Opinions on polygamy and polyamory?

[Endbringer fan xoxo]

I assume the creator of the thread meant polyamory.

The same way the mind assumed that the "or" in the title "Opinions or polygamy" was an "on"?

 

[ĦĦĦ]

I assumed the creator of the thread meant polyamory. Maybe not.

i meant polyamory, didn't think that there was a difference between those two. thanks for pointing it out

 

[Noxy]

Polyamory is complicated, I don't think it can last unless a robust monogamy already exists as a base, because everyone has to be very communicative and trust each-other in good faith. In that same topic, I don't think a 'strong monogamy' of less than a year or two can handle a poly on top of it, because for a poly to work the two partners in the monogamy need to genuinely feel happiness both being with a third person and seeing their partner happy with a third person. This requires a ton of emotional maturity, and this sort of emotional maturity in a relationship does not develop in a single year.

@llillilll post is very relevant here, it's probably the wisest post on the whole thread, it's simple and to the point:

if homosexuality is involved it is good if it doesn't it won't work.

You can't have a 'straight' poly because, again, for a poly to work the two partners in the monogamy need to genuinely feel happiness both being with a third person and seeing their partner happy with a third person.

My first relationship was a polyamory and it failed. Second polyamory happened after 3 years together with my boyfriend and it also failed but the experience was surprisingly good for our monogamy, bf and I grew closer together over the next year discussing what worked, what didn't, our insecurities and etc. I think there's nothing wrong to give it a try if the option presents itself, but no one should be actively seeking people to add to their current relationship, that's unhealthy.

 

[alCannium27]

The same way the mind assumed that the "or" in the title "Opinions or polygamy" was an "on"?

No, mine was not an opinion

It is the truth

 

[angertard]

what difference does homosexuality make in a polyamorous relationship? could you specify please?
-------------------------------------
on another note, has anyone actually interacted with polyamorous people? online and in real life. if so can they talk about their experiences with them?

Homosexuality is often perceived as a social lubricant for sticky jams. In this case, it it supposed to make the full range of sexual experiences in your poly thing titilating and not persistently angsty or jealousy-inducing. So a bunch of girls having fun, none of them need to be jealous. Or a guy who has two girlfriends who like each other, it would be rare for him to be very jealous of his girlfriends stealing kisses with each other from him.

I've even heard female acquaintances recommend to each other "just get a bisexual guy" not for sexual compatibility purposes but because they think that bisexual guys are less likely to be machismo masculine assholes in disguise as suave gentlemen. This advice makes steam pour out of my ears in spiraling fountains.

Spoiler: little offtopic - why I think bi guys are not automatic gentle souls

In this particular instance it turned out that the bisexual guy who spurred the recommendation actually turned out to be pretty abusive or something, so there!
I think logic might work something like "Macho assholes are conforming to a societal role, bisexual romantics prove they aren't going to do that because they're already in violation of societal roles, they're way too eccentric to be pressured like that"
I think the thesis fails because I (manipulative, needy, incel child) would have totally been a gay/bi guy in highschool if I knew that I wouldn't need to put things in my butt, as long as it could help me get hugs or sex from the cute faghag girls. I am saying that you can still be acclimated to "not give a fuck what people think" or present yourself as a punk/underdog/gay and still be an inauthentic pretender seeking access to emotional/sexual intimacy/attention by any means. It wouldn't be hard to imagine someone like me who is more insecure/desperate/horny and has fewer hangups, so I doubt you can just select for bi guys who like being degraded to filter out the sneaky fucks. Abusive behavior isn't just someone conforming to a complete modeled role, it's something emergent from a mere seed of modeled desire, deeply planted in one's nature.

A similar thing was involved in my closest interaction with a poly thing. This handsome but low self esteem guy got a girl- and then he sort of realized he could do better. Sidelined her, told her they could be intimate but he wasn't exclusive and started swiping on tinder to get another one. She had said she liked girls a bit, so I imagine it would seem to him that he could just find another girl who likes girls, and then he could have to freckling girls, oh my freck, two girls! I want to have two girlfriends! She said she understood and she was okay with it, but apparently everyone knew she wasn't really okay with it. It eventually fell apart, possibly with sabotage from their supportive, drama-hungry and/or jealous "friends". I don't know if he even got to the point where he had a second girl, I think that might have been the breaking point?

