well i have to tell you a secret .. i live near a forrest and their are apple trees nearby... yes.. sometimes i walk up to them and grab some apples and berries...

guilty as charged lol im sorry ....it's my reptile brain i do not fuck mulitple poly woman but man .. when i see those red apples hanging !

_________________
AK-47...When you absolutely positively have to kill every fucking orc in the room
questions about herbal medicine here-vp582526.html#582526

also,

you can't just decide to redefine the word "need", lol.

it is what it is.

and you can't get ornery with people for using it in its true context either.

_________________
what dr. house brings to medicine, i bring to everyday life (an extreme dose of cynicism), don't listen to the curmudgeon!

OK man, you want it, you got it:
Sorry, I don't know what you are talking about. My reptile brain doesn't tell me to kill anyone.... is there something you want to share with us man?

Anyway... Do you know what Pica is? From wikipedia:

"Pica is a medical disorder characterized by an appetite for substances largely non-nutritive (e.g., metal, clay, coal, sand, dirt, soil, feces, chalk, pens and pencils, paper, batteries, spoons, toothbrushes, soap, mucus, latex gloves, ash, gum, lip balm, tacks and other office supplies, etc....

Causes:

The scant research that has been done on the causes of pica suggests that the disorder is a specific appetite caused by mineral deficiency in many cases, such as iron deficiency, which sometimes is a result of celiac disease[4] or hookworm infection..."

This shows you how strong is our reptile brain. People who lack iron start CHEWING ON PENCILS. That's how "smart" our body is in recognizing a deficiency and working towards "compensating" for it. Just one example...

Our body KNOWS. And our body ACTS. When we lack vitamin D - your brain will tell you to go out to the sun. When you lack vitamin C, you will crave an orange or lemon.

Your reptile brain CRAVES to SPREAD your DNA far and wide. This is WELL DOCUMENTED. I can't give you a footnote but if you really want me to then let me know and I will google it.

Now if you want to fuck around with your reptile brain, by all means brother, go ahead. Have your monogamous relationship for ten years. But when the shit hits the fan, and IT WILL hit the fan, just as it happened to you once and to me once and for most couples MOST of the times - don't be surprised.

I already said this once - I attribute a big part of "relationship problems" to this issue of our sexual desire to spread our DNA around, the lack of sexual variety.

You may want be with that one person - but your mind will start fucking with you and work against you, failing your relationship, so your reptile brain will get "what it wants" which in this case is to "fuck around -

You and your partner will start to resent each other. You will start arguing about shit that doesn't matter. You will start noticing the girls in the street more and more. You and your girl will go thru the motions of "weekend sex" but your dick won't be hard.... I talked about this before...

And that's just the sexual / "spreading your DNA" aspect of this debate. There are other areas:

DUDE - My mother LOVES me. She LOVES my brother. She LOVES my sister. And she LOVES our dog. I've been involved now with three women simultaneously and I can tell you that I had feelings towards all of them. Try it... you will see that it is possible.

I just left Ibiza two days ago.. while there I was involved with three girls for almost two months:

One of the girls is very independent, very strong, reserved. I have a certain type of feelings towards her... Then there is another girl, who is younger and very fragile, she tried killing herself once. She is very light headed, will try anything, but also extremely smart. Towards her I have very different feelings - a lovingly "I want to take care of you" emotion which is very different from the feelings I have towards the first girl... then there is the 3rd girl to who I have less feelings for, but towards who I have much higher sexual attraction. I liked spending time with her, I loved fucking her, but I'm not as much emotionally connected to her.
I will probably meet again with the first two girls... life long lovers perhaps.

I can literally think about one girl for one minute and feel those emotions towards her, and then the next minute think about the other girl, and feel those other feelings. There is NOTHING contradicting about this.

Do you have a few guy friends? Do you have feelings towards them? Even if these are "manly brotherhood" feelings, these are still feelings, right? How come?? Why can you have feelings towards A FEW guy friends? and these are all different feelings, right?

When you meet a new girl knowing this stuff and realizing that your emotions towards her do not have to be exclusive and that it is OK to have emotions towards a few girls, when you ALLOW yourself to have these feelings - it is NOT a problem. It feels 100% natural.
Society has been improving from an economic / technological perspective. It has to do with private property, taxation, class system, and general order. It doesn't mean that our society is "best" for the individual.

In fact, who are the happiest people in the world? The NIGERIANS:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/3157570.stm

"Nigeria has the highest percentage of happy people followed by Mexico, Venezuela, El Salvador and Puerto Rico, while Russia, Armenia and Romania have the fewest...... The researchers for World Values Survey described the desire for material goods as "a happiness suppressant.

They say happiness levels have remained virtually the same in industrialised countries since World War II, although incomes have risen considerably".

Money and technology do not buy happiness. In the contrary. Half of Americans are on anti depression pills while in Africa and less developed countries people live a much more harmonious and less stressful lifestyle.

Come'on man... it's not about indulging your primal mind, it is about not denying from it the fundamental things that make us human - freedom, pursuing social and emotional variety, sexual novelty....

