this PMR make my butt look big?

I am just using Tomspeak to describe safe sex.

I figure one should be able to figure out how to have adventures without bringing disease back to the home

the key is transparency and respect for all stakeholders

_________________
Does this PMR make my butt look big?

I saw a movie last Sunday: "For Colored Girls". It's high entropy (good not to suffer from it if you can). Shows how life can get hard to manage and shows how dishonesty can screw up big time (related to the quote).

Clau

_________________
"Every moment can be as good as you want it to be."
"Experience is the ultimate teacher."

> http://soprano.com <

Which is why I think it dishonest to promise to feel a specific emotion for only one person for a set amount of time.

That entire set-up Randy, is kind of disgusting, and sexist to boot. The woman must realize in advance that the man will require outside sex after x years if the marriage will work, and allow it with the constraint that emotions are saved for those in their same social class. Kind of ridiculous.
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.

I think marriage is evolving and it should evolve if kids are involved as a compromise to a best partnership towards the development of the life of the kid/s.

Not to defend men, but I see this story that repeats itself: Women: "You only want to have sex". "I want a serious relationship, I am not playing" (and then, they may be the ones that end up playing). This also goes the other way, less common I guess (just switch Women to Men). Let's be honest, there is a try to make something natural unnatural (or viceversa). As beings we are mainly about experiencing, evolving. We can love, but our love is evolving towards unconditional love. Basically, our "love" sucks, in general, because there is so much evolving to it. The key for me is honesty, and I think I tune to what Bette says regarding this. Let's not promise what we have trouble to follow through and just focus on giving the best love to the other and to others. That's how it should be.

Clau

_________________
"Every moment can be as good as you want it to be."
"Experience is the ultimate teacher."

> http://soprano.com <

A lovely being in NPMR giving love to other beings is considered something nice. In PMR a male or a female giving love to somebody that is not a "legal one" is considered:

1. a bitch.
2. a cheater.
3. a dog.
4. a low life.

...

Will this PMR ever evolve?

Clau

_________________
"Every moment can be as good as you want it to be."
"Experience is the ultimate teacher."

> http://soprano.com <

Im confused on what you mean by that, can you help me out?

_________________
I eat ego's for breakfast!
Sincerely, Ego.

I'd say he probably meant those words as possible names a free spirit in PMR would be called, considered per current social norms here, now while in NPMR it's all good with none of that man made social norm BS like marriage as it currently exists.
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.