Polyamorous relationships, are they damaging to society?

[Grenartia]

Gren, if it is fabricated bullshit, give us some evidence on the other hand.

I don't have qualms with consenting polyamory but you have to be fair.

I'm not the one making a positive claim. The burden of proof falls on them to show that polyamory is bad, not on me to disprove that claim.

[Bunkaiia]

Polyamory is just one trait of a plethora of different sexual relationship methods. To form an educated opinion you need to consider all of the other factors and must be as an adaptation to their situation.

Take for example, "religion" some might consider it harmful or beneficial. There are obvious benefits and costs to it. Not all religions believe in sacrifice, supernatural entities, or propound dogmatic behaviours.

Another example, in the Arab world, children essentially are generally the products of the parents (with special importance placed on the father), while in Ancient Tibet or in some Papuan tribes, children can either be the product of a woman, you and your brother (specific paternity has nothing to do with it) or the product of only the mother being impregnated/blessed by the forest spirits (sex has nothing to do with it)

[Luminesa]

Someone can literally point to Solomon having 700 wives as a perfect example. Split a relatively-stable kingdom straight down the middle. Or all of the emperors who had multiple wives and partners at the same time, which caused entire empires to fall.

Its easy to make the entire concept of polyamory look bad when you focus only on cases of societies in the past which tolerated non-monogamy and had plenty of other problems, instead of examining the concept itself and only what is inherent to it.

Blaming polyamory on the fall of empires and massive amounts of violence and radicalization is as fucking pants-on-head stupid as blaming the fall of Rome on gay marriage.

On a more micro level, this is peak gatekeeping. Cek is not a part of a blob, and it’s not their responsibility to defend glorified infidelity just because some rando on the internet they have to, in order to be an ally. Cek has their own beliefs and is not into polyamory. And doesn’t have to be to want trans people to have happier lives. Not all trans people are polyamorous either, so I guess they’re not true allies?

Congratulations on missing my entire point. Maybe you should go back, and actually read it instead of skimming.

I didn’t miss anything. You literally told Cek that they of all people should know better than to go against polyamory, since people go against transgenderism. They’re not the same thing. Transgenderism is a condition, polyamory is a relationship. Transgenderism is not a choice, polyamory is.

And uhhhhhh Solomon’s empire is explicitly said to have fallen more or less because when he got married, he began worshipping the gods of his wives. And then ordered the people to do so. I never would have said that Rome fell because of gay love, because Rome fell due to barbarian invasions and a breakdown of its infrastructure due to overexpansion (among other things).

This is assuming that I would make uneducated comparisons due to your rage at being told that a particular kind of relationship is unhealthy by basically everyone else. You’ve got an entire page of people asking you for proofs, and you’re more or less just defaulting to, “IT’S STUPID YOU GOTTA BELIEVE ME.” On any place other than an Internet forum, you’d be laughed out the room.

[Celritannia]

im cackling
an incel will be an incel, no matter what types of relationships are common.

yes, but it seems like common sense to want there to be as few incels as possible

Men also attack a women who are in another relationship.
So how would someone being in a relationship with 2 or 3 people be any different?

IIRC, men who are no longer in a relationship attack those they know or have some connection with.

[Cekoviu]

Gren, if it is fabricated bullshit, give us some evidence on the other hand.

I don't have qualms with consenting polyamory but you have to be fair.

I'm not the one making a positive claim. The burden of proof falls on them to show that polyamory is bad, not on me to disprove that claim.

we have though

[The South Falls]

Gren, if it is fabricated bullshit, give us some evidence on the other hand.

I don't have qualms with consenting polyamory but you have to be fair.

I'm not the one making a positive claim. The burden of proof falls on them to show that polyamory is bad, not on me to disprove that claim.

The claim you're making that their studies are false or don't apply falls on you to prove.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

im cackling
an incel will be an incel, no matter what types of relationships are common.

yes, but it seems like common sense to want there to be as few incels as possible

First of all, most people have heard of Polyamory and are still monogamous. It won't become so common that it's going to create a wave of incels.
And second, like I said, an incel is not created by what relationships are acceptable. They're going to be incels regardless of whether monogamy or polyamory is abundant.

[Nap the Magnificent]

Ladies and gentlemen, feast your eyes upon COPE.

Pretend like anyone else knows what that means in context.

I'm pretty sure most people understand what the word 'cope' means.

[Galloism]

Polygamy has multiple structures that are not always the same. Structures you described have existed.

Here’s what you are doing. Let’s say I want to engage in a practice of schtlicking. That’s my new word. It’s where when people have a disagreement, one can challenge the other to a schtlick. That’s where you back up back to back, walk at least 25 yards, and turn and shoot. One person wins and the other is dead.

And then, when you point out dueling had lots of bad consequences, I say “schtlicking is not dueling. In dueling, you only had to be ten yards apart. This is totally different. “

Then your head explodes from frustration.

Again, using articles that show the damages of polygamy does not determine polyamory as dangerous.

Again, they’re about 99% the same thing. It’s missing a few documents and a record with some sort of government clerk.

I look forward to your support of schtlicking. Which I’ve now used enough times my iPad recognizes it as a word. Thanks NS.

[Deacarsia]

Polyamorous relationships are morally wrong and damaging to society.

Human beings are meant to engage in only one intimate relationship, not multiple with multiple relationships with multiple partners.

[Grenartia]

"Mass amount of research" = some barely-disguised thinkpieces masquerading as actual science? That's news to me.

There is nothing about that that is inherent to polyamory.

>what is ISIS and extremist Islam as a whole
>what is the incel movement
>what is white nationalism

I'll give you a hint, all of these groups prey on the same group to perpetuate themselves. Young men with nothing going for them in life, this is a very well documented thing by this point.

Due to social aspirations and desires it's not gonna be the average guy who benefits from widespread acceptance of polyamory, it's gonna be the really successful guy. Which will create even more lonely and angry young dudes who start shooting places up.

Where does one even begin in unpacking something so fractally wrong?

Polyamory is not responsible in any way for "bad mooslem", incels, and neonazis. To claim otherwise is to be entirely dismissive of the multitude of other factors that cause people to be drawn in towards them. Polyamorous people are not responsible for making sure people don't turn into hateful mass-murdering scumbags. I hate to break it to you.

[Celritannia]

Again, using articles that show the damages of polygamy does not determine polyamory as dangerous.

Again, they’re about 99% the same thing. It’s missing a few documents and a record with some sort of government clerk.

I look forward to your support of schtlicking. Which I’ve now used enough times my iPad recognizes it as a word. Thanks NS.

It's not fully about signing a document or not.
So no, polygamy is somewhat different to polyamory, and therefore the articles relating to polygamy are not related to polyamory.

[The New California Republic]

Human beings are meant to engage in only one intimate relationship, not multiple with multiple relationships with multiple partners.

According to what?

[Grenartia]

>what is ISIS and extremist Islam as a whole
>what is the incel movement
>what is white nationalism

I'll give you a hint, all of these groups prey on the same group to perpetuate themselves. Young men with nothing going for them in life, this is a very well documented thing by this point.

Due to social aspirations and desires it's not gonna be the average guy who benefits from widespread acceptance of polyamory, it's gonna be the really successful guy. Which will create even more lonely and angry young dudes who start shooting places up.

I do find "they have all the women" to be a weak argument to be against polyamory.

Its flimsier than fucking balsa wood. The little pig that hid in the house made of straw had a sturdier building material than whatever that argument is made of.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

Human beings are meant to engage in only one intimate relationship, not multiple with multiple relationships with multiple partners.

According to what?

mumble mumble jesus mumble holy bibble mumble

[Luminesa]

I don't like the idea of it, nor would I ever engage in that sort of relationship, but if people really want to, who am I to stop them?

I think the main issue I have is with actual polygamists who may or may not coerce multiple people into marriage (think the hardcore LDS sects in places like Colorado City). That can be problematic from an ethical and legal standpoint. There is a hugeline between relationships where non-monogamy is encouraged and marriages that involve people accruing a number of wives, often in an unethical and terrible fashion.

*Points to Sister Wives.*

[Washington Resistance Army]

>what is ISIS and extremist Islam as a whole
>what is the incel movement
>what is white nationalism

I'll give you a hint, all of these groups prey on the same group to perpetuate themselves. Young men with nothing going for them in life, this is a very well documented thing by this point.

