Polyamory.com Forum  

Go Back   Polyamory.com Forum > Polyamory > General Poly Discussions

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 06-14-2013, 08:16 PM
DarkDuality DarkDuality is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 9
Default

Instead of bound to, I should say usually. It does not always happen. But versus usually implies conflict, instead of "or". Or implies choice. Does not really matter to me though, whatever you like best.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 06-14-2013, 09:11 PM
BoringGuy BoringGuy is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Nowhere
Posts: 1,647
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkDuality View Post
Instead of bound to, I should say usually. It does not always happen. But versus usually implies conflict, instead of "or". Or implies choice. Does not really matter to me though, whatever you like best.

Ooh, rich. I'll take last things first: "versus" certainly can suggest "conflict". A quick Google brings up the Free Dictionary (not the most authoritative source but this is quick-and-dirty, not up to ANSI specifications, so roll with me)

Quote:
ver·sus (vûrss, -sz)
prep.
1. Abbr. v. or vs. Against: the plaintiff versus the defendant; Army versus Navy.
2. As the alternative to or in contrast with: "freedom of information versus invasion of privacy" (Ian Hamilton).
So, according to what we have here, "versus" APPLIES TO situations where conflict is present, but I see no indication by definition that "versus" IMPLIES conflict IN a situation. It's a very subtle distinction, but it exists.

Oh hey. I just want to say, I'm really sorry if I'm not choosing my words in the exact way that you need me to in order to not vanish in a puff of greasy black smoke. Besides being a fellow Aspie and therefore exempt from certain things neurotypicals have to do in order to make us feel at ease, i also have not mastered the ability to read people's minds, nor am I half-Betazoid or anything, so that's why I have no Empathy, acccording to at least one person. I mean, I don't agree with that, but I have been accused of it.

Which brings me to the next thing, speaking of Betazoids.

Quote:
Instead of bound to, I should say usually. It does not always happen.
Now that we clarified the meaning and use (did you realize that "usage" and "utilize" are useless words? Anything you can use "usage" or "utilize" for, you can use "use" for instead. I bet you DID realize that, and you probably thought you were the only one who did. Maybe not. Like I said, I'm not a mind reader; but I aam a pretty good guesser. I can't do differential equations in my head, but i can reach into like, a bag of screws or something and pull out the exact number i need without counting #stupidautistictricks) of "versus", we can say "Star Wars versus Star Trek" without "inevitably", "frequently", "usually" ending up in a "conflict" or "fight" about it (for one thing, I really don't care so much about either (although I prefer Trek - TNG mainly, and TOS but not DS9 or Voyager or any of the other ones. I also wasn't THAT crazy about the latest motion picture, the one where Kirk and Spock were all young and fresh out of the Academy) to the point where it would be worth "fighting" over). Indeed, I have personally never seen that happen in MY experience, and believe me, I have done more than my share of discussing the relative merits and aspects and social implcations, etc. of those two popular cultural icons. Therefore, I would say that those discussions "sometimes" or "might" end up "in a fight", because while I have no empirical observation of such a thing, it is CONCEIVABLE, as in, "not out of the realm of reasonable possibility" that other people might be emotionally or intellectually invested in that debate to the point that they get really worked up about convinccing others they are right, which is what I'm GUESSING you mean by a "fight" (as opposed to people beating each other up with their fists). Correct me if I'm mistaken.

I am JUST getting warmed up, but i have to do other things. For your edification, and to keep you entertained while I am away, I refer you to

http://www.polyamory.com/forum/showt...highlight=star

I thought there was another thread; maybe they got merged. Speaking of which - if a moderator wants to move these off-topic posts to that thread right there, that would be peachy-keen and super-grooovy.

(This Episode was brought to you by the Aspies in Favor of Giving NeuroTypicals a Break Foundation, or the AFGNTBF. "We don't need our acronym to spell a word. We know who we are.")

Last edited by BoringGuy; 06-14-2013 at 09:15 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 06-14-2013, 09:17 PM
onoma onoma is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 78
Default

Sigh... I'm not getting any answers to my question in this thread, am I?
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 06-14-2013, 09:25 PM
BoringGuy BoringGuy is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Nowhere
Posts: 1,647
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by onoma View Post
Sigh... I'm not getting any answers to my question in this thread, am I?
Maybe not, but it's only page 2, and just look at all the love and rockets. you could almost cut it with a knife. Doesn't that make it worth it? Can you roll with me?

