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.
Reddit when they disagree with anecdotal evidence: source? SoUrce? SOURCE?
Reddit when anecdotal evidence is driven by bigotry: up votes to the left
I still remember the time when Reddit took as gospel that
CW: Racism
Indians all shit in "designated streets" based on a single anonymous post from 4chan
Why yes I believe X group are always criminals. One of them stole a blade of grass from my neighbor's cousins yard once!
No I don't believe the numerous reports members of that group saying they have been hate crimed because of racism. They aren't a race sweaty. There hasn't even been a peer reviewed report of it!
Casual misogyny? Race trutherism? Everyone being a debate bro? Dumb jokes that weren't funny in 2010? Welcome to 
This isn't even true from a stereotypical point of view. The most common type of "polygamous relationship" are men with multiple wives. It's even legal in some countries. But in those places, women aren't allowed to have multiple husbands.
Like the Mormon church isn't exactly famous for having women with multiple husbands lmao
I'm not poly but the various poly ppl I know don't neatly conform to this stereotype at all.
The older I get the more I feel neither poly- nor monogamous folks have the "correct" idea. It's all down to the people involved and what works for them. The poly and monogamous relationships around me seem to "succeed" and "fail" at similar rates. No idea why so many feel the need to advocate for any one relationship style over another, beyond insecurity.
Because if you don't follow monogamy, how can your bloodline accumulate property? How can the rules of inheritance be clearly defines, and how can your property ownership not be rapidly diluted?
^^^ the argument engels makes about why class societies are obsessed with monogamy
Any children who wish to inherit must enter the Thunderdome
Succession wars in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ...
Royals still had plenty of polyamory, and in come cases, even polygamy. I guarantee you that horny, or the desire for more progeny, far outweighed any concern about diluting the inheritance.
The social norm of only having one of the partnerships being recognized was what centered the question of wealth and lineage.
Polyam is a bit of an umbrella term and there's many different flavors of it, so I'm not sure what you mean by polyam having or not having the "correct" idea. That's not really how relationships work anyhow.
It sounds like you'd be a fan of the idea of "relationship design" though - it's about regularly discussing the design of a relationship collaboratively rather than falling into any template of what a relationship is "supposed" to be or look like. Not just the relationship escalator template, but even ideas common in the polyam community like not adding monogamous people into a polyam network.
I'm trying to wrap my head around why anyone would add a monogamous person to a poly network. Seems they would always be causing issues, no?
The idea behind relationship design is that if they agree that it works for them, then it's valid. I know a couple people online who have discussed being on either side of such a dynamic. If the monogamous person wants to eventually marry etc. then perhaps the relationship has a planned expiration time - that's okay too. Or the polyam person could be fine being married to that person so long as they're still allowed to have their other relationships still. Point is that they get to decide for themselves what they're okay with. It could also just be that the monogamous person only wants one partner, but does not mind that partner having more than one.
Of course, I should also mention I'm using the term "relationship" but part of it being intentionally designed means it could look very different than what you're envisioning. Like the polyam person could be ace but desires multiple romantic relationships, and the monogamous person might think that's fine. Or maybe the monogamous person is really just monogamous wrt child raising, and wants only that dyad to be co-parenting, but if otherwise open to other forms of relationship. Etc.
A related idea is relationship anarchy.
I hadn't run into that term ("relationship design") before but that sounds like more or less what I have in mind. I first started thinking about it while using the apps (years ago - perhaps things have changed) and noticing how many users seemed to have in mind not only the exact type of person they were after but also the exact relationship model waiting for said person to neatly slot into. that seemed backwards to me - ideally you would meet people based on shared interests or values, chat/meet and see if there's potential, and proceed from there as it makes sense for all parties. at least in my experience this kind of progression seemed to be disincentivized in favor of the "job interview" model.
I only wanted to be poly because jealousy is annoying as hell. I don’t have the bandwidth for multiple relationships.
Fortunately/unfortunately, jealousy can crop up in any form of relationship without adequate communication.
Yeh, I’ve seen poly folks having screaming matches in public over one person feeli Ng neglected compared to other partners lol. Turns out some people suck at relationships and communication, it isn’t really about the type of relationship they’re in.
My partner has other partners and it works great for us. He gets to visit his girlfriend this weekend and I get to smell up the house with my totally awesome Indian takeout (spicy food give him heartburn) and play the latest Rimworld DLC.
Edit: the connection is that I can't handle multiple partners because omg scheduling is hard, but I still benefit from the polyamorous nature of the relationship.
As a poly person people should shut the fuck up about shit they know nothing about. I know many many healthy polyamorous relationships that take as many forms as you could think of. Leave us the fuck alone and let us have the communities we want to have.
Anyway ama about healthy polyamory if you want I guess
Just block R/www.reddit.com and you'll be good to go permanently.
Seriously, these are (and have been for quite some time) just bots talking with each other.
If not literally then sociologically
A straight poly woman has multiple male partners? Wow shocking 😲
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.
"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 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.
I mean, there might be some dude who isn't really polyamorous but is so desperate for a relationship that he goes out with a polyamorous woman who already has multiple partners, but if he can't handle that, that's his problem, he should probably examine himself and his own issues, not blame polyamory for it.
I personally don't "get" polyamory and it isn't for me, but it costs me nothing to just not give a shit about other people's preferred lifestyle. It doesn't work for me, but it does work for other people, so that's fine.
Now that I think about it, this guy is probably basing his entire "polyamory bad" opinion on one of the Futurama movies, the second one? Third one maybe? Fry dates a polyamorous girl who doesn't reveal that she's poly until after he's moved in with her. Come to think of it, it has a lot of overlap with transphobic "jokes" from around the same time the movie came out. I can't really think of any other media where polyamory fearmongering was a thing.
Polyamory fearmongering is very prevalent. It comes from the fearmongering about some powerful men having multiple wives in feudal societies (a genuine problem) + the western man's obsession with cuck porn + class societies obsessing over inheritance.
Reactionaries not making everything about cuckoldery challenge: impossible.
The reason reactionaries can only perceive alternative familial structures as kinks is because they only see these structures in porn.
Hmm yes, my selection bias shows me that I am correct about my gut instincts.
No I will not investigate further.
I am very smart.
They're most likely making up a scenario to get mad at I'd assume. Like it's frustrating because poor men are just as shit on and dogged by this oppressive society as women are but instead of getting some consciousness and finding solidarity with women, they turn around and blame them, and keep the system going.
The dudebro culture is toxic as hell too. Every gym influencer eventually branches out to some other field. Whether it's dating advice, race science, or politics.
This isn't a statement about poly dynamics. This is a statement about gender dynamics in dating. It is just simply easier for women to find people to date than men. Women, regardless of their relationship structure, have no problem with quantity. They have a problem finding quality.
Personally I’m not poly but I’ve hung around with poly people and it just seems exhausting lol. And it always seemed like at least someone involved was not happy with the situation.
Each to their own of course but relationships are hard enough, I don’t need more variables 😅
I think like 1/3 of the people I know are in marriages that count as not happy with the situation. Overall I think I see a higher success rate for poly relationships than normative ones
i'm the same way, but i think/imagine to most poly people, they'd feel trapped/suffocated by monogamy to the same degree you or I would feel exhausted by polyamory. and then ofc, there's a whole range of people who aren't strictly one or the other and are open to a variety of relationship styles/structures.
Obviously, I cannot and do not speak for the whole of the Poly population.
As someone who is poly and spent a decade in a practically monogamous relationship(It's a lot to explain, but boils down to I didn't feel like I actually could have another partner with the one I was with actually being happy), yeah. It was absolutely exhausting on both the mental and emotional level, and I didn't even realize how much it was hurting until I was free of that situation.
But you're very right! Not every situation works for everybody. We all need to recognize our own needs, especially in emotional relationships, and work to best meet them as we can.
Ya for sure. The closest I’ve personally gotten is a sorta open thing for six months, but I genuinely didn’t even have time to date a second person. I think my partner at the time went on like two dates the whole time. Between work and activism and life in general I’d rather dedicate my limited dating time to one person, at least for quite a while in the beginning. But to thine own heart be true.
God, I remember 10 years ago even the most progressive forums that mercilessly crushed transphobes would have userbases lock-step in the opinion that polyamory was inherently dysfunctional, asexuals were just "unfuckable" people in denial, and demis were just "special snowflakes who wanted to feel oppressed."
asexuals were just "unfuckable" people in denial
Tbh, I sometimes wonder if this is just me. It still hurts, and sometimes feels like the people around me think about me that way. 
Synthesis: There will definitely be people who judge you but they can go fuck themselves
inventing a guy to be mad at is a serious condition. aside from lmao who cares
"most"
but when it does happen it's probably something to do with patriarchal violence and cishet women not feeling safe to approach men, while a woman making herself available probably has a lot of opportunity to passively screen the deluge of shit for someone acceptable.
The issue is that to be poly you have to be "weird". To be weird you are predisposed to negative outcomes. So pretty much every rich person is non-monogamous. They aren't "poly"
Poly is for queer ex theater kids. Us basically. By virtue of our distance to whiteness we are gonna have a bad time. Same as most AES nations are disadvantaged from their distance to whiteness. In both cases the theory is objectively superior
The only polycule I know that didn't disintegrate in a year due to some petty bullshit was a couple of (bi?) women, inviting their male friend to join them. Seems to me that to make polycules work you need just the same personality traits and emotional labour as with mono relationships, except proportionally more of them.
I feel like queer ones are fairly stable, and ones that have pairings within a larger poly group are very successful. Sort of like swinging but looser.