Steve's Midlife Crisis?

[quickheads]

I have been an avid reader of Steve’s blog since its inception, and I believe that it has helped me to view the world from a totally different perspective. I give Steve great credit for a lot of the personal and spiritual growth I have experienced over the past 2-3 years. However, as with any personal development guru, it is necessary to filter what the speaker is saying through your own experiences and either choose to incorporate, disregard, or worse yet comment in his forums about it.

Recently I’ve found myself mistrusting Steve, since he admittedly tends to choose the most logically optimal path, but ignore or dismiss the emotional consequences of his actions. We all witnessed this during his polyphasic sleep experiment, his juice feasting, and now most recently, with his ideas about polyamorous relationships.

Oddly, with the polyamorous relationship idea, the one experiment that will have the most dramatic affect on the people around him, Steve has decided to forego the 30 day experiment, and jump right in to the deep end of the pool! All of his posts to date about the concept seem, at least to me, to be his logic rationalizing a midlife crisis.

It’s time to call a spade a spade. Mid Life Crisis is not a new concept, although it might feel that way to Steve since he has never experienced it himself. But let’s be frank, Erin and Steve both are self proclaimed “dorks.” Both of them appear to have been pretty socially awkward in high school and college. The majority of their social interactions were probably with fringe groups of computer geeks and witches. Now that they have some measure of financial and business success, and the ego boost and popularity that results from it, perhaps they are attempting to relive some of those younger years where they wished they had been more attractive, and had more success with the opposite sex.

In their most recent podcast, Erin and Steve discuss “Hiking Activity Partners” and “Dancing Activity Partners” but it seems clear that Steve really is only interested in finding female “activity partners.” So on some level there is a bit of denial going on here. For example, I am currently building an airplane in my garage, which is an activity that my wife wouldn’t particularly enjoy. However, if I need help with a certain aspect of building my plane, I don’t necessarily need to find a large breasted blonde to be my “Homebuilt Airplane Activity Partner.” My point is that Steve could go hiking with a guy friend. Deep emotional and spiritual connections don’t necessarily need to be made only with members of the opposite sex. Either Steve is insanely homophobic, or there are other motives behind his search for a particular “Activity Partner.”

I think Steve’s logical side also allows him to quickly rationalize any perceived problems with the polyamorous arrangement. I noticed that he quickly dismisses the impact on his children and the impact of his wife of 15 years. When we attempt to take a purely logical or clinical approach to something as complex as human sexuality, human beings run into problems. The New York Times wrote the following regarding Kinsey’s work on human sexuality, “Any sort of scientific approach to the problems of sex is difficult because the field is so deeply overlaid with such things as moral precept, taboo, individual and group training, and long established behavior patterns.” These precepts and behavior patterns do not simply disappear because you have decided to embark on a polyamorous journey.

You must consider the ability of all of your partners to handle the concept. Will your “Hiking Activity Partner” be OK with just hiking? Your children might be OK with your guests if they’re vegan and play Halo3, but what are the social consequences for them in the future? Your wife might want to ensure your happiness by allowing you to experience sex with your dancing partner, but what if she has sex with her “Pool Cleaning Activities Partner?” These issues shouldn’t be addressed so flippantly and perhaps the “Ready – Fire – Aim” approach isn’t appropriate for use with your marriage and children. Despite having regrets over getting married, the fact remains that you are married. More people should take that commitment seriously.

I realize that I am bringing my own emotional baggage into this post, but I don’t think Steve is being completely honest and realistic about his own. I hope that I deal with my own mid life crisis a little better. I love my wife, and I would like to come out the other side of my own crisis still growing spiritually and emotionally WITH her. I’d be willing to bet that polyamorous relationships result in Steve’s divorce within the next year or two. After all, I think that’s what Steve is really looking for here. I just wish he would come out and say it!

Dan Yager
www.QuickHeads.com | Home | http://www.quickheads.com

[Savage]

Cool... I will add this to my every-growing list of remote diagnoses from people who've never met me.

I think this is my 5th diagnosed midlife crisis in 4 years. Apparently I buy them in bulk.

Now if you would kindly prescribe the cure...

Seriously, I do appreciate that you care about me. I'm touched by your concern for my well-being. However, in the future you may want to actually meet your patient before diagnosing him.

[million]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

Cool... I will add this to my every-growing list of remote diagnoses from people who've never met me.

I think this is my 5th diagnosed midlife crisis in 4 years. Apparently I buy them in bulk.