(that's going to be my go-to cliché. until-i-get-sick-of-myself-however-long-that-is - "roll with me" it's gonna be. And I have to do that now, but it will be by myself.)
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 06-14-2013, 09:35 PM
onoma onoma is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 78
Default ntsrebs congress

Quote:
Originally Posted by BoringGuy View Post
Maybe not, but it's only page 2, and just look at all the love and rockets. you could almost cut it with a knife. Doesn't that make it worth it? Can you roll with me?

(that's going to be my go-to cliché. until-i-get-sick-of-myself-however-long-that-is - "roll with me" it's gonna be. And I have to do that now, but it will be by myself.)
I didn't see any rockets... now I want rockets! :P
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 06-14-2013, 10:01 PM
kkxvlv kkxvlv is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 74
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by onoma View Post

Thinking of getting it for my mono girlfriend to read. I know there are other books specifically about polyamory, but thinking that just introducing her to the idea that a lot of how she sees sex is due to societal pressure could be a good first step.
A good first step to what?
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 06-14-2013, 10:11 PM
onoma onoma is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 78
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kkxvlv View Post
A good first step to what?
Lots of things... talking about sex, talking about open relationships. Probably should have given less information in my initial post... really just want to see what people thought of the book. I read one bad review, but also a couple good reviews...
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 06-14-2013, 10:30 PM
Josie Josie is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 70
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by onoma View Post
I've seen a few interviews with the author of this, and one of the claims in the book is that monogamy is more unnatural for women than for men. Also, that much of a woman's sex drive is basically controlled or dampened through societal pressure.
I haven't read this book but I have done a lot of research into evolutionary psychology recently for my course. The majority (or at least a great number) of evolutionary scientists argue, for a plethora of reasons, that monogamy is in fact more unnatural for men. This is mostly based on Trivers' theory of parental investment and the later research that was inspired by it. There are a large number of studies that suggest that polygyny (a man with more than one woman), whilst still no where near the majority (monogamy) is found to occur in much larger numbers than polyandry (a woman with more than one man)- which is considered very rare. Polyandry is also incredibly rare in most other species - unless the female is the lesser investing sex when it comes to parental investment.

Obviously, it does exist. The countless people in polyandrous situations on this site prove that but, in general it is a much lower number. Although, with the relatively recent introduction of fairly reliable birth control , this could be changing as women are no longer at risk of having to put in a larger (minimal and obligatory) investment from sex. Though it's too soon for the proposed change to have occurred through evolution it could be a cognitive thing that is going against the innate trend. I don't know, this part is merely speculation.

As for sex drive being controlled by culture, I know a lot less about that but, at a guess, I'd say that (like in most circumstances) both biology and culture play a part.

I'd agree with what others have said though, if you're partner identifies as mono - leave her be. This book suggests that monogamy is unnatural for women but there are lots of books that suggest that polyamory is general in unnatural. It doesn't mean it's true and if there's one thing people don't like, it's being told that the way they are is wrong or unnatural. I appreciate that you probably weren't trying to do that and probably were just introducing them to a book with an interesting perspective, but if they're happy as they are don't try and push them.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 06-14-2013, 10:43 PM
BoringGuy BoringGuy is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Nowhere
Posts: 1,647
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by onoma View Post
I didn't see any rockets... now I want rockets! :P
Ok, i can't decide between "your thread, your way" (i'd say "your welcome" too but i would be compeled to stab myself in the eyeballs as a result, and i'm not ready for that), and "i got yer rockets riiiiiiiight here, baybee". But either way, here's the link to the thread:

http://www.polyamory.com/forum/showthread.php?t=687
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 06-14-2013, 11:00 PM
Marcus's Avatar
Marcus Marcus is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Haltom City, TX
Posts: 1,076
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by onoma View Post
really just want to see what people thought of the book. I read one bad review, but also a couple good reviews...
I would focus less on this book and whether or not it will get you closer to accomplishing your plan than I would focus on being honest with my partner.

Have you spoken with her about wanting an open relationship (or whatever it is that you are gunning for)? Has she requested that you find a good book for her? If you have talked with her unambiguously about what you want and she has requested that you do some research for her (which would tell me that she's not actually that interested) then so be it:

I have not read that particular book.

If you haven't spoken with her about it and she thus has not asked you to do research for her... what exactly is your plan? You going to slip it under her pillow and play dumb?
__________________
Independent (Anarchist) Non-Monogamy

Me: male, 40, straight, single
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:26 PM.