Monogamy: Is it the best we can hope for?

> A look at modern relationships

Emily Klatt The Sheaf (University of Saskatchewan)

M onogamy has long been the standard when it

comes to relationships, but it’s possible that different kinds of arrangements may work better for some people rather than a

conventional relationship.

Monogamy is painted as the ultimate goal for romantic relationships. However, as views on love and sex change, we’re forced to ask the question: is monogamy still something we should be aiming for, or are other forms of relationships— open, polyamorous, whatever you call them—a better fit for today’s generation of students?

I once made out witha guy who has a girlfriend.

Let me preface this by saying that he didn’t tell me about the girlfriend until after he’d kissed me. We were in a different city, at a karaoke bar. Both a little drunk, he told me I was cute, and then asked if he could kiss me.

But when he casually mentioned that he was ina relationship, I was horrified. Horrified might be too strong of a word, but I was convinced that I'd just become an unassuming accomplice in the biggest cheating scandal of the year.

What I’d missed,

however, was that the word “open” preceded the word “relationship.” This guy and his partner were okay with each other being with other people. Everything was cool. Everything, that is, except me.

I grew up believing in the idea of a “one true love.”

I’m an avid fan of Jane Austen romances. My parents have been married for over 20 years. | had a crush on the same person for most of high school.

Most importantly, I’m avery introverted person. I have a hard time sharing the most vulnerable parts of myself with one person, much less multiple people.

How could a polyamorous relationship ever work? Wouldn't you get jealous? Wouldn’t you run out of energy to love people? Wouldn't you get hurt multiple times?

The thing is, all of these problems can happen in monogamous relationships too. Just because you're committed toa single person doesn’t mean youre immune to difficulty.

I’ve met plenty of people who find happiness in open or polyamorous relationships, including close friends. They are able to fulfill their needs and wants in a safe and consensual relationship, just with multiple people instead of one.

Perhaps relationships

arent really about the number of people in them, but rather the affection and trust that exists between those people.

True love is often viewed as one of the absolutes in this crazy thing called life, but the truth is that it changes, just like everything else does. People change, and the ways in which we love them change too.

I've been on both sides of the equation, and I’ve figured out that—from what I know—I prefer to be romantically involved with one person at a time. That’s not to say that I don’t love many people, but I choose to invest most significantly in one.

I’m not set in stone. Someday, I might find myself better off with more than one partner, although it’s unlikely. The best way for me to love people may change over time, and I’m starting to be okay with that.

So back to the original question: is monogamy still the best can hope for? Honestly, I don’t really think the answer is clear. For some it is, and for others, it isn’t.

What is clear, however, is that most of us are looking for the exact same thing — to love, and to be loved, in whatever form that may come in. Everyone deserves a chance to be happy, and J think that’s an idea that we can all commit to.

Image via thinkstock

TransLink shouldn't add signage for invisible illnesses

> We can only properly accommodate those with physical disabilities, rather than invisible ones

Adam Van der Zwan The Peak (Simon Fraser University)

I. admit that I mindlessly sat in one of the fold-up disability seats on the SkyTrain the other day. I don’t have a disability, I just saw the empty seat on what looked to be a fairly full car, so I went in for the taking—mindful that | would give up the seat to any transit-goer who | knew would need it more than me. In other words, any transit customer who is either elderly or uses some form of apparatus to help with their mobility. However, after clicking through CBC’s website last night, I was given a small dose of reality, and perhaps a little guilt. I read a story about a young woman with severe epilepsy who uses the disability seating on Vancouver’s public transit amid the dirty looks from bystanders who are ignorant to her invisible condition. She uses the seats because there’s not enough room in the back to have a seizure

without getting hurt. She’s now calling on TransLink to provide proper signage for people with invisible illnesses, such as hers. The numerous times I’ve sat ina disability seat, I don’t recall ever being given dirty looks, but perhaps I haven't been paying

é

Zi

Image via thinkstock

proper attention to those around me. This might be a fault on my behalf. However, I do see a sadly difficult circumstance when it comes to asking TransLink to “properly” accommodate all customers on public transit.

The fact of the matter is

that invisible disabilities are just that—invisible. Unfortunately, the general public is ignorant of these issues, and that’s just the way it is. After all, how could they know? To ask TransLink

to update their safety signage

to include those with invisible problems is a safe request, but it’s equivalent to asking people to “be considerate” of others when using transit services, something TransLink already does.

And while this is a fair use of sign space, I’m saddened to say that many perfectly healthy people don’t take it to heart. The public in this city like to keep to themselves while they travel; most wont be bothered to keep an awareness of others while on transit, and most don’t want any part in drama should it occur.

The unfortunate truth is that if the transit-goers don’t notice there’s a problem, then the problem won't be solved. If you have an invisible disability, it’s best that you, yourself, make others aware by using your own

signage—whether it be a tattoo, a paper sign, or some other indicator. Yes, I understand that many disadvantaged people may feel “branded” or “outcast.” They may not feel comfortable publicly displaying their personal problems, and they probably don’t want to be reminded of them each time they use transit. However, it’s sadly out of TransLink’s reach to help these people. Invisible disabilities are a tricky subject to navigate when it comes to public spaces. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that when these issues meet the need for public recognition, they’re impossible to solve without somebody feeling violated or isolated in the end. While I'll be sure to leave the disability seat to someone else from now on, if I’m sitting in another space and you indicate to me that you need it more than I do, I will respect those needs. But you can’t expect TransLink to influence people to do this for you.