View Single Post
  #19  
Old 02-05-2013, 10:52 AM
MrFarFromRight's Avatar
MrFarFromRight MrFarFromRight is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Smack in the middle of The Spanish Revolution!
Posts: 483
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fleurisseur View Post
Hello
we are a small polyfamily
2 men, 5 women, 7 kids


rule 1) never lie
rule 2) be always available to give love and sex
rule 3) bring your brain to increase our strengths
I'm going to jump into this conversation, late as I might be. fleurisseur, you define yourself as a philosopher. It appears that you're even a TEACHER of philosophy. Since Philosophy isn't a subject offered in primary school, and only [rarely] in the upper age-range of secondary schools, the probability is that you're a Philosophy teacher in higher education: university or technical college or something.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Philosophy EXTREMELY interested in (philistines would even say "obsessed with / pedantic about") the meaning of words, EXTREMELY cautious about how words are used/misused?

In your OP, you write "rule 2) be always available to give love and sex". Then when members of this board object to this rule, you counter with "why do you put NEGATIVE SENSE in a simple phrase ???"; "your opinion is 100% wrong"; "It is just a sign, not a gun on your head"...

Now, IMAO [in my arrogant opinion], the non-professional-philosopher members of this forum have a better grasp of at least 2 key words than you do: "rule" and "always".

There is a rule where I live that you're not allowed to park next to a double yellow line. If somebody breaks this rule it's unlikely - this NOT being the USA - that the police would hold a gun to their head. But it's still a rule.

What you might have meant is "guideline 2) All [adult - assuming you don't include the kids in guideline 2), though I would hope that guidelines 1) and 3) do apply to them] members of the family should be open to the possibility of having sex with any or all of the others, should not reject that possibility through personal dislike or prejudice". Even with this as a guideline, I think that many people would have doubts about joining your family. It's one thing for Jesus to ask that we love our enemies. It's another to ask people to be sexually available for / turned on by any particular person not of their choosing.

***

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Philosophy EXTREMELY interested in the exchange of points of view, in listening to - and considering - others' opinions? A statement such as "your opinion is 100% wrong" doesn't instill in me a great faith in your philosophical merits. More than one comment on this thread backs up SchrodingersCat's opinion. But - of course -
Quote:
Originally Posted by fleurisseur View Post
Your opinion is "an opinion"

even if 20 000 000 people have the same "opinion".

And

I am not here to discuss "your opinion"
Too many of us poor mortals lose sight of the fact that fleurisseur is always right, and that it's a sign of mental feebleness to hold opinions that he doesn't share. Personally, I would advise you to seek some line of work more in harmony with your personality. Instead of Philosophy professor, you should maybe be swami or guru or Buddha... at the very least Pope.

***
Quote:
Last edited by AutumnalTone; 01-13-2013 at 11:54 PM. Reason: removed "looking for" statement as off-topic on this board
I understand the reason for this decision, but I find it a shame that these lines were deleted, because they give added insight into this "family", helping us to steer clear of it. Thanks to that "looking for" in the reason given, as well as
Quote:
Originally Posted by JaneQSmythe View Post
I was also intrigued/put off by the requirement for ONE man and TWO women
I can put 2 and 2 together and suspect (not assume) that your original post was trying to expand a 2man-5woman family to a 3man-7woman one. WHY? WHY are you so interested in keeping the man/woman ratio more or less the same? Even though on another thread - started by you - you state that
Quote:
Originally Posted by fleurisseur View Post
but I confirm : in our polyfamily all women are bisexual, since day one.
and offer
Quote:
Originally Posted by fleurisseur View Post
So, please my darling, don't be afraid to become bisexual, I will help you.
If everybody should love / have sex with everybody else in the family, and all are encouraged to be bisexual (REALLY bisexual), WHY should it matter whether new members are men or women?

Oh, NOW it has clicked!!! The women are supposed to be bisexual. OK, I get it. "2+ hot bi chicks for every man! And since there's a rule that they should be always available to give love and sex, if you [a man] don't get your first choice tonight, you have a good chance of getting your #2... and a shot at #1 tomorrow." And maybe the women are supposed to cook and clean, especially the toilets. [A favourite rant of mine: in mixed-sex shared homes, it's generally - notice that I wrote generally - the men who piss on the floor next to the toilet bowl*... and it's the women who keep the toilets from getting disgusting.]

***

fleurisseur, fleurisseur: unlike other, more generous, spirits on this thread, I do NOT wish your project "all the best". Frankly, I worry about those 7 children. What sort of attitudes are they being brought up with? And as soon as they reach the legal age of consent, are they expected to follow rule 2)?

***

All in all, sounds like a pretty scuzzy outfit to me, but hey, don't let me put the rest of you off: you might be PROUD to live with the Pope.

* Even if all the piss lands in the bowl, it sends up a spray of urine+water that coats the rim of the bowl as well as the nearby floor [and walls]. WHEN will men learn than sitting down to piss robs NOTHING of their virility??? [This last comment might be removed by moderators for being off-topic.]
__________________
If I can't dance, I want no part in your Revolution.
- Emma Goldman Anarchist and Polyamorous par excellence
The person who says something is impossible should not interrupt the person who is doing it.
- old Chinese proverb
And the day came when the risk to remain tight in a bud was more painful than the risk it took to blossom.
~ Anais Nin
I'd rather have a broken heart / Than have a heart of stone.
- from "Boundless Love (A Polyamory Song)" by Jimmy Hollis i Dickson
Reply With Quote