Page 347 of 418 FirstFirst ... 247297337345346347348349357397 ... LastLast
Results 3,461 to 3,470 of 4172

Thread: The OT thread V1

  1. #3461
    Quote Originally Posted by Unfated33 View Post
    The idea that poly people have a better path because of the openness of not just their relationship but also their communication leads to a common refrain of "We're better than you plebes are." That ability to sit up on high and mock the masses for not understanding what has been carefully intuited is a feature of the system.

    But I also think it would be scary to find something that really works for you, and then look around to discover that most people don't choose and don't want the system that works for you. So I think a lot of the outspokenness about it being better comes as a reaction to the choice to put oneself in a minority out-group.
    i think this is entirely imagined. it makes sense, as both times poly has come up here, the prime reason why someone is arguing with me is that they believe i am arguing that they should be poly. no idea why, because i explicitly state that is not my point repeatedly. now, i didn't take a handful of psych classes, so im clearly unqualified to discuses it, but i think there might be a little projection based on insecurity going on there. something about sexual availability freaks folks out.

    nowhere have i proposed that being poly is better, or most importantly, how most people should live. if you want to however, it also shouldn't be stigmatized.

    i have simply argued its not fundamentally worse. and that standard nuclear family models could use some fresh ideas to improve them because its obvious to most observers, that its not working that well. on these two points (my only two points) i dont think an effective counter point has been made.
    Last edited by cockerpunk; 08-24-2018 at 10:48 AM.
    social conservatism: the mortal fear that someone, somewhere, might be having fun.

  2. #3462
    Quote Originally Posted by Unfated33 View Post
    Oh my gosh wall of posts.

    But this is the way I view it as well. I think the argument that the concept of "rules are bad because some rules can be made to be bad" is too extreme for me.

    And I know we've sidestepped a lot, but my impression back at the beginning of this thread is that poly specifically was a path to avoid negative outcomes. When I think the correct way to mitigate problems in relationships is communication, concession, and investment. I also believe that distributing resources among multiple people reduces the possibility to invest as much in any given person. Another downside for me to mull over.
    i dont think that humans have only a finite supply of emotions to give. investing in multiple humans (something we do every day, just not about sex) does not take a finite supply and spread it around so everyone gets less. it fosters emotional commitment and intimacy across a group of humans, not just one.

    time is the only true finite resource, everything else humans can have an abundance of. time does pose problems, and has to be managed, again, just like any relationship in our lives.
    Last edited by cockerpunk; 08-24-2018 at 10:56 AM.
    social conservatism: the mortal fear that someone, somewhere, might be having fun.

  3. #3463
    Quote Originally Posted by Unfated33 View Post
    The idea that poly people have a better path because of the openness of not just their relationship but also their communication leads to a common refrain of "We're better than you plebes are." That ability to sit up on high and mock the masses for not understanding what has been carefully intuited is a feature of the system.

    But I also think it would be scary to find something that really works for you, and then look around to discover that most people don't choose and don't want the system that works for you. So I think a lot of the outspokenness about it being better comes as a reaction to the choice to put oneself in a minority out-group.
    I believe in going with your heart. Not the mass of muscle that pumps yiur blood, but the spiritual heart. The one that tells you when you are with your partner, the world could fall apart and you don't care. That does not work with everyone nor should it. Whether you are defined by your religion, ethnicity, creed or whatever; if it works for you, so be it. As long as you don't throw it in my face, on how wrong i am for not going with one idea over the next, i am fine with how you wish to lead your life.

    But do we need validation of the masses if that makes one happy? I am not saying total anarchy or going against the law, but the need to have over acceptance just because you scream the loudest? Communication should be an exchange of ideas, thoughts and a discussion of the value for all or the one, not a race to be the best. Too many people have been forced to be the one true thing; whether religion, sport, lifestyle, thought or belief. While, the concept of true communication in a poly relationship is a great basis, shouldn't ever be just with one train of thought but with all thoughts.

  4. #3464
    Quote Originally Posted by Nobody View Post
    I believe in going with your heart. Not the mass of muscle that pumps yiur blood, but the spiritual heart. The one that tells you when you are with your partner, the world could fall apart and you don't care. That does not work with everyone nor should it. Whether you are defined by your religion, ethnicity, creed or whatever; if it works for you, so be it. As long as you don't throw it in my face, on how wrong i am for not going with one idea over the next, i am fine with how you wish to lead your life.

    But do we need validation of the masses if that makes one happy? I am not saying total anarchy or going against the law, but the need to have over acceptance just because you scream the loudest? Communication should be an exchange of ideas, thoughts and a discussion of the value for all or the one, not a race to be the best. Too many people have been forced to be the one true thing; whether religion, sport, lifestyle, thought or belief. While, the concept of true communication in a poly relationship is a great basis, shouldn't ever be just with one train of thought but with all thoughts.
    shockingly, we agree completely. good post, thank you for repeating exactly what i've been saying for 4 pages.
    social conservatism: the mortal fear that someone, somewhere, might be having fun.

  5. #3465
    Insider
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,182
    Quote Originally Posted by cockerpunk View Post
    i've spent a considerable amount of time figuring out why there are very few married older men i truly understand. its a common thread in my life ive tried to tackle a few times. and this really hits home that its actually a fundamental difference in how we see the purpose of human life. in my 20s, how i live my life was expected, and cheered on by these guys. i was roudy, fast cars and faster womening my life, and it was great, and it was expected. but it always came with a "these days are short lived, your gonna end up married with a couple of nuggets in no time, enjoy it while you can." i saw the twinkle in there eye, remember there long lost days of youth, fondly. and i planned to enjoy those years, and i did, and i plan to enjoy the rest of my life too. there is no inevitability to this life. you can choose how you want to live it, at any point, in any way. i have person hood, if i don't want to marry someone, i don't. i know i don't want to have kids, so i wont. these are totally 100% in my control. if i do get married, which i'd like too, it will to who I'm excited about marrying, with no second thoughts, no doubts, it will be exactly what i want. and i can choose that. i have the power to choose that. this all seems to disagree on this fundamental level with what many married men i talk to seem to think about how life goes. and that is why, at its core, i don't understand the motivations of these humans. and they can't seem to grasp mine. there is a disconnect, about the purpose of life, a disconnect about the meaning of life, and a disconnect about agency, desire, and the actions of living life.
    It seems like by and large you're operating under a hedonic philosophy. Not making a value statement about that one way or the other, but the married men you're interacting with decidedly aren't using the same philosophical compass as you.
    "So you've done this before?"
    "Oh, hell no. But I think it's gonna work."

  6. #3466
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    Quote Originally Posted by Nobody View Post
    I believe in going with your heart. Not the mass of muscle that pumps yiur blood, but the spiritual heart. The one that tells you when you are with your partner, the world could fall apart and you don't care. That does not work with everyone nor should it. Whether you are defined by your religion, ethnicity, creed or whatever; if it works for you, so be it. As long as you don't throw it in my face, on how wrong i am for not going with one idea over the next, i am fine with how you wish to lead your life.

    But do we need validation of the masses if that makes one happy? I am not saying total anarchy or going against the law, but the need to have over acceptance just because you scream the loudest? Communication should be an exchange of ideas, thoughts and a discussion of the value for all or the one, not a race to be the best. Too many people have been forced to be the one true thing; whether religion, sport, lifestyle, thought or belief. While, the concept of true communication in a poly relationship is a great basis, shouldn't ever be just with one train of thought but with all thoughts.
    You can prove the existance of this "spiritual heart?" Don't you think this "spiritual heart" that you think leads you is actually preceeded by explainable biological and psychological elements? It is. Your logic is delusional. Now, if you want to ignore science and talk philosophy, then:

    No man is happy without a delusion of some kind. Delusions are as necessary to our happiness as realities.
    -Christian Nestell Bovee
    Things don't make you happy. You choose to be happy or not.
    Last edited by ironyusa; 08-24-2018 at 12:37 PM.

  7. #3467
    Quote Originally Posted by ironyusa View Post
    Things don't make you happy. You choose to be happy or not.
    very very true.

    you can also only be happy when you know who you are.
    social conservatism: the mortal fear that someone, somewhere, might be having fun.

  8. #3468
    Quote Originally Posted by ironyusa View Post
    You can prove the existance of this "spiritual heart?" Don't you think this "spiritual heart" that you think leads you is actually preceeded by explainable biological and psychological elements? It is. Your logic is delusional. Now, if you want to ignore science and talk philosophy, then:



    Things don't make you happy. You choose to be happy or not.
    Spirit of the land, spirit of the metaphorical heart. It is nothing exact. Just like explain what is love, what are the feelings of how much you love your wife and children? I equate that feeling of heart to the desire to be with a partner, physically, mentally and spiritually. I never had to define spirit, but i believe in it, just like the soul.i believe all living things have a certain spirit. Call it their presence in nature and how it effects things.

    Spirit and soul go againt my belief in existentialism. There is no why in the spirit, there is no soul, only parts of us that make up the whole beyond the physical sense. As much as i do not believe in a god, i am sure there are some that feel "his spirit". It can not be explained.

    Happiness is excitement, the "Joie de livre", happiness is also when everything goes right for you. Chemical, emotional, reactionary, whatever. It is not nor ever been just one thing. That is for certain.
    But i would gladly have a philosophical discussion with you or anyone. Here, pm email wherever.

  9. #3469
    Quote Originally Posted by cockerpunk View Post
    very very true.

    you can also only be happy when you know who you are.
    No. You have never dealt with someone bi-polar, depressed or with anxiety. At times they are incapable of being happy, one way or the next.

  10. #3470
    Quote Originally Posted by Nobody View Post
    No. You have never dealt with someone bi-polar, depressed or with anxiety. At times they are incapable of being happy, one way or the next.
    i have dated women with all three of these.

    and yes, i agree, there are times when they are unable to be happy, why would think i said anything otherwise?
    social conservatism: the mortal fear that someone, somewhere, might be having fun.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •