Are you familiar with a duprass?
duprass – a karass of only two people, who almost always die within a week of each other. The typical example is a loving couple who work together for a great purpose.Cat’s Cradle, Kurt Vonnegut
Most of us have multiple connections, multiple obligations in our lives.
We all have to balance these connections, obligations, passions, etc. If I were to be the kind of person that wanted nothing but my master, I would have no need of anyone else. But he and I are not a duprass. It’s just not us.
Most of us are social creatures, as most humans are, and therefore we have many attachments. We care about more than only our romantic other. It does not make us love this very special, romantic person any less because of it. Even if we only have one such romantic person in our life.
I am fairly sure duprasses exist.
I have never met someone who fit that description, but so what? I’ve not met plenty of people. For that matter, I am sure some exist entirely content within themselves and who would find possessing even a single romantic partner too slutty and too much for their taste.
Perhaps it is risky– and toxic if forced upon one in any fashion including social pressure– but it is a valid choice. To live within only themselves and their One love. Content to let the rest of the world operate outside, or perhaps on the fringe, of their consciousness.
But I’m not sure that’s right for me.
Were my master and I to decide to be romantically exclusive today, not much would change as far as time commitment. I would still want to see my friends and my chosen family. I would still need my space apart from my master– and from everyone else. I would still need time for my family, my munchkins, my siblings, my parents, etc. I would still need to devote time to my writing and my business.
The truth is I need very little for myself alone. I love sharing, my time, my body, my mind. My words, my being. I know that is not what everyone wants, but it is my preference.
I think we all ought to share as much or as little of ourselves as we personally desire.
You may need to save more of yourself for “you,” thus needing everything left to give to your romantic other. Or perhaps you wish to devote yourself utterly to the One. Or perhaps you choose to share, somewhat, but to a degree. The degree to which you do is also your own choice.
But know that it is not a matter of finding the time. It is a matter of choosing what to do with that time. And it is a matter of your own personal desire and theirs.
Some may prefer not to seek out too much intimacy with others, but indulge as suits them (monogamish; open relationships with flexibility; non monogamous but not quite poly; and so on). Some like to live as I do. Some have even established a home with multiple romantic loves (something I aspire to, but have yet to quite put together). Or something else altogether.
I love to let each relationship flow however it feels right, without any limitations at all.
Emotionally, anyway. Time and space is limited. But I’ve never felt any need to restrict depth of feelings (if anything, I’m usually a bit disappointed they didn’t run deeper). It isn’t moral superiority to want…more. It’s a simple fact. I don’t want to assign a particular value to any one person, that is all. It may be everything, it may be hardly anything. Hopefully, it deepens to the furthest possibility, but if not that does not mean our connection is without value.
I simply don’t know what will happen with that person I met yesterday at the bus stop. Maybe it’s just a passing wave. But maybe it is a lifetime together. For myself, I don’t want to say what it will or won’t be.
I am perhaps silly to believe that there could possibly be two loves for me, let alone more. That would wish to share my life.
Still, I will be silly for a little longer. If I’m right, I’ll have allowed myself ultimate happiness. If I’m wrong, well, I guess I’ll have to settle for “only” a romantic partner, three kids, a loving family, and amazing friends.
I really don’t see the downside, either way.