Polygamy

Post Reply New Topic

Monogamy as a cultural standard is clearly holding low-quality males' chances artificially high. In the name of liberty, this barrier must be overcome so people freely establish whatever relationships they want without governments meddling in them. I concur with the prediction that this will lead to all females forming relationships with the top-quality males, the rest of males staying single for life, and seldom or never seeing a female at all.

Polyamory is 100% legal, I don't understand your post..

Poly marriage isn't legal almost everywhere.

And even in most muslim countries, except the GCC states, isn't much socially accepted.

I don't think so, at least not if we are talking about the typical polyamory model. In that model, the assumption is that people share time fairly with multiple partners, and high quality males only have so much time, so cannot gather harems. Besides, females will have similar number of partners as males, so it will not at all affect the gender balance. It is the polygyny model, where a single male marries multiple females that affects the balance so low-status males are left single, not the polyamory model.

[/quote] That sounds pretty familiar to me. I no longer have any doubts that polyamory is a neurodiverse trait, and even if many neurodiverse people have problems to find a single relationship, they still are more positive about polyamory than NTs. Polyamory is also related to the neurodiverse relationship traits, like strong attachments. Even more important, polyamory forms a "breakup" route for neurodiverse people that isn't hurtful. It's sad that so few people know that they are capable of polyamory, and that even fewer actually will try it out.[/quote]

Thanks for sharing the above thoughts. I like the idea of polyamory, it seems that an "open relationship" as it's often called here in the U.S. is a way to not only show love/caring to more than one person. It can also give variety for the people involved.

I'll probably get my female card revoked for say this, but...who really wants to eat the same food for breakfast, lunch or dinner every single day? OTOH, for those that choose to find other ways of liven things up with only one person in the bedroom, that should be okay too. Often, it seems like there is such a divide in this area...seeing things as black or white. I like to look at most things as grey and even other colors.

If this man and his wife would be open to it, this would make me happy to try and see if it would be a good option. He does work a lot, so as one person mentioned about successful men sometimes having less time, this would probably be the case with him. So, we'd have to find either scheduled time around this or another way to keep all parties happy.

We both work in the counseling field, so he has his own business and also works through the week helping people in another capacity. It would be nice to have someone to share thoughts with at the end of the evening about psychology, ideas, work, and simply on movies that we both like.

Polyamory sounds like a great option at this point. However, he'd have to be the one to approach this subject with his wife. That's the part I'm less sure about. It sounds like she is even more conservative than him considering that she used to facilitate something similar to a "purity ring" project. When I found this out, I was like "Nope, am not sure she'd be up for sharing." lol

With all those thoughts in mind...I'm still open to the idea and would at least like to try it. I mean, it's not like I just want to go out naked into the streets knocking several men in the head and dragging them back into a cave with me like some "neanderthalic" woman. I mean, I only want to knock one man in the head and drag him back into my cave. But if this is going to work, it may be necessary to knock his wife in the head first. Okay, joking aside...it would be awesome to spend more time with him.

I appreciate your post because it helped me think through this idea in a clearer way.

well eventually the low quality males like myself, will all die off. the population will decline(probably good for the planet)




huh o.O. so say there's about 1 male per female.(think its actually leaning towards more females then males.) if 4 females get together with 1 male. that leave 3 males single for life. so how is it it won't effect the gender balance?

so one is marriage an other isn't what does that have to do with women wanting high quality men only? they can be in such a 4-1 relationship without being married. potential one guy could have 7 women. and spend a day with each one. well whatever time he has left in a day after working long hours and his hobbies. but I think for most women its not about companionship but rather the status of a well off boyfriend.

they wont' have similar partners unless you count the other women. they don't' accept low quality males. there's probably 4 low quality men to 1 high quality man. its probably actually higher then that. its the only way women can have everything they want so I think its the future. might be a while but if trends keep as they are the ratio of men will continue to get worse and this will have to become the logical solution. or women will have to adjust their desires and wants when it comes to men.

That's not polyamory. That's polygyny. As I wrote, polygyny will leave many low-status males single. However, in polyamory, males will have equal number of partners as females, and then people divide their time among them. This does not lead to many males remaining single. Also, in many polygyny contexts, the male will feel that he owes his females, and thus they are not allowed to find additional males. That is not polyamory at all. It's something completely different.

The polyamory way is very vulnerable to STDs.

the philosophy or state of being in love or romantically involved with more than one person at the same time.

The state of having multiple sexually or romantically committed relationships at the same time, with the consent of all partners involved.



so polyamory is just that. people being with multiple other people. no where does it say its has to be or will be equal. one guy with multiple women is still polyamory. 4 gays guys together is polyamory, 4 gay women together is polyamory.
4 guys with one woman is polyamory. polyamory is just being with more then one person. there for polygyny is just polyamory with marriage. i never said the 4 women with one man would be married.

why you may view polyamory as 4 guys and 4 women, it isn't defined as such it could be any variable of combinations as long as its more then 2 people.

so the question is why would a woman who only values high quality men, being in any relationship with a low quality man. anwser she wouldn't if anything she'd want to be in multiple relationships with a few high quality men.

Well if its a woman monopolizing multiple douchebaggy NT's its a good riddance and us aspies will have more chance of getting a girlfriend

No, it is not. Polyamory is a neurodiverse trait and thus only exist in a smaller amount of humans (at most 10-15%). Harems (polygyny) is a neurotypical trait where a high status male monopolizes multiple women, which are not allowed to have other males. Thus, for the male, it's still a form of monogamy as he won't share his women with anybody, while for the females they will tolerate it because the male is high-status and desirable.

Not really. Monogamous people still have a lot of casual sex with many different partners. Polyamory isn't a loose constellation of people having casual sex, it's more like long-term relationship with multiple people.

Why do you have this idea that all (or most) Neurotypicals are douchebags? Aspies can be very douchebag too, I can see many of them in this forum. Douchebagery doesn't depend on one'stype of mind. It always makes me sad when I see people here like you call NTs stupid or douchebags or making absurd claims of superiority. Please try to be more rational.

Those are practicing polyamory ....

Do you mean there's a sort of commitment in polyamory? Like X with Y, W and Z only and mutually exclusive; and not like: X with Y, W and Z while Y is also with A, B and C and W also with D and F?

you're just making up your own definitions for what you feel. those are the definitions for that word in the dictornary.
i like you but I'm really starting to get sick of this neurodiverse s**t.

that word means what I posted it means people being romantic of sexual with more the one person. polygamy means when they are married to more then one person.

polygamy: the practice or custom of having more than one wife or husband at the same time

polyamory: the state or practice of having more than one open romantic relationship at a time

I deal in facts not ideas of what you want it to mean or think it should be. the difference between the two is marriage, not control. in one case the people decide to get married in the other they don't . its not a matter of monopolizng. have a lot of the famous cases been about that yes. doesn't mean the majority are.

monogamy : the practice or state of being married to one person at a time. 2. the state or practice of having only one sexual partner during a period of time

so no polygamy is not a state of monogamy. they are opposite, they can't be a state of the other. one is to be with one person and one person only, the other is to be with multiple people. then polyamory is just begin with multiple people without being married. you don't wont he rights on these words.

hes making up his own meanings to words and ignoring the means that are in use and legal. he really should just go all the way and make up new words. its like calling bushes trees. a bush is not a tree, a tree is not a bush. they have meanings to these words. if they were the same they would be one word. hes using words and ignoring their meanings to suit his own agenda. it irritates me. he seems to think that nerdevirse people are way better then nts like we're a super race. that in polyamory, people will be with multiple people but all pair of in equal sexes. so they can't be 2 men and a woman. no no. they'd find a bother guy. or not love each other. because they could only love if they were equal number of men and women. thats nonsense. you could have any number of combination of men and women. or it could even be all men or all women. polyamory is just multiple lovers.

Neurodiversity is an approach to learning and disability that suggests that diverse neurological conditions appear as a result of normal variations in the human genome.

sounds like a fancy way of saying evolved. why I can see how it is better to see that then that we are defective. taking to the level that we are like some different species or a more advanced human, is silly. I highly doubt different neurodiverse people would get along. mean aspergesrs and say someone with biopolor are both considered neurodiverse by rds but yet the disorders are different. so its not like we'd get along or think alike. heck so many aspies don't even see the same or think alike. but how many nts are there? really so many disabled/different people never share it to others. I'd wager there's likely more different people then there is a group of people who are all the same mentally.

I don't think you can cure austism. but I'm not going to buy into this neurodiverse movment either. I would rather just be accepted and seen as a person.