Women's polyamory

[Six]

Girls, women, who is in the subject and how did you approach this? Do you get a kick out of it yourself or do you “prove” something to the guys?

[The passage]

Girls, women, who is in the know and how did you approach this? Do you get a kick out of it yourself or do you “prove” something to the guys?

This is a consequence of the lack of a serious relationship. There’s really nothing good about this.

[Epidemic]

This is a consequence of the lack of a serious relationship. In fact, there is nothing good about this.

I agree that women are for the most part monogamous, unlike men.

[Touch-a-Love]

There is an opinion that imposing polyamory as a norm is a very harmful practice, because it involves the infringement of women’s rights and lowers the position of a woman compared to a man. But I fully admit the opposite - that any woman has the right and opportunity to be polyamorous. But only if she wants it, of course.

[The passage]

There is an opinion that imposing polyamory as a norm is a very harmful practice, because it involves infringement of women’s rights and lowers the position of a woman compared to a man. But I fully admit the opposite - that any woman has the right and opportunity to be polyamorous. But only if she herself wants it, naturally.

What kind of opinion is this?))) Don’t be offended, but you wrote something stupid. I mean that this practice is harmful due to the infringement of rights. What rights are being infringed?))) The right to whore? A whore man has the right to whoreness, but a woman does not? It would look funny if it weren’t sad.
Google Promiscuity and read venereologists, sexologists, psychologists about how dangerous this phenomenon is.

[Serg_A]

Girls, women, who is in the subject and how did you approach this? Do you get a kick out of it yourself or do you “prove” something to the guys?

This is a consequence of the lack of a serious relationship. In fact, there is nothing good about this.

Well, not always, for example, five years ago you started falling in love with one guy, but now the love has passed, and you already have another one.

[niqk]

Serg_A, well, this is somewhat different. And here is a girl’s male harem. And she loves everyone! And you can
say it’s the same!

[The passage]

Girls, women, who is in the subject and how did you approach this? Do you get a kick out of it yourself or do you “prove” something to the guys?

This is a consequence of the lack of a serious relationship. In fact, there is nothing good about this.

Well, not always, for example, five years ago you started falling in love with one guy, but now the love has passed, and you already have another one.

You apparently don’t know what polyamory is. Polyamory is when your partner is aware and does not mind the fact that he is not the only sexual partner. Open relationship.

[in the]

Why are women who have many sexual partners called a dirty word, so such a woman is an outcast in a female environment?

[The passage]

why are women who have many sexual partners called a dirty word, why is such a woman an outcast in a female environment?

Because such women are capable of destroying a family . She doesn’t care who she’s with, but the men are males, they saw someone else’s skirt and saliva flowed.
Of course, some men may be indignant that they don’t salivate at the sight of pretty, sexy women and they need something more, not just see. Therefore, I will immediately make a reservation that I do not take homosexuals and impotent people into account.

[in the]

Because such women are capable of destroying a family.

Is it really only married women who condemn her?

[The passage]

Because such women are capable of destroying a family.

is it really only married women who condemn her?

Not only women, but also men with low self-esteem. They understand their inferiority and admit it, but they want there to be someone who is lower than them in level and so they join the general opinion. Infantile and weak-willed.

[in the]

Not only women, but also men with low self-esteem.

it seems my question was not related to men

[The passage]

Not only women, but also men with low self-esteem.

it seems my question was not related to men

Your question was:

Because such women are capable of destroying a family. n

is it really only married women who condemn her?

I told you that not only.
If you were expecting a different answer, then try to formulate your question differently.

[Valimor]

I know a lot of swinging couples where women are sexwives and quietly walk away from their spouse with his full permission and consent. Moreover, even if we talk not about swing couples, but ordinary couples, many women fuck on the side.

[Serg_A]

This is a consequence of the lack of a serious relationship. In fact, there is nothing good about this.

Well, not always, for example, five years ago you started falling in love with one guy, but now the love has passed, and you already have another one.

You apparently don’t know what polyamory is. Polyamory is when your partner is aware and does not mind the fact that he is not the only sexual partner. Open relationship.

Yes, you’re right.)

[in the]

I answered you that not only.
If you were expecting a different answer, then try to formulate your question differently.

my question was about married, for some reason you didn’t see this and dragged in men

[The passage]

I told you that not only.
If you were expecting a different answer, then try to formulate your question differently.

my question was about married, for some reason you didn’t see this and dragged men in

nIf you were not interested in the opinion of men, then you would have written that you are only interested in women. I have already written about women above. Why did you decide that I wrote about married women?

Sent after 1 minute 57 seconds:

Well, not always, for example, five years ago you started falling in love with one guy, and now the love has passed, and you have another.

You apparently don’t know what polyamory is. Polyamory is when your partner is aware and does not mind the fact that he is not the only sexual partner. Open relationship.

Yes, you’re right.)

It’s nice to be with you communicate. There are very few adequate men here, with normal self-esteem and the ability to think.

[in the]

If you were not interested in the opinion of men, then you would have written that you are only interested in women. I have already written about women above. Why did you decide that I wrote about married women?

oh, it’s hard for you with the conceptual apparatus... we’ve passed everything

[The passage]

If you were not interested in the opinion of men, then you would have written that you are only interested in women. I have already written about women above. Why did you decide that I wrote about married women?

oh, it’s hard for you with the conceptual apparatus... we’ve all passed

Why is it hard for me?))) Show me where I wrote about married women or show me where you asked not about men?)))
This It’s hard for you, but it won’t get easier, as I realized, not for the first time talking to you. So, go or walk, whichever is more convenient for you. Do you know the way?)))

[Serg_A]

why are women who have many sexual partners called a dirty word, why is such a woman an outcast in a female environment?

Because such women can destroy a family. She doesn’t care who she’s with, but the men are males, they saw someone else’s skirt and saliva flowed.
Of course, some men may be indignant that they don’t salivate at the sight of pretty, sexy women and they need something more, not just see. Therefore, I will immediately make a reservation that I do not take homosexuals and impotent people into account.

Everything is based on the law "He who is strong is right". I will give an example from the book of the Iranian writer Iraj Pezeshk-zod"My Uncle Napoleon". There he describes real people. One butcher had a very beautiful wife, and she walked away from him. But when some simpleton dared to even hint at this, the butcher (a huge and strong man)’s eyes became bloodshot, and he chased the unfortunate man, with an ax or knife, for several blocks. In general, no one blamed her. If she had been alone, they could have stoned her, as happened recently in Iran. And if that injured girl had a couple of Colts in her purse, everyone would immediately start asking for an apology. All this “morality” of ours is based on our meanness and the rule of the strong.

[The passage]

why are women with many sexual partners called a dirty word, why is such a woman an outcast in a female environment?

nBecause such women are capable of destroying a family. She doesn’t care who she’s with, but the men are males, they saw someone else’s skirt and saliva flowed.
Of course, some men may be indignant that they don’t salivate at the sight of pretty, sexy women and they need something more, not just see. Therefore, I will immediately make a reservation that I do not take homosexuals and impotent people into account.

Everything is based on the law "He who is strong is right". I will give an example from the book of the Iranian writer Iraj Pezeshk-zod"My Uncle Napoleon". There he describes real people. One butcher had a very beautiful wife, and she walked away from him. But when some simpleton dared to even hint at this, the butcher (a huge and strong man)’s eyes became bloodshot, and he chased the unfortunate man, with an ax or knife, for several blocks. In general, no one blamed her. If she had been alone, they could have stoned her, as happened recently in Iran. And if that injured girl had a couple of Colts in her purse, everyone would immediately start asking for an apology. All this “morality” of ours is based on our meanness, and the rule of the strong.

Morality is a way of survival for humanity. All these open relationships are good in theory. You want your child, right? And, if the relationship is open, then what are the chances that it was your sperm that fertilized the egg? You can, of course, come up with a rule that sex for conception is only with your husband, but this is no longer an open relationship. These are already restrictions.
Then STDs. Of course, you can ask everyone for a certificate from a venereologist, but... Let’s say you had sex today, and tomorrow you go to the doctor for a test. The doctor will tell you - you came early, it doesn’t work like that. Diseases have an incubation period and come back in a few weeks. These certificates work when you have one sexual partner, but if you have an unlimited relationship with sexual partners, then no certificates will help you and you will easily become infected and infect yourself. Family, monogamy and morality are not all in vain.
Your butcher may not have children from him and his wife could have infected him. Well, the fact that his wife is not condemned would not change anything. The children would not have become his because of this.
I understood what you want to say. Do you feel sorry for women prone to promiscuity? Think about their health. Not all STDs can be cured.

