I don't believe polyamory means promiscuity. It does mean that you have multiple lovers simultaneously. So, my point is valid. When you get cheated on, you have a safety net. You have spread your feelings and your needs out into many different partners. You have a partner you talk deeply to, a partner you cook with, a partner who helps you with your taxes, a partner you exercise with, etc. So, when you get cheated on by one of those many, I contend it hurts a fraction of being cheated on by someone who was all of those things in one to you. I haven't seen you refute that point. No amount of distorting that point into me being a misogynist will knock that down. And I don't think me placing all of my trust in one person is anywhere near the picture you paint of me: the sex crazed misogynist who owns women's bodies. I could just as easily characterize yours as wanting to 'own their mind'.
Polyamory is a method, which one may choose in the long-term, and therefore continue to identify with regardless of their current status, in the same way single monogamous people still identify as being monogamists. It doesn't mean anything about what your love life currently looks like. Again, I'm single. And as predicted, you simply ignored that bit.
Where on earth do you get the idea that partners are "divvied up" like that? That is just weird, and has nothing to do with reality or the nature of how humans interact.
As far as it "not hurting" when one gets betrayed as long as they have other partners, lemme ask you something: if you have two siblings, and one of them dies, do you say to yourself, "Oh well, no big, I have another one"? If you do, then I think you need a therapist.
You seem to look at relationships as nothing but contracts, rather than connections people are invested in on their own terms. I don't. I'm invested on its own terms. That is the refutation. It's called normal human emotion.
My portrayal is based on what you've actually said: that there's no reason to care about anyone if you have a replacement for them, that your judgment of a partner's worthiness comes down to whether they let you dictate the terms of their body, etc. Those are your claims, not mine.
Also, I have no idea how allowing people to decide who they are for themselves is equivalent to "owning their minds."
That's not what I said. I said when you get cheated on you have an instant rebound, whether you want to get even with sex or just talk about it over coffee. you have the options at your fingertips. Not everyone does. I don't limit my girlfriends in that way. Basically the only limitations I would put on them is I don't want them engaging in sexual activity with other people. I wouldn't want them going on a vacation with an ex-boyfriend. etc.
Actually I don't, SINCE I'M SINGLE. Earth to Winston. :roll: Plus, friends get coffee too. I know, crazy.
But also, not everyone is so emotionally immature that they just go out and screw people whenever they're hurting.
This sounds like rhetoric to me. I put my ego above the reality of changing human beings and their needs? I set aside an evolutionary remainder: the instinct to spread my seed, because my instinct to procreate is so strong, that I would like to mate with almost a girl that smiles at me. I set my desire aside in order to honor someone else's feelings and engage in that type of behavior with her exclusively. In that sense we touch, breathe, and feel theair of intimacy, because we've chosen each other. I don't expect her to make me 100% happy. But, the point of us choosing each other, is that we do something to each other physically and emotionally. our egos become like a Venn diagram through intimacy.
Evolutionary psychology is a debunked pseudo-science that exists for the sole purpose of justifying misogyny. So please don't spout ev-psych at me, or try to justify yourself with it. It's about as meaningful as telling me you can read my palm, and about as offensive as telling me that Gaia wants me to breed for the planet.
In reality, there is no evidence in anthropology or sociology that men function that way, or would function that way if not for being constrained by a suffocating and inflexible social mandate of how to date. Men are social, emotional maters just like women. And women are actually more novelty-seeking than men, when it comes to their partners.
The fact that you think sex is the only thing that matters in "choosing each other," or that sex is the main modality of experiencing intimacy, speaks volumes.
Sorry if I'm comin' at you strong, but if you're gonna sit here and tell me I'm unfeeling towards the people I love most simply because I don't live how you prefer, and then explain to me how people are unimportant as long as you have a replacement lined up, I'm not going to go easy on you.
