Polygamy and Sister Wives ?

PJ_Soul

Drowned Out said:

PJ_Soul said:

Drowned Out said:

PJ_Soul said:

Drowned Out said:

PJ_Soul said:

The problem is their children and those raised to do it. No, it's not worse than a wife with many husbands, but someone please show me a case where that is actually happening. I'm sure it might be somewhere or other, but we all know it would be extremely rare, so that is a rather moot point.
Polygamy is 99.99% a man with many wives, and in such arrangements, the man is necessarily the king of the castle, and they think that is the family structure that God demands, since it is almost always a religious practice. That's really the whole point behind it. Therefore, I find polygamy as it is usually practiced to be extremely unequal. And if there were just an uninfluenced choice of the women to put themselves into that subservient role, I don't respect that choice at all, but I would at least respect their right to choose it .....
But what about their children (and the ones who were raised to believe that is how it must be done because it's the way of the Lord)? These kids are raised in that environment, basically brainwashed through family and religion, and I don't feel like they are choosing to grow up and then oftentimes adopt this unequal power structure within the family and to accept that women have a subservient role. Those who don't want to follow in those footsteps often have a very hard (and in some cases dangerous time) extracting themselves from that lifestyle. For that reason, I am against polygamy for the most part. Add to that the issues of actual illegal activity that occurs in some polygamist societies, where I believe that polygamy very much contributes to the abuse of girls, and it makes it so much worse. Of course, there are exceptions to everything, but if we look at the reality of polygamy, as it is usually practiced, it is a very archaic, fucked up religious arrangement that places women beneath men.

FWIW, I believe that Sister Wives is a show meant to try and convince people of some stuff that isn't actually very reflective of the real world. It is reality TV after all. No one should be watching that show and deciding that that is how it normally is in polygamist families (and frankly, I think that family comes off a pretty fucked up anyhow, and the husband is indeed the master, no matter how snotty his weird wives get).

What if it has nothing to do with religion? I would posit that there are probably more people in poly relationships who are not religious, than there are married polygamists (just googled...latest study says 5% of Americans live a poly lifestyle). Pretty sure I know your answer. Guess it depends on whether we're discussing this show (which I've never even heard of and would never waste a single breath watching), or poly relationships in general.

As long as there is a power structure in the family where the man is the head, I am against it, religious or not. It's not them being religious that really bothers me (not that I'm a fan of religion, as I'm sure you know. And religion certainly plays a big role is coercing people into the practice). It's the sexism of the arrangement. As I said, I'm sure there are a small minority of exceptions, but generally, no. I am offended by the implications of polygamy. Not that my being offended should matter to anyone, obviously. That's just how I feel. Now if we're talking the legality of it.... that's pretty tricky. I think that as soon as children are in the picture it becomes very difficult, since you can no longer just say "as long as they are all consenting adults they can do what they want", which is, of course, true... unless they choose to get married. That's still illegal.

Gotcha. The people I know in this lifestyle live with complete equality. They are both free to have other gf's or bf's. I know one couple who have gf's but not bf's...the woman is bi and doesn't want to suppress that part of herself for the relationship, but feels like her emotional relationship needs are met by being with her male spouse...they only bring females into the relationship, but there is still no inequality or sexism involved as she is driving that aspect of their relationship as much as her partner is.

As far as you know anyway. Arrangements like that often go sideways after an amount of time, no matter how bad the people involved want it to work ... But in any case, that actually just sounds like an open relationship, not a polygamous one.

What's the difference tho? That's what I was saying....is it just marriage? I've seen polygamy defined without the marriage aspect. (From wiki: Polygamy involves sexual activity with mutiple partners without or with marriage).
And we can say that these things go sideways but that is our perception of it. The poly couple I know have been doing this for well over half of their 20+ year marriage. Besides....over 50% of marriages 'go sideways' anyway...im sure a majority of those are associated with infidelity....which may have been prevented by consensual polyamory....
Again, not something we can clearly define and make black or white judgements about. It's an individual choice - as long as there is no coercion or abuse.

I don't think marriage is necessary, but I think cohabitation is necessarily a part of it, no? That is where power structures and family dynamics become involved.
I think there is a lot of research on the effects of open relationships on relationships. I'm not just going off of my own perceptions. I've just read some stuff about it. Not that I'm any kind of expert. But in my own experience, when a couple adopts an open relationship (again, I really don't think this is polygamy in any way, shape, or form), there are usually some pretty profound issues between them. Obviously, again, there are exceptions to every rule. I wouldn't only look at the exceptions to form an overall opinion though.

Back to polygamy... As I mentioned, while I don't respect it, and the usual practice of it offends me as a woman, I don't think it really becomes an issue until children are involved (which is more often the case than not).

Drowned Out

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Drowned...

When it is a choice made... I'm okay with it.

When it is indoctrinated and the alpha male sits atop the food chain... I have an issue with it. This situation begs reform.

Agreed. But regulating indoctrination has always been a fascinating topic to me...we set our own morals as individuals, then are expected to assimilate to the consensus morals of society...then to actual law....and on top of that, we then attempt to force other societies to conform to our standards. It's the slippery slope fallacy defined, and I think there is way too much nuance to make absolute statements about many indoctrinated beliefs.
I think we're indoctrinated to believe in monogamy....nationalism, militarism,interventionism, capitalism, Christian morality even if we don't consider ourselves Christian, political ideologies, and everything else we learn. Becomes a nature vs nurture discussion, like so many discussions surrounding 'belief' or ideology.
On this topic I feel the only line should be drawn at abuse and coercion (I think I've said that enough times now lol). We can encourage people to be re-educated to think like us (in the case of religious indoctrination with a patriarchal relationship structure). But it's similar to fighting for women's rights in Islamic society....if they have been raised this way and are happy and ok with having gender roles...how do we combat that? I don't think progress on these topics can be forced, it needs to be learned or unlearned over time, by presenting people with options. Tough conversation.

Drowned Out

PJ_Soul said:

I don't think marriage is necessary, but I think cohabitation is necessarily a part of it, no? That is where power structures and family dynamics become involved.
I think there is a lot of research on the effects of open relationships on relationships. I'm not just going off of my own perceptions. I've just read some stuff about it. Not that I'm any kind of expert. But in my own experience, when a couple adopts an open relationship (again, I really don't think this is polygamy in any way, shape, or form), there are usually some pretty profound issues between them. Obviously, again, there are exceptions to every rule. I wouldn't only look at the exceptions to form an overall opinion though.

Back to polygamy... As I mentioned, while I don't respect it, and the usual practice of it offends me as a woman, I don't think it really becomes an issue until children are involved (which is more often the case than not).

Cool, I get all of that...and I agree. the examples I'm going by don't involve any live-in poly relationships so I can't comment to that. But I really don't think it would become a male dominant situation if they got to that level. If anything, she 'wears the pants' in their relationship. And I think it may get to that level for them once their kids are older...they are aware of (and careful about) other people's notions of their situation and how it would affect their kids.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

Drowned Out said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Drowned...

When it is a choice made... I'm okay with it.

When it is indoctrinated and the alpha male sits atop the food chain... I have an issue with it. This situation begs reform.

Agreed. But regulating indoctrination has always been a fascinating topic to me...we set our own morals as individuals, then are expected to assimilate to the consensus morals of society...then to actual law....and on top of that, we then attempt to force other societies to conform to our standards. It's the slippery slope fallacy defined, and I think there is way too much nuance to make absolute statements about many indoctrinated beliefs.
I think we're indoctrinated to believe in monogamy....nationalism, militarism,interventionism, capitalism, Christian morality even if we don't consider ourselves Christian, political ideologies, and everything else we learn. Becomes a nature vs nurture discussion, like so many discussions surrounding 'belief' or ideology.
On this topic I feel the only line should be drawn at abuse and coercion (I think I've said that enough times now lol). We can encourage people to be re-educated to think like us (in the case of religious indoctrination with a patriarchal relationship structure). But it's similar to fighting for women's rights in Islamic society....if they have been raised this way and are happy and ok with having gender roles...how do we combat that? I don't think progress on these topics can be forced, it needs to be learned or unlearned over time, by presenting people with options. Tough conversation.

It is a tough conversation.

I hear what you are saying regarding 'passing judgement' and it's legitimate.

My problem, as expressed, is the notion that many born into that type of structure are slaves to its ways. They might not see any problem with that, but it is only because they do not have the perspective that allows them to see the misfortune surrounding their way of life.

polaris_x

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Drowned Out said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Drowned...

When it is a choice made... I'm okay with it.

When it is indoctrinated and the alpha male sits atop the food chain... I have an issue with it. This situation begs reform.

Agreed. But regulating indoctrination has always been a fascinating topic to me...we set our own morals as individuals, then are expected to assimilate to the consensus morals of society...then to actual law....and on top of that, we then attempt to force other societies to conform to our standards. It's the slippery slope fallacy defined, and I think there is way too much nuance to make absolute statements about many indoctrinated beliefs.
I think we're indoctrinated to believe in monogamy....nationalism, militarism,interventionism, capitalism, Christian morality even if we don't consider ourselves Christian, political ideologies, and everything else we learn. Becomes a nature vs nurture discussion, like so many discussions surrounding 'belief' or ideology.
On this topic I feel the only line should be drawn at abuse and coercion (I think I've said that enough times now lol). We can encourage people to be re-educated to think like us (in the case of religious indoctrination with a patriarchal relationship structure). But it's similar to fighting for women's rights in Islamic society....if they have been raised this way and are happy and ok with having gender roles...how do we combat that? I don't think progress on these topics can be forced, it needs to be learned or unlearned over time, by presenting people with options. Tough conversation.

It is a tough conversation.

I hear what you are saying regarding 'passing judgement' and it's legitimate.

My problem, as expressed, is the notion that many born into that type of structure are slaves to its ways. They might not see any problem with that, but it is only because they do not have the perspective that allows them to see the misfortune surrounding their way of life.

we are all slaves to corporations now ... what's the diff!?

i think the fundamental issue here is choice ... and whether or not anyone can prove that the people involved did not freely choose this path ... if not - then we should allow them to exercise that free will especially if they are not hurting anyone ...

PJ_Soul

You mean ONLY if they are not hurting anyone. I would argue that that is impossible for female children.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

polaris_x said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Drowned Out said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Drowned...

When it is a choice made... I'm okay with it.

When it is indoctrinated and the alpha male sits atop the food chain... I have an issue with it. This situation begs reform.

Agreed. But regulating indoctrination has always been a fascinating topic to me...we set our own morals as individuals, then are expected to assimilate to the consensus morals of society...then to actual law....and on top of that, we then attempt to force other societies to conform to our standards. It's the slippery slope fallacy defined, and I think there is way too much nuance to make absolute statements about many indoctrinated beliefs.
I think we're indoctrinated to believe in monogamy....nationalism, militarism,interventionism, capitalism, Christian morality even if we don't consider ourselves Christian, political ideologies, and everything else we learn. Becomes a nature vs nurture discussion, like so many discussions surrounding 'belief' or ideology.
On this topic I feel the only line should be drawn at abuse and coercion (I think I've said that enough times now lol). We can encourage people to be re-educated to think like us (in the case of religious indoctrination with a patriarchal relationship structure). But it's similar to fighting for women's rights in Islamic society....if they have been raised this way and are happy and ok with having gender roles...how do we combat that? I don't think progress on these topics can be forced, it needs to be learned or unlearned over time, by presenting people with options. Tough conversation.

It is a tough conversation.

I hear what you are saying regarding 'passing judgement' and it's legitimate.

My problem, as expressed, is the notion that many born into that type of structure are slaves to its ways. They might not see any problem with that, but it is only because they do not have the perspective that allows them to see the misfortune surrounding their way of life.

we are all slaves to corporations now ... what's the diff!?

i think the fundamental issue here is choice ... and whether or not anyone can prove that the people involved did not freely choose this path ... if not - then we should allow them to exercise that free will especially if they are not hurting anyone ...

The difference between young women locked into a polygamist lifestyle and people locked into the rat race... hmmm. I'll take being a slave to corporations.

I agree with choice and I believe choice is something young women born into polygamist colonies don't have a choice because they know no alternative being brainwashed from youth.

polaris_x

but we are ALL borne into a lifestyle that has social constructs ... it's not so black and white ... we ALL participate in systems that cause suffering ... that's what it means now to be part of the "economy" ...

PJ_Soul

polaris_x said:

but we are ALL borne into a lifestyle that has social constructs ... it's not so black and white ... we ALL participate in systems that cause suffering ... that's what it means now to be part of the "economy" ...