Sexual greed aside, this also goes back to the observation of "this cheapens romance" or "one relationship is hard enough" perspective we see in this thread. Their relationship wasn't very strong to start. Him and his partner were insecure and inexperienced. I imagine he might have been more in a desperate scramble to get her and keep her than to actually find what he enjoys about her and bond with her, at the same time she was probably experiencing something similar. The guy has the moment where the tension breaks, because he finally gets sex and that was the big thing he's been aiming for. He has the yoink and sploink award, now what? Get another woman? Get a hotter woman? It's probably trite to say, but we need a masculinity that suggests to men that they can savor the rich experience of romance.

I've heard people say that a lot of these poly things operate on the principle of having at most one penis. This practically means it is all just some combination of women-loving-women sharing with each other and a guy having some girlfriends, with some intersection. The real weirdness IMO is when a woman has multiple guys. The guy perspective is sort of easy for me to understand, but I don't get why a woman would want more than one guy.

I have read a little about polygynous African cultures and while they are interesting, I don't think that I really like them. I haven't read the book about it, but it is sad how the Japanese description of the male parent as "our weekend friend" because they (feel pressured to?) spend so much time after work at the equivalent of strip clubs bonding with their coworkers. I guess I haven't read much about the vikings. But polygyny is more committed than hookup culture, so focusing on it as a decadent problem is a little rich. It has the same issue as a guy who calls women who sell nude photos whores, when his girlfriend isn't a virgin. There's scarce room for a distinction, at least not in their favor. I think polygyny should be legal and lightly discouraged in western cultures.

Robin Dunbar's book "Friends" has some interesting statistics and stuff- he basically says that out of the innermost 5 friends/relatives of your social network you need to drop 2 of them to sustain the social grooming required for 1 romantic relationship. The cost to establish one of those 5 closest tends to average 2 hours/day for quite a while, he suggests for at least 100 hours. If I understand correctly the cost to keep close friends is lower than the cost to establish them, but he also says that romance costs double what friends cost which is why you need to drop two friends out your inner circle. Maybe he presumes that you're in the process of making two friends at the same time as a romance? If people are interested in this I can try to find his paper instead of working from the confusing text of his book. Anyway, the point he tries to make is that you can only have 1 super close friend if you have 2 girlfriends. Except elsewhere he says more introverted people have stronger friendships as their social grooming is more concentrated in a smaller number people, which seems like it could allow an introvert to have a few girlfriends, a few close friends, and no medium-to-distant friends. This sounds just fine to me, but if I had less-introverted girlfriends I could be a drag- romantic partners inevitably wind up sharing friends, and mismatch of friendship number/strength seems chaotic.

I'm probably dumb for wanting to have girlfriends. It just isn't very practicable.

 

[SparkyWilson]

Are we talking where one man/women has more then on wife/husband. Or are we talking about where its a mixed group of men and women and are intimate with each other?

 

[ĦĦĦ]

Are we talking where one man/women has more then on wife/husband. Or are we talking about where its a mixed group of men and women and are intimate with each other?

we are talking about the former

 

[Bookware]

A lot in this thread has been said about polygamy so I'll add some additional thoughts on polyamory.

In modern times, polyamory is associated with this vague notion of a sexual and romantic free for all. The ultimate conclusion of the "sex positive" movement - where the entirety of one's life is a constant orgy of pleasure where you do and date whoever you want whenever you want. This is why modern polyamory tends to be so self destructive and fail - it's pure hedonism without structure.

Regardless of what you believe or how you want to live, life requires discipline. That requires occasional self denial, disappointment, and boredom. These things, while uncomfortable, allow us to self-reflect and maintain internal balance and social cohesion with others. Otherwise we become aimless and succumb to every desire and flee from every challenge.

 

[K0WLOON]

The thing is complicated. In general one could simply say "it takes all kinds" but specific circumstances require specific responses. However, in many places, the thing usually involves polygany exclusively (that is, one man with many wives. Certain Mormon sects for a modern western example, or medieval Islam or early Judiasm in the era of the Patriarchs). Now, one cannot say for certain that the women in these circumstances are completely without autonomy, but one suspects that her objections would go unheeded if she were to raise them. We also, tho, have to avoid treating women like helpless children, or, one gets caught up in enforcing certain standards that are foreign to some folks and the thing can have the opposite effect intended, where one paternalizes and you start to paint yourself into a really obnoxious "white man's burden" situation (tho the thing isn't necessarily about race in this instance). You end up doing the thing you are nominally trying to prevent. One can end up as France circa 2013AD, infantilizing adult women by telling them that they are incapable of making the informed choice to follow religious edicts on headcoverings. Because only Big Daddy, the established liberal state apparatus, is allowed to decide what women can do with their own bodies.


Now, personally? One finds that the thing, within the context of the modern "West" and 20-something white people who are otherwise not involved in certain religious or cultural contexts, is often merely attempting to contradict for it's own sake. tryhards or folks who define themselves solely by being in opposition to something, rather than any actual conviction or personality.

But this one also has many more important things to be concerned about so as long as it's not getting fluids on the sidewalk, this one couldn't give less of a shit

 

[Slumber]

I think a fairly sizable amount of people struggle with one on one deep connections, let alone the dynamic of multiple deeper connections.
I don't have much of an issue with it, I just don't find it to be a sustainable relationship model for most people; It's probably healthier to have an open relationship to have a polyamorous relationship for some.

It's fine for people to experiment and find out what they like, but the "Kai's dirty polycule apartment" isn't a stereotype for no reason. Just be mindful and intelligent about the people you date and you'll be fine, no matter what side of the spectrum you're on.

 

[silkdealer]

never got it. seems like a hassle. why deal with the complications of having more than one partner when you can just stick to serial monogamy or short term stuff? feel like its a case of people wanting their cake and eating it too and while some make it work, most fail horribly. only ones i saw where it worked out had the same pattern of there only being one man and multiple women. makes sense-seen a lot of women nowadays whod rather be a sidepiece for THE guy than have A guy all to themselves. if theres more than one man you can immediately tell which ones fucking and which one cries himself to sleep every night.

 

[Bookware]

I thought about it more.

I like cake. But if I eat cake for every meal every day, and constantly think about cake, and constantly talk about cake.. I'd very quickly become a weird ass person and no one would want to hangout with me.

This, in essence, is the problem I think a lot (but not all) polyamorous people have.

 

[Minardi]

Honestly, I think polyamory and polygamy can work fine if everyone involved is on the same page and emotionally mature. It's not for me, but I've seen friends in poly relationships who are happier and more honest than some people in monogamous ones.

 

[Ardea]

Is it hedonistic

Yes. It is, almost without exception, damaged people feeding off each other by submitting wholesale to fleeting vices instead of bettering themselves.

degenerate

Absolutely

hurtful to everyone involved?

Nearly always. I say nearly only because I can't prove it's 100%. However, despite what these whores will tell you, polyamory isn't a new concept. Do you see any happy polyamorous octogenarians that have been in such an arrangement for decades? No? There's your answer. I have only seen a handful of cases personally, all ended in a very ugly fashion.

should it be normalized?

No, because sex and sexuality is a private matter. This, for obvious reasons, is something polyamorists fail to understand. if by "normalized" you mean they shouldn't be made second-class citizens, pelted with eggs or deported for their behaviour, then yes I suppose. If by "normalized" you mean celebrated then absolutely not. It's deviant behaviour and absolutely incompatible with a happy or healthy life.

In the end, what the next person is doing in their bedroom is none of my business or concern. However many people who are into polyamory (naturally) can't keep it to themselves, and try to evangelize about it and recruit you into their sad den of iniquity. This is foul and my principal issue with them. It's like fat activists trying to convince obese people that they don't need to diet. Polyamorists know on some level that what they're doing is fundamentally flawed, and feel the need to try to drag others into it so they have more people to bounce their lies off.

 

[ĦĦĦ]

though that it would be funny to post this here

 

[internet_userr1]

To put it simply, polygamy is not good. In modern day, it is hedonistic. Anecdotally, I've known people with open relationships; they seem happy, and the relationships usually fall apart. If you look at societies where it is the norm, it tends to be that men have all the power.

Definitely true. The only way polygamy could possibly work is if every single person is 100% agreed on the relationship and the man (or woman) treats both of wives (or husbands) with complete equal love, which I don't believe is possible. Maybe in the beginning, but committing to this long-term is exhausting. Not only are you giving your full attention to one person, but to another person too, and on top of that, this attention needs to be divided equally and fairly. I just don't think its possible.