[Truwor]

You are very right. If a husband is pleased that his wife is with another man, then this should be without restrictions. Wife to me: - Are you ready that our child with you may not be yours? I am a woman, and first of all this will be my child. And you decide for yourself whether you are ready to accept our child from another man, from our friend. Our elder friend is right that in such relationships, sympathy between men is no less important than sympathy between men and women. Sympathy between men should be such that the husband allows his wife to give birth to a child from another man and perceives him as his own. Any restrictions are already hypocrisy in relation to oneself.

[Cyrus Tabor]

There is an opinion that imposing polyamory as a norm is a very harmful practice, because it involves infringement of women’s rights and lowers the position of a woman compared to a man. But I fully admit the opposite - that any woman has the right and opportunity to be polyamorous. But only if she herself wants it, naturally.

It turns out that when the idea of ​​polyamory is promoted by men, it is bad, but when women choose a polyamorous style in relationships , then is this correct? This is a purely feminist approach.

You apparently don’t know what polyamory is. Polyamory is when your partner is aware and does not mind the fact that he is not the only sexual partner. Open relationship.

Google Promiscuity

You do you feel sorry for women prone to promiscuity?

Polyamory is not the same as promiscuity. You confuse two phenomena and mislead people. There is a clue in the very words denoting the types of multipolar relationships. The first implies constant love relationships of one person with several people, and with some there may not even be a sexual relationship. Whereas promiscuity implies only sexual intercourse, moreover, intermittent and disorderly, essentially completely free and without creating a relationship more high level. There is also polygamy and polyandry, and they also have their own nuances and differences.

[The passage]

Polyamory is not the same as promiscuity. You are confusing two phenomena.

Polygamy is really not the same anymore, it is polygamy and polyandry. Well, polyamory means sex, it’s just that your other half is aware of it and is not against it.
Of course, you can understand this concept as exactly love for several people, but I think you understand everything correctly. If you are an adult.

[Touch-a-Love]

What kind of opinion is this?))) Don’t be offended, but you wrote something stupid. I mean that this practice is harmful due to the infringement of rights. What rights are being infringed?))) The right to whore? A whore man has the right to whoreness, but a woman does not? It would look funny if it weren’t sad.
Google Promiscuity and read venereologists, sexologists, psychologists about how dangerous this phenomenon is.

nYou yourself tend to give out, to put it mildly, emotions instead of facts on the forum. I myself am not inventing anything, in particular, on the wiki in the article "Polyamory" there is an interesting paragraph, with links to sources .

“Some authors emphasize that consensual monogamy—and polyamory in particular—can have negative effects on women. Thus, feminist Julie Bindel believes that polyamory is just another institution that reinforces the oppressed position of women in front of men[29]. According to another author, Conor Friedersdorf, the institution of monogamous marriage prevents men from competing for women and thereby reduces the overall level of violence in society, therefore, polyamorous relationships should not be encouraged [30].”

So before you try to be harsh, study the subject of discussion if you don’t know it well, but are trying to emotionally argue based on incorrect or one-sided ideas about it. You’ve already been told that you’re trying to lump polyamory and promiscuity together.
And yes, I don’t consider polyamory a positive factor, regardless of gender, you also don’t have to think for me.

It turns out that when the idea of ​​polyamory is promoted by men, it is bad, but when women choose for yourself, a polyamorous style in relationships, then is this correct?

It doesn’t matter who exactly is promoting polyamory in any case cannot be promoted as a norm. But living in such a relationship is completely possible and acceptable. For bisexual women, by the way, this may be the only possible type of relationship.

This is a purely feminist approach.

I like feminism as a movement and I share many feminist ideas.

[romannaich]

Marinka, this is exactly how a normal healthy man will react to a sexy girl a woman is dug up, what to do to pull a finger from a burn

[Keep the change for yourself]

Of all the people I saw as "polyamorous" in my youth, not a single one is left; they all have husbands and children.
Polyamory is a beautiful word to replace whoreness. I see in life that she jumped on dicks, calmed down, and went to look for a husband from a completely different social circle, or better yet from the other end of the city or better in another city.

As it seems to me (for me) of course there is little data), but married women change extremely, extremely rarely, and only during periods of family crises. IMHO

[The passage]

What kind of opinion is this?))) Don’t be offended, but you wrote something stupid. I mean that this practice is harmful due to the infringement of rights. What rights are being infringed?))) The right to whore? A whore man has the right to whoreness, but a woman does not? It would look funny if it weren’t sad.
Google Promiscuity and read venereologists, sexologists, psychologists about how dangerous this phenomenon is.

nYou yourself tend to give out, to put it mildly, emotions instead of facts on the forum. I myself am not inventing anything, in particular, on the wiki in the article "Polyamory" there is an interesting paragraph, with links to sources .

“Some authors emphasize that consensual monogamy—and polyamory in particular—can have negative effects on women. Thus, feminist Julie Bindel believes that polyamory is just another institution that reinforces the oppressed position of women in front of men[29]. According to another author, Conor Friedersdorf, the institution of monogamous marriage prevents men from competing for women and thereby reduces the overall level of violence in society, therefore, polyamorous relationships should not be encouraged [30].”

So before you try to be harsh, study the subject of discussion if you don’t know it well, but are trying to emotionally argue based on incorrect or one-sided ideas about it. You’ve already been told that you’re trying to lump polyamory and promiscuity together.
And yes, I don’t consider polyamory a positive factor, regardless of gender, you also don’t have to think for me.

It turns out that when the idea of ​​polyamory is promoted by men, it is bad, but when women choose for yourself, a polyamorous style in relationships, then is this correct?

It doesn’t matter who exactly is promoting polyamory in any case cannot be promoted as a norm. But living in such a relationship is completely possible and acceptable. For bisexual women, by the way, this may be the only possible type of relationship.

This is a purely feminist approach.

I like feminism as a movement, I share many of the ideas of feminists.

I suggested that you read sexologists, psychologists, venereologists, and you give me Wikipedia, with the opinion of a feminist.
Promiscuity is promiscuity. This should not be taken literally. An orderly sex life is when you have one single sexual partner. If there are more of them, then this is already promiscuity. Polyamory only means that you have sex not in secret from your boyfriend, but with his permission. That is, sex outside of relationships with different sexual partners, polyamory, family life with infidelity. All this is promiscuity.
Read the opinions of psychologists, sexologists and venereologists.

[Keep the change for yourself]

Marinka,
Oh, these feminists , there was Lenka the whore, and now polyamorous Elena

[Cyrus Tabor]

Touch-a-Love, Are you a feminist? Strange. Feminists do not write porn stories, and generally have a negative attitude towards porn, because they believe that this product is exclusively for the needs of male satiety.

Sent after 8 minutes 35 seconds:

polyamory means sex

No, that’s not true . Even these friend zones of yours can be included in the circle of polyamory. Take the average college-age girl. She definitely has a friend who has connections, has started to make a career and is positioned as a promising fiancé or even husband (sex is optional), but she also has a jerk who rides her in a black boomer and is ready to hit anyone in the face, and also there is a former classmate who follows her around like a platonic shadow and fulfills all her whims, but will never get sex. And she has all her favorites, but each in their own way.

[The passage]

No, that’s not true. Even these friend zones of yours can be included in the circle of polyamory. Take the average college-age girl. She definitely has a friend who has connections, has started to make a career and is positioned as a promising fiancé or even husband (sex is optional), but she also has a jerk who rides her in a black boomer and is ready to hit anyone in the face, and also there is a former classmate who follows her around like a platonic shadow and fulfills all her whims, but will never get sex. And everyone has her favorites, but each in their own way.

But, there must be agreement on each side of this love polygon. Yes, and in your example, she most likely has love for one thing. To the bully, because sex at this age is not yet a necessity. If it’s there, it’s good, but if it’s not, then it’s not necessary. Well, the bully most likely doesn’t like her. More precisely, he loves, loves to fuck.
A classmate loves her, but she just feels sorry for him. It’s hard to say what’s going on between her and her husband. But loving two people at the same time is not loving anyone.
Your example does not apply to polyamory. Neither the one I wrote about, nor the one you write about.

[Cyrus Tabor]

But, there must be agreement on each side of this love polygon. Yes, and in your example, she most likely has love for one thing. To the bully, because sex at this age is not yet a necessity. If it’s there, it’s good, but if it’s not, then it’s not necessary. Well, the bully most likely doesn’t like her. More precisely, he loves, loves to fuck...

So, the juggling of facts begins in order to fit the hypothetical situation to your theory. This is fine. This happens even among graduate students and other minors. I’m not even talking about students who are poorly prepared to defend their coursework or diploma.

[The passage]

But, there must be agreement on each side of this love polygon. Yes, and in your example, she most likely has love for one thing. To the bully, because sex at this age is not yet a necessity. If it’s there, it’s good, but if it’s not, then it’s not necessary. Well, the bully most likely doesn’t like her. More precisely, he loves, loves to fuck...

So, the juggling of facts begins in order to fit the hypothetical situation to your theory. This is fine. This happens even among graduate students and other minors.

I wasn’t too lazy and googled what polyamory is) It turns out that it includes both consensual sex and romantic relationships. But...
This is what Google gave me:
What is polyamory in simple words?
Polyamory is a form of non-monogamous relationship that involves more than two people. Polyamory differs from infidelity by consistency, that is, both partners are aware that in the relationship they are far from the only objects of love, and communication with other partners occurs with the consent of all participants in the relationship.

Consent is necessary in any case. Consent of all participants. Well, I was only mistaken in thinking that a romantic does not count.
So, we will have to redo our story with yours))

[Serg_A]

Because such women are capable of destroying a family. She doesn’t care who she’s with, but the men are males, they saw someone else’s skirt and saliva flowed.
Of course, some men may be indignant that they don’t salivate at the sight of pretty, sexy women and they need something more, not just see. Therefore, I will immediately make a reservation that I do not take homosexuals and impotent people into account.

Everything is based on the law "He who is strong is right". I will give an example from the book of the Iranian writer Iraj Pezeshk-zod"My Uncle Napoleon". There he describes real people. One butcher had a very beautiful wife, and she walked away from him. But when some simpleton dared to even hint at this, the butcher (a huge and strong man)’s eyes became bloodshot, and he chased the unfortunate man, with an ax or knife, for several blocks. In general, no one blamed her. If she had been alone, they could have stoned her, as happened recently in Iran. And if that injured girl had a couple of Colts in her purse, everyone would immediately start asking for an apology. All this “morality” of ours is based on our meanness, and the rule of the strong.

Morality is a way of survival for humanity. All these open relationships are good in theory. You want your child, right? And, if the relationship is open, then what are the chances that it was your sperm that fertilized the egg? You can, of course, come up with a rule that sex for conception is only with your husband, but this is no longer an open relationship. These are already restrictions.
Then STDs. Of course, you can ask everyone for a certificate from a venereologist, but... Let’s say you had sex today, and tomorrow you go to the doctor for a test. The doctor will tell you - you came early, it doesn’t work like that. Diseases have an incubation period and come back in a few weeks. These certificates work when you have one sexual partner, but if you have an unlimited relationship with sexual partners, then no certificates will help you and you will easily become infected and infect yourself. Family, monogamy and morality are not all in vain.
Your butcher may not have children from him and his wife could have infected him. Well, the fact that his wife is not condemned would not change anything. The children would not have become his because of this.
I understood what you want to say. Do you feel sorry for women prone to promiscuity? Think about their health. Not all STDs can be cured.

1. Marinka, you’re saying that now because you have there is someone to build such relationships with.
2. Regarding the morality and survival of humanity, at different times, and in different countries, there are different morals, and different family structures. And everyone somehow survives.
3.Yes, you can get various bad diseases. Your truth. I can only add that in addition to everything there are many diseases that are not only transmitted sexually, and which are also practically incurable.
4. Regarding the example from the book of the Iranian writer, I wanted to show that our morality actually is not as moral as we think. And also, I want to say that the desire for promiscuity is the same normal property of ours as the desire for monogamy. Even where they can kill for it, it still flourishes.
5.I wouldn’t like to speak about children, but if you insist, I will tell you my opinion

[The passage]

Everything is based on the law “He who is strong is right.” I will give an example from the book of the Iranian writer Iraj Pezeshk-zod"My Uncle Napoleon". There he describes real people. One butcher had a very beautiful wife, and she walked away from him. But when some simpleton dared to even hint at this, the butcher (a huge and strong man)’s eyes became bloodshot, and he chased the unfortunate man, with an ax or knife, for several blocks. In general, no one blamed her. If she had been alone, they could have stoned her, as happened recently in Iran. And if that injured girl had a couple of Colts in her purse, everyone would immediately start asking for an apology. All this “morality” of ours is based on our meanness, and the rule of the strong.

Morality is a way of survival for humanity. All these open relationships are good in theory. You want your child, right? And, if the relationship is open, then what are the chances that it was your sperm that fertilized the egg? You can, of course, come up with a rule that sex for conception is only with your husband, but this is no longer an open relationship. These are already restrictions.
Then STDs. Of course, you can ask everyone for a certificate from a venereologist, but... Let’s say you had sex today, and tomorrow you go to the doctor for a test. The doctor will tell you - you came early, it doesn’t work like that. Diseases have an incubation period and come back in a few weeks. These certificates work when you have one sexual partner, but if you have an unlimited relationship with sexual partners, then no certificates will help you and you will easily become infected and infect yourself. Family, monogamy and morality are not all in vain.
Your butcher may not have children from him and his wife could have infected him. Well, the fact that his wife is not condemned would not change anything. The children would not have become his because of this.
I understood what you want to say. Do you feel sorry for women prone to promiscuity? Think about their health. Not all STDs can be cured.

1. Marinka, you’re saying that now because you have there is someone to build such relationships with.
2. Regarding the morality and survival of humanity, at different times, and in different countries, there are different morals, and different family structures. And everyone somehow survives.
3.Yes, you can get various bad diseases. Your truth. I can only add that in addition to everything there are many diseases that are not only transmitted sexually, and which are also practically incurable.
4. Regarding the example from the book of the Iranian writer, I wanted to show that our morality actually is not as moral as we think. And also, I want to say that the desire for promiscuity is the same normal property of ours as the desire for monogamy. Even where they can kill for it, it still flourishes.
5.I wouldn’t like to speak out about children, but if you insist, I will tell you my opinion

I won’t insist. You better tell me why you feel sorry for people you know nothing about?

[Serg_A]

I like feminism as a movement and I share many of the ideas of feminists.

I also share all the ideas of feminists in their original form. If you take and read all this and strictly adhere to it, then I’m all for it. But now the ruling class is turning this movement into a purely bourgeois one, using it to divide people and pit them against each other, so that even in families people are divided.

[Serg_A]

Morality is a way for humanity to survive. All these open relationships are good in theory. You want your child, right? And, if the relationship is open, then what are the chances that it was your sperm that fertilized the egg? You can, of course, come up with a rule that sex for conception is only with your husband, but this is no longer an open relationship. These are already restrictions.
Then STDs. Of course, you can ask everyone for a certificate from a venereologist, but... Let’s say you had sex today, and tomorrow you go to the doctor for a test. The doctor will tell you - you came early, it doesn’t work like that. Diseases have an incubation period and come back in a few weeks. These certificates work when you have one sexual partner, but if you have an unlimited relationship with sexual partners, then no certificates will help you and you will easily become infected and infect yourself. Family, monogamy and morality are not all in vain.
Your butcher may not have children from him and his wife could have infected him. Well, the fact that his wife is not condemned would not change anything. The children would not have become his because of this.
I understood what you want to say. Do you feel sorry for women prone to promiscuity? Think about their health. Not all STDs can be cured.

1. Marinka, you’re saying that now because you have there is someone to build such relationships with.
2. Regarding the morality and survival of humanity, at different times, and in different countries, there are different morals, and different family structures. And everyone somehow survives.
3.Yes, you can get various bad diseases. Your truth. I can only add that in addition to everything there are many diseases that are not only transmitted sexually, and which are also practically incurable.
4. Regarding the example from the book of the Iranian writer, I wanted to show that our morality actually is not as moral as we think. And also, I want to say that the desire for promiscuity is the same normal property of ours as the desire for monogamy. Even where they can kill for it, it still flourishes.
5.I wouldn’t like to speak out about children, but if you insist, I will tell you my opinion

I won’t insist. You better tell me why you feel sorry for people you know nothing about?

I have always been against judging people for any of their personal qualities . Have they (people prone to promiscuity) raped, robbed, or killed someone? By the way, they don’t force anyone to come to them. And I’m generally against cruelty

[The passage]

1. Marinka, you’re saying that now because you have there is someone to build such relationships with.
2. Regarding the morality and survival of humanity, at different times, and in different countries, there are different morals, and different family structures. And everyone somehow survives.
3.Yes, you can get various bad diseases. Your truth. I can only add that in addition to everything there are many diseases that are not only transmitted sexually, and which are also practically incurable.
4. Regarding the example from the book of the Iranian writer, I wanted to show that our morality actually is not as moral as we think. And also, I want to say that the desire for promiscuity is the same normal property of ours as the desire for monogamy. Even where they can kill for it, it still flourishes.
5.I wouldn’t like to speak out about children, but if you insist, I will tell you my opinion

I won’t insist. You better tell me why you feel sorry for people you know nothing about?

I have always been against judging people for any of their personal qualities . Have they (people prone to promiscuity) raped, robbed, or killed someone? By the way, they don’t force anyone to come to them. And I’m generally against cruelty

You’re a smart girl. If suddenly, someday we get together for a meeting of forum members, I will definitely kiss you. On the cheek))) I am also against cruelty.
And, there are no people inclined to promiscuity, there are circumstances that force them to this. There’s no need to explain for a long time.

[Serg_A]

You are smart. If suddenly, someday we get together for a meeting of forum members, I will definitely kiss you. On the cheek))) I am also against cruelty

And I dream of carrying you in my arms)))

[Touch-a-Love]

Touch-a-Love, Are you a feminist? Strange. Feminists do not write porn stories, and generally have a negative attitude towards porn, because they believe that this product is exclusively for the needs of male satiety.

I do not unequivocally support all the ideas of feminists and completely. But I purposefully don’t write stories of this type; all you could read were fragments from books, those that could not be published in full editions. You will be surprised, but not only men consume porn, if anything.

I suggested that you read sexologists, psychologists, venereologists, and you give me Wikipedia, with the opinion of a feminist.

Can’t there be feminists among psychologists and sexologists? In my opinion, one does not interfere with the other. Why read venereologists? Their job is to treat patients according to the fact of their treatment and, moreover, with high quality, and not to soar in the empyrean. Besides, I see you with Cyrus Tabor already are approaching the creation of a unified theory of non-monogamy, your joint research will also be cited in the future. By the way,

Even these friend zones of yours can be included in the circle of polyamory. Take the average college-age girl. She definitely has a friend who has connections, has started to make a career and is positioned as a promising fiancé or even husband (sex is optional), but she also has a jerk who rides her in a black boomer and is ready to hit anyone in the face, and also there is a former classmate who follows her around like a platonic shadow and fulfills all her whims, but will never get sex. And she has all her favorites, but each in their own way.

If you exclude one extra element from your polygon (the groom or the brutal macho), the example will look more slender , sustainable and close to reality.

[The passage]

Can’t there be feminists among psychologists and sexologists?

Who is the feminist you cited as an example? Psychologist or sexologist?

[Vik.ruba80]

You apparently don’t know what polyamory is. Polyamory is when your partner is aware and does not mind the fact that he is not the only sexual partner. Open relationship.

if I’m on long business trips, then why limit my other half with any obligations, because life is so short. But sometimes it includes jealousy, why it’s hard to understand.

[King Bird]

In any case, polyamory cannot be promoted as the norm. But living in such a relationship is quite possible and acceptable. For bisexual women, by the way, this may be the only possible type of relationship.

This probably needs to be somehow developed more broadly, and asked from bisexuals themselves, men and women. After all, if a person is bi (and of any gender), then he cannot limit himself to one sexual partner in life. And if he consciously limits himself, then he is unable to show his bisexuality and become what he is (bent). Perhaps living with three is really the best option? And it turns out that it’s just a polyamorous family.

[Touch-a-Love]

This probably needs to be developed more broadly and asked from bisexuals themselves, men and women. After all, if a person is bi (and of any gender), then he cannot limit himself to one sexual partner in life. And if he consciously limits himself, then he is unable to show his bisexuality and become what he is (bent). Perhaps living with three is really the best option? And just like a polyamorous family it turns out.

I have never communicated with bi men. I’m not even sure if I’ve met them. And with women - yes. One of my friends lived with a woman constantly, as in a civil marriage, and dated a man from time to time, it was like a guest marriage. Everyone knew about each other, probably this is what a polyamorous relationship is. And this is an ideal case. Because everything else is just some kind of throwing around. Another woman, who lived in a legal marriage, was constantly looking for a girlfriend and nothing worked out for her. That is, I had sex with someone from time to time, but the relationship did not improve. The husband was strongly against such “disposable” hobbies, and as a result they got a divorce. I only know about life with three people or Swedish families from hearsay. And to what extent all this is true, and to what extent this model of relations is stable, I cannot judge.

[King Bird]

Here’s another, by the way, well-known type of polyamorous relationship on the part of a woman - cuckoldism. All three know about each other, and often see everything that happens. And everyone is fine.

[Henson]

Many people here confuse polyamory with polygamy/polyandry and open relationships. In two words, polyamory is precisely about love relationships. That is, just as we imagine a classic relationship “for two,” so in polyamory, only with more than one person. And there aren’t a ton of girls like that, but they exist. And there are chats in tg, applications, groups in facebook, etc. For those who are really interested, it’s not at all difficult to find such communities

[etc]

Morality is a way for humanity to survive.

That’s right. But now, it seems, other tasks are being set.

Sent after 26 minutes 30 seconds:

I also share all the ideas of feminists in their original form. If you take and read all this and strictly adhere to it, then I’m all for it. But now the ruling class is turning this movement into a purely bourgeois one, using it to divide people and pit them against each other, so that even in families people are divided.

There was a video on YouTube where some American producer (I could be wrong), in his old age, said that he had friendly relations with one of the Rothschilds. He invited him to work for him. But the producer, having his own principles and views, did not share the direction in which he was asked to work.
Rodschild complained about his friend’s naivety and told, as an example, about a successful project that they launched at the end of the nineteenth century.
The project was called "feminism". We, he said, pursued two goals, which were successfully achieved. We received cheap labor in the form of women’s hands and control over raising children (mothers are now at work).
So, I remembered by the way.

[Cyrus Tabor]

Many people here confuse polyamory with polygamy/polyandry and open relationships. In two words, polyamory is precisely about love relationships.

I already wrote about this a little higher.

Here’s another, by the way, well-known type of polyamorous relationship on the part of a woman - cuckoldism. All three know about each other, and often see everything that happens. And everyone is fine.

I thought that someone would write about this. But what’s interesting is that women, unlike men, rarely say kind words about this phenomenon. Although they seem to be participating too. How so?

There was a video on YouTube, where some American producer (I could be wrong), being in old age, said that he had friendly relations with one of the Rothschilds.

Believe these old bastards too . Some Alzheimer’s producer might even confess to the Kennedy assassination in order to grab the hype in his old age. However, I readily admit that feminism is artificially inspired. However, any global project, if left even a little to chance, can ultimately take on completely moronic and uncontrollable forms that the creators never imagined. Take the same Radfem. Or childfree.

[etc]

Believe these old bastards too. Some Alzheimer’s producer might even confess to the Kennedy assassination in order to grab the hype in his old age. However, I readily admit that feminism is artificially inspired. However, any global project, if left even a little to chance, can ultimately take on completely moronic and uncontrollable forms that the creators never imagined. Take the same Radfem. Or childfree

It’s not entirely clear what you wanted to say? - I can’t believe it, but I fully admit it?...
It is absolutely certain that in Britain at the end of the nineteenth century, men were left without work, their wives worked for less money. And the fact that global projects are difficult to control, so what? Who stopped this?

The interview with this old man was recorded almost in the 90s. I think at his age there is no need for hype.