Quote :

"Like any good investment, emotional bonds should grow stronger over time, they just won't grow as fast as if I was only dating one person."

this is laughable

you can't say that emotion is a key component of polyamory and then pretend like you're capable of remaining so emotionally distant that you won't become lonely/sad/upset/depressed/whatever when one of these people you have an emotional connection with finds a better one with someone else

i'm not saying someone, somewhere, isn't capable of doing it...i'm saying YOU aren't because your blatantly obvious self-esteem and emotional issues guarantee you aren't

this thread is retarded...polyamory works until someone finds themselves more emotionally invested than they "planned" on being...in which case, drama and whining ensues

7/29/2011 12:10:06 PM

Quote :

"If you want to sleep around, sleep around. You don't need to church it all up with a fancy and misleading name like Polyamory."

Yeah, you kinda do, because it implies awareness of your partner(s). Otherwise it's just cheating.

Quote :

"If reasonable people did poly relationships I think that is what would/should happen. ... it's not the rational ones who do that though."

That's bullshit. You can't make that statement just because you don't know anyone with a stable poly relationship.

http://www.reddit.com/r/polyamory/comments/in45n/what_is_the_longest_poly_relationship_that_you/

7/29/2011 12:12:26 PM

Quote :

"I was reading a layman's review of a scientific article a while back about the predisposition of women to cheat while on their menstrual cycle. This is nothing new, but it backs what people have known intuitively for years. Women crave stable men 3 weeks out of the month. The accountant type with a boring but stable job who provides a good home and a steady paycheck. But when she's fertile, give her that "super-dominant male monkey motherfucker" who will slam his superior genetic code deep into her ripe fallopian tubes and ensure that her children are bad mother fuckers just like him."

meh, the jury is still out on a lot of what you say. The point of using science to answer social questions is that we accept that our current notions and stereotypes may or may not turn out to be correct.

Science has found a huge impact from the HLA chromosomes, which code for the immune system. Women have a strong predisposition to the HLA phenotypes in a male at all times, and it's super heightened during menstruation. The chemicals she's looking for are those that show he's genetically different from her, which can possibly make a stronger immune system in offspring (with effects well documented), or just act as a proxy to prevent inbreeding. Males can't smell this by the way, only females can, and they don't even know they do it.

You would think the "sniff test" would be a direct result of genetics, but it's not. This chemical system in a woman's body is established through breast feeding, but it works since the mother has similar genes to her anyway. Many people today were not breast fed or were adopted or something, meaning those women no longer have this natural ability to sniff for better genetic partners, or they have it and it's looking for the wrong guy.

I understand what you're saying about the alpha-male, and it's true to some extent, but what you describe is our relatives and not us. Humans are no so simple at all. If you look at people who have dedicated their lives to tricking women into having sex with them, pickup artist communities, you find really messed up tactics. They establish social dominance by getting attention from the her friends and ignore the target, and then downright insult her. This gets them laid, and even lets them steal women from other men. Really.

The social order in human communities isn't determined by strength, contrary to many other animal communities. Homo Sapiens dominated by exactly not doing that. Having big, energy hungry, brains in an uncertain world is the reason these "needs" are there in the first place, because neglecting to make social bonds would virtually guarantee reproductive failure in early communities.

Maybe there was a pendulum that swung between monogamy and polyamory in hunter gather communities, I don't know. The bottom line is that we developed in an environment where the ability to identify loyalty was a matter of life and death, which is why we're so sensitive to the matter now. The general attitude in this thread is that other people doubt that sylvershadow fosters the kind of loyalty she thinks she does in a polyamory community.

7/29/2011 12:14:54 PM

Quote :

"You would think the "sniff test" would be a direct result of genetics, but it's not. This chemical system in a woman's body is established through breast feeding, but it works since the mother has similar genes to her anyway. Many people today were not breast fed or were adopted or something, meaning those women no longer have this natural ability to sniff for better genetic partners, or they have it and it's looking for the wrong guy. "

Pure. Comic. Gold.

7/29/2011 12:33:24 PM

Quote :

"you can't say that emotion is a key component of polyamory and then pretend like you're capable of remaining so emotionally distant that you won't become lonely/sad/upset/depressed/whatever when one of these people you have an emotional connection with finds a better one with someone else"

I always admit I have issues, but I'm aware of them and I think they are about the same as every other person on this message board. I've also been trying to work on them for years now, and nothing has really worked for me. So I figure, maybe it's not really ME that's the problem, maybe its how I go about relationships. And that is why I say I'm going to TRY polyamory. I have no idea if it will work, but I realized why do I have to try and make one person fit the bill for all my sexual, emotional, and entertainment needs? 1) It's nearly impossible to find one person to do all that and 2) It's stressful to both people when you're both trying to get the other person to fulfill all those needs. Why not just accept each other as who they are? Realize that hey, I'm not going to fulfill all his needs, so if he sees other women, I'm happy for him (compersion) because it makes our bond stronger when he comes to me to fulfill other needs. And same with me.

Anyways, key word is TRY. No idea if that is how things will turn out and I'm sure there will be times when my feelings are hurt, but emotionally mature people know that this happens and can accept it or make agreements so it doesnt happen again

7/29/2011 1:07:31 PM

Trying to be in a real relationship in 2011 is like being in a real conversation on TWW.


It's never going to happen.


Back in the day, when everyone knew of 1 way to do things. I.E. Man and woman get married and must stay married for the rest of their lives... relationships lasted a lifetime. Relationships were enforced by society and didn't necessarily give in to someone sob story about being unhappy.

Today is pretty much a free-for-all to do whatever.. whenever.. for whyever.

7/29/2011 1:32:06 PM

Quote :

"So I don't think polyamory "implies" significant investment in multiple people."

Poly = Many. Amor = Love.

Last I checked love was an investment. Again, I'm not criticizing your decision to sleep around I just feel like you're hiding behind a name to justify your admitted emotional instability. Fuck it, embrace the crazy and ride the wave.

Quote :

"it implies awareness of your partner(s). Otherwise it's just cheating. "

Swinging isn't cheating and only an asshole would pretend that swingers "love" all the people they fuck.

Quote :

"The chemicals she's looking for are those that show he's genetically different from her, which can possibly make a stronger immune system in offspring (with effects well documented), or just act as a proxy to prevent inbreeding."

No argument here. But with a wide variety of genetic differences, there are other factors that will play into it.

Quote :

"I understand what you're saying about the alpha-male, and it's true to some extent, but what you describe is our relatives and not us. Humans are no so simple at all. If you look at people who have dedicated their lives to tricking women into having sex with them, pickup artist communities, you find really messed up tactics. They establish social dominance by getting attention from the her friends and ignore the target, and then downright insult her. This gets them laid, and even lets them steal women from other men. Really."

Key phrase, "they establish social dominance". Not sure it matters how / why they do it.

Quote :

"The social order in human communities isn't determined by strength, contrary to many other animal communities. Homo Sapiens dominated by exactly not doing that."

I'm not arguing that and I apologize if I gave that impression. Physical strength alone is not enough to establish dominance in human society, but there is a reason that (with the sole exception of GWB) every President elected since the beginning of the television age has been the taller of the two candidates. Most flag officers in the military are in the range of 6' tall (GEN Petraeus being a notable exception). Chick lit isn't filled with stories of squat balding strangers in corporate offices sweeping women off their feet in the elevator. While it isn't the only force in motion, there is something to be said for physical dominance at a young age leading to the development of socially dominating traits later in life.

7/29/2011 1:36:48 PM

Quote :

"Trying to be in a real relationship in 2011 is like being in a real conversation on TWW."

while i don't necessarily agree with this statement, it made me laugh

7/29/2011 2:01:36 PM

relevant issue: http://news.yahoo.com/jeffs-defends-polygamy-during-sex-assault-trial-172409698.html

7/29/2011 2:14:09 PM

Quote :

"So I figure, maybe it's not really ME that's the problem, maybe its how I go about relationships."

ummm...if the latter is true, then the former is, too...at least you're finally admitting that the issue lies with you

i look forward to when you realize that slutting it up isn't going to "fix" you

7/29/2011 2:16:37 PM

Quote :

"Swinging isn't cheating and only an asshole would pretend that swingers "love" all the people they fuck."

Polyamory isn't swinging. Only an asshole would pretend that polyamorous people don't "love" the people they have a relationship with.

7/29/2011 2:19:09 PM

love IS TO women AS sex IS TO men.



Is this a valid analogy?

7/29/2011 2:23:30 PM

i don't quite understand the need to be romantically involved.

i have lots of guy and girl friends that i love (yes i love them) dearly but i don't feel the need to sleep with them.


am i looking at this wrong?
should i want to sleep with them? (seriously...from an evolutionary standpoint-is that what im supposed to do?)



[Edited on July 29, 2011 at 2:32 PM. Reason : ??]

7/29/2011 2:28:30 PM

Quote :

"Only an asshole would pretend that polyamorous people don't "love" the people they have a relationship with."

I didn't imply this at all. I just pointed out that there are polygamous relationships that don't require the tortured sobriquet for "Polyamorous". I'm not saying polyamorous relationships don't or can't exist, but I suspect that truly polyamorous relationships are more spontaneous than planned and are exceedingly rare.

Quote :

"seriously...from an evolutionary standpoint-is that what im supposed to do?"

No, as a female with limited opportunities to reproduce by virtue of the fact that you can only carry one child to term every 9 months (as opposed to a man who can inseminate an indefinite number of women) you're supposed to be as selective as possible to ensure the best possible genetic code is passed on to your offspring.

Obviously, the sexual revolution and birth control have allowed women a great deal of freedom sexually, but don't rule out thousands of years of evolutionary biology especially when it comes to something as fundamentally evolutionarily important as reproductive strategies.

7/29/2011 2:44:54 PM

Quote :

"should i want to sleep with them? (seriously...from an evolutionary standpoint-is that what im supposed to do?)"

a) Evolution is a random walk and many of the things we look for what we're supposed to do are just cases of over-analyzing
b) a lot of what we think is wrong anyway

If I had to say, I would guess that you need your friends to help chase down large game on the Savannah. YOU CAN'T FELL A BEAST WITH 2 PEOPLE NOW CAN YOU?

[Edited on July 29, 2011 at 2:59 PM. Reason : 'T]

7/29/2011 2:49:36 PM

lol

i love you guys

7/29/2011 2:54:31 PM

7/29/2011 4:28:18 PM

I love Joie. She has an attention span of no longer than her own post.


"You guys, I'm really really really interested in knowing why you're wrong and I'm right and vice versa. I'm serious! I love learning and understanding other people's psychology!!
...
nevermind my brain's full right now. Maybe another time."




[Edited on July 29, 2011 at 4:54 PM. Reason : .]

7/29/2011 4:54:07 PM

hahahaha...i do have a super short attention span.

and i tend to bite off more than i can chew because of it


i love taking in everything

[Edited on July 29, 2011 at 4:58 PM. Reason : i'm genuinely curious though. i ask a LOT of questions irl. a fucking lot. ]

7/29/2011 4:55:52 PM

Quote :

"I just pointed out that there are polygamous relationships that don't require the tortured sobriquet for "Polyamorous"."

Polyamory is a subset is polygamy, so that's definitely true.

Quote :

"I'm not saying polyamorous relationships don't or can't exist, but I suspect that truly polyamorous relationships are more spontaneous than planned and are exceedingly rare."

You're might be right. Relationships that aren't as spontaneous can work out though, and if someone wants to experiment, they should go for it. This is more of a philosophy on relationships in general. Some people prefer to just let it happen, and some prefer to actively seek it out. For me, the former seems to result in greater stability.

Quote :

"If I had to say, I would guess that you need your friends to help chase down large game on the Savannah. YOU CAN'T FELL A BEAST WITH 2 PEOPLE NOW CAN YOU?"

Quote :

"I love Joie. She has an attention span of no longer than her own post."

lol

[Edited on July 29, 2011 at 5:37 PM. Reason : .]

7/29/2011 5:32:46 PM

Quote :

"I have no idea if it will work, but I realized why do I have to try and make one person fit the bill for all my sexual, emotional, and entertainment needs? "

Why do you expect that all of your needs should be met in life? Once you accept that they don't all have to be fulfilled, you realize that they're not all really needs. At that point, you can be a lot more content.

I'm only half-kidding; it does sound like you're expecting life to be a nonstop thrill ride, and from all the things you've mentioned in this thread and elsewhere, I don't think there is enough time in the day to meet all of your needs, much less enough people to meet them with.