Now if you would kindly prescribe the cure...

Seriously, I do appreciate that you care about me. I'm touched by your concern for my well-being. However, in the future you may want to actually meet your patient before diagnosing him.

If you read 500 articles I've written Steve, you would know quite a bit about me too. We've heard your podcasts and we know what you and Erin look like, so we aren't 'diagnosing' a completely faceless entity.

I fully support you going into Polyamory btw, but it would be better if you were more honest about certain things, i.e you not being physically attracted to your wife. If that were true I just don't see why you'd go into Polyamory

[Ralph]

Originally Posted by million

If you read 500 articles I've written Steve, you would know quite a bit about me too. We've heard your podcasts and we know what you and Erin look like, so we aren't 'diagnosing' a completely faceless entity.

I fully support you going into Polyamory btw, but it would be better if you were more honest about certain things, i.e you not being physically attracted to your wife. If that were true I just don't see why you'd go into Polyamory

Well, I can't come up with better ironic humor than Steve, but ...

You know what Steve and Erin look like. So perhaps you just weren't attracted to Erin and assumed that Steve wouldn't be either? Why else would you mention you know what they look like, what difference could it make?

I sure am not attracted to many people's wives, but if they're doing as much cuddling as they claim to do ... and Steve doesn't seem like the bragging type ... I don't know, it would feel by far too empty if he wasn't attracted

[TropicThink]

Dear Lord Christ in Heaven, there's a lot of people making assumptions about this stuff. Didn't anyone tell you assumptions are the mother of all f@#k ups?

Anyway, as for me, my favourite soup in the world is Tom Kha Gai. You have probably heard about it and even tasted it. If ou haven't, let me briefly tell you that it's a famous coconut galangal chicken soup that some outrageously gifted genius in Thailand came up with at one particularly blessed moment in time. That the Tom Kha Gai is the best soup in the world is obviously beyond debate at this point. It just is. Done properly, it can pretty much be described as God in "soup form."

Now, even though I love my Tom Kha Gai just like any other top soup connoiseur, there's one thing that could ruin that relationship like no other: having only Tom Kha Gai, day after day, year in and year out, and never allowing myself to try another soup for the rest of my life. I think it's obvious that at one point I'd lose my love for Tom Kha Gai. Hate would grow between us, and at one point I'd find myself swearing that I would never have another bowl of Tom Kha Gai in my life. That's why me and Tom Kha Gai have an open relationship. I often find myself enjoying other soups as well. The other day, for instance, I had a Tom Yum Goong, which is another well known and superbly tasty Thai soup. It's great. Amazingly tasty. That being so, it won't ever replace Tom Kha Gai as my favourite soup in the world. Rather, by having Tom Yum Goong (as well as tomato soup, Goulash soup, lobster soup, coconut curry laksa soup, lentil soup, fruit soups, oxtail soup and all kinds of other soups) now and then, I ensure that my love for Tom Kha Gai is a life-long one that will never end. And that's something that brings peace to my heart, since I could not possibly live without Tom Kha Gai.

Anyway, you get my point. I gotta get something to eat now.

[Savage]

Originally Posted by million

If you read 500 articles I've written Steve, you would know quite a bit about me too. We've heard your podcasts and we know what you and Erin look like, so we aren't 'diagnosing' a completely faceless entity.

I fully support you going into Polyamory btw, but it would be better if you were more honest about certain things, i.e you not being physically attracted to your wife. If that were true I just don't see why you'd go into Polyamory

You'd be surprised. People who've read everything we've written and listened to every podcast and then finally meet us in person often say something like, "This is so weird. You guys aren't quite what I expected. It's so strange watching you to talk about X, Y, Z. I had no idea this is what you guys are like in real life."

What happens then is that such people understand our online communication in a whole new light.

A lot of communication is completely non-verbal.

[Jack Christopher]

I've read Steve since nearly the beginning. I can remember binge reading the site for three days straight. I've even met him in person. His jump to polyamory was not shocking, it was the obvious next step.

I asked about the issue late last year, to a ho hum response. Which I couldn't figure out ... now I know why!

But I do agree with you, polyamory is probably a phase. But I disagree with your reasons. Knowing his history, he'll discover an better way to love more, and jump to that. I can already think of how that going to happen.

Newer readers don't have context to make good judgments of character. I've seen him evolve since early '05. Steve becoming polyamorous for kinky sex is laughable. It's simply too inconsistent with his developed philosophy.

But I have been shocked before. I never thought I'd be reading about Steve's bowel movements.

[JeromeX]

Originally Posted by TropicThink

Rather, by having Tom Yum Goong (as well as tomato soup, Goulash soup, lobster soup, coconut curry laksa soup, lentil soup, fruit soups, oxtail soup and all kinds of other soups) now and then, I ensure that my love for Tom Kha Gai is a life-long one that will never end. And that's something that brings peace to my heart, since I could not possibly live without Tom Kha Gai.

Anyway, you get my point. I gotta get something to eat now.

How the hell do you compare drinking soup with having sex?

The objects that you are f@#king up have consciousness. The soups that you are sucking up have no consciousness. That is the difference.

[TropicThink]

Originally Posted by JeromeX

How the hell do you compare drinking soup with having sex?

The objects that you are f@#king up have consciousness. The soups that you are sucking up have no consciousness. That is the difference.

Haha, prove that Tom Kha Gai has no consciousness! I dare you!

[Andreas]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

Cool... I will add this to my every-growing list of remote diagnoses from people who've never met me.

I think this is my 5th diagnosed midlife crisis in 4 years. Apparently I buy them in bulk.

Now if you would kindly prescribe the cure...

Seriously, I do appreciate that you care about me. I'm touched by your concern for my well-being. However, in the future you may want to actually meet your patient before diagnosing him.

Those come 5 for the price of 1 now, right?

I've been shopping around but it's hard to find a better deal than that!

If only they came with built-in pseudo-cures.

[million]

Originally Posted by TropicThink

Now, even though I love my Tom Kha Gai just like any other top soup connoiseur, there's one thing that could ruin that relationship like no other: having only Tom Kha Gai, day after day, year in and year out, and never allowing myself to try another soup for the rest of my life. I think it's obvious that at one point I'd lose my love for Tom Kha Gai. Hate would grow between us, and at one point I'd find myself swearing that I would never have another bowl of Tom Kha Gai in my life. That's why me and Tom Kha Gai have an open relationship. I often find myself enjoying other soups as well.

Totally +1 to that, that's my i'm in support of Steve trying polyamory and I sympathise with him. Its something he should've done long time ago. I'd even advocate a divorce and my guess is that this would happen sometime in the future.

Originally Posted by Ralph

but if they're doing as much cuddling as they claim to do ... and Steve doesn't seem like the bragging type ... I don't know, it would feel by far too empty if he wasn't attracted

May be he is feeling empty, and that's why he's going for polyamory? (i cant spell this word)

[JeromeX]

Originally Posted by TropicThink

Haha, prove that Tom Kha Gai has no consciousness! I dare you!

OK, I give up. Gotta to learn some Quantum Physics first. Or should I meet your Miss Tom Kha Gai personally in order to approve that she has no consciousness?

[SimonaRich]

Hi Quickheads

I love your logic. Very great post, your writing style fascinates me. As I have recently started my own website, I will learn from your unique writing style.

About Steve. Firstly I want to say that I learnt a great deal from him. I really appreciate that his website is full of free articles that other authors would definitely charge for. Everyone can raise their consciousness by reading such posts. I certainly did, although I read many other personal development books too.

I really tried to understand why Steve made such a decision. But the problem is I cannot think at his level of consciousness, as I am at the Acceptance level which is two levels below Steves' consciousness (considering that he is in Love level of conscousness).

I know it is wrong to judge people that are on higher consciousness level than you currently are. I have made such mistake before. You think that someone is doing plainly stupid things, but when you raise your consciousness to that level, you suddenly realise that those things were not stupid at all. Actually you start doing them too.

So it is hard to decide why he made such turn. Of course, I don't say that your argument is wrong.

However, the midlife crisis mainly happens to those men that are on quite low consciousness level and try to be happy by buying stuff instead of improving themselves internally. That certainly does not apply to Steve

Thank you for your insights and have a lovely evening (9.21pm London time)

[hithere]

Let's try not to pretend to know Steve. A lot ahppens behind the scenes of life.

On that note, Mr. Rogers (God rest his soul) agreed

YouTube - Fred Rogers - Archive Interview Part 1 of 9

[jendoe]

Hi Quickheads!

I agree that we shouldn't listen to any "guru" and blindly accept what they say. Nobody's perfect, nobody is right 100% of the time. It's just not possible, and even if it were, sometimes there are no "right" answers - and what is a fabulous solution for one person is impossible, or dangerous, or just plain dumb for someone else.