I'm reading this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_human_needs

Max-Neef classifies the fundamental human needs as:

subsistence,
protection,
affection,
understanding,
participation,
leisure,
creation,
identity and
freedom.


And all I can think of is how much more "fulfilling" a poly lifestyle would be for all of these needs.... and how much a monogamous relationship only limit their fulfillment.

When you are involved with a few girls both them and you will enjoy higher fulfillment of all of these. More subsistence, more protection, more affection... more more and more.... not 24/7 of the SAME KIND, but generally more from everything, from a few sources.


Yes, over many many tens and hundreds of thousands of years. Not 2000 or 5000 years. It is WELL DOCUMENTED that the move to monogamy happened just 2000 years ago as the result of the spread of Christianity.

http://www.amazon.com/Myth-Monogamy-Fid ... 0805071369


I'm not saying that a long term poly relationships can work either.... on a time scale the longer a relationship is, the higher the chances that it will "fade" and end. This goes for ANY relationship. This is because of many reasons:

Because people CHANGE.
Because we need variety.
Because we get USED to each other.
Because we need NEW ideas and emotions.

Its the same with same sex relationships, for example with your buddies.

Did you ever have a friend you really got along with, like a good high school buddy or college friend and you were best friends, and then you went to travel together for two weeks and after two days you wanted to kill each other and canceled the trip and went your separate ways? It happens MANY times.

Because people can't be in EACH OTHERS ASSES. Relationships are HARD because they CONSTRAIN us.


Now add to the general difficulty of maintaining a relationship (ANY relationship) the pressures of a monogamous male/female relationship which normally consists of:

LIVING IN THE SAME HOUSE.

SHARING THE SAME BAD.

SEXUAL EXCLUSIVITY.

SPENDING TOGETHER MOST OF YOUR FREE TIME.


All of the above go DEEPLY against our very basic needs as outlined above.


Come on man... it's really simply common sense. It is just that we are brained washed to think otherwise from a very young age so it is hard to see the facts straight.

I'm not saying that it is impossible to maintain a monogamous relationship. People are doing it every day. Just KNOW that it is going to be VERY HARD, no matter who your partner will be. Go into it knowing that the odds are stacked against you. Know that if it does goes south that is the fault of NO ONE but that of our own nature.

In fact the best way to maintain an EMOTIONALLY monogamous relationship is to open it up SEXUALLY, because sexual pressures are the strongest of all.


And finally - Monogamous pairing in animals - FROM WIKIPEDIA:

"The evolution of mating systems in animals has received an enormous amount of attention from biologists. This section briefly reviews three main findings about the evolution of monogamy in animals.

The amount of social monogamy in animals varies across taxa, with over 90% of birds engaging in social monogamy while only 7% of mammals were known to do the same."

90% in BIRDS. 7% in mammals... haha... how sad....

Good luck buddy !!!! I mean it!

stupid people cannot have a monogamous relationship...

stupid + stupid = 2 stupid...

_________________
AK-47...When you absolutely positively have to kill every fucking orc in the room
questions about herbal medicine here-vp582526.html#582526

phangan,

are you like "the salesman" for a poly-amorous relationship?

i'm not saying i'm a diehard believer in monogamy.

lol.

as a matter of fact, i tend to be a misanthrope and think that no relationships will last.

which, is why, i laugh at the fact that you call fucking random chicks "polyamoury" instead of "fucking random chicks".

lol.

you want to have this CONVERSATION from the point-of-view that i am pro-monogamy and you are anti-monogamy.

that isn't what is happening here.

and you are picking and choosing points to respond to in a VERY selective way.

does your reptile brain every tell you:

- punch that guy in the face for looking at you like that!
- smack that chicks ass, it looks ripe!
- look at that loomis-fargo truck, fuck, i'd like to take the cash and run!
- i'm hungry, i really want a double bacon pizza with extra cheese!

none of these things are GOOD for us, but on some level, we desire them...

if anything, let me correct on the points-of-view in this conversation.

you think:

- i am pro-monogamy
- and, you are pro-polyamoury

the truth is:

- i am anti-relationships
- and, you are pro-polyamoury
- AND, i think that is hilarious that you call fucking multiple chicks "love".

lol

_________________
what dr. house brings to medicine, i bring to everyday life (an extreme dose of cynicism), don't listen to the curmudgeon!

Dude you use the word "love " like a 16 years old... there are many different emotions, which are hard to define exactly, and its not just "fucking " as you call it... I answered you point by point.

Now you say you are anti relationships? And not pro monogamy? Do you want me to find the post where you say you can only love one woman etc? You're lucky I'm on my phone... I would go over all your posts and quote your defence of monogamy.

you are simply not understanding anything that i am saying.

i bow out.

_________________
what dr. house brings to medicine, i bring to everyday life (an extreme dose of cynicism), don't listen to the curmudgeon!

I guess Bill Clinton and tiger woods and woody Allen and every person to ever divorce or separate must be stupid...