Edit 1> It's also inherently sexist. While times have changed, its probably definite that the entire concept of polygamy was invented by men, for men. If polygamy was to be completely and 100% normalized, then if 1 man has like 6 wives each, then there's going to be less and less women for other men to get. It will be very competitive, having multiple wives will be seen similar to badge collecting, and the value of a woman's worth as a human being will slowly but shortly decline.
Its like regular sex VS gangbangs. A woman will easily get slut-shamed for just having sex, but even more so for participating in a gangbang. And when gangbangs (polygamy in this scenario) are the new norm, the slut-shaming goes 2x higher.
Men's mental health would also take a GIANT dump and there would be way more psychological issues within men, probably higher suicide rates and insanely unnatural sex-drives, hypersexual individuals, addictions etc.
It would not be good for society at all.

And a lot of the time, people only get into these relationships for better sex lives, which is just useless and unnecessary, in my opinion.

Off topic:

I've even heard female acquaintances recommend to each other "just get a bisexual guy" not for sexual compatibility purposes but because they think that bisexual guys are less likely to be machismo masculine assholes in disguise as suave gentlemen. This advice makes steam pour out of my ears in spiraling fountains. I think logic might work something like "Macho assholes are conforming to a societal role, bisexual romantics prove they aren't going to do that because they're already in violation of societal roles, they're way too eccentric to be pressured like that"

Haha, I see it a bit more differently.

Bisexual is the closest sexuality to gay- which presents itself as far more feminine than masculine (at least for the bottom.) So I assumed that, with that logic, since bi is the closest sexuality to gay, and it's still acceptable for a female to be in a relationship with a bisexual because he's... well... bisexual... that they just associated bisexual men closer to femininity, which in turn, made them believe that these men are "kind souls" and "less likely to be machismo masculine assholes in disguise as suave gentlemen" lmao. That's just what was going through my mind when I read this haha, kinda off topic but I wanted to add my 2cents.

 

[Echos]

I think it's just gluttony, plain and simple—an inability to control yourself. Wanting multiple partners at once doesn't feel like freedom to me, it feels like a lack of depth. Like you're chasing novelty because you're scared of real commitment, scared of what it means to actually grow with someone.

I love my girl. I love who she is, and who we're becoming together. That slow, layered kind of love—the kind that takes time, patience, and effort—that's what makes me feel rich. Truly rich. No amount of new partners or "experiences" could come close to that.

People can do what they want. I'm not out here telling anyone how to live. But if you stand for nothing, you'll fall for anything. And to me, spreading yourself thin in the name of love just isn't it. It's shallow. It's messy. And it's not what I call love. Also people who practice polygamy all look fat & hedonistic.

Discipline and morals gives true freedom.

 

[Ardea]

Also people who practice polygamy all look fat & hedonistic.

"If it feels good, do it"

Modern culture has been encouraging people to let their brains and bodies atrophy and lurch mindlessly from one toxic indulgence to the next. It makes for good customers, but a terrible society.

 

[dreamsphere]

Very satanic

 

[ark]

Is it hedonistic

Sure.

degenerate

What does this even mean?

or/and hurtful to everyone involved?

It's like a monogamous relationship but with more people, so of course the potential to hurt someone is even higher than the former one.

Or is it like any other kind of relationship and should it be normalized?

Normalized in the sense that people shouldn't be judged for being in a polyamorous relationship.

If any of you hold at least one of these opinions then write a post about it and argue with other users about how morally superior you are, and how your God's chosen soldier or something.

So, I think most people read about polyamorous relationships and polygamy on the Internet which, in my opinion, is not a good basis for forming an opinion. Because let's be honest, when we read about polygamy / polyamory on the internet, it's mostly about a psychotic fat blue-haired chick and her harem of unhygenic neckbearded orbiters. When people talk about their polyamorous experiences online, it mostly reads like a complete train wreck.

I only know one couple IRL that lives in a polyamorous relationship and that works well for them. I think they are in a relationship for about 5 years? I think the important thing is that their relationship already started as a polyamorous relationship and didn't just become that over the course of the relationship. But probably the biggest success factor for this relationship is that they are not socially awkward and are not terminally online.