from an anti-poly BookFace group that claims to be ML :wtf-am-i-reading:
a lot of things have been ruined by captialism but this is such bad fucking analysis
from an anti-poly BookFace group that claims to be ML :wtf-am-i-reading:
a lot of things have been ruined by captialism but this is such bad fucking analysis
It goes either way IMO
some people really just want to be selfish atomized sex addicts, and polyamory is technically compatible with that
other people just legitimately want to have more than one actual relationship, and polyamory is compatible with that.
The first kind is even more alienating than a "trad nuclear family", and the second kind is less alienating.
deleted by creator
well, you made me revisit my reason for using that language. The reason I used it was that I've seen instances where a (usually hetero) couple goes poly, and one partner will essentially stop sexually desiring the other.
Whether this cessation of sexual desire was there to begin with and was the original motivation for the polyamory in the first place, or whether it developed naturally after going poly, is an open question. If the former, I think it qualifies as "selfish". If the latter, then it can't be helped and too bad
But yea I guess it was harsh and not super accurate language. But I really doubt that there are zero couples who fit that first type
again this isn't a criticism of polyamory as every other arrangement has its own problems too
deleted by creator
To be fair, trad nuclear family is something that I find particularly scary, but yeah.
Well I actually misspoke, I should have said "trad monogamous couple". Multigenerational family would still work
What do you find scary about nuclear families? Environmental impact/suburbia?
the risk of proliferation and Israel
The neurosis of it. The whole repressed milquetoast suburbian non-existence it offers, the alienation ...