Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Polyamory doesn't liberate; monogamy doesn't protect

carsonogenic.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 296 posts

Re: Polyamory doesn't liberate; monogamy doesn't protect

#251

Post by magicalhippo »

Buttons840 wrote: post #178
JohnBooty wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've kind of wondered this over the years myself. The downsides of being in a rigidly-defined monogamous relationship are all kind of obvious, I think. Most people do not experience love or attraction as zero-sum games: you can have a "crush" or whatever on Person B without diminishing your feelings for Person A. So a person in a monogamous relationship is going to miss out on some positive physical and emotional con…

If someone truly loves their partner, wouldn't they be happy that their partner is getting more of what they need? Even if that is more sex? I honestly don't know the answer to this question. I've heard the optimal form of monogamy is when both partners fully give themselves to each other, and 100% seek the happiness of their partner. I was taught this in a religion. I can't logically understand it though. I can't im…

> If someone truly loves their partner, wouldn't they be happy that their partner is getting more of what they need? Even if that is more sex?

When analyzing my feelings after I got cheated on by a fairly long-term partner, I realized I wasn't upset she had had sex with another guy, but the rather the betrayal of doing so behind my back and trying to hide it.

This realization shaped my following relationships.

> I can't imagine being happy or maintaining my own identity without spending at least a portion of my energy on myself.

This is also true for myself, however it doesn't involve sex with others in my case. I'm content with my partner.

Re: Polyamory doesn't liberate; monogamy doesn't protect

#253

Post by NerdSniper9001 »

kilpikaarna wrote: post #236
daymanstep wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a sign of increasing inequality / hypergamy as the most desirable 1% of men have multiple partners while the rest have none. In other words human society is reverting to the way it always has been since the dawn of the agricultural age 12,000 years ago. There was never any reason to believe that the monogamous system of the 1950s West was a permanent stable arrangement and indeed we are seeing its death in our…

Ehh, maybe it's just how the poly scene is shaped around here, but in my experience the men are usually very far from any real or imagined "most desirable 1%". For poly women the gamut is wider, but not that much. Heavy tendency towards the ASD spectrum in both. Your "1%" will just go to clubs or on Tinder and hook up with other conventionally attractive people, without having to deal with some weirdo subculture.

> Your "1%" will just go to clubs or on Tinder and hook up with other conventionally attractive people, without having to deal with some weirdo subculture.

Pretty much. There's a lot of swingers these days, but no one with a triple digit IQ will raise their say "Hey I'm a swinger!" to their entire friend circle due to all the downsides that come along with it. People just do it quietly to avoid causing drama (from usually ugly people). I've always suspected the need for people to declare these types of alternate-sexuality lifestyles is more attention seeking and validation than actual organic expression of an identity. The loudest ones about these lifestyles are usually the most boner-killer types in terms of looks.

Re: Polyamory doesn't liberate; monogamy doesn't protect

#254

Post by giraffe_lady »

moralestapia wrote: post #248
t-writescode wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intersectionality. 100k out of *how many out homosexual individuals during that era in the area being studied*? And it's not just raw numbers, either. It's how many lives / families were impacted in this unique way. To add, it's also 100k that were almost entirely in a single demographic that was explicitly and implicitly being harmed by those in power during that era.

>Intersectionality. Nah, just elementary school Math. It was around 1%, a considerable morbidity but still very far from losing "a complete generational cohort".

Hey btw I absolutely did mean "a generational cohort of lgbtq people" not the broader total population. Which would make no sense, so I assumed no one would interpret my meaning that way. Thanks for calling me a bigot and then starting a fight with these other people about it though.

Re: Polyamory doesn't liberate; monogamy doesn't protect

#255

Post by claytongulick »

swagasaurus-rex wrote: post #198
ck425 wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Similar to comments above there's a difference between poly and open. I've not tried either but I've multiple good friends who are in "monogamish" relationships and it seems to work pretty well. For them the non-monogomy is just fun they have with others, but ultimately their partnership comes first. Otherwise it's very similar to the monogamy you describe but with agreed exceptions to sexual exclusivity. It's not fo…

Why does their partnership come first? Whats stopping you from finding somebody better to make a priority? Isn’t that the point of being poly is to have the ability to shop around?

