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

91–100 of 296 posts

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

#91

Post by wakawaka28 »

nordsieck wrote: post #6
jimbob45 wrote: post #3

21% of Americans have experimented with consensual non-monogamy at some point in their lives, far more than two decades ago Not only do I not believe that statistic, but the footnote citation seems to be broken. I've never seen a poly relationship make it past 10 years and I've never seen a poly relationship without significant issues that you wouldn't see in a monogamous relationship. Furthermore, there simply isn't…

> 21% of Americans have experimented with consensual non-monogamy at some point in their lives, far more than two decades ago > Not only do I not believe that statistic, but the footnote citation seems to be broken. I guess it depends a lot on how the terms are defined. If you include parallel dating (during the "non-exclusive" phase of dating), I could easily see this as being true.

I don't think most people are having sex with multiple people or even doing this parallel dating business. Parallel dating is less common than serial dating, and parallel dating with sex is even less common than parallel dating. It sure isn't looking like 20% of people to me. I avoid people like that too so maybe there is some selection bias.

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

#92

Post by echoangle »

renewiltord wrote: post #26
thatfrenchguy wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 0: It's not that we're old but that we will be old by the time we're done. Raising children when you're old is so much harder, and you'll be mega-old when they're 20. I really don't see the point?

The point is to avoid that precise problem by parallelizing the child-having. My wife can only have one child at a time and medically recommended spacing is 18 months. The objective is to have our children as young as we can given our current ages.

I hope it’s not too personal, ignore if it is: How many children are you aiming for?

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

#93

Post by echoangle »

big-green-man wrote: post #74
silexia wrote: post #30

Fantastic article, but as a monogamous married father of 4, I think the author misses the fundamental point of all relationships... And the point of life itself: Reproduction. The primary drive of every living creature from whales to amoeba is to procreate. Having children is WHY we have a sex drive and an urge to have relationships in the first place. Tons of studies show children require stability in the relationsh…

Well, you're not exactly primally driven to reproduce. You're primally driven to engage in some behavior, and experience hedonistic pleasure from it, with the side effect of reproduction. Reproduction is expensive, so evolution created a dirty trick. This is why birth control is so damn popular. You're driven to fuck, not to reproduce. I have no idea what the experience is for an amoeba, but I would guess it feels mo…

> For a lot of people though, the desire for children is there, strong, and comes from somewhere else, almost like it comes from somewhere deeper like a soul or something.

Isn’t that just another part of the evolutionary drive to get you to have children? Besides the sex drive? Just like you have a natural will to live and an objection to be killed/kill yourself?

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

#94

Post by sandspar »

bluefirebrand wrote: post #53
123yawaworht456 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> my brother in Christ, you should've broken up with her on the spot After she told me she wanted to be with me for life? I had hoped the poly issue was going to be in the past I was in my early 20s, I was in love, she was my second girlfriend, who happened to be my high school crush, "the one that got away" but I got a second shot with her and took it, I was living the dream How that relationship ended screwed me up…

Your problem is that you tried to make a relationship with your oneitis. Those never work.

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

#95

Post by spondylosaurus »

ted_bunny wrote: post #75
spondylosaurus wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The poly vs open distinction is interesting because (anecdotally) I see some variation there between gay and lesbian relationships—it seems like gay dudes are more likely to be in a door-ajar couple, whereas the throuples I know are usually groups of lesbians! Conversely, I don't see many poly gay dudes or door-ajar lesbian couples, and lesbians might be more monogamous on average.

Sounds like you haven't heard of UHauling. It's a trope that many lesbians are highly relationship oriented and things get serious really quickly.

Oh, I've heard of it... and have even been accused of doing it, lol. But I'm not sure it counts as u-hauling if you talk about marriage within the first month and then take another decade to tie the knot :P

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

#97

Post by znpy »

I have a strong feeling that like many new things, poliamory is currently mostly/only getting get “positive marketing” narrative.

Basically: what’s being advertised is mostly the “happy path”. Everything goes well until it doesn’t, what then?

Relationships are hard. There are a number of ways things get messy (and/or toxic) with two individuals, somehow things should improve with more than two persons ?

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

#99

Post by emptiestplace »

VeejayRampay wrote: post #98

I wish someone would find a way to shield us from those topics on Hacker News, the one place that we can go without being flooded with those mundane societal issues and focus on actual technology and science

Great comment, appreciate you taking the time to come in and share your thoughts. We've discussed and decided to prioritize this change - please check back very soon!

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

#100

Post by inglor_cz »

wakawaka28 wrote: post #91
nordsieck wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 21% of Americans have experimented with consensual non-monogamy at some point in their lives, far more than two decades ago > Not only do I not believe that statistic, but the footnote citation seems to be broken. I guess it depends a lot on how the terms are defined. If you include parallel dating (during the "non-exclusive" phase of dating), I could easily see this as being true.

I don't think most people are having sex with multiple people or even doing this parallel dating business. Parallel dating is less common than serial dating, and parallel dating with sex is even less common than parallel dating. It sure isn't looking like 20% of people to me. I avoid people like that too so maybe there is some selection bias.

A single threesome is enough to put all its participants into those 20 per cent, and according to studies, 10 per cent of women and 18 per cent of men had a threesome.

There is a majority of the cohort already, and if your friends perceive you as judgmental, they won't likely tell you that they have had one.

Post reply on HN