(I also don't think I've ever seen anything from Steve to suggest that he thinks everyone should do exactly what he's doing, or that he has all the answers. Thank goodness!)

...Oddly, with the polyamorous relationship idea, the one experiment that will have the most dramatic affect on the people around him, Steve has decided to forego the 30 day experiment, and jump right in to the deep end of the pool!

This really struck me. It sounds to me like you're saying he's jumping in blindly, without doing any kind of trial. But, from what I've read, I just can't believe he'd make a serious, unbreakable committment to this lifestyle without testing it first.

I mean, seriously, he tests everything. He's one of the few people who really seems to thoroughly try things out, and actually observe the results, and then make decisions based on those.

My hunch is that - if he gets into it and it's clearly not working, he'll modify. He doesn't appear to be masochistic enough to say, "geez, this is really messing up my life and causing all kinds of problems, but I had better stick with it, just to show those people who told me it would be a disaster how wrong they were!" if it's a disaster, he'll stop, or he'll modify what he's doing.

...But let’s be frank, Erin and Steve both are self proclaimed “dorks.” Both of them appear to have been pretty socially awkward in high school and college. The majority of their social interactions were probably with fringe groups of computer geeks and witches.

You say all that like it's a bad thing. At any rate, apparently I too am a big, huge dork. At least now I know!

My point is that Steve could go hiking with a guy friend.

Yup, he could! But, really he's looking for something different that that. It was weird to me too first, because the whole thing was couched as "I want to connect with more people" and really, he wants to connect with more women. Nothing wrong with that, but it was a bit muddled at first (to me).

One other thing that occurred to me though. We can't ever really predict what we'll learn from our experiences. (I suppose if we could, we wouldn't need the experience in the first place.)

It makes me wonder if this experience is something he needs to later learn something else. For example, maybe he goes out into the polyamorous world, and after a year realizes that - despite having formed some great new relationships - there's still something that he's not getting. Which leads to some new path of growth that is currently unavailable to him. Who knows?

Deep emotional and spiritual connections don’t necessarily need to be made only with members of the opposite sex.

No argument here.

[quote]
Either Steve is insanely homophobic, or there are other motives behind his search for a particular “Activity Partner.”

Anyway, I know you acknowledged your own "baggage" - I think we're all doing that. And then I realized, this has absolutely nothing to do with me. And honestly, in the end, if him and his wife agree to it - why shouldn't they give it a try?

Just some random thoughts...

[Trezker]

I think it's pretty clear that Steve has committed his life to "midlife crisis", that's what personal development is all about.

What is midlife crisis if not an effort to do some personal development after neglecting it for half your life?

Steve is so committed to personal development that his whole life looks like one huge midlife crisis.

[Savage]

Originally Posted by Trezker

Steve is so committed to personal development that his whole life looks like one huge midlife crisis.

Lol. At least it keeps me out of jail.

[The David]

Why does everyone keep assuming Steve isn't attracted to Erin? What difference does it make how attractive a woman is if her husband wants to have sex 24/7, or something, or if he's kinky and she isn't, or whatever else it is? I mean, come on, when men have affairs it's often with a much uglier woman. If Steve starts dating this woman, will you finally admit that you're the ones who don't find Erin attractive?

Incidentally. . .how can Steve have a midlife crisis when his life drastically changes every year? His version of a midlife crisis would probably look like most of our ordinary lives.

[Savage]

Perhaps some people don't like 42DDs and can only handle B-cups?

[Gregorz]

I've had a lot of similar times where I've started doubting Steve, during the two years I've been reading his blog. I got hooked initially by reading articles like how to be an early riser and the polyphasic sleeping blogs. Then as I started reading the more 'far-out' stuff like subjective reality and intention-manifestation, I began to dismiss him as crazy. For long periods of time I stopped reading the blog - but I eventually went back after periods of growth, looked at the articles which had previously made me turn away, and found that I now agreed with them. Each time it was a different thing that planted the seed of doubt.

Ironically enough, it's his most recent and controversial articles about polyamory that have removed the last traces of doubt from my mind. It's a subject I've always felt strongly about, even as a kid. When I read the articles, it basically seemed like he was saying the things I've always argued (though in my teenage years, whilst I still saw the logic in my arguments, I assumed that I must have gone wrong somewhere since everyone else disagreed with me. I now see that I should have trusted myself). The fact that he had the courage to assert those things at great risk to his own reputation and business was like a final confirmation to me that he couldn't be running this blog for selfish reasons (not that I had much doubt left at this point).

My advice is not to blindly adhere to Steve if you honestly disagree with him. Don't try to repress your opinions - just accept them, and keep thinking and growing anyway. If you're anything like me, down the road some of the stuff he's saying might start to make sense. In the meantime, don't stress over it too much.

[Trezker]

Originally Posted by Gregorz

I've had a lot of similar times where I've started doubting Steve, during the two years I've been reading his blog. I got hooked initially by reading articles like how to be an early riser and the polyphasic sleeping blogs. Then as I started reading the more 'far-out' stuff like subjective reality and intention-manifestation, I began to dismiss him as crazy. For long periods of time I stopped reading the blog - but I eventually went back after periods of growth, looked at the articles which had previously made me turn away, and found that I now agreed with them. Each time it was a different thing that planted the seed of doubt.

For me it was the opposite. I discovered the blog when there was tons of stuff written already and I went through it front to back, or was it back to front..., in pretty much a reading marathon. Just about everything he had written made sense to me, it made my vague thoughts more structured and gave me many new ideas.

The subjective reality stuff especially gave me a big aha! moment as it gave me a breakthrough in how to think about reality. I had some loose theories myself before, but this helped me to see how it could actually work. My own theories had the big problem of god/the supercomputer being a superentity that had to have been created by something else in turn. But the thought of consciousness being the source of everything solved the problem. I no longer saw a need for a creator of a creator infinity problem.

[Fullcrum]

Funny .

I don't think you guys should put him on a pedestal so much. He's a person just like us, cut from the same cloth.

It's silly to see emotions provoked by his *startling revelation* about the direction he's taking his relationships. In fact, it's kinda funny.

This is the same celebrity-guru syndrome that keeps magazines like USA Today and the Enquirer swimming in a vat of money.

I mean sure, drama gives Steve traffic and keeps him in business. But please, for your own sanity, use Steve's articles as a catalyst for your OWN growth and stop following him like a puppy waiting for a treat.

It makes you look like a self-help junkie.

==============================

Nevertheless I am amused by the drama. The show must go on!

[RT Wolf]

Let's play a game. Say you see someone walking down the street wearing garlic around his neck, a cross, carrying a water bottle marked "Holy Water" and a bandolier with wooden oak stakes. You could reasonably infer that they believe in vampires. But, let's say you stop them and ask them, "hey why do you have all that stuff? Are you afraid of vampires?" They might reply, "No, vampires don't exist. Don't be silly."

You might then be inclined to overrule his assertion that he does not believe in vampires and say that his behaviour indicates a belief in vampires. What you've done there is looked at his behaviour and inferred his motivations and beliefs that may lead to that behavior based on your own lens. Other people are insanely complicated, just like you. So when you're trying to understand another person, you often have to bring in large amounts of yourself to fill in the gaps. You can read Stumbling on Happiness for more info on this. We do this all the time, we have to. We usually have only the behaviour or actions of another person with which to infer their beliefs and motivations.

Furthermore, let's say this person decides to explain his motivations and says, "I'm actually a priest, that's why I'm carrying the holy water and cross. I'm going camping and these wooden stakes are tent pegs. I'll be doing some cooking there and that's why I have this garlic." Would you overrule him and say, "No. You don't know yourself and you don't know your own motivations. You believe in vampires even though you say you don't"?

Some critics are essentially claiming, "Steve, you don't know your own motivations. The real reason you're doing this is x, y and z." You can fill in x, y, z here being "not attracted to Erin", "selfish and just harming others for your own selfish reasons", "just wanna sleep around", "having a midlife crisis", etc.

I've been reading his blog since pretty much when he started it. However, I don't yet have the arrogance to claim I understand Steve on such a deep level and especially that I understand Steve better than he does. However, one thing that I have learned is that Steve is about the most self-aware individual I know, as well as one of the most honest. So the suggestion that he may not be aware of his own "real" motivations for this move, or that he's burying the "real" reasons for this move is laughable. I think that, "I want to have sex with other people" is far less damaging to him than say, "religion is spiritual immaturity", believing that your thoughts can "magically" change the world, taking responsibility for the death of some murder victims that he wasn't even near, admitting that he stole for a long time and that he got off scot free through an error, etc.

Let's play the same game now with the OP. He's been kind enough to put in his name up and two links to his website. Instead of replying to one of the other threads on this issue, he opened up his own thread, drawing more attention to himself. He has also not replied since he started the thread. From his behaviour, I'm going to infer that he doesn't really care about the issue one way or the other, he simply wanted to promote his site among like-minded people. If the OP claims that was not his motivation, I'm going to assert that he doesn't really know his motivations and that I know his motivations better than he does. Fair enough?

If you feel that this post has value in these discussions, feel free to simply link to this post in other discussions.

[quickheads]

Well Wolf. I appreciate your diagnosis as well, having never met me, I would say it was pretty spot on.

As I said, I brought my own emotional baggage to my post, and was raised by a single mother. I know the pain and suffering that divorce can bring, especially to children. In fact, my current wife is my second. I was genuinely concerned for Steve, Erin, and their children. Even though I've read most of Steve's blog posts and listened to all of his podcasts, I do not claim to know him at all. However, I do believe that he has the best of intentions for proceeding along the path he's chosen. However, I've also learned that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

I have found, in my personal experience, that a committed monogomous relationship, although at times difficult to maintain, is the most fruitful path to personal and spiritual growth. Biologically, I don't think men are wired to be monogomous, which makes it tempting for us to rationalize wandering between multiple partners. (I have yet to figure out how women are wired.)

At any rate, given the thoughts above, I DO NOT find any of this laughable. I still think it's quite possible that Steve is unaware of his underlying motivations. Despite Simona's assertion that Steve is on the higher concious level of love, I'm not convinced he's there yet. (How the hell would I know from whatever lower consciousness level I'm at?) So part of my reasoning behind posting with a negative tone was to get a better feel for where Steve is at. I'm probably wrong again, but it seems that the quickest way to get Steve to respond to a post is to disagree with him, or say something negative about his ideas. (At least it proved to be true here.)

I have tried to refrain from posting responses in this thread, so that I could take some time to reflect upon what people were saying. You're all probably right. I should keep my mouth shut, let Steve learn from his own experiences, and allow myself to continue to learn from them as well. I truly am concerned, but I must learn to let go. The bumps and bruises, are why we've embarked on the journey in the first place.

As for generating traffic to my website? It didn't work, but I'm still glad I started this post!

BTW: I think Steve and Erin are both beautiful people. (Physically and Spiritually) Steve is right though, I couldn't handle the 42DD's. (The B's have me smitten.)

Namaste all,
Dan Yager

[sk8joyful]

Originally Posted by quickheads

re "Steve's Midlife Crisis?"

Steve believes... in a "mid"-life ? Naw, I doubt that. That would be silly!

[DeRocky]

Originally Posted by quickheads

I have found, in my personal experience, that a committed monogomous relationship, although at times difficult to maintain, is the most fruitful path to personal and spiritual growth.

This statement implies that you have experience with committed non-monogamous relationships. (And you haven't mentioned such experiences though you seem to have had some?)

Your lengthy diagnosis of Steve's "problem" is almost certainly flawed in various respects. Probabilities suggest that you might be right about one or two things, but certainly the more you elaborate the more "off" you're bound to be.

For starters, while it's very fashionable to bandy around the term "midlife crisis" there's practically no pscyhological research supporting the idea that midlife is more prone to crisis or personal-identity upheaval than any other stage in life.

Like practically anything else in life - if you feel deeply satisfied with your relationship and committment to it - that's absolutely wonderful. But Erin & Steve certainly have the right to choose and explore aspects of themselves and their relationship and decide on what is deeply satisfying for them.

You can not possibly know (as you asserted in the above quote) what is the "most fruitful path for spiritual growth" for everyone.

Finally, your coupling of the words "committed" with "monogamous" seems (to me) to suggest that the two are inseperably linked. And yet Steve and Erin have both revealed many times that they feel deeply committed to each other, deeply in love. In fact, through a particularly liberal lens one could say that this relationship choice is an affirmation of this very committment.

I don't know if that's the case (and neither do you), but there is only a limited amount of information. And after all, why does either of us care?

Best of luck to both of them.

[hayden tompkins]

"Perhaps some people don't like 42DDs and can only handle B-cups? - Steve Pavlina"

HEAR HEAR!

My husband tells me that anything more than a face-full is a waste. To each, their own. I'm just saying.

[Savage]

Originally Posted by hayden tompkins

"Perhaps some people don't like 42DDs and can only handle B-cups? - Steve Pavlina"

HEAR HEAR!

My husband tells me that anything more than a face-full is a waste. To each, their own. I'm just saying.

I've always preferred abundance instead of scarcity.

[sk8joyful]

Where's Steve?