I agree with him as it happens. Polyamorous or 'polyphonic' as we call it in our house, conjures up the thought of someone who is selfish and likes to sample many 'goods' at once. Making up a name doesn't change it.
If it is important to you to explain it to me then you should find the source.
You said that you would like the source, feel free to use a search engine, I've given you the ground work. For someone who doesn't like anti-intellectualism, you don't seem too eager to research (unless it supports your own agenda apparently)
You said that you would like the source, feel free to use a search engine, I've given you the ground work. For someone who doesn't like anti-intellectualism, you don't seem too eager to research (unless it supports your own agenda apparently)
If I want to provide a source for something I am trying to convey I will find one.
Everyone has their own moral compass. Morality is a very personal thing in my view and if you are comfortable in yourself about your behaviour then it's not up to anyone else to decide whether you are moral or immoral.
No, it's more moral to be monogamous and stay faithful to your partner
This is the perfect misunderstanding of polyamory. There isn't one partner to be faithful to, and in polyamorous relationships, no one is "cheating".
As far as morality goes, polyamorous relationships are not even PRIMARILY about sex, although sex will often be involved. These are primarily loving, intimate, emotionally rich relationships, above and beyond friendship.
Polyamorous people in my experience are no less moral than anyone else, and are extremely serious and self-reflective about their lifestyle. To call them "sl*ts" and "sl*gs" is, quite literally, ignorant.
I can see why you're bored, your original plan was to spout off a load of leftist opinions while we gather around to listen to your 'wisdom' but when others start picking holes in it, you're not interested in listening. Thanks for the last word anyway, very generous. Let's see if you mean it
I can see why you're bored, your original plan was to spout off a load of leftist opinions while we gather around to listen to your 'wisdom' but when others start picking holes in it, you're not interested in listening. Thanks for the last word anyway, very generous. Let's see if you mean it
This is the perfect misunderstanding of polyamory. There isn't one partner to be faithful to, and in polyamorous relationships, no one is "cheating".
As far as morality goes, polyamorous relationships are not even PRIMARILY about sex, although sex will often be involved. These are primarily loving, intimate, emotionally rich relationships, above and beyond friendship.
Polyamorous people in my experience are no less moral than anyone else, and are extremely serious and self-reflective about their lifestyle. To call them "sl*ts" and "sl*gs" is, quite literally, ignorant.
I'm sorry but most of what you have just said makes no sense. Alex Comfort who wrote "The Joy of Sex" commented after experimentation in various fields, that multiple partner scenarios don't work. The reason for that is - according to his observations - humans beings can't truly separate themselves emotionally or psychologically from monogamy. In short one or more people in such relationships form bonds that would normally require exclusivity. He also noted that none of the relationships were likely to last long term or be ultimately be satisfying.
So pretty it up how ever you like polyamorism goes against human nature, and is about the selfishness of one or more people who like to get around.
I'm sorry but most of what you have just said makes no sense. Alex Comfort who wrote "The Joy of Sex" commented after experimentation in various fields, that multiple partner scenarios don't work. The reason for that is - according to his observations - humans beings can't truly separate themselves emotionally or psychologically from monogamy. In short one or more people in such relationships form bonds that would normally require exclusivity. He also noted that none of the relationships were likely to last long term or be ultimately be satisfying.
So pretty it up how ever you like polyamorism goes against human nature, and is about the selfishness of one or more people who lie to get around.
So DS:BB, Alex Comfort has written this in a book. You have been told, and on her exit, the police should ensure Jade reads it and reshapes her thoughts accordingly.
The book was first published 43 years ago. Like Lieutenant Pigeon also from 1972, the world has moved on.
if you dont know who Alex Comfort and Lieutenant Pigeon are, exactly.
So pretty it up how ever you like polyamorism goes against human nature, and is about the selfishness of one or more people who like to get around.
I find it really odd that people feel that anyone's life choices, as long as they are within the law, need justifying.
If a person wishes to sleep with more than one partner and are open and honest about that and up front with their sexual partners I see nothing wrong with those actions at all.
