Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!umich!samsung!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!ucsd!sdcc6!sdcc13!pa1412
From: pa1412@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (pa1412)
Newsgroups: alt.sex
Subject: Re: Body count. . .
Message-ID: <6262@sdcc6.ucsd.edu>
Date: 20 Jan 90 03:08:30 GMT
References: <70181@tiger.oxy.edu> <690@banyan.UUCP> <11539@thorin.cs.unc.edu>
Sender: news@sdcc6.ucsd.edu
Organization: University of California, San Diego
Lines: 27

In article <11539@thorin.cs.unc.edu> bell@threonine.cs.unc.edu (Andrew Bell) writes:
>In article <690@banyan.UUCP> gil@banyan.com writes:
>>In article <70181@tiger.oxy.edu> mortisia@oxy.edu (Lynn Alyn Tanner) writes:
>>>How does the idea of group marriage strike anyone?
>
>A pure group marriage strikes me as problematic,  based on the interaction
>count.  In a 2 person marriage,  you have one relationship.  As the number
>grows,  you have:
>
># people	relationships
>   3		3
>   4		6

Actually my count is N * (N-1). Of course for some people the thought
of homosexual contact may not be included in the group marriage. But
just on an non-sexual contact level there is a 'relationship' which must
be accounted for.

OK so what. Daily you have relationships with others. You, if you
are mentally well balanced, don't worry about the N*M*....
interactions which can happen to you before you leave home. So why
not try to develop an attitude which can handle an intamate group
relationship???
--
John Clark
jclark@ucsd.edu
pa1412@iugrad2.ucsd.edu