Yeah, but human beings pick their battles, and there is nothing wrong with that. Sure we're all born into a lifestyle that has a social construct. The question is how bad for a person or group of people is that social construct in relative terms? I would argue that a polygamous community is VERY VERY bad for girls to be born into. Others are much worse than the norm too. Like kids born into white supremacist communities or fanatical militaristic sects, or any fanatical religious sect, and so on. It is okay to qualify lifestyles. Some of the them are very obviously less healthy than others.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

PJ_Soul said:

polaris_x said:

but we are ALL borne into a lifestyle that has social constructs ... it's not so black and white ... we ALL participate in systems that cause suffering ... that's what it means now to be part of the "economy" ...

Yeah, but human beings pick their battles, and there is nothing wrong with that. Sure we're all born into a lifestyle that has a social construct. The question is how bad for a person or group of people is that social construct in relative terms? I would argue that a polygamous community is VERY VERY bad for girls to be born into. Others are much worse than the norm too. Like kids born into white supremacist communities or fanatical militaristic sects, or any fanatical religious sect, and so on. It is okay to qualify lifestyles. Some of the them are very obviously less healthy than others.

This is kind of where I'm at.

amethgr8

I have watched less then one episode because I can't watch anymore. It frustrates me to see women live like that, my interpretation, they are not seeing their true potential. However in their view, they all fully believe they are carrying out purpose and are okay with it. Bully for them, it's not for me.

In VERY general terms our western civilized brains really function better doing one thing at a a time. Relationships are different they are intimate. I estimate that even tho there is a fair divorce rate, as realationships deepen either mono or poly, it's easier on the brain to only have to process one partners actions, reactions, family issues, work schedule, etc. and vice verse. While there maybe poly relations out there, working, I believe they are the exception to the long term rule. Others just fooling around or limiting their partners and keepin it light and not religious, to me are not ready for more deep relationships and really just learning who they are and what they want out of a partner.

I'm not saying a poly relation cannot be deep it certainly can, but I estaime not as deep as every single day, day in and out only one person (of course to qualify there is no dysfunction in said example relationship). I think ultimately one would pick the person that fulfills them the most for what their specific needs are. There are people that don't want to share all that of themselves with another, ever, and that's ok too.

As it relates to insurance of your spouse, where is that line drawn? Are you allowed to have 5 husbands or wives and 15 children on your insurance? Why would anyone divorce?

Relationships, marriage, it's all socialize learning. Other cultures have taught us "normal" is only a matter of perspective.

Godfather.

trippy....no thanks to the several wives idea.

Godfather.

Godfather.

what would Lorena Bobbitt do ? HAHHAHHAHHAHHAH

Godfather.

polaris_x

PJ_Soul said:

polaris_x said:

but we are ALL borne into a lifestyle that has social constructs ... it's not so black and white ... we ALL participate in systems that cause suffering ... that's what it means now to be part of the "economy" ...

Yeah, but human beings pick their battles, and there is nothing wrong with that. Sure we're all born into a lifestyle that has a social construct. The question is how bad for a person or group of people is that social construct in relative terms? I would argue that a polygamous community is VERY VERY bad for girls to be born into. Others are much worse than the norm too. Like kids born into white supremacist communities or fanatical militaristic sects, or any fanatical religious sect, and so on. It is okay to qualify lifestyles. Some of the them are very obviously less healthy than others.

based on what? ... do you have literature that proves this? ...

listen - i'm not saying it's great or it's bad ... i don't know what it's like ... all i'm saying is that the biases we project are often based on constructs we have been indoctrinated with ... i'm pretty sure if we were to truly open our minds and be given all the information - we'd be ok with some and not so ok with others ... we live in a generally fucked up world now - so, my position is that our current conventions isn't necessarily producing a great society ... so, we've got no real ground to stand on ...

Thirty Bills Unpaid

polaris_x said:

PJ_Soul said:

polaris_x said:

but we are ALL borne into a lifestyle that has social constructs ... it's not so black and white ... we ALL participate in systems that cause suffering ... that's what it means now to be part of the "economy" ...

Yeah, but human beings pick their battles, and there is nothing wrong with that. Sure we're all born into a lifestyle that has a social construct. The question is how bad for a person or group of people is that social construct in relative terms? I would argue that a polygamous community is VERY VERY bad for girls to be born into. Others are much worse than the norm too. Like kids born into white supremacist communities or fanatical militaristic sects, or any fanatical religious sect, and so on. It is okay to qualify lifestyles. Some of the them are very obviously less healthy than others.

based on what? ... do you have literature that proves this? ...

listen - i'm not saying it's great or it's bad ... i don't know what it's like ... all i'm saying is that the biases we project are often based on constructs we have been indoctrinated with ... i'm pretty sure if we were to truly open our minds and be given all the information - we'd be ok with some and not so ok with others ... we live in a generally fucked up world now - so, my position is that our current conventions isn't necessarily producing a great society ... so, we've got no real ground to stand on ...

So don't throw stones when you live in glass houses?

Some things are a little more f**ked up than others. We can open our minds up all we want, but in my opinion... some things will never be appropriate: indoctrinating young girls for full participation in a polygamous religious cult lifestyle is not something I can begin to think is acceptable.

If adults choose to seek out such a lifestyle then fair enough.

I hear what you're saying though: in reality... raising a child to fear the Lord and dedicate themselves to a life of worshipping him is in the same hemisphere whether people care to admit it or not. Both are unfortunate in my mind.

polaris_x

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

polaris_x said:

PJ_Soul said:

polaris_x said:

but we are ALL borne into a lifestyle that has social constructs ... it's not so black and white ... we ALL participate in systems that cause suffering ... that's what it means now to be part of the "economy" ...

Yeah, but human beings pick their battles, and there is nothing wrong with that. Sure we're all born into a lifestyle that has a social construct. The question is how bad for a person or group of people is that social construct in relative terms? I would argue that a polygamous community is VERY VERY bad for girls to be born into. Others are much worse than the norm too. Like kids born into white supremacist communities or fanatical militaristic sects, or any fanatical religious sect, and so on. It is okay to qualify lifestyles. Some of the them are very obviously less healthy than others.

based on what? ... do you have literature that proves this? ...

listen - i'm not saying it's great or it's bad ... i don't know what it's like ... all i'm saying is that the biases we project are often based on constructs we have been indoctrinated with ... i'm pretty sure if we were to truly open our minds and be given all the information - we'd be ok with some and not so ok with others ... we live in a generally fucked up world now - so, my position is that our current conventions isn't necessarily producing a great society ... so, we've got no real ground to stand on ...

So don't throw stones when you live in glass houses?

Some things are a little more f**ked up than others. We can open our minds up all we want, but in my opinion... some things will never be appropriate: indoctrinating young girls for full participation in a polygamous religious cult lifestyle is not something I can begin to think is acceptable.

If adults choose to seek out such a lifestyle then fair enough.

I hear what you're saying though: in reality... raising a child to fear the Lord and dedicate themselves to a life of worshipping him is in the same hemisphere whether people care to admit it or not. Both are unfortunate in my mind.

sort of ... everyone is a product of their experiences and their belief systems that evolved through a complex system ... we have like a bunch of people who think donald trump would be a great POTUS - do you trust them to raise kids?

our society is fucked up now ... people shoot each other over road rage incidents; bullying is at an all time worse, states are instituting more discriminatory laws and reading internet comments should render any sane person suicidal ... i'm just not sure we have the authority to dictate what is good anymore ...

Go Beavers

polaris_x said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

polaris_x said:

PJ_Soul said:

polaris_x said:

but we are ALL borne into a lifestyle that has social constructs ... it's not so black and white ... we ALL participate in systems that cause suffering ... that's what it means now to be part of the "economy" ...

Yeah, but human beings pick their battles, and there is nothing wrong with that. Sure we're all born into a lifestyle that has a social construct. The question is how bad for a person or group of people is that social construct in relative terms? I would argue that a polygamous community is VERY VERY bad for girls to be born into. Others are much worse than the norm too. Like kids born into white supremacist communities or fanatical militaristic sects, or any fanatical religious sect, and so on. It is okay to qualify lifestyles. Some of the them are very obviously less healthy than others.

based on what? ... do you have literature that proves this? ...

listen - i'm not saying it's great or it's bad ... i don't know what it's like ... all i'm saying is that the biases we project are often based on constructs we have been indoctrinated with ... i'm pretty sure if we were to truly open our minds and be given all the information - we'd be ok with some and not so ok with others ... we live in a generally fucked up world now - so, my position is that our current conventions isn't necessarily producing a great society ... so, we've got no real ground to stand on ...

So don't throw stones when you live in glass houses?

Some things are a little more f**ked up than others. We can open our minds up all we want, but in my opinion... some things will never be appropriate: indoctrinating young girls for full participation in a polygamous religious cult lifestyle is not something I can begin to think is acceptable.

If adults choose to seek out such a lifestyle then fair enough.

I hear what you're saying though: in reality... raising a child to fear the Lord and dedicate themselves to a life of worshipping him is in the same hemisphere whether people care to admit it or not. Both are unfortunate in my mind.

sort of ... everyone is a product of their experiences and their belief systems that evolved through a complex system ... we have like a bunch of people who think donald trump would be a great POTUS - do you trust them to raise kids?

our society is fucked up now ... people shoot each other over road rage incidents; bullying is at an all time worse, states are instituting more discriminatory laws and reading internet comments should render any sane person suicidal ... i'm just not sure we have the authority to dictate what is good anymore ...

I see society being better now than it was. We just hear about things happening now that were happening in the past, but our news radius was only about 30 miles then. Now I get to read about someone finding a 15' snake in their bed in Uzbekistan. I think were still learning how to balance the avalanche of available news where we're often fed the most dramatic and outrageous stories, vs. actual reality.

polaris_x

Go Beavers said:

polaris_x said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

polaris_x said:

PJ_Soul said:

polaris_x said:

but we are ALL borne into a lifestyle that has social constructs ... it's not so black and white ... we ALL participate in systems that cause suffering ... that's what it means now to be part of the "economy" ...

Yeah, but human beings pick their battles, and there is nothing wrong with that. Sure we're all born into a lifestyle that has a social construct. The question is how bad for a person or group of people is that social construct in relative terms? I would argue that a polygamous community is VERY VERY bad for girls to be born into. Others are much worse than the norm too. Like kids born into white supremacist communities or fanatical militaristic sects, or any fanatical religious sect, and so on. It is okay to qualify lifestyles. Some of the them are very obviously less healthy than others.

based on what? ... do you have literature that proves this? ...

listen - i'm not saying it's great or it's bad ... i don't know what it's like ... all i'm saying is that the biases we project are often based on constructs we have been indoctrinated with ... i'm pretty sure if we were to truly open our minds and be given all the information - we'd be ok with some and not so ok with others ... we live in a generally fucked up world now - so, my position is that our current conventions isn't necessarily producing a great society ... so, we've got no real ground to stand on ...

So don't throw stones when you live in glass houses?

Some things are a little more f**ked up than others. We can open our minds up all we want, but in my opinion... some things will never be appropriate: indoctrinating young girls for full participation in a polygamous religious cult lifestyle is not something I can begin to think is acceptable.

If adults choose to seek out such a lifestyle then fair enough.

I hear what you're saying though: in reality... raising a child to fear the Lord and dedicate themselves to a life of worshipping him is in the same hemisphere whether people care to admit it or not. Both are unfortunate in my mind.

sort of ... everyone is a product of their experiences and their belief systems that evolved through a complex system ... we have like a bunch of people who think donald trump would be a great POTUS - do you trust them to raise kids?

our society is fucked up now ... people shoot each other over road rage incidents; bullying is at an all time worse, states are instituting more discriminatory laws and reading internet comments should render any sane person suicidal ... i'm just not sure we have the authority to dictate what is good anymore ...

I see society being better now than it was. We just hear about things happening now that were happening in the past, but our news radius was only about 30 miles then. Now I get to read about someone finding a 15' snake in their bed in Uzbekistan. I think were still learning how to balance the avalanche of available news where we're often fed the most dramatic and outrageous stories, vs. actual reality.

that's what people think about diseases too ... that reporting and diagnoses is so much better now ... it's an illusion to the reality ... our evolvement has definitely brought about much things we can deem positive but in many respects it's gotten worse ...

rgambs

I definitely feel like I have enough love for at least a half dozen women!


I know for sure a woman would have to be incredibly needy to absorb ALL the love I have to give!

*Edit, "love" is not being used as a euphemism here lol

Thirty Bills Unpaid

rgambs said:

I definitely feel like I have enough love for at least a half dozen women!


I know for sure a woman would have to be incredibly needy to absorb ALL the love I have to give!

*Edit, "love" is not being used as a euphemism here lol

This is actually a good perspective.

I mean... why be a suicide bomber to get yourself 1000 virgins when you can be a polygamist and do it without maiming anyone?