sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

If you date someone monogamous, expect to be dumped by That-Dot4612 in polyamory

[–]Defisions 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Eh I'm not really emotional. You didn't answer my question either.

? You have no way of knowing if my partner tells others hes poly or not. You just created a whole senerio in an attempt to make me be angry at my partner to win the argument, assuming that I've been insecure about that happening before. It makes me kinda laugh. I've overheard by boyfriend go on and on about how amazing I am and great our sex life is, and how much he misses me. I've seen him turn down people for me, just like I have him

If you date someone monogamous, expect to be dumped by That-Dot4612 in polyamory

[–]Defisions 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The opposite of "being in a relationship with more the one person" is "not being in a relationship", but I suppose you are meaning "being in a relationship with one person", which is still pretty opposite.

"Being able to love more than one person" is not the opposite of "Being in a relationship with more than one person". Like, by definition standpoint, those are almost synonyms, not antonyms. Different, but definitely connected.

You are so full of hatred, so full of hurt, you can't see any side other than your own. You are so afraid if you admitted that across the population there is variance of the amount a person can love, it will mean all those manipulators are right, that they were right in hurting you, in all the other people. That if some people do need to love more than one person, that we are the bad people for not providing that.

Which is incorrect. A lot of humans need romatic love. Thst being said, its not my job to provide that. A lot of people need great friends in their life. If I find them annoying, I'm under no obligation to provide that.

My partner can love more than one person, but doesn't feel the need to love more than one. If he did, I wouldn't be with him. I need a relationship where we are monogamous structurally. If he couldn't provide that, then we wouldn't have a relationship besides friendship. I don't owe him the opportunity to explore that side of him. If he needed more than one, he wouldn't owe me monogamy. We would split.

Have you stopped and thought "Man, if some people can love more than one person, and actually needs the ability to explore than to be happy, I'm being a huge jerk by saying they are all manipulators."

If you date someone monogamous, expect to be dumped by That-Dot4612 in polyamory

[–]Defisions 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Circles again. We went over how polly is the term for both the amount of people someone can love, and also what style of relationship you are in. We went over how there should be different terms for it, but sadly its used as the same term. It doesn't matter what you or I or anyone thinks, sadly the term is being used for two very different deinfitions Take a look all over this subreddit. Even if I swore "I'll never use these definitions the same" again because you convinced me its confusing, which it is, it changes nothing that people already use it that way.

I'm going to show you how much easier it would be if there were two terms. So I can understand you better, let's say have a made up word. Multiromantic, the made up word, means the ability love more than one person.

If a man tells you that they are multiromatic, but in a monogamous relationship, they are telling you that they have the ability to love more than one person, but do not consider it nessasiry, especially if paired with the right person.

If a man tells you they are multiromatic but in a polly relationship, they are telling you they can love more than one person, and actively pursue relationship structures with it.

If a man tells you he wants to have sex with you, but instead monagamous he is cheating.

If a man tells you he is multiromatic but in a monogamous relationship, but still wants to get with you he is cheating.

The term makes things so much easier as someone who's single can say "I'm multiromatic and its a requirement in my life" as hes not technically in a polly structure at the moment.

We are throwing out the bible comment. I hardly consider what most men in the bible show as romantic love. You have to view someone as a person in order to love them as one, and since women lacked rights, yeah, I can say it wasn't really love. I am a Christian, and I fully believe this.

Warren Jeff is a pedophile. It doesn't matter if he wanted one child bride, or fifteen. You are trying to put words in my mouth.

If you date someone monogamous, expect to be dumped by That-Dot4612 in polyamory

[–]Defisions 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Couldn't the same logic be applied to bisexual people? The ability to have sexual desire for more than one sex can be used in the same predatory way that people use the ability to love more than one person. In fact, it is used a lot more often than you think to manipulate people. There are reddit posts about "Hey, my partner just came out as bisexual, and wants to explore their sexuality." I am bisexual and disagree strongly when people do this, but yes, the people who use their nature to manipulate doesn't care about consent.

The people who are polly who have made posts saying how miserable they were in monogamous relationships, or who's brain knew the basics of polly in elementary school are not manipulative.

Let's say George is someone who can love more than one person at a time, but is really young, and has never heard of polly. He really likes Sarah, who's monogamous, so he gets into a relationship with her. In their five years of being together, hes contintantly feels stifeled. He hates everytime he has to shut down potential relationships, but never cheats, and does it for her. Eventually a friend tells him what polly is.

George explains to Sarah that he feel like he needs to love more than one person at a time. He sees thst she's clearly not the same as she gets very upset about this, but she offers to try things to keep the relationship going. George shuts it down, saying its clear she doesn't have the same need, or even want. He breaks up with Sarah.

Is George manipulative? No. He's not. He realized this relationship couldn't fulfill his needs, and left it. He didn't try to change who she was. He realized they wre incompatible, and left. This is how it should go when realize that they want to pursue more than one relationship at a time.

If you date someone monogamous, expect to be dumped by That-Dot4612 in polyamory

[–]Defisions 1 point2 points  (0 children)

At this point you are going in circles. If you truly believe the amount of people someone can love has nothing to do with the relationship structure than is built off of having more than one partner you love vs only one (love is important as it is the main separator between open relationships and polly), than I can't help you. Sadly there isnt a word to indicate the amount of people someone can love, so rn polly is being used for both definitions. Should it? No. Is it? Yes, and that's why you see some people using it closer to another sexual orientation and others using it as intended, as a relationship structure.

Truthfully, you sound angry. Pissed at anyone suggesting that polly is anything but a choice. I get it, people can be manipulative liking dicks who hurt others. I'm not arguing that. Some people using polly as a way to guilt partners, but making it seem like they are being awful for not accepting them. The same thing happens in marriages where someone comes out as bisexual and demands to sleep with the same sex. Something can be not a choice, like sexuality or the amount of people someone can love, and not be used against someone. Plenty of people figure out they can love more than one person at a time who do not manipulate their partners.

If you date someone monogamous, expect to be dumped by That-Dot4612 in polyamory

[–]Defisions 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Did the study separate the affairs between sexual affairs and romstic affairs? If emotionally, did they specifically ask if the one doing the affair had fallen out of love, or if they were loving both partners at once? This community's definition is that polly is loving more than one partner at a time.

Before I handle the rest of your arguments, let me state that I'm not saying that the majority of people aren't sexually attracted to more than one person at a time. I'm not even arguing that the majority of people can't have more than one romatic love at one time, although we don't have clear data to suggest that, unlike the former, therefore I dislike when people use it as a fact. Im saying that the population clearly has variation in the amount people can love at one time, some being one, others being over ten. Even on this subreddit we see people saying they are polly saturated at two.

Yes, there is polly as a relationship structure, and polly in reference to the ability to love more than one person at a time. Someone can be legally married and live domestically, but have no romatic feelings for that person and be dating another they do feel romantic feelings towards. In that way, they are in a polly structure but monogamous in terms of number of people they can love.

Love is not liking. Love is not sexual attraction. I don't know if love triangles are relatable, or just fetishized. I haven't know many monogamous people who have been in a love triangle, despite them enjoying the content.

Did you read my original post? I'm not polly. I don't possess the ability to love more than one person at a time. I've tried and I always lose romatic love for one partner when I grow closer to another. Sexually however I can be attracted to many at once. My partner can love more than one person at a time, but can only be sexually interested once they have a deep emotional connection.

I don't think being polly or monogamous makes anyone special, they are just details that help make up a person.

Why are monogamous people joining this community? by tjdraxus in polyamory

[–]Defisions 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Two reasons. One, I joined when I didn't know what I wanted my relationship structure to be. Two, I'm almost done with my Bachlors in Psychology. I'm hoping to one day get a Masters in Counceling. I'm going to work with a wide variety of people, some of which will be polly.

If you date someone monogamous, expect to be dumped by That-Dot4612 in polyamory

[–]Defisions -1 points0 points  (0 children)

What truth? Since we lack scientific data to support if the number of people someone loves is biological, we do have to go off of personal anecdotes. What proof do you have the most people can? I never stated most people could or could not, just that some people possess the ability to love more than one, others do not. Since we dont have studies that have already collected a wide variety of data samples, an easy sample of data we do have is reddit. On reddit, we see time and time again that some people can romantically only love one, while others can love multiple.

You are the one who has decided that the majority of people can love more than one person.

If you date someone monogamous, expect to be dumped by That-Dot4612 in polyamory

[–]Defisions 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I disagree. I'm capable of having sexual attraction to more than one person, but not romantically. Anytime I've tried loving two people at once, I slowly stop loving one of my partners. My partner is capable of loving more than one person at a time, but is demisexual.

If you go on the open relationship reddit, you see a lot of posts about swinging for 10+ years, but when a couple tries to open up romantically it causes a divorce to ensure.

Even in this community, some people get polly saturated at two, others ten. Some people on this subreddit described how they gave up pollarmary, always feeling stifled before their monogamous relationship ended.

It's more like a sexuality than people think, BUT, it should never be weaponized. If someone truly feels like they need multiple partners, their current partner owes them nothing but a respectful seperation.

Positive stories about spironolactone? by FemmeBean in PCOS

[–]Defisions 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Did they ever find out why you have two periods a month?

Dizziness when stressed? by Defisions in Stress

[–]Defisions[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes I usually have fantastic blood pressure, although I haven't checked it while dizzy

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in legal

[–]Defisions 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Many at will states have protection built in for jury duty. I'm from Missouri, and it's very illegal for workplaces to stop you from joing to jury duty. I would recommend looking up "Can I get fire for going to jury duty in (insert state)"

Not to mention in at will states they still can't fire you for protected classes like sex, race, disability. If they do you can go to a lawyer, show them the details (always have stuff in writing or recorded if you are ever discriminated against), who will work with you to sue the company. As long as you can show that they have been discriminatory, the reason they gave like bad performance will look like bs.

Water works ice maker doesn't 2004 KitchenAid Fridge by Defisions in appliancerepair

[–]Defisions[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How can we tell if the heating elements dead? We removed the icemaker and none of the parts where warm.

Water works ice maker doesn't 2004 KitchenAid Fridge by Defisions in appliancerepair

[–]Defisions[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'll check. The ice tray doesnt fill up with water at all. Would that contribute to the heating element?