What about polyamory

Post Reply New Topic

We are social animals, and we need of a way of living in a group. Poly is the best of alternatives for that. The alternatives come at a price of lower social cohesion (social exclusion, violence, etc..).

Several of you seem to not quite grasp how natural selection works, for humans or in general.

Here's a concise and (hopefully) understandable summary:

New traits arise (or old ones are modified) in a species when certain old ones are or become so maladaptive that the genes of a given species are at risk of not surviving. The individuals whose traits are best suited for survival will pass on their genes (usually), and the individuals marked for death do not pass on any of their genes (even the good ones). Over a period of time that makes homo sapiens' dominance seem completely insignificant, eventually those best suited to GENETIC SURVIVAL will mate enough to spread the gene fairly widely, and select mutations occur along the way. It has nothing to do with what makes you feel good, or when people are at their happiest.

All modern research points to the idea that the best strategy for homo sapiens--who again, have NOT been around nearly long enough for us to have fundamentally changed more than a tiny, tiny bit--differs by gender, like it does in all animals. For males, the best strategy so far seems to be having a MANAGEABLE, STABLE number of children with a MANAGEABLE, STABLE number of women. These numbers vary depending on the individual male.

What that means is that "impregnate everything you see" is absolutely NOT how the male mind works, because in the long run and without contraception, that would lead to thousands of dead children, because a baby without someone to raise it may as well not exist (for this purpose).

So ladies, next time a guy tries to use the excuse, "I'm a guy, it's in my genes to spread as much of my DNA as humanly possible," you can kindly remind him that he's completely full of s**t.

I'm not offended at all. Why would I be offended that your opinion is different than mine?If you mean the "one twue way" comment it's an old joke from the scene. It wasn't meant offensive, that's why true is spelled twue. You would have to be around enough OTWers for a while and see what I'm talking about. It's not meant mean (or offended) at all.

You want to be poly, be poly. I don't want to be poly, I'm not poly. It doesn't matter to me at all what you or anyone else does in their love life, and it's your choice to do with yours what you wish as it's my choice to do with mine what I wish. It's everyones choice to do with their love lives exactly what they wish to. Social pressure about sex has caused so many problems for so many people for so long that it's time to just let go of all the pressure and as long as it's live, consenting, human adults involved, let it go.

People are going to do what they want to do, regardless of what anyone else believes. That's the bottom line. Like it or not, want them to become enlightened to your point of view and embrace the way of living that you think is best, or not, (lots of religious groups take that stance too) people are still going to do exactly what they want to do, one way or the other. If they can't find a way to do that, or the courage to go against society's norm, they may be miserable.

If you want to sit around and espouse the virtues of polyamory, and get into all the nitty gritty aspects of it, John Warren is your man for that, but you won't find him here.

@OliveOilMom
Usually people get offended at me.

We don't talk on the same level, you are doing philosophy. In the end there's a reality check from the out side. The reality check is coming. Our current society isn't stable in the long term, its just isn't. Social problems on top of environment problems, that haven't finist in getting worse. You'll say these problems have nothing to do with what people do in there bedrooms, but this isn't the case. Sex, isn't just fun or a perversion, it has social effects in the society, depending how it is practiced. Thats almost the whole point of sex in humans(evolutionary speaking), directly for reproduction is something like less then 1%.

@BurningMoose

I prefer the smurf theory of evolution. Nature, an old nice lady with a little wand, walks around in her forest, when she see a mutant, pouf she fixes it with her little wand. If however it actually works, she doesn't bother. Creationists should at least accept this theory



We aren't rats. We live in groups. We are totally useless alone. Sex is not just reproduction, it has gotten to the point, that sex is mainly for social bonding, almost totally displacing the original reason it evolved for(like in rats). The ration of children born per sexual act is near zero.

The real main strategy of both sexes is to have children inside a group. The main objective is to build alliances, reproduction is almost secondary.