g450 Posted March 28, 2012 Posted March 28, 2012 Polywhata? Polly want a cracker? Why dont they just stop playing word games and put "poly want a di**" on their OLD profiles? Or how about "poly want an STD" LOL.
Disenchantedly Yours Posted March 28, 2012 Posted March 28, 2012 I'm a one-man kind of girl looking for a one-woman kind of man.....I hope I said that right.
ScreamingTrees Posted March 28, 2012 Posted March 28, 2012 The only problem I could foresee in a Polyamorous relationship is someone faking on the romantic side for sexual gratification with one partner, and then faking the sexual part with another partner to get a romantic response.. Then again, chances are neither partner will object to getting "used" like a specific-purpose utility and wouldn't care because they're both getting some sort of satisfaction and they probably see the person as more of one of their friends with benefits rather than a shared intimate life partner, so they probably have no problem with some other partner being with them, because they don't feel violated, there's no unique bond to be broken other than a mechanical one.. I don't know who'd want to SHARE an intimate life partner, even physically. But I guess that so long as everyone is aware of where they stand in the "relationship" and have no qualms, they're all perfect for each other. Same way Anna Nicole Smith was perfect for Hugh Hefner. Other than that, and the increased risk of STDs that come with a partner who might have two or three swinger pals who have pals of their own.. Well, I'd rather be happy with one person than have casual sex with someone for whom I feel nothing. I would never be interested in this sort of lifestyle, but I guess I have no problem with it, s'long as their intentions are known.
dasein Posted March 28, 2012 Posted March 28, 2012 I have seen no evidence that polyamory is "window dressing" for anything. No problem with your community, hope I didn't imply such. But as the term becomes more FWB level popular, you will see it used as window dressing on simple NSA sex more and more. I already see it misused that way in other areas. 1
dasein Posted March 28, 2012 Posted March 28, 2012 Tell me. Why are you the self-appointed expert on all things LoveShack? Whatever, is that how you respond to anyone who dares express their opinion? Or is it really just personal animus v me and the things I post? Rhetorical, I know the answer. Your professorial stance is misguided. I don't think it takes a thesaurus to read and understand what I post. If it does for you, well... 1
Author hotloader Posted March 28, 2012 Author Posted March 28, 2012 the only reason you want to put down women for being "sluts" is that you can't get free sex anywhere anytime anyplace. Even a fat, short ugly girl can get laid as much as she wants, just for being a female. Sucks to be a man, doesn't it. Do you hate dogs cos they can lick their nuts? Because you hate women just cos we can get sex and you can't? At least not without paying (either in money or something else) Men can brag about how many chicks they bang. Sorry men, it's time the ladies get that right too. Whatever you say, slut. Bwhahahah!
mostlyclueless Posted March 28, 2012 Posted March 28, 2012 If being poly makes me a slut, I guess I'll just be a slut. However, I think the meaning of these two words is being badly conflated.
Author hotloader Posted March 28, 2012 Author Posted March 28, 2012 I heard sosuave is back now; why don't you go there where you and all the other playahs can high five and trash women. While the rest of us are having sex and / or love with likeminded people. Well....Looks like I've struck a nerve here. 1
sLiPpeTh Posted March 28, 2012 Posted March 28, 2012 Humans aren't monogomous by nature. Nor are primates in general. Monogomy is an attainable goal, but why bother?
mostlyclueless Posted March 28, 2012 Posted March 28, 2012 Man, I don't know why I thought of this, but I could really go for a Pepsi right about now. 2
Black Jack Posted March 28, 2012 Posted March 28, 2012 Whatever, is that how you respond to anyone who dares express their opinion? Or is it really just personal animus v me and the things I post? Rhetorical, I know the answer. I don't think it takes a thesaurus to read and understand what I post. If it does for you, well... Don't worry about Mme. She hasn't had her daily dosage to put her to sleep so she's cranky at any man tonight who dare challenges her feminist bull crap.
Disenchantedly Yours Posted March 28, 2012 Posted March 28, 2012 Humans aren't monogomous by nature. Nor are primates in general. Monogomy is an attainable goal, but why bother? UGGGGGG thank you POP Science for letting every person on the internet use pseduo science when it helps them. The reality is that humans are not "wired" for monogomy or "ployamorous" relationships, one way over the other. That is why it comes down to a choice. We have free will and a deeper conscience awareness. There are actually positives and negatives to both relatoinship systems. Monogomy builds a foundation of trust and provides a safe family unit. Being with many people increases the risk of STDs. If we were suppose to sleep with everything that moved, there would be no such thing as STD. We also have a mixture of chemicals that support both approaches to relationships. We have chemicals that help both men and women bond to one person and we clearly have chemcials that make us attracted to a variety of people. Again, it comes down to choice. This has never been about what we are "wired" for. Because while we are not completey "wired" for monogamy, we are not completely wired for the other either. And this is the mistake many people make. They rather blame their choices on what they tell themselves they are "wired" to do, then to make a choice and stay committed to it. It's easier to tell yourself that you are "just not wired " to do that. But it's not hoenst. 5
sLiPpeTh Posted March 28, 2012 Posted March 28, 2012 UGGGGGG thank you POP Science for letting every person on the internet use pseduo science when it helps them. The reality is that humans are not "wired" for monogomy or "ployamorous" relationships, one way over the other. That is why it comes down to a choice. We have free will and a deeper conscience awareness. There are actually positives and negatives to both relatoinship systems. Monogomy builds a foundation of trust and provides a safe family unit. Being with many people increases the risk of STDs. If we were suppose to sleep with everything that moved, there would be no such thing as STD. We also have a mixture of chemicals that support both approaches to relationships. We have chemicals that help both men and women bond to one person and we clearly have chemcials that make us attracted to a variety of people. Again, it comes down to choice. This has never been about what we are "wired" for. Because while we are not completey "wired" for monogamy, we are not completely wired for the other either. And this is the mistake many people make. They rather blame their choices on what they tell themselves they are "wired" to do, then to make a choice and stay committed to it. It's easier to tell yourself that you are "just not wired " to do that. But it's not hoenst. What's dishonest is the extremely high percentage of individuals who gain the trust of another; commit to monogomy...then faulter in navigating their biological cycles.
ariadne999 Posted March 28, 2012 Posted March 28, 2012 Whatever you say, slut. Bwhahahah! how's life as a virgin? I prefer the term "female player"
Feelsgoodman Posted March 28, 2012 Posted March 28, 2012 blah, blah, blah. No, it's not. Tell me. Why are you the self-appointed expert on all things LoveShack? Please, give it a rest. If people here want to understand what is known as "polyamory" by those who practice it, they are right here on the Internet, right now. They can read and learn - from people who might even know what they're talking about. They don't need you to pontificate about what it "simply" means, especially since you have no clue. Your professorial stance is misguided. In fairness, I don't think dasein ever claimed to be an expert on "all things Loveshack". He was merely expressing his opinion, which, believe it or not, is what people do on this discussions forum. I found his post to be intelligent, articulate and pertinent to the subject at hand. The same cannot be said of your PMS-inspired drivel. Your angry woman/vagina monologues stance is misguided. 2
Black Jack Posted March 28, 2012 Posted March 28, 2012 In fairness, I don't think dasein ever claimed to be an expert on "all things Loveshack". He was merely expressing his opinion, which, believe it or not, is what people do on this discussions forum. I found his post to be intelligent, articulate and pertinent to the subject at hand. The same cannot be said of your PMS-inspired drivel. Your angry woman/vagina monologues stance is misguided. Be careful or she'll slap you with her soaked tampon.
Mutant Debutante Posted March 28, 2012 Posted March 28, 2012 I see the tools are out in force these days. Whatever, man. Monogamy is good for me, and people are always going to use words the wrong way and try to cover up acting like *******s, but..I know some really poly people, guys and girls. One of my best friends lives with her two mates, they're a triad and they're pretty happy. Less drama than most of the "regular" folks I know, all in love all the way around the triangle. I don't really know how they do it but it's definitely not just swinging.
Thieves Posted March 28, 2012 Posted March 28, 2012 I don't think I even know what "slut" means any more. Is it just a girl who has more sex than you do? Pretty much. The word 'slut' has been overplayed in so many ways that it barely means anything anymore. I kind of laugh and don't bat a lash whenever I hear it nowadays, so I find it funny when some people still try their hardest to use it as an insult towards a woman. It's almost the equivalent of calling someone a 'poopy head' in an argument. As far as people using terms like 'polyamory', whenever I see that, above all that means one thing: not traditionally monogamous. Which = not a match for me. That's all that matters, since I choose not to get involved in those type of relationships. I'd rather have people be honest about their dating style, "slutty" or not, than lie.
Buck Turgidson Posted March 28, 2012 Posted March 28, 2012 This thread makes me wonder exactly how insecure in your manhood you have to be for the concept of women having sex to be so threatening. So deeply threatening that without any prompting at all, you would start a thread just to call them all sluts. Maybe you can shed some light on this, hotloader. When you think of women having sex but not with you, what is it exactly that's going through your mind that frightens you so much? Is there anything we can do to help you get over this obviously disabling phobia?
mostlyclueless Posted March 28, 2012 Posted March 28, 2012 Feelsgoodman, you were doing pretty well up until the last 2 lines. You know you're more persuasive when you get away from the ad hominems, right?
Recommended Posts