If only I had this Gen Y rebuttle four years ago....

As a member of Generation Y, I am sick of being branded with the 'flighty, promiscuous, self-centered, unstable, egotistical, over-expecting' brush.

I will never forget the first true 'Gen Y' argument that I had with my Generation X friend as he openly slated the 'kids' from my generation. Whilst reassured that the discussion was not personal, many of the above adjectives were thrown around. Given that this debate occurred almost four years ago, and I am raising it today, it would be fair to conclude that it had a significant impact on me. Why? Because I felt that it lacked perspective and I felt that it lacked context.

Four years later, someone has raised a few very valid points that I desperately wish I had as ammunition four years ago. That person is Hugh Mackay. Yes, I experienced one of those 'damn it, I wish I had thought to say that' moments. If I could re-wind four years and have the same debate with my friend, these are just some of the points that I would have raised:

1. The very fact that Generation Y are the offspring of the most divorced generation in history might explain why many are:

a) commitment adverse - why would we commit when we have seen first hand the pain it has caused our parents?

b) tribally driven - why wouldn't we seek new connections and surrogate families (which are generally facilitated through online communities) to compensate for the highly fragmented world that we have been raised in?

2. Generation Y were raised to be 'wonder children'. We were taught to seize the moment, to never shy away from self-expression, that everyone has the right to voice their opinion and that the world is our oyster. Given this, is there any wonder that we have become more expecting, more demanding and more outspoken than previous generations?

3. I'm sure we have all heard the expression 'Generation Y don't understand money, they don't understand the implications of debt'. Hold up. We are the first generation to go through university knowing that when we graduate, we not only get to wear an over-sized Harry Potter cap, but are the proud owners of a big fat HECS debt. Unlike other generations, we are in debt before we even start working. This has made us more accepting of debt - it's just part of getting educated. And to further this point, I would like to add that society was living on borrowed money long before us Gen Yers got our first credit card. So, it would be fair to say that we have simply learnt from the credit card pros - our parents and Gen X siblings/relatives.

4. The world in which we live in is evolving at a rapid pace. Think social change, think technology change and think economic change. It's all happening and it's happening at a pace that makes our grandparents kiddy. Given this rapidly evolving environment, how would you expect someone to respond? The logical answer is to mirror the environment in which you live in - to stay as agile and dynamic as possible. And this is exactly what Generation Y are doing - we keep our options open in order to adapt when adaption is required. Be it study, career, travel plans, relationships, preferred music genre or religious beliefs, its all about keeping our options open. How can you expect Generation Y to commit when the world in which we live in refuses to?

Just as my friend's attack on Generation Y was not personal, I have not made my above re-buttle points personal. If I could re-wind four years, I would use the above points (thanks Hugh Mackay for the inspiration) to speak on behalf of my generation. I would provide some perspective and context. And as a result of my re-buttle, I would hope that my friend would think twice before he tarnished me or fellow Generation Y members with the 'flighty, promiscuous, self-centered, unstable, egotistical and over-expecting' brush.

A newly wed questioning monogamy?

Herbert and Zelmyra Fisher just celebrated their 85th wedding anniversary. Having recently promised my husband that I would be by his side ‘till death do us part’, their achievement has got me thinking. Upon reading about Herbert and Zelmyra’s anniversary in Tim Elliott’s SMH article and considering his musings, I have grappled with a kaleidoscope of emotions over the past 24 hours.

A couple of things that Tim commented on in his article have got me thinking.

Firstly, we should not use animal anatomy (i.e. the larger the male’s testicle size, the more promiscuity is hard wired into the species - as seen in chimps and baboons who have large testicles, therefore huge sperm production capabilities and are prodigiously promiscuous) to explain, rationalise or justify human polygamy. Why? Because such an observation fails to consider the complexity of emotions that are woven into human relationships and are absent from animal relationships.

Secondly, polygamous behaviour of ancient civilisations is an excuse, not a justification for polygamous behaviour in the 21st century. A ‘they did it, so why can’t we’ attitude doesn’t really cut it for me.

At this point, it would be fare to put me in the ‘idealistic newly-wed’ category. But keep reading, because I have a feeling that what I am about to write is going to surprise even myself!

Yes, I do believe that marriage is for life.
Yes, I do believe that it is possible to enjoy monogamy.
Yes, I do believe in monogamy over polygamy.

Having said all of that, I don’t believe that being in love means you are immune to the opposite sex. However, what’s important is how you chose to manage this ‘lack of immunity’.

From my perspective, there are three potential ways for someone in a relationship to tackle this challenge:
1) choose to run with your emotions, embrace polygamy (and its consequences) and possibly use the above points raised in Tim’s article to justify your actions
2) recognise your emotions, and then put them to bed. Value and be content with what you have rather than fantasise over what your don’t
3) recognise your emotions and find appropriate channels for them to be addressed that don’t impact on your relationship in the long term

Now this is where I surprise myself. My beliefs and values are a product of the society in which I have been raised within. Consequently, I would choose Option 2 as a way to address any ‘lack of immunity ‘ to the opposite sex that I may experience.

Having said that, I find myself strangely open to the Brazilian Mamuse described in Tim’s article – a designated festive period where adults are free to have sex with whoever they chose. Such an idea is a possible solution to Option 3. However, it raises the following questions:

1) Does setting timed ‘parameters’ around polygamy address any desire to be promiscuous in an otherwise monogamous relationship?
2) Is this time-out from monogamy enough to keep the ‘lack of immunity’ at bay, allowing for an otherwise fulfilling and happy monogamous relationship?
3) Would I be willing for my husband and I to participate in this festival?

I have raised a lot of questions - questions that I don’t necessarily have an answer to (especially my last question!). Importantly, I think that a newly wed couple, a middle age couple and an aged couple would have different answers. I’m sure a chat with Herbert and Zelmyra Fisher would shed much more light on this debate! The question that I am burning to ask them is: what role did monogyny and polygamy play in them achieving 85 years of marriage?