I was sold a lie. It's such a lie that even after everything I said you still can't wrap your mind around it. Its called a hegemonic construction, Google it. Google hegemony.

Here, read this. Basically what you consider "the norm " is just ideas imposed my the majority in its own interest :


Cultural hegemony is the philosophic and sociological theory, by the Marxist philosopher Antonio Gramsci, that a culturally diverse society can be dominated (ruled) by one social class, by manipulating the societal culture (beliefs, explanations, perceptions, values) so that its ruling-class worldview is imposed as the societal norm, which then is perceived as a universally valid ideology and status quo beneficial to all of society, whilst benefiting only the ruling class.

So yea the ruling class - kings, priests, wall street bankers benefit from your monogamous life style which you believe is the norm... while in fact it is not our natural condition and it has only been invented and imposed to benefit the ruling class - each generation and its own...

would like to be monogomous

Me too....

I think polyamory is a bit of a wank word really. My problem with it is that the guys I've met who are into it spend about 50x more time talking about it than actually doing it.

The guys I know who are the best at juggling multiple deep relationships with multiple women usually don't spend much time if any discussing their relationships. They just get on with them instead.

Phangan's being a bit too passionate about the whole thing, I know mack was saying angry but im not going that far yet. I'll reiterate I am neither pro poly or monogamy btw, I believe it was Kasabi that said that these guys have taken up a lifestyle and are enjoying it, very true imho I have no issue with people practicing different ways of living unless it drastically effects my well being.

Although honestly to me they come across as a bit too preachy and definitely passionate hehe which is probably why this topic is both interesting to read and rather bloated. I stated before everyone's different there what's good for one person is not good for another, we live in a time were we have a lot more freedom of choice because of how we as a species and societies evolved and progressed.

I usually only come on here when im at work hehe and I should be playing rugby today but unfortunately im sitting in my living room watching the news with a hairline fracture in my ankle and using my laptop so I have some spare time to type not really a response in the theme of a counter argument as that would imply I disagree with a view (I honestly don't) but more of a response in the terms of correcting factoids and giving people some information to digest.

In regards to monogamy being something that has occurred in the last 2000 years that's incorrect, it's been recorded as the basic model practiced a lot longer than that in *successful* society, im talking about ones that endured and expanded and left their marks not some dink donk tribe that hasn't amounted to much or succeeded. Examples of were monogamy was practiced would be Ancient Mesopotamia or Egypt which coalesced ~3000bc that's more like 5000 years than 2. But lets look at that figure further that's recorded history. There is even division as to when monogamy was first introduced to humanity, there are 2 real camps.

First camp is that monogamy actually came into existence around 20000 years ago with the advent of farming. The other and hold your breath and don't freak out is that it was an evolutionary choice in order to allow us to start the march towards progress and to forge ahead competitively of other species. This is why I cannot understand the references to inferior species as models to emulate exclusively - chimpanzee's and gorillas as examples(more on them in a bit). Our evolutionary pedigree dictates a move away from these species, devoting more of our time towards environmental preservation i.e. food gathering/invention to further increase survival rates of the species a whole. This combination has allowed us as a species to reduce mortality rates and increase our population dramatically. That is the point I was trying to make earlier - that progression, evolution and society has allowed us greater freedom to pursue individual ideals and that condemning the current basis for all this is akin to shooting yourself in the foot in a rather Luddite manner.

Going into the detail of the evolutionary perspective of monogamy (not the institution of marriage) we did in fact begin a slow and natural(probably not the best word) change from polygamy to monogamy, or at least there is solid scientific evidence to indicate that. Yes we were probably polygamists but we are moving away from it, if you are aware of the 'Lucy' ancestor to us, this was the first sign of a move towards monogamy. This ancestor of ours, lived 3.2 Million years ago, which is obviously slightly more than even 5000 years ago.

As a sexual evolutionary course I'll use the chimpanzee and gorillas as examples. Chimpanzees have evolved sexually promiscuous strategies, while Gorillas are more Polygyny orientated - dominate silverback controlling mating and a female group. These two sexual routes effects the evolution of the species Diamorphically that is a difference in size and characteristics between the male and female of the species. In brief when sexual competition isn't an issue males and females in primates both sexs are fairly similar in size, effective development of characteristics for creating dominance over other males is reduced - for example incisor length of teeth (okay whose licking their incisors to feel how long they are right now? lol) as seen in chimps whiles polygyny as seen in gorillas emphasise greater combat effectiveness, significantly greater male size, larger teeth etc etc.

Lucy's bone structure indicates a move away from both polyamory towards monogamy which started 3.2 million years ago in our evolutionary ancestors. http://www.pnas.org/content/100/16/9404.full is a link to examples of the research it's quiet dry, but that's because it's concentrating on facts rather than prose.

Just some food for thought guys, I'll reiterate im neither pro or anti im rather impartial in fact I think there is room for both. But I do accept that the current sexual trend of monogamy is a serious foundation of our species exponential success, and therefore have concerns (correct or not) over the view that it is not the right way to live (nucleic family-esque situation).