One benefit to commitment is that it's hard.

It takes work, for both people to compromise, to critically self-evaluate and improve.

When it's easy to just "shop around", you never really have to look hard in the mirror. It's easier to just internally assign blame to the other person: "they're not meeting my needs", and go off seeking someone else who will.

There's value in resilience, in building up your character so that you can endure turmoil.

All relationships have stormy times.

A key facet of emotional maturity is to be able to distinguish climate from weather.

Re: Polyamory doesn't liberate; monogamy doesn't protect

#257

Post by 9rx »

p0w3n3d wrote: post #118
shadowerm wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are taking effective birth control completely for granted. It wasn't that long ago that monogamy was the default because no one wants to have a baby from a night of netflix and chill. IMO you have the direction of causation backwards. Monogamy is not some child rearing optimization strategy. It was a social construct that evolved because causual sex at one point was incredibly expensive and now it is not because…

I can't imagine going to my theorerical wife-in-open-monogamy-relationship and tell her that the girl I had sex with at work's Christmas party gave me std because, despite she had her pills, but the rubber fell. It's just not mixing up in my head. Also, if I give myself to my wife as a whole (i.e. I take care of her, the home and the children) I do not have time really to have another affairs. The rest of the time I'…

> I do not have time really to have another affairs.

That's a good point, and true of most people I expect. The wealthy have time, though. Wealth buys time. Kings, the epitome of being wealthy historically, have always had time for affairs, and are oft remembered for exactly that(!), but a growing proportion of "common folk" are becoming increasingly wealthy themselves, freeing up the necessary time among more and more people. However, wealth inequality is high, so the opportunity of time is not evenly distributed.

Re: Polyamory doesn't liberate; monogamy doesn't protect

#258

Post by kordlessagain »

bluefirebrand wrote: post #18

I am someone who experienced the "longterm partner decided she wanted to be poly" heartbreak. When she told me, I asked her why she would choose to stay with me rather than just be single and date as many men as she wanted. She told me something along the lines of "I love you, I want to spend the rest of my life with you, but I don't feel like one person is enough for all the love I have". I wasn't terribly happy wit…

> spent the whole time trashing me

The real danger comes when this pattern meets underlying trauma or personality issues - the manipulation becomes a way to process or control rather than connect, while the constant desire from others makes it feel justified or even righteous.

This isn't about relationship styles - it's about recognizing when multiple connections are being used as tools for manipulation rather than genuine human bonds.

Re: Polyamory doesn't liberate; monogamy doesn't protect

#259

Post by kordlessagain »

123yawaworht456 wrote: post #38
bluefirebrand wrote: post #18

I am someone who experienced the "longterm partner decided she wanted to be poly" heartbreak. When she told me, I asked her why she would choose to stay with me rather than just be single and date as many men as she wanted. She told me something along the lines of "I love you, I want to spend the rest of my life with you, but I don't feel like one person is enough for all the love I have". I wasn't terribly happy wit…

the more I glimpse American culture, the happier I am that I was not born there. >I wasn't terribly happy with that response, and she broke up with me a week later my brother in Christ, you should've broken up with her on the spot.

Someone said something like this to me recently about a story I related where I was told an ex boyfriend would be at a falsely framed "party" the partner was literally driving me to when she told me.

My new friend said to me, "you should have gotten out of the car". I replied that if I had I would have had to been prepared to walk away from the relationship on the spot when it happened. That is easier said than done in a moment.

Re: Polyamory doesn't liberate; monogamy doesn't protect

#260

Post by [deleted] »

nerdjon wrote: post #13

There is one issue that I have with this article and most discussions around polyamory. That is mixing in open relationships and poly. There is a massive difference between, you can do whatever sexually you want and dating other people. There is an emotional difference. Myself, I am in an open relationship but I know that what I consider poly is a line I do not wish to cross. I know that just it is not for me. I don'…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN