For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: Do not post public figures, these should be posted to c/El Chisme
The provided image is fairly bad, but there is another part of this thread where some guy is unironically trying to science and logic other people about how "unhealthy" polyamory is, and how it is a "choice" and therefore should be discouraged.
Plus the hundreds of upvotes on deleted comments that were likely ... not so good. Though I have no idea how to view deleted comments.
And yes, feel proud of me. I blocked r/neoliberal. A small step towards better mental health.
Goddamn, even here you make a post like this and multiple people come out of the woodwork to tell us unprompted that they've never seen it work, find it exhausting, could never do it themselves, strongly dislike it, etc.
It's important to understand that polyamory is not the same as traditional queerness, but it's a pretty good quick heuristic to make the swap in your head and ask yourself if what you're saying doesn't sound a bit bigoted. No one would comment on a post like this one and say, "Personally I could never imagine being gay. Not going to police anyone on it but I can't really see it working out."
It's a strong reminder to me that many people never learned the principles behind queer theory; they just adopted the specific social manners around what you can and can't say or think about queer people.
It's the second sentence that makes this bad and bigoted. Most straight people can't imagine being gay. Nor would most gay people imagine themselves being straight. There's nothing bigoted about that. It's just a matter-of-fact statement about one's attraction.
I couldn't see myself in a poly relationship or a gay relationship but I also can totally see them working out for people who are different from me.
Absolutely agree, but what makes something like the first sentence strange is this: why is it worth saying at all? Why would a straight person need to chime in with that particular qualifier?
Anytime you talk about food or love/relationships people will come out of the woodwork to give opinions. These are the two most foundational aspects of the human experience.
I do find it interesting that there are people out there right now who are anti poly, but if you knew about their relationships you'd find that there were times that they were in casual relationships or FWBs situationships where they absolutely knew the other party was not exclusive to them just as they weren't. What I would say is, isn't this a kind of poly relationship? Didn't it work just fine for what it was at the time? Why couldn't you see that progressing in it's free and open structure?
For me I've never been in such a relationship or sought one out. Hell, I only ever had a single one-night-stand and it was awful. Just wasn't for me at all. I wouldn't say that I can't imagine people enjoying casual sex with a stranger. All I can say is I know it's not for me.
(You linked a post, not a thread.)
Whoops, fixed. Thanks.