Are there any good books about Polyamory Veeky Forums?

Are there any good books about Polyamory Veeky Forums?

I just read the latest article by Laurie Penny and it really made me think...

>"Having been polyamorous for almost a decade, I spend a good deal of time explaining what it all means [...] It’s the conversations. It’s the texts with your girlfriend’s boyfriend about what to get her for her birthday. It’s sharing your Google Calendars to make sure nobody feels neglected."

>"There’s something profoundly millennial about polyamory"

>"People have all sorts of needs through their lives – love, companionship, care and intimacy, sexual adventure and self-expression – and expecting one person to be able to meet all of them is not only unrealistic, it’s unreasonable. Women in particular, who often end up doing most of the emotional labour in conventional, monogamous, heterosexual relationships, don’t have the energy to be anyone’s everything"

newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2016/08/many-my-fearful-frustrated-generation-having-it-all-means-opting-out-monogamy

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madonna–whore_complex
reddit.com/r/polyamory/
reddit.com/r/books/
youtube.com/watch?v=oj9dA6E3fJw
manyfesto.org/2014/07/15/the-weaponized-naked-girl/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

That last quote holy fuck.

Why are you so shocked? It's 2016.

Can't you please fucking talk about this in /pol9k/? This isn't literature and you know it.

you know in the past people were able to share companionship, care and (non-sexual) intimacy with friends.

I feel like that woman has no idea how to make lasting relationships and thinks sex if far, far more important than it is.

She wrote an article, which is a form of literature. There may be books that go into further detail, which would help OP.

I'm still blown away by the fact there actually exists men that want to deal with women like this.

She is merely part of a harem of sub-standard women who exist for the pleasure of a single Chad.

And yet she feels "empowered" by it.

Ironic.

Just because she gets banged by Chad and Friends doesn't mean she isn't still good

Good for what?

To dump semen I guess

>Over the past ten years, I have been a “single poly” with no main partner; I have been in three-person relationships; I have had open relationships and have dated people in open marriages. The best parts of those experiences have overwhelmingly been clothed ones.

It sounds like she discovered having friends desu.

She is empowered by it. I mean I realize it's hard for you to understand, but some of us appreciate the option of expending emotional labour for one man and sexual labour for another. It's only a very rigid and very ancient and outdated form of patriarchal restraint which tells a woman that she must be everything to a single man. If a woman has the choice to spend part of her time with one man who she can discuss nerdy stuff with and even live with but not have sex with, and another part with a man she can relate to on a sexual level, then it's a win-win situation for all involved.

...

S A V A G E
A
V
A
G
E

It's funny because it's true.

>I mean I realize it's hard for you to understand, but some of us appreciate the option of expending emotional labour for one man and sexual labour for another
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madonna–whore_complex
I wonder how it feels, being in your twenties and still mentally a child

>then it's a win-win situation for all involved.

Doesn't sound like a win-win for the man who doesn't get any pussy.

She dances around the issue of family and raising children. Is polyamory just for people who don't want kids, or until they do? Or does she think a polyamorous relationship can be a good environment for child-rearing?

Those are genuine questions, I'm not sure what it would look like. Maybe in practice it would just be a single mother with lovers flitting in and out of her life.

fuuuuuuuuuuck

>Maybe in practice it would just be a single mother with lovers flitting in and out of her life.
So, the archetypal black family.

Feels great!

But if he is open-minded and empathetic (a big ask, I know) he will accept that his partner does not see him in that way, and if he truly loves her (or him) he will cherish their conversations and holidays and geek-outs regardless as to whether their relationship is of a sexual nature.

>But if he is open-minded and empathetic (a big ask, I know) he will accept that his partner does not see him in that way, and if he truly loves her (or him) he will cherish their conversations and holidays and geek-outs regardless as to whether their relationship is of a sexual nature.
So ?

Look, we all know that you're just memeing. You can drop the act already.

...

You're making me very sad right now. Please stop.

polyamory never ends well unless it's a man with multiple wives (no one in this sort of relationship would describe it as polyamorous)
if you want proof:
reddit.com/r/polyamory/
nothing but jealousy and insecurity

muh anecdote

I've had my wife's son read this and he really liked it

...

You tell me.

I really wouldn't trust Laurie Penny's judgement on what is and isn't well adjusted

The bonds of marriage make the underclass stronger. We must remove them, like we've removed religion, nation, race. Soon we will live in a world where nobody could have any possible reason to care about one another, and we can all be safely exploited and disposed of as individuals.

It also has the potential to keep men unfit for reproduction from meltdowns by keeping them tied up in sexless pseudo-romantic relationships.

Polyamory is a natural step in underclass dehumanization.

>people who read books are idiots
>if you want proof:
>reddit.com/r/books/

people that read books are idiots though

this
can this thread end and never reappear?
this laurie penny person completely discredits herself, discussion isn't necessary

OMG BURN xDD
Solving the dicothomy between people to fuck and people to love is part of sexual maturity, but you wouldn't know, like most