7/29/2011 6:05:05 PM

^ that makes sense if you take her words at face value

she's really just trying to ameliorate the shame she feels for being a slut

7/29/2011 6:33:02 PM

Quote :

"i love taking in everything "

that's what she said

7/29/2011 6:35:52 PM

I don't know where you ever got the impression that I'm ashamed of enjoying sex. I'm sad for you if you feel that way about sex.

7/30/2011 12:23:42 AM

i never once said you were ashamed of enjoying sex

i'm suggesting that you're ashamed of being a slut, evidenced by your misguided attempt to come up with some bullshit term to cover the fact that you're incapable of having a normal relationship, coupled with the pathetic claim that you can't find a single man that meets all of your "needs"

i'm quite aware that "normal" is subjective...so perhaps i mean "healthy" instead

and, just for clarification, i'm not saying that engaging in polyamory isn't healthy...i'm suggesting that, based on your post history in general and this thread in particular, polyamory doesn't seem healthy for YOU

7/30/2011 2:17:49 PM

Quote :

"i'm suggesting that you're ashamed of being a slut, evidenced by your misguided attempt to come up with some bullshit term to cover the fact that you're incapable of having a normal relationship, coupled with the pathetic claim that you can't find a single man that meets all of your "needs""

It's healthy that she's ashamed of being a slut. Slut is a derogatory term. Are you a nigger or are you African American? Are you an Italian or a Gwop? Asian or Chinky? Slut or Polyamorous?

Learn some respect, dude.

7/30/2011 4:17:54 PM

LOL

[Edited on July 30, 2011 at 4:21 PM. Reason : ]

7/30/2011 4:21:27 PM

Quote :

"Are you a nigger or are you African American? Are you an Italian or a Gwop? Asian or Chinky? Slut or Polyamorous?"

none of the above...i'm one of the lucky few who fall into the category of middle-class white guy and am therefore immune from such derision

Quote :

"Learn some respect, dude."

i'm not sure if you're serious or not, but the notion of giving this girl respect is downright laughable...the very fact that she wrote "I think it's going to be impossible for me to find someone who meets 100% of my needs" automatically makes her embarrassingly naïve

she's far more immature than a 27-year old should be

7/30/2011 5:08:55 PM

this seems like it would be excellent for a group of couples but could quickly become a sausage fest when single men caught wind of it

7/30/2011 7:33:49 PM

Quote :

"the very fact that she wrote "I think it's going to be impossible for me to find someone who meets 100% of my needs" automatically makes her embarrassingly naïve"

Actually, it makes you embarrassingly naive about probability and statistics. There's a 7.1 million to 1 chance of picking a winning combination in a pick-6 lottery game out of a limited set of numbers.

Let's start with the world population of 7 BILLION.

Imagine each of your "needs" as a number between 1 and X (where x>=1) symbolizing every possible outcome for that particular need.

If you have one need to fulfill, it's pretty simple to find someone to fulfill it.

For example: If one of your needs is "My partner needs to be the opposite gender" then you have eliminated 1/2 of the world's population.

You have 3.5 Billion men/women to choose from.

If you have two needs to fulfill, the pool of people to choose from is even slimmer.

For example: If one of your needs is "My partner needs to be the opposite gender" and a second need is "My partner has to be over 18 and younger than 50" then you have eliminated roughly 3/4 of the world's population.

So you're down to 1.25 Billion people to choose from.

How about a mere THIRD need of "My partner NEEDS to be within my own state"

Now you're down to 1/4 of your state's population: 2,383,871 people.

So from 7.1 BILLION, you're down to 2.3 MILLION in THREE VARIABLES.

Now take a guess how many NEEDS you have.

Finding someone who fulfills even half of your needs is likened to be like winning the lottery or better.

7/30/2011 7:35:24 PM

i think that may be a little misleading.
applying that to the general population may be a little off.

don't most people have the same basic "needs"?
(for the most part for "normal" people...and for those that are outliers there are subcultures that cater to that....hell polyamory is one)


maybe "desirables" is a better term.

[Edited on July 30, 2011 at 8:59 PM. Reason : shit this is Joie. damnit cod. ]

7/30/2011 8:59:33 PM

Christ on a pogo stick. Sorry I said "I think it's going to be impossible for me to find someone who meets 100% of my needs".

What I meant to say was "It's impossible for me to find someone who meets 100% of my needs and I don't want to be like the majority of the population who settles for less that 100%".

And Shadowrunner is right... life is not all sunshine and flowers, but it's my life and I choose to make it as fun and exciting as possible.

For one, I am usually the one to instigate a break up. I truly loved some of my ex's but after a while they become too familiar and you're both set in your ways and your interaction with each other. Sure, you can both go do things on your own with friends, or try new things with eachother, or try new things in bed. But you each have things you like and dislike that no manner of convincing will make the other enjoy. They're still going to feel and smell and taste the same and have the same thrusting motions and the same things that they like done to them and the same things they like to do to you.

I am running into a problem already tho: physical limits! I'm already too sore from one guy to keep a date with another. Which is totally unfair to guy #2. Oh sad day.



[Edited on July 31, 2011 at 3:25 PM. Reason : f]

7/31/2011 2:58:57 PM

Quote :

"I am running into a problem already tho: physical limits!"

You'll also find out that the amount of attention you are physically able to exert may not exceed the minimum requirement of attention for each guy. 1 person usually has about 1 person's worth of attention needs. Since you are 1 person, you must divide your attention inventory by 1/2 per guy or else you'll run out of wanting to give the guy any attention. When this happens, the guy begins to want you twice as bad the next day until his attention needs are met. You can force yourself to meet his needs, but it will feel like a job/work with no pay at the end of the day.

Most people have fwb that require zero to ten percent attention, while having a gf/bf that requires 90% of that attention.

In any case, as long as that amount of attention needed doesn't exceed your daily inventory of attention, you can have as many guys as you want.*

*you must know that if a guy only requires 1/3 your attention, he is getting 2/3rd from someone else.

7/31/2011 3:21:18 PM

It amuses me that nobody really brought up the trust factor...

If you're really going to go about the poly lifestyle, that requires trust moreso than a typical relationship. If you're in a polygamous relationship, you're trusting your SO to be honest, open, and safe. You're trusting your relationship is strong enough to withstand the 'trade in' distraction that will happen with the other relationships.

If you're in a monogamous relationship, you trust your SO isn't cheating on you. Its harder to get distracted when you don't 'start' a relationship with someone else.

People in general are not trusting. Its rare to find people who can trust each other to commit to that sort of relationship, let alone ones you want to be in that sort of relationship with. Or you can forgo the trust, but as pointed out, there are several risks that then increase dramatically.



All that being said, if you're into it, more power to you! Its not for everyone, but that's not to say its for nobody. I tried it before and it definitely had its perks, but the trust factor bubbles up; people aren't honest with themselves for what they want, and things come to blow.

7/31/2011 3:50:01 PM

LMAO, that last post from the OP is begging to get shit on

7/31/2011 4:34:36 PM

loving your partner, taking an interest at least occasionally in their passions, carrying out duties as they are agreed upon and being generally helpful otherwise, refraining from spending sprees or hiding or stealing money, making love when they want unless you are physically unable and being generous with affection and "free time" should be enough to fulfill the needs of partners who come together as equals, along with a no-cheating clause in there for most couples. There's no reason why people, even someone with personality disorder can't fulfill that list with two or more people but it's hard enough with one, as most vanilla couples will testify. And, if you feel like you have more needs from your partner you need some intensive one-on-one therapy, preferably before you're experimenting with other people's emotions.


but if you really have "border personality disorder" then you have to know that the toxic emotional element in your past monogamous relationships has probably been you. people with personality disorder are quite prone to "needing" more from a partner than they can give back themselves, which will always leave the partner frustrated. you may be more able to attract more genuinely interested partners by mirroring their interests and best qualities, but sustaining 2 sets of artificial interests will get tiresome even quicker. even if you have two people to "fulfill your needs", you still won't be fulfilling theirs, even though your extravagant behavior, violent tantrums and accusations of infidelity and abandonment might be more bearable divided among 2 people.

In short, I think you will just cause more emotional damage if you pursue multiple relationships, but not because there is anything wrong with polygamy. But having an untreated mental disorder wreaks hell on any relationship. people with personality disorder are well known to unwittingly completely destroy their poor partner who thought they had found a soulmate, from their finances to their ability to trust and love, sometimes even damaging their bodies. you should seek long-term treatment before you emotionally scar yourself and others with tragically failed relationships.

7/31/2011 5:40:13 PM

Umm, regardless of how often people in this thread have claimed I'm crazy, none of then are psych's and none of them have actually met me and gotten to know me. All the "bitch is crazy" shit it this thread is immature name-calling, like the 7 yr old boys who claim girls have cooties.

I think that it's very presumptive and obnoxious that you would make that leap about "personality disorder". I've been to a couple of therapists, and its always been during college because I guess the stress of school makes me depressed so that's usually what I deal with. They've never mentioned any sort of personality disorders, and I don't fit the bill for any so I don't have a personality disorder.
Other than that, my personal issues are mostly related to hormones and my monthly cycle.

Quote :

" extravagant behavior, violent tantrums and accusations of infidelity and abandonment "

Who the hell are you talking about? Cause that is definitely not me.

[Edited on August 1, 2011 at 9:11 AM. Reason : f]

8/1/2011 9:09:14 AM

GeniuSxBoY, you put way too much effort into missing the point...not surprising from a failed pizza joint owner, but you have my pity nonetheless

Quote :

"Umm, regardless of how often people in this thread have claimed I'm crazy, none of then are psych's and none of them have actually met me and gotten to know me."

some things do not require an advanced degree in psychology to be identified as "crazy"...though perhaps it's unfair in the sense that i certainly don't mean you're clinically insane...just stupid...see below:

Quote :

"What I meant to say was "It's impossible for me to find someone who meets 100% of my needs and I don't want to be like the majority of the population who settles for less that 100%"."

this makes you an idiot, though i suppose i was giving you the benefit of the doubt in attributing it to emotional dysfunction

there are very few people in this world with few enough "needs" (by your apparent definition) that they can be met by a slew of people, let alone one...and i'm betting most of those are vegetables whose only needs are to have their catheters changed and to be rolled over to prevent bed sores

you quite obviously have unrealistic and immature expectations of what you "need"...whether that stems from general naïveté or emotional issues, it's likely something you should have addressed under the care of a professional

there are, undoubtedly, many relationships in which realistic needs are not met by the significant other and as such, are unhappy, unstable, destined to fail, whatever...but there is no point in this thread in which you've given the impression of having realistic expectations

look, i don't care if you get fucked by 10 guys to the point that you walk bowlegged for a week...keep it safe and enjoy yourself...but please at least TRY to understand yourself well enough to recognize that you're incapable of having a stable relationship and that you are, quite likely, the biggest part of that problem

[Edited on August 1, 2011 at 9:35 AM. Reason : grammar]

8/1/2011 9:30:49 AM

ITT we find out how long we can possibly talk about the excuse for sleeping around.

8/1/2011 9:34:47 AM

Quote :

"ITT we find out how long we can possibly talk about the excuse for sleeping around."

exactly...no one cares if she's a slut...people (myself included) just seem to take issue with her pathetic excuses for being one

8/1/2011 9:35:48 AM

is it pathetic because it doesn't conform to your beliefs?

8/1/2011 9:59:38 AM

have you read a single word i've written? it has absolutely nothing to do what i believe and everything to do with the fact that this girl has given every indication that she is incapable of handling the emotional aspect of sexual relationships and has (pathetically) tried to pawn it off as not being able to find a guy to meets her "needs"

never once has she considered that her "needs" are unrealistic and as such, will forever remain unfulfilled...the most likely scenario is she'll find a series of fuckbuddies into different things and remain the emotional crippled that she most likely is now

this girl might be a good lay (though let's be honest, a girl who will put out so willingly will be good enough for most guys), but she's an unlikely candidate for anything more serious than sex

which, if you'd bother to read ANYTHING i've written, you'd realize i don't care one iota about...i find her attempt to justify her decision to be a slut as anything but to be embarrassingly pathetic

how the hell have you made it through college without finding at least a couple of girls who are exactly like this? she's no more mature than a horny 16-year old...which is great for the guys who she'll put out for

8/1/2011 12:01:35 PM

Quote :

"Christ on a pogo stick. Sorry I said "I think it's going to be impossible for me to find someone who meets 100% of my needs". What I meant to say was "It's impossible for me to find someone who meets 100% of my needs and I don't want to be like the majority of the population who settles for less that 100%"."

My friend used to say the same thing. Then all her friends started getting married and having babies so she's settling for the most boring guy on the planet whom she doesn't even seem to really like just so she can get married too. She probably should have stuck with one of the many guys before him that she enjoyed their company and they treated her right.

8/1/2011 12:41:31 PM

^ why do i think i know that person

8/1/2011 12:43:56 PM

haha I'm sure you do

8/1/2011 12:47:12 PM

well, i was pretty sure last night you had publicly claimed to have BPD so if it's not the case, i retract the parts of my comment pertaining to textbook BPD behaviors.


I'm still interested in what exactly comprises your nebulous "needs" that still haven't been met by one partner. i think you should establish a firm list of what your "needs" are from a long-term partner or partners. i still think you'll find that one or more of these might be unrealistic for another person to completely fulfill for you in the first place. That or you have really been finding guys that can't give emotionally over and over again. in that case, 2 half-men still won't make a whole, given the extra efforts it will take to keep them both in your thrall.

I'm sure that the most successful groups of your poly community would tell you that juggling complicated relationships is just like juggling balls: you don't add the third until the first two are going smoothly, not because you can't keep anything up in the air.

[Edited on August 1, 2011 at 1:28 PM. Reason : ]

8/1/2011 1:27:35 PM

Allright, I'm just going to ignore quagmire because he is simply way off base about me, keeps repeating himself (how many times/ways can you call someone you don't know crazy?), hasn't read anything I've posted, and is only interested in projecting his pent up hatred of women onto me.

Quote :

"I'm still interested in what exactly comprises your nebulous "needs" that still haven't been met by one partner."

So, I hang out with people that are poly and/or spin fire, are into art, costuming, fetishes, and music and sex and alcohol and omg *gasp* even drugs. Most of them are even in control in their lives, as implausible as that sounds. They're also all very supportive of each other and accepting. I love this and I love all of them and all their various quirks and interests. Noone is perfect. One girl has a self image problem and is always wearing heels and corsets when the rest of us are running around naked. One guy is a sarcastic asshole. The list goes on, but once you realize their faults, you can accept them and move on. One of my needs is someone who's cool with this crowd. I also prefer dominant men. And then there's physical requirements. And emotional requirements.

Last guy I dated was in this crowd, but his bipolar issues meant every party we went to ended in a disaster for us because they would send him into a manic state and then I got to deal with the depressed state after. He also wasn't that into being dominant. (7mo)

The guy before that was awesome and fit in well but worked too much and wants kids, so that was doomed to end before it started. (3 mo)

The guy before that just wasn't that into me and was also not very dom. (6 mo)

The guy before that told me he wanted an open relationship after we'd been dating a month or more, and didn't tell me he was still involved with his long distance gf until after 6 months or so when she demanded he stop seeing me and he complied. (6-8 mo off and on)

The guy before that came off as dominant and cool at first and then proved to be submissive and very anti-social.
(3mo)

The guy before that I thought was the one--dom, fun, social, stable income...and then he bailed with no explanation at all, only "it's not you, it's me". (2 years)

Guy before that, wanted kids, not dom at all, not very adventuresome. (6mo)

Guy before that had lots of social anxiety and was not into trying new things. (2.5 yrs)

Guy before that was too outgoing for me (I was super shy then and was going thru a very large depression) ~6 mo.

And finally my first boyfriend-- went into the airforce and used pity and jealousy tactics to keep me in a long distance relationship with him my first year of college. And dammit, I wasn't going to settle down with the first guy I ever dated. (2 years)

So, that's all the ones I actually dated for longer than a couple weeks. The rest I slept with a few times and some I still sleep with but wouldn't date for various reasons. So tell me, TWW, who should I have settled for?

[Edited on August 1, 2011 at 2:11 PM. Reason : f]

8/1/2011 2:10:31 PM

looks like the greatest common factor in all of this is you.

8/1/2011 2:16:37 PM

^ wow really?? How profound. I guess I should have listed all my friends ex bf's as well, because that would have really helped out there.

8/1/2011 2:17:48 PM

Again sylver is right. She's living in the real world.

Anyone who can find someone that can fit all their needs is a lottery winner.


Not only is it nearly impossible to find someone that meets all your needs, but it has to be bi-directional and you have to meet all their needs, too.

It's quite an amazing feat.

All the relationships you think are perfect, they are just a front. They are fighting and yelling and backhanding each other behind closed doors.

[Edited on August 1, 2011 at 2:21 PM. Reason : .]

8/1/2011 2:21:11 PM