Due to social aspirations and desires it's not gonna be the average guy who benefits from widespread acceptance of polyamory, it's gonna be the really successful guy. Which will create even more lonely and angry young dudes who start shooting places up.

Where does one even begin in unpacking something so fractally wrong?

Polyamory is not responsible in any way for "bad mooslem", incels, and neonazis. To claim otherwise is to be entirely dismissive of the multitude of other factors that cause people to be drawn in towards them. Polyamorous people are not responsible for making sure people don't turn into hateful mass-murdering scumbags. I hate to break it to you.

I never said polyamory was responsible for those movements, I said they prey on the same part of society to self perpetuate. The part that widespread acceptance of polyamory/polygamy would create more of.

[Galloism]

Again, they’re about 99% the same thing. It’s missing a few documents and a record with some sort of government clerk.

I look forward to your support of schtlicking. Which I’ve now used enough times my iPad recognizes it as a word. Thanks NS.

It's not fully about signing a document or not.
So no, polygamy is somewhat different to polyamory, and therefore the articles relating to polygamy are not related to polyamory.

Explain the difference.

It’s not that polyamory has multiple interrelated relationships. Polygamy has that sometimes, and polyamory doesn’t necessarily. It’s that there’s love between all participants, which polygamy has that sometimes, and polyamory doesn’t necessarily.

Barring the paperwork aspect, I’m really struggling to see any difference at all.

[Atlacatl Batallion]

Can someone really point to a social good that comes out of polygamy/polyamory?

Also, can someone point to a meaningful difference between polygamy and polyamory?

I understand everyone has strong opinions regarding both, but the topic is whether or not, at the social level, they would do more harm than good, if I understand the OP correctly, not whether or not we should allow them per se.

[Celritannia]

Where does one even begin in unpacking something so fractally wrong?

Polyamory is not responsible in any way for "bad mooslem", incels, and neonazis. To claim otherwise is to be entirely dismissive of the multitude of other factors that cause people to be drawn in towards them. Polyamorous people are not responsible for making sure people don't turn into hateful mass-murdering scumbags. I hate to break it to you.

I never said polyamory was responsible for those movements, I said they prey on the same part of society to self perpetuate. The part that widespread acceptance of polyamory/polygamy would create more of.

I highly doubt that, and there is no evidence to suggest it either.

Men have attacked women who dumped them and started dating someone else.

[Grenartia]

It specifically focuses on a few, hand-picked special cases to attempt to paint the entire concept as inherently flawed (and even dangerous).

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3782180/

Where's that post I made...

Here.

Cherrypicking is when you choose a few pieces of evidence supporting your position out of a lot of pieces of evidence that generally don't. There are not a lot of pieces of evidence that generally indicate that polyamory is okay.

Its easy to make the entire concept of polyamory look bad when you focus only on cases of societies in the past which tolerated non-monogamy and had plenty of other problems, instead of examining the concept itself and only what is inherent to it.

[Nap the Magnificent]

Gren, if it is fabricated bullshit, give us some evidence on the other hand.

I don't have qualms with consenting polyamory but you have to be fair.

I'm not the one making a positive claim. The burden of proof falls on them to show that polyamory is bad, not on me to disprove that claim.

We literally gave you links to research showing that polygamy is bad and all you could do is claim that they must be full of bullshit.

[Galloism]

Also, can someone point to a meaningful difference between polygamy and polyamory?

Usually polygamous marriages have paperwork on file with some government agency that records these things.

[Washington Resistance Army]

I never said polyamory was responsible for those movements, I said they prey on the same part of society to self perpetuate. The part that widespread acceptance of polyamory/polygamy would create more of.

I highly doubt that, and there is no evidence to suggest it either.

Men have attacked women who dumped them and started dating someone else.

Hypergamy yo

[Major-Tom]

I don't like the idea of it, nor would I ever engage in that sort of relationship, but if people really want to, who am I to stop them?

I think the main issue I have is with actual polygamists who may or may not coerce multiple people into marriage (think the hardcore LDS sects in places like Colorado City). That can be problematic from an ethical and legal standpoint. There is a hugeline between relationships where non-monogamy is encouraged and marriages that involve people accruing a number of wives, often in an unethical and terrible fashion.

*Points to Sister Wives.*

...Jesus Christ, that's an actual show? What the fuck.