FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Gay / Polyamorous Marriage
Gay / Polyamorous Marriage
Jump to: Newest in thread
So there was a news story that the venue of the Australian Open would not be renamed, despite being named after someone who doesn't support gay marriage. But that prompted a thought I can't explain...
Why do the people who support gay marriage not also support polyamorous marriage? Which of the arguements in favour of gay marriage (consenting adults, love is love, liberty, equality) don't apply to polyamory? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So there was a news story that the venue of the Australian Open would not be renamed, despite being named after someone who doesn't support gay marriage. But that prompted a thought I can't explain...
Why do the people who support gay marriage not also support polyamorous marriage? Which of the arguements in favour of gay marriage (consenting adults, love is love, liberty, equality) don't apply to polyamory? "
I concur, but I suspect if there was someone who was pro gay marriage but anti poly marriage it's because they're sworn on the monogamy is sacrosanct idea. I agree, it seems ridiculous to be pro one/anti the other as would hope for a more open consideration of allowing people to express their relationships how they want, but we know that kinda common sense doesn't always work for people.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So there was a news story that the venue of the Australian Open would not be renamed, despite being named after someone who doesn't support gay marriage. But that prompted a thought I can't explain...
Why do the people who support gay marriage not also support polyamorous marriage? Which of the arguements in favour of gay marriage (consenting adults, love is love, liberty, equality) don't apply to polyamory?
I concur, but I suspect if there was someone who was pro gay marriage but anti poly marriage it's because they're sworn on the monogamy is sacrosanct idea. I agree, it seems ridiculous to be pro one/anti the other as would hope for a more open consideration of allowing people to express their relationships how they want, but we know that kinda common sense doesn't always work for people. "
Yeah I'm not trying to be facetious, i just can't think of a single logical reason to support one and not the other. Yet one has so much support that it's a news item not to rename an arena after a person who doesn't support it and the other enjoys vritually no support  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Yeah basically what Estella said...
The people who support gay marriage recognise homosexuality as an inherent protected trait - you can't help your sexuality.
And they see polyamory as a choice. A lifestyle choice. One that goes against many many traditional values of "true love" and "being faithful to one person for the rest of your life" (which gay marriage does not conflate).
So I guess that's it. It "breaks more rules" than gay marriage. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Yeah basically what Estella said...
The people who support gay marriage recognise homosexuality as an inherent protected trait - you can't help your sexuality.
And they see polyamory as a choice. A lifestyle choice. One that goes against many many traditional values of "true love" and "being faithful to one person for the rest of your life" (which gay marriage does not conflate).
So I guess that's it. It "breaks more rules" than gay marriage."
Unpopular as it may be to say, there's no scientific consensus that people are born homosexual. It's naturally a very touchy subject so not one that people are keen to fund research in and get a definitive answer.
Even if we could get a definitive answer it wouldn't fit nicely into the boxes we like. Homosexuality would be a mixture of nature and nuture with a fuzzy definition of what homosexuality even was because sexuality is a spectrum and relatively few people exclusively have sexual desires for just one sex. Then we'd have to consider transgendered people and it would become too messy for polite conversation.
So i don't find it a convincing arguement, especially since there is scientific comsensus that the majority of the population are not predisposed towards monogamy. But that isn't the same as saying that a lot of people might attempt to justify it on those grounds. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
It's a sign of commitment between two people.
If two people can't commit to each other and publicly declare a love, what point is there in all the other freedoms?
If a same sex couple want to openly declare their love and make promises and commitments, why not?
I'm sure god will send the angels with the flaming swords in if it's that wrong.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
its only about what is acceptable under the present society of today.
many cultures and society have polyamory as part of their lives.
what you need to do is hold lots of marches, and change society that way. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Yeah basically what Estella said...
The people who support gay marriage recognise homosexuality as an inherent protected trait - you can't help your sexuality.
And they see polyamory as a choice. A lifestyle choice. One that goes against many many traditional values of "true love" and "being faithful to one person for the rest of your life" (which gay marriage does not conflate).
So I guess that's it. It "breaks more rules" than gay marriage.
Unpopular as it may be to say, there's no scientific consensus that people are born homosexual. It's naturally a very touchy subject so not one that people are keen to fund research in and get a definitive answer.
Even if we could get a definitive answer it wouldn't fit nicely into the boxes we like. Homosexuality would be a mixture of nature and nuture with a fuzzy definition of what homosexuality even was because sexuality is a spectrum and relatively few people exclusively have sexual desires for just one sex. Then we'd have to consider transgendered people and it would become too messy for polite conversation.
So i don't find it a convincing arguement, especially since there is scientific comsensus that the majority of the population are not predisposed towards monogamy. But that isn't the same as saying that a lot of people might attempt to justify it on those grounds. "
Um. What? Sexuality is 100% inherent. Lol. Your suggestion of its being a mix of nature and nurture seems to mean that the external environment someone is in can make them homosexual...? That's not how sexuality works... lol
Yeh, I agree that many humans have predispositions away from monogamy but literally centuries of social and religious conditioning have created really rigid societal structures around maintaining monogamy (linked to the patriarchy inheriting of assets) that it's now seen as a super norm. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It's a sign of commitment between two people.
If two people can't commit to each other and publicly declare a love, what point is there in all the other freedoms?
If a same sex couple want to openly declare their love and make promises and commitments, why not?
I'm sure god will send the angels with the flaming swords in if it's that wrong.
"
Monogamy came way after marriage was invented. There's absolutely no basis for saying marriage is a sign of commitment between two people. For most of human history, marriage has been an exchange of property rather than any notion of love. The Israelites in the bible were polygnous, as most civilisations in history have been. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Yeah basically what Estella said...
The people who support gay marriage recognise homosexuality as an inherent protected trait - you can't help your sexuality.
And they see polyamory as a choice. A lifestyle choice. One that goes against many many traditional values of "true love" and "being faithful to one person for the rest of your life" (which gay marriage does not conflate).
So I guess that's it. It "breaks more rules" than gay marriage.
Unpopular as it may be to say, there's no scientific consensus that people are born homosexual. It's naturally a very touchy subject so not one that people are keen to fund research in and get a definitive answer.
Even if we could get a definitive answer it wouldn't fit nicely into the boxes we like. Homosexuality would be a mixture of nature and nuture with a fuzzy definition of what homosexuality even was because sexuality is a spectrum and relatively few people exclusively have sexual desires for just one sex. Then we'd have to consider transgendered people and it would become too messy for polite conversation.
So i don't find it a convincing arguement, especially since there is scientific comsensus that the majority of the population are not predisposed towards monogamy. But that isn't the same as saying that a lot of people might attempt to justify it on those grounds.
Um. What? Sexuality is 100% inherent. Lol. Your suggestion of its being a mix of nature and nurture seems to mean that the external environment someone is in can make them homosexual...? That's not how sexuality works... lol
"
I'm afraid there's no scientific consensus around that statement
"
Yeh, I agree that many humans have predispositions away from monogamy but literally centuries of social and religious conditioning have created really rigid societal structures around maintaining monogamy (linked to the patriarchy inheriting of assets) that it's now seen as a super norm."
In this country yes, but this culture is neither particularly old or representative of the world. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *orum TrollWoman
over a year ago
•+• Access Denied •+• |
"Yeah basically what Estella said...
The people who support gay marriage recognise homosexuality as an inherent protected trait - you can't help your sexuality.
And they see polyamory as a choice. A lifestyle choice. One that goes against many many traditional values of "true love" and "being faithful to one person for the rest of your life" (which gay marriage does not conflate).
So I guess that's it. It "breaks more rules" than gay marriage.
Unpopular as it may be to say, there's no scientific consensus that people are born homosexual. It's naturally a very touchy subject so not one that people are keen to fund research in and get a definitive answer.
Even if we could get a definitive answer it wouldn't fit nicely into the boxes we like. Homosexuality would be a mixture of nature and nuture with a fuzzy definition of what homosexuality even was because sexuality is a spectrum and relatively few people exclusively have sexual desires for just one sex. Then we'd have to consider transgendered people and it would become too messy for polite conversation.
So i don't find it a convincing arguement, especially since there is scientific comsensus that the majority of the population are not predisposed towards monogamy. But that isn't the same as saying that a lot of people might attempt to justify it on those grounds. "
the majority of the population is monogamous though.
science can have all it's theories for certain behaviours, but the actual evidence is that the majority of humans enjoy monogamy. so much so that i don't really hear about anyone protesting for a change in bigamy laws.
and cheating doesn't seem to entail that someone wants to participate in polygamy in particular. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
You don't need to have scientific proof of everything.
There's no scientific proof you're born heterosexual either. Lol.
And yeah, we're not an old culture, but we sure colonialised the shit out of a bunch of older cultures and destroyed them with our glorious imperialism, making our culture now the global norm.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Yeah basically what Estella said...
The people who support gay marriage recognise homosexuality as an inherent protected trait - you can't help your sexuality.
And they see polyamory as a choice. A lifestyle choice. One that goes against many many traditional values of "true love" and "being faithful to one person for the rest of your life" (which gay marriage does not conflate).
So I guess that's it. It "breaks more rules" than gay marriage.
Unpopular as it may be to say, there's no scientific consensus that people are born homosexual. It's naturally a very touchy subject so not one that people are keen to fund research in and get a definitive answer.
Even if we could get a definitive answer it wouldn't fit nicely into the boxes we like. Homosexuality would be a mixture of nature and nuture with a fuzzy definition of what homosexuality even was because sexuality is a spectrum and relatively few people exclusively have sexual desires for just one sex. Then we'd have to consider transgendered people and it would become too messy for polite conversation.
So i don't find it a convincing arguement, especially since there is scientific comsensus that the majority of the population are not predisposed towards monogamy. But that isn't the same as saying that a lot of people might attempt to justify it on those grounds.
the majority of the population is monogamous though.
science can have all it's theories for certain behaviours, but the actual evidence is that the majority of humans enjoy monogamy. so much so that i don't really hear about anyone protesting for a change in bigamy laws.
and cheating doesn't seem to entail that someone wants to participate in polygamy in particular."
I would contest that the majority of people are not monogamous, less than 16% of marriages have zero incidents of infedility. Which also overlooks the fact that 43% fail all together despite falling marriage rates.
The majority of people profess to be monogamous publically, do something rather different privately and generally have a few goes at it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"You don't need to have scientific proof of everything.
There's no scientific proof you're born heterosexual either. Lol.
And yeah, we're not an old culture, but we sure colonialised the shit out of a bunch of older cultures and destroyed them with our glorious imperialism, making our culture now the global norm. "
Let's put it another way, there's a lot of scientific evidence that suggests birth factors cannot account for 100% of sexuality. For example, studies of identicial twins where one is gay and the other isn't. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
the majority of the population is monogamous though.
science can have all it's theories for certain behaviours, but the actual evidence is that the majority of humans enjoy monogamy. so much so that i don't really hear about anyone protesting for a change in bigamy laws.
and cheating doesn't seem to entail that someone wants to participate in polygamy in particular."
I think it's unaccurate to say "a load of people do it" means the same as "a load of people enjoy it". The majority of my friends are poly; they don't enjoy it at all. Lol. They're protesting for polyamory legal rights all the time. It's all about the circles we walk in.
And "everyone does it" because it's a systematically enforced social norm. We do not have social allowances for poly relationship. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Let's put it another way, there's a lot of scientific evidence that suggests birth factors cannot account for 100% of sexuality. For example, studies of identicial twins where one is gay and the other isn't. "
Yeah, I've read that too. But did you read the linked studies which showed that twins do not have as identical dna as we previously thought? So that is conclusive of nothing... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *orum TrollWoman
over a year ago
•+• Access Denied •+• |
"and cheating doesn't seem to entail that someone wants to participate in polygamy in particular.
I would contest that the majority of people are not monogamous, less than 16% of marriages have zero incidents of infedility. Which also overlooks the fact that 43% fail all together despite falling marriage rates.
The majority of people profess to be monogamous publically, do something rather different privately and generally have a few goes at it. "
cheating does not equal polygamy. there are many reasons why someone might cheat and hope to stay with their partner and not really give a shit about being with the person they are cheating with, or they'd leave their partner for someone else...neither of these imply polygamy to me.
how many of the cheats on here alone actually want anything more than one on one with someone? cheating doesn't necessarily equal the urge to swing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Let's put it another way, there's a lot of scientific evidence that suggests birth factors cannot account for 100% of sexuality. For example, studies of identicial twins where one is gay and the other isn't.
Yeah, I've read that too. But did you read the linked studies which showed that twins do not have as identical dna as we previously thought? So that is conclusive of nothing..."
Hence the wording of my original statement, "no scientific consensus". What I'm saying is that it's unscientific to argue one is a choice and one isn't. Although i would admit some people would try that line. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"and cheating doesn't seem to entail that someone wants to participate in polygamy in particular.
I would contest that the majority of people are not monogamous, less than 16% of marriages have zero incidents of infedility. Which also overlooks the fact that 43% fail all together despite falling marriage rates.
The majority of people profess to be monogamous publically, do something rather different privately and generally have a few goes at it.
cheating does not equal polygamy. there are many reasons why someone might cheat and hope to stay with their partner and not really give a shit about being with the person they are cheating with, or they'd leave their partner for someone else...neither of these imply polygamy to me.
how many of the cheats on here alone actually want anything more than one on one with someone? cheating doesn't necessarily equal the urge to swing."
Not all cheating is polygamous, but all cheating is non-monogamous. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Hence the wording of my original statement, "no scientific consensus". What I'm saying is that it's unscientific to argue one is a choice and one isn't. Although i would admit some people would try that line. "
Oh I see what you mean now.
But I do believe that sexuality is much less a choice than being poly (as evidenced by the failure of conversion therapy), but I mean ultimately I also believe people should be able to be okay if they want.
I was just putting forward the general attitude of people to the two things. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *orum TrollWoman
over a year ago
•+• Access Denied •+• |
"
the majority of the population is monogamous though.
science can have all it's theories for certain behaviours, but the actual evidence is that the majority of humans enjoy monogamy. so much so that i don't really hear about anyone protesting for a change in bigamy laws.
and cheating doesn't seem to entail that someone wants to participate in polygamy in particular.
I think it's unaccurate to say "a load of people do it" means the same as "a load of people enjoy it". The majority of my friends are poly; they don't enjoy it at all. Lol. They're protesting for polyamory legal rights all the time. It's all about the circles we walk in.
And "everyone does it" because it's a systematically enforced social norm. We do not have social allowances for poly relationship."
nobody i know is even married (older relatives but that's about it), nobody i know wants to be a swinger. you're right it is those circles and the majority of people do only have one partner at a time and don't express the need or urge for more than one.
why think they aren't enjoying their relationships just because they're not swingers or polygamists?
most people i know if they're unhappy in a relationship they won't even cheat, but have usually been cheated on...they don't accept their partner should be fucking other people. they do not accept more than one sexual partner for themselves or their partner, hence why the divorce rate is high because of cheating. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Hence the wording of my original statement, "no scientific consensus". What I'm saying is that it's unscientific to argue one is a choice and one isn't. Although i would admit some people would try that line.
Oh I see what you mean now.
But I do believe that sexuality is much less a choice than being poly (as evidenced by the failure of conversion therapy), but I mean ultimately I also believe people should be able to be okay if they want.
I was just putting forward the general attitude of people to the two things."
Yes it can get very academic after a point because some people make an arguement that free will is an illusion anyway, not that i personally subscribe to it.
I actually think someone already nailed it earlier when they said that the LGBT community got out there, marched for it and won the public debate where poly people haven't. I honestly think it's as simple as that rather than a rational stopping point, i was more curious how people who support one and not the other could justify it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
the majority of the population is monogamous though.
science can have all it's theories for certain behaviours, but the actual evidence is that the majority of humans enjoy monogamy. so much so that i don't really hear about anyone protesting for a change in bigamy laws.
and cheating doesn't seem to entail that someone wants to participate in polygamy in particular.
I think it's unaccurate to say "a load of people do it" means the same as "a load of people enjoy it". The majority of my friends are poly; they don't enjoy it at all. Lol. They're protesting for polyamory legal rights all the time. It's all about the circles we walk in.
And "everyone does it" because it's a systematically enforced social norm. We do not have social allowances for poly relationship.
nobody i know is even married (older relatives but that's about it),
"
51.2% of UK adults are married
"
nobody i know wants to be a swinger.
"
Yeah we're a minority alright, jealousy is engrained in the human brain for most people
"
you're right it is those circles and the majority of people do only have one partner at a time and don't express the need or urge for more than one.
"
Sexually most men desire more than just one woman, you can look at the UK prostitute population for a good proxy
"
why think they aren't enjoying their relationships just because they're not swingers or polygamists?
"
Because they cheat so much
"
most people i know if they're unhappy in a relationship they won't even cheat, but have usually been cheated on...they don't accept their partner should be fucking other people. they do not accept more than one sexual partner for themselves or their partner, hence why the divorce rate is high because of cheating."
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *orum TrollWoman
over a year ago
•+• Access Denied •+• |
"and cheating doesn't seem to entail that someone wants to participate in polygamy in particular.
I would contest that the majority of people are not monogamous, less than 16% of marriages have zero incidents of infedility. Which also overlooks the fact that 43% fail all together despite falling marriage rates.
The majority of people profess to be monogamous publically, do something rather different privately and generally have a few goes at it.
cheating does not equal polygamy. there are many reasons why someone might cheat and hope to stay with their partner and not really give a shit about being with the person they are cheating with, or they'd leave their partner for someone else...neither of these imply polygamy to me.
how many of the cheats on here alone actually want anything more than one on one with someone? cheating doesn't necessarily equal the urge to swing.
Not all cheating is polygamous, but all cheating is non-monogamous. "
it's also non-consensual on one side.
i think that's the main reason why people divorce a partner. they weren't the person they thought they were and now they can't trust them and so they stop investing their precious energy into them and cut ties.
i still don't really see much evidence for the majority of people wanting multiple partners. i don't think that's strange either you know. people like to invest in their true relationships, with other commitments it can be hard enough work just having one partner to invest in. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"and cheating doesn't seem to entail that someone wants to participate in polygamy in particular.
I would contest that the majority of people are not monogamous, less than 16% of marriages have zero incidents of infedility. Which also overlooks the fact that 43% fail all together despite falling marriage rates.
The majority of people profess to be monogamous publically, do something rather different privately and generally have a few goes at it.
cheating does not equal polygamy. there are many reasons why someone might cheat and hope to stay with their partner and not really give a shit about being with the person they are cheating with, or they'd leave their partner for someone else...neither of these imply polygamy to me.
how many of the cheats on here alone actually want anything more than one on one with someone? cheating doesn't necessarily equal the urge to swing.
Not all cheating is polygamous, but all cheating is non-monogamous.
it's also non-consensual on one side.
i think that's the main reason why people divorce a partner. they weren't the person they thought they were and now they can't trust them and so they stop investing their precious energy into them and cut ties.
i still don't really see much evidence for the majority of people wanting multiple partners. i don't think that's strange either you know. people like to invest in their true relationships, with other commitments it can be hard enough work just having one partner to invest in."
Well i can list some sources if you like but the scientific consensus is that ~70% predisposed towards multiple partners ~30% not.
You can understand that monogamy isn't going to help much for a species whose brain evolves in an environment characterised by low infant survival, high risk of death from childbirth and a bloody long time before children reach reproductive age. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *orum TrollWoman
over a year ago
•+• Access Denied •+• |
"and cheating doesn't seem to entail that someone wants to participate in polygamy in particular.
I would contest that the majority of people are not monogamous, less than 16% of marriages have zero incidents of infedility. Which also overlooks the fact that 43% fail all together despite falling marriage rates.
The majority of people profess to be monogamous publically, do something rather different privately and generally have a few goes at it.
cheating does not equal polygamy. there are many reasons why someone might cheat and hope to stay with their partner and not really give a shit about being with the person they are cheating with, or they'd leave their partner for someone else...neither of these imply polygamy to me.
how many of the cheats on here alone actually want anything more than one on one with someone? cheating doesn't necessarily equal the urge to swing.
Not all cheating is polygamous, but all cheating is non-monogamous.
it's also non-consensual on one side.
i think that's the main reason why people divorce a partner. they weren't the person they thought they were and now they can't trust them and so they stop investing their precious energy into them and cut ties.
i still don't really see much evidence for the majority of people wanting multiple partners. i don't think that's strange either you know. people like to invest in their true relationships, with other commitments it can be hard enough work just having one partner to invest in.
Well i can list some sources if you like but the scientific consensus is that ~70% predisposed towards multiple partners ~30% not.
You can understand that monogamy isn't going to help much for a species whose brain evolves in an environment characterised by low infant survival, high risk of death from childbirth and a bloody long time before children reach reproductive age. "
you're not talking about the western world here? deaths from birth are very low. if our species doesn't adapt then it doesn't survive either.
you can't put links if they're not youtube or well known sites btw.
i don't believe that just because someone cheats it always means they want multiple partners, there's not eviddence for it plus i've experienced it myself and cheated, so from both sides and trust me jealousy was not the first thing in my head either. i was let down and lied to and both those things make a partner unworthy of my investment. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"and cheating doesn't seem to entail that someone wants to participate in polygamy in particular.
I would contest that the majority of people are not monogamous, less than 16% of marriages have zero incidents of infedility. Which also overlooks the fact that 43% fail all together despite falling marriage rates.
The majority of people profess to be monogamous publically, do something rather different privately and generally have a few goes at it.
cheating does not equal polygamy. there are many reasons why someone might cheat and hope to stay with their partner and not really give a shit about being with the person they are cheating with, or they'd leave their partner for someone else...neither of these imply polygamy to me.
how many of the cheats on here alone actually want anything more than one on one with someone? cheating doesn't necessarily equal the urge to swing.
Not all cheating is polygamous, but all cheating is non-monogamous.
it's also non-consensual on one side.
i think that's the main reason why people divorce a partner. they weren't the person they thought they were and now they can't trust them and so they stop investing their precious energy into them and cut ties.
i still don't really see much evidence for the majority of people wanting multiple partners. i don't think that's strange either you know. people like to invest in their true relationships, with other commitments it can be hard enough work just having one partner to invest in.
Well i can list some sources if you like but the scientific consensus is that ~70% predisposed towards multiple partners ~30% not.
You can understand that monogamy isn't going to help much for a species whose brain evolves in an environment characterised by low infant survival, high risk of death from childbirth and a bloody long time before children reach reproductive age.
you're not talking about the western world here? deaths from birth are very low. if our species doesn't adapt then it doesn't survive either.
you can't put links if they're not youtube or well known sites btw.
i don't believe that just because someone cheats it always means they want multiple partners, there's not eviddence for it plus i've experienced it myself and cheated, so from both sides and trust me jealousy was not the first thing in my head either. i was let down and lied to and both those things make a partner unworthy of my investment."
Our brains didn't evolve in the western world, we're stuck with a naturally occuring predisposition that came from a radically different environment. An industrialised western civilisation hasn't even existed for over 99% of the time the human brain has been evolving, we haven't had long enough to adapt even if we can. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *orum TrollWoman
over a year ago
•+• Access Denied •+• |
i'm also not saying that some won't wanna be polygamous, i know people can fall in love with more than one person. and i'm not saying it's wrong for that to happen either.
but i feel a good majority are happy with one partner. they like to invest in someone special and be invested in, they like to pair bond and enjoy that. they like being a team.
maybe they settle, maybe they don't. people are complicated overall. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *orum TrollWoman
over a year ago
•+• Access Denied •+• |
"Our brains didn't evolve in the western world, we're stuck with a naturally occuring predisposition that came from a radically different environment. An industrialised western civilisation hasn't even existed for over 99% of the time the human brain has been evolving, we haven't had long enough to adapt even if we can. "
nuclear families happened pretty quickly. we can evolve quickly at a social rate and do so. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
