Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: Cohousing vs intentional community

[Loren Davidson (lmd]

At 05:23 PM 2/3/95 CST, Rob Sandelin wrote:
> 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.

That's what I've been seeing a lot in this list and in two of the local Bay
Area groups in formation.  While it's not my cup of tea, I suppose the
"planned neighborhood" orientation at leasts gets people in the neighborhood
communicating with each other.  This, by itself, is more than happens in
most neighborhoods.

However:  I'd like to be on closer terms with some or all of my intended
neighbors, because that's the kind of community that *I* want to be part of.
In this case, I'd view the "CoHousing model" (which many of the groups in
here aren't necessarily bound by) as a means to an end, rather than the end
in itself.  I don't see any reason why this universe isn't big enough for
all of us.  So for me, apparently for Rebecca, and for others on this list,
any form of cohousing that we would consider living in would by necessity
include many of the aspects of an intentional community.  This doesn't mean
we'd force it on anyone else, just that we (I, at least) feel that it's a
valid option and should be treated as such.

>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.
Which is exactly what I don't like about the projects I've seen locally,
which are little more than condo projects with a fancy name and a higher
price tag.  When people are more interested in my financial statement than
who I am as a person (and I got this feeling from one intro meeting I went
to), I get turned off.

>  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.
Why do you believe that being in a community means giving up your privacy?
It *is* a "sweeping generalization", and not true in about half the groups
I'm familiar with.  Why do you say "in cohousing we are saying", as though
you are making policy for all cohousing groups everywhere?

And what positive function does it serve to allow people to be "unhappy,
destructive or unhelpful" if these attributes adversely affect the living
experience of others in the "community"?  How do you deal with people of
this sort once they're living in your new custom neighborhood?  Do you
ignore them until they do something you don't like, then call the cops?  Or
do you have some sort of conflict resolution structure in place within your
neighborhood, despite the fact that this practise smacks of "communardism"
as you describe below?

>
>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.  
True.  This is, IMHO, why we have things like wars, crooked politicians and
homeless people.  Looking at your personal "stuff" is what Jung would call
"embracing the Shadow".  I can't say I enjoy dealing with my own "stuff" any
more than you or the next person.  But I know that if I don't, problems in
my life that are connected to my "stuff" aren't going to go away.

>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.

Yep.  And growth isn't comfortable, regardless of what area it occurs in.  I
forget which philosopher type who once said something to the effect that
"the end of growth is the beginning of death".

I appreciate, Ron, your willingness to talk about where you are in this
area, and what you believe others believe.  That's the beginning of
understanding.  And if all that cohousing (by your definition) does is
create places where people *might* start to interact more with each other,
it is at least a step in what I believe is the "right" direction of creating
greater understanding amongst people of various types and stripes.

But, as Stuart recently posted here, I don't believe you have to be in an
"official" cohousing development to interact more with your neighbors.  And
I believe that if I'm going to spend 3-5 years planning a development with
people and perhaps the rest of my life living with them, I'm going to want
to develop strong friendships and bonds of trust with many of them, to the
extent that we *will" trust one another enough at some point to share
ownership of some items like washing machines, yard tools and even
automobiles, to share child care responsibilities and possibly home
schooling, to be living around people we can actually *rely* on.  At that
point, IMO, regardless of what you call it, you have community and you have
something that I believe will make life easier to deal with in many ways.

Respectfully yours,

Loren

_________________________________________________________
Loren Davidson 
lmd [at] beauty.batnet.com
http://www.batnet.com/beauty
This document made from 100% recycled electrons.