|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
posted June 27, 2014 11:03 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 23:04, 27 Jun 2014.
|
mvass said:
Though the point of "it's better to be honest than to cheat" is a good one.
Not really. It presents a fake duality (you love those, btw), the third option is to "behave yourself" as already mentioned. So, the real question is, is there a valid reason to behave yourself? Again, as already mentioned, both parties, monogamous or polyamorist, can come up with plenty of rationalization to claim their way of relationship is the more satisfactory and/or emotionally deeper one, (the polyamorist can easily say that bond of real love goes much deeper than sex, so why evaluate it over that).
In monogamy, there is a uniqueness to your partner in the physical intimacy part of the relationship also. Depending on the meaning you attach to sex, that can be something you may not want to sacrifice for simply having more sex. I mean, since you also care about keeping your position as the primary, that's what it comes down to basically, doesnt it, being able to get laid with people you like. You indicate that you would get jelaous, if some other person threatens that position.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 27, 2014 11:32 PM |
|
|
Quote:
It presents a fake duality (you love those, btw)
It compares two options and says that one of them is better than one is better than the other. It doesn't say that those are the only two options. In fact, if the reason that someone wants to be polyamorous is because they'd cheat otherwise, I'd still be wary of them and wouldn't want to get into a relationship with them. But of course, you have to take the chance to attack me, since that's something you love to do.artu said:
I mean, since you also care about keeping your position as the primary, that's what it comes down to basically, doesnt it, being able to get laid with people you like. You indicate that you would get jelaous, if some other person threatens that position.
If I just wanted sex, there'd be much easier ways of getting it, such as regularly going to bars/clubs and finding other people who are looking to get laid. Polyamory isn't about sex any more than relationships in general are about sex - polyamory is about having multiple relationships at the same time, which may or may not involve sex (though they usually do), but also involve the emotional/attitudinal aspects of relationships, i.e. friendship, romantic interest, and perhaps eventually love. My girlfriend and I love each other and are also free to love other people - that's what polyamory is about.
As for primaries, someone can have more than one primary at a time. As long as I'm one of them, I have nothing to complain about - I care about the attention/affection/etc I get from her, and as long as I get a sufficient amount of it, I'm happy, regardless of the number of other people who also get high amounts of attention/affection/etc from her as well.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted June 27, 2014 11:59 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 00:03, 28 Jun 2014.
|
Quote:
It compares two options and says that one of them is better than one is better than the other. It doesn't say that those are the only two options. In fact, if the reason that someone wants to be polyamorous is because they'd cheat otherwise, I'd still be wary of them and wouldn't want to get into a relationship with them. But of course, you have to take the chance to attack me, since that's something you love to do.
When you present two options, pick one and ignore the rest of the possibilities, in order to defend or justify something, it kind of DOES indicate those are the only two options, even if not theoretically or strictly so. You used a similar logic with extortion during disaster debate and a few other cases I cant pinpoint right now, so underlining it is hardly attacking you, it's not even teasing you.
Quote:
If I just wanted sex, there'd be much easier ways of getting it, such as regularly going to bars/clubs and finding other people who are looking to get laid. Polyamory isn't about sex any more than relationships in general are about sex - polyamory is about having multiple relationships at the same time, which may or may not involve sex (though they usually do), but also involve the emotional/attitudinal aspects of relationships, i.e. friendship, romantic interest, and perhaps eventually love. My girlfriend and I love each other and are also free to love other people - that's what polyamory is about.
As for primaries, someone can have more than one primary at a time. As long as I'm one of them, I have nothing to complain about - I care about the attention/affection/etc I get from her, and as long as I get a sufficient amount of it, I'm happy, regardless of the number of other people who also get high amounts of attention/affection/etc from her as well.
Dude, anybody can have close friends or even little romantic tendencies to someone else while in a relationship. Sex is the part that separates the deal, unless you are talking about platonically falling in love with more than one person at the same time, which is very very unlikely. And what exactly do you mean someone can have more than one primary at a time? That wasn't what you said before, you said her devotion to you wouldn't be less, because you were the primary. And even if we skip that, you cant have two favorite lovers at the same time, that's an unrealistic push. Emotional/attitudinal aspects of relationships involve devotion and there is a limit to the devotion, a single person is capable of. You cant madly fall in love with 5 people at the same time. I don't think that's possible even on a biological basis.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 28, 2014 12:11 AM |
|
|
Given your record in our previous discussions, I don't think trying to explain it to you would be fruitful.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted June 28, 2014 12:14 AM |
|
|
|
That's usually something you say when you have no real argument.
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 28, 2014 12:22 AM |
|
|
artu said:
That's usually something you say when you have no real argument.
that's not true. whenever someone doesn't try to understand another's point of view, and merely debates their own, and this happens pretty much whenever you debate this person, you learn that it might not be worth bothering to continue.
what you said is the equivalent of trolling someone, just to get them to react.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted June 28, 2014 12:33 AM |
|
|
|
That "you" is not used as "people in general." Mvass keeps on explaining things to even trolls, IF he has something valid to say. Of course, that may be hard to comprehend if you don't know how to distinguish between a different but still valid opinion and incoherent non-sense.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 28, 2014 12:35 AM |
|
|
artu said:
Mvass keeps on explaining things to even trolls, IF he has something valid to say.
I'm not going to explain anything to this troll.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted June 28, 2014 12:42 AM |
|
|
|
I don't understand why you're implying what you're implying since our last conversation was two pages ago and it seems like a regular debate but since "you love fake dualities" cant be something to get this mad about, I will leave you with your instability and ignore you until you apologize to me.
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 28, 2014 12:43 AM |
|
|
artu said:
that may be hard to comprehend if you don't know how to distinguish between a different but still valid opinion and incoherent non-sense.
one man's incoherent nonsense is another man's valid opinion, and vice versa. remember that, when you decide to come down off of your horse. 
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 28, 2014 12:45 AM |
|
|
artu said:
I will leave you with your instability and ignore you until you apologize to me.
there's that horse again. be careful mvass, artu is now in personal insult mode.
|
|
meroe
Supreme Hero
Basically Smurfette
|
|
posted June 28, 2014 12:47 AM |
|
|
artu said:
Quote:
It compares two options and says that one of them is better than one is better than the other. It doesn't say that those are the only two options. In fact, if the reason that someone wants to be polyamorous is because they'd cheat otherwise, I'd still be wary of them and wouldn't want to get into a relationship with them. But of course, you have to take the chance to attack me, since that's something you love to do.
When you present two options, pick one and ignore the rest of the possibilities, in order to defend or justify something, it kind of DOES indicate those are the only two options, even if not theoretically or strictly so. You used a similar logic with extortion during disaster debate and a few other cases I cant pinpoint right now, so underlining it is hardly attacking you, it's not even teasing you.
Quote:
If I just wanted sex, there'd be much easier ways of getting it, such as regularly going to bars/clubs and finding other people who are looking to get laid. Polyamory isn't about sex any more than relationships in general are about sex - polyamory is about having multiple relationships at the same time, which may or may not involve sex (though they usually do), but also involve the emotional/attitudinal aspects of relationships, i.e. friendship, romantic interest, and perhaps eventually love. My girlfriend and I love each other and are also free to love other people - that's what polyamory is about.
As for primaries, someone can have more than one primary at a time. As long as I'm one of them, I have nothing to complain about - I care about the attention/affection/etc I get from her, and as long as I get a sufficient amount of it, I'm happy, regardless of the number of other people who also get high amounts of attention/affection/etc from her as well.
Dude, anybody can have close friends or even little romantic tendencies to someone else while in a relationship. Sex is the part that separates the deal, unless you are talking about platonically falling in love with more than one person at the same time, which is very very unlikely. And what exactly do you mean someone can have more than one primary at a time? That wasn't what you said before, you said her devotion to you wouldn't be less, because you were the primary. And even if we skip that, you cant have two favorite lovers at the same time, that's an unrealistic push. Emotional/attitudinal aspects of relationships involve devotion and there is a limit to the devotion, a single person is capable of. You cant madly fall in love with 5 people at the same time. I don't think that's possible even on a biological basis.
Actually this post by Artu is very valid and hasn't been answered by Mvass. I think Artu has Mvass on the ropes here.
____________
Meroe is definetely out, sweet
as she sounds sometimes, she'd
definetely castrate you with a
rusted razror and forcefeed
your genitals to you in a
blink of an eye - Kipshasz
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 28, 2014 12:49 AM |
|
|
|
i'm not debating that, because that isn't my point. even if artu was wrong, he would react the exact same way. THAT'S the point i'm making.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted June 28, 2014 01:20 AM |
|
|
fred79 said:
there's that horse again. be careful mvass, artu is now in personal insult mode.
Quote:
i'm not debating that, because that isn't my point. even if artu was wrong, he would react the exact same way. THAT'S the point i'm making.
React what way exactly, I told him I expect an apology and left him with his own business. Things don't transform into something else just because you have no limit when it comes to lying.
And you had been given every opportunity to stop your non-sense before I treated you the way I did. (In your first days here, I even suggested the mods to cut you some slack because you seemed like a highly vulnerable person). Unfortunately for you, there is a real and big difference between non-sense and difference of opinion and almost anyone can see it. It's nobody else's fault if your POV isnt taken seriously, even you dont respect your own opinion, that's why you don't bother to learn new things. How shameless it is of you to constantly provoke me when I ignore you post after post, and then try to mud-sling by blaming me like I am the one who gets personal. If you were not a troll, you wouldn't be doing this in the first place and trust me, anybody with common sense sees you for what you are. What a pity, because of your toxic, wounded ego, and because of your kind of trolling, quality posting started to occur less and less here and now we have a case of "bad money sweeps out good money." I guess you'll finally feel satisfied when everyone is miserable as you are. But that's not possible fred. I'll never be as unhappy as you, cause I'll have my dignity.
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 28, 2014 01:36 AM |
|
Edited by fred79 at 01:43, 28 Jun 2014.
|
@ artu: you said you were leaving mvass with his "instability", which is an insult. when people referred to elodin as "crazy", they were asked to stop, and even given penalties, i think.
when you say, "that may be hard to comprehend if you don't know how to distinguish between a different but still valid opinion and incoherent non-sense", that is ALSO an insult.
the reason i address this ongoing issue with you, is because someone as intellent as you are, shouldn't have to resort to insults to get their message across. i've had the same problem with some of the things I'VE said in discussions in the past, but i am trying to remedy that. i want to help you as well, artu. it is beneath an intelligent individual to insult people when you are at your wit's end with them. it is better to just say, "i cannot continue this conversation with you", which is what mvass did with you. and you posted that he HAD no argument. that is provocation, by my understanding. calling someone a troll is, also(which mvass did, in RESPONSE to your provocation). do you see where i am going with this?
and you call me a troll again. people were penalyzed over calling someone a troll before, which is why i stopped.
so, i am single-handedly making this place worse? that's a hell of a point to try to make, artu.
and, i'm not unhappy at all. why do you think i laugh at so much? if you were to make a drinking game out of whenever i say, "lol"(because i laughed), whoever participated, would be dead from alcohol poisoning. 
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted June 28, 2014 01:56 AM |
|
|
No, I haven't called him unstable as in "crazy", I called what he did unstable (which is obvious by the context) because just a few days ago everything was fine. All the things you list happened before I used that word anyway and "You love fake dualities" is not an insult.
And if you blatantly and deliberately make non-sense and then accuse people of not respecting different opinions again and again and again, people will eventually tell you there is a difference between the two.
Anyway, I wish not to discuss these. It all seems like bickering. Stop trying to manipulate my reactions and let us leave each other in peace.
You act like you are fixated and yes, that alone makes this place worse.
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 28, 2014 02:04 AM |
|
|
|
fine, artu. ok. i'll try to stay out of your way, and let you do whatever you want. i wouldn't want you to be unhappy by me trying to improve things between human beings, and helping them to grow. in reality, i should be focusing on improving myself, instead of wasting time on those who insult me and throw **** all over my opinion.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 28, 2014 02:18 AM |
|
|
Since Meroe wants to know, I'll address Artu's points.
It's true that people can have close friendships while in a monogamous relationship, but contrary to what Artu suggests, sex is not the only thing that separates close friendships from relationships. The existence of an arrangement called "friends with benefits" is evidence for this - the people involved are friends and they have sex, but they're not in a relationship. So, a relationship is more than friendship + sex, as it also involves feelings/attitudes that aren't involved in a friendship, not even a close friendship. Particularly, romantic interest is a major feeling/attitude that's different between the two, and if a relationship goes well and the people involved are compatible, that romantic interest can develop into love. So, a relationship is friendship + sex + acting on mutual romantic interest. As we're polyamorous, we're fine with each other developing and acting on romantic interest in other people, i.e. forming relationships with them, and because these relationships involve romantic interest, it's more than just sex.
As for "primary" and "secondary", those are loose terms that indicate how people are prioritized, and they apply rigidly to some polyamorous people's relationships, but in my case, they only indicate that she and I are very close and intend to spend our lives together, and that term could mean something else in a different context. I'm not concerned about how many other people she's close to, as long as I get the attention and affection that I want - and I get ample amounts of both.  Her devotion to me isn't lessened by her also being in close relationships with others.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 28, 2014 02:52 AM |
|
Edited by fred79 at 02:55, 28 Jun 2014.
|
mvassilev said:
sex is not the only thing that separates close friendships from relationships. The existence of an arrangement called "friends with benefits" is evidence for this - the people involved are friends and they have sex, but they're not in a relationship. So, a relationship is more than friendship + sex, as it also involves feelings/attitudes that aren't involved in a friendship, not even a close friendship.
i don't understand what you're saying, mvass. you say that people who are friends with benefits, aren't in a relationship. but isn't simply having a friend being in a relationship? and, "a relationship is more than just friendship +sex, because it involves feelings/attitudes that aren't involved in even a close friendship"... what feelings/attitudes are you referring to? i am completely mystified by this outlook. i cannot make any sense of it.
mvassilev said:
Particularly, romantic interest is a major feeling/attitude that's different between the two, and if a relationship goes well and the people involved are compatible, that romantic interest can develop into love. So, a relationship is friendship + sex + acting on mutual romantic interest. As we're polyamorous, we're fine with each other developing and acting on romantic interest in other people, i.e. forming relationships with them, and because these relationships involve romantic interest, it's more than just sex.
how is sex and "acting on mutual romantic interest" seperate from one another? this also doesn't make any sense to me. they sound like one and the same thing. are you referring to plain old, feel-good sex and making love?
mvassilev said:
As for "primary" and "secondary", those are loose terms that indicate how people are prioritized, and they apply rigidly to some polyamorous people's relationships, but in my case, they only indicate that she and I are very close and intend to spend our lives together, and that term could mean something else in a different context. I'm not concerned about how many other people she's close to, as long as I get the attention and affection that I want - and I get ample amounts of both. Her devotion to me isn't lessened by her also being in close relationships with others.
when you say, "spend our lives together", do you mean, "i spend my life with her, and she spends her life with me + anyone else she is romantically interested in"? because that is what will happen, by my understanding of how you are relating this relationship to us. and you are really ok with her screwing anyone else for as long as you two are together? how about after you have kids with her? who will be the acting father? who will BE the father? not to mention the drastically increased chances of S.T.D.'s, and pregnancy? i cannot fathom this kind of thinking at all. you have to be the first person i have ever met who feels like this sort of thing is ok. not that that's bad; it just confuses the hell out of me.
|
|
meroe
Supreme Hero
Basically Smurfette
|
|
posted June 28, 2014 03:39 AM |
|
Edited by meroe at 03:48, 28 Jun 2014.
|
Yeah Freddums, I have already had the 'babyfather and STD' convo with Mvass, and he swore blind it wasn't ever going to be an issue, without explaining how it wouldn't end up being an issue. Personally I think Mvass would get peeved pretty damn fast if he found himself as glorified babysitter (of maybe his kids or someone elses), while the missus is having lots of sex with her other 'lesser' romantic partners.
And I also mentioned sex with benefits to him and he swore blind that his relationship was more than that. But the truth is his relationship is more like friends with benefits than anything else. Of course you can be emotionally and superficially romantically involved with several people in a 'friends with benefits' scenario. Its all about 'you', and as an emotional vampire you will leech off those people who will be very supportive and sympathetic, especially as they know their time won't be wasted as they are going to have sex with you anyway. So polyamorous relationships pretty much are 'damn good friends with benefits' set-ups.
Mvass your post is a jumbled mess. You had originally told us that you were your girlfriends special one. The Primary. Now you are saying that you don't care what your position is in your girlfriends sex life, as long as you get some time with her eventually.
Yeah friends with benefits.
Also you said something about 'finding like-minded people who would understand and suit a polyamorous lifestyle'. Well right now your girlfriend has set up home with a guy she met recently. So, finding those like-minded people must be pretty damn easy, I am guessing. Sounds like a hook-up to me.
But that's cool Mvass. If that is how you are happy and how you like to live, its no one else's business or problem. Good luck to you, I say.
____________
Meroe is definetely out, sweet
as she sounds sometimes, she'd
definetely castrate you with a
rusted razror and forcefeed
your genitals to you in a
blink of an eye - Kipshasz
|
| |
|
|
This Popular Thread is pages long: 