Polyamourous may (or may not) be a real condition/life choice, but Jade certainly isn`t it. She has read it somewhere & thought it would make her seem interesting, but when she was put on the spot to define exactly what it meant, everything she said about herself completely contradicted what it would mean to be polyamourous, She then tried to justify that & made herself look like a total idiot.
So DS:BB, Alex Comfort has written this in a book. You have been told, and on her exit, the police should ensure Jade reads it and reshapes her thoughts accordingly.
The book was first published 43 years ago. Like Lieutenant Pigeon also from 1972, the world has moved on.
if you dont know who Alex Comfort and Lieutenant Pigeon are, exactly.
Ha, ha that really irritates me when people use that argument. It's like saying Freud was wrong, it's like saying Marie Curie was a hack, it's like saying all the great thinkers and scientists were wrong because we are more enlightened.
By the way I am old enough to have been around when the Joy of Sex was written. Not only that but I was not commenting on the book but observations made after it had been in publication for at least ten years.
Finally whatever you like to call it poly wotsit has been around for thousands of years. It is not new.
Comments
Scientific research shows that the general tendency is that they are less intelligent.
Of course, all scientific research can be criticised.
It can also be censored when the scientific findings are considered 'non-politically correct' therefore having a pro-left bias
Everything is open to bias.
However I'd also like to see a source for what you just said.
I disagree
Are you having trouble finding a search engine? 'Controversial science censored', etc
The fm has a point there.
If it is important to you to explain it to me then you should find the source.
You said that you would like the source, feel free to use a search engine, I've given you the ground work. For someone who doesn't like anti-intellectualism, you don't seem too eager to research (unless it supports your own agenda apparently)
I don't see as Immoral at all.
I wonder what else he see's as immoral. I bet behind the scenes he isn't keen on homosexuality either and likely would vote against gay marriage.
If I want to provide a source for something I am trying to convey I will find one.
And if you want a source for something you demand others go and find it for you
This is boring. Have the last word if you want.
As far as morality goes, polyamorous relationships are not even PRIMARILY about sex, although sex will often be involved. These are primarily loving, intimate, emotionally rich relationships, above and beyond friendship.
Polyamorous people in my experience are no less moral than anyone else, and are extremely serious and self-reflective about their lifestyle. To call them "sl*ts" and "sl*gs" is, quite literally, ignorant.
I can see why you're bored, your original plan was to spout off a load of leftist opinions while we gather around to listen to your 'wisdom' but when others start picking holes in it, you're not interested in listening. Thanks for the last word anyway, very generous. Let's see if you mean it
left right, black white.
I'm sorry but most of what you have just said makes no sense. Alex Comfort who wrote "The Joy of Sex" commented after experimentation in various fields, that multiple partner scenarios don't work. The reason for that is - according to his observations - humans beings can't truly separate themselves emotionally or psychologically from monogamy. In short one or more people in such relationships form bonds that would normally require exclusivity. He also noted that none of the relationships were likely to last long term or be ultimately be satisfying.
So pretty it up how ever you like polyamorism goes against human nature, and is about the selfishness of one or more people who like to get around.
So DS:BB, Alex Comfort has written this in a book. You have been told, and on her exit, the police should ensure Jade reads it and reshapes her thoughts accordingly.
The book was first published 43 years ago. Like Lieutenant Pigeon also from 1972, the world has moved on.
if you dont know who Alex Comfort and Lieutenant Pigeon are, exactly.
Excellent point, yes it's good she's honest about it, giving people a choice to avoid her if they couldn't cope with an open relationship.
I find it really odd that people feel that anyone's life choices, as long as they are within the law, need justifying.
If a person wishes to sleep with more than one partner and are open and honest about that and up front with their sexual partners I see nothing wrong with those actions at all.
Ha, ha that really irritates me when people use that argument. It's like saying Freud was wrong, it's like saying Marie Curie was a hack, it's like saying all the great thinkers and scientists were wrong because we are more enlightened.
By the way I am old enough to have been around when the Joy of Sex was written. Not only that but I was not commenting on the book but observations made after it had been in publication for at least ten years.
Finally whatever you like to call it poly wotsit has been around for thousands of years. It is not new.