Re: Cohousing vs intentional community | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Rob Sandelin (robsan![]() |
|
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 95 17:24 CST |
Rebecca Dawn Kaplan made several points about poly relationships. What struck me was her use of the term intentional community in the context of describing cohousing. IMHO one way in which cohousing is often very different than other forms of intentional community is cohousing forms around building physical structures, capital improvements if you will, and this dominants the agendas of most groups. Cohousing has been very successful in building housing units, up from bare ground in 3-4 years. Cohousing IMHO has not been as successful in working the human dynamics beyond the construction process. Now this may sound really odd, especially coming from me, but what I seem to be continually finding is a certain kind of shallowness to the relationships people are willing to commit to. Sure I'll watch your kid and help you do a small chore. But don't ask me to help pay your mortgage or provide you with long term health support if you get aids. You're my neighbor, not my brother and this aint no commune. Sure, there is some great cooperation going on which is light years ahead of the standard neighborhood isolation. But few groups have any sense of common mission beyond vague notions of living together. Why are we here? Because it's better than there. Many other intentional communities are very mission focused and extremely committed to that mission. Since there is no real predefined notion of how people will relate to each other, and thats much too time consuming to deal with in face of all this development stuff, in most groups I know about, even the most basic of interpersonal issues splashes across a wide spectrum of feelings and opinions with no community action taken, because their is no central mission to relate at that level. In many intentional communities, the expectations for things like participation, interpersonal relationships, communication, etc. are very much part of the whole package, and if it doesn't work for you, you don't join or you leave. In cohousing we are saying, hey you can be private if you want. And what goes along with that are things like: hey, you can be pissed off if you want, you can be unhappy, destructive or unhelpful if you want to. In my admittedly limited experience, one of the common denominators of long lasting intentional communities, is that they have put in place ways to call people on their behaviors and feelings- good, bad and ugly. When someone does something destructive to a relationship, the whole community points it out and clarifies it and deals with it. From what I know, which is based on 6 cohousing communities including my own, cohousing groups don't do this much, largely because that's not what people signed up for. Most people do not want to look at their own negative behaviors, or really have to deal with anyone else's. In many intentional communities I have visited, that is a requirement to live there and that, IMHO, makes a huge difference in how people relate and what levels or relationships they would consider even talking about. So, that such a notion as poly partnering is not talked about, or dealt with much in cohousing, is no real surprise. This aint no commune and sex is really scary to honestly talk about and its so much more comfortable just to not. Rob Sandelin Making sweeping generalizations again based on his own limited experience and perception.
-
Re: Cohousing vs intentional community Rob Sandelin, February 3 1995
- Re: Cohousing vs intentional community areinert, February 3 1995
- Re: Cohousing vs intentional community Loren Davidson, February 6 1995
- Re: Cohousing vs intentional community Rob Sandelin, February 6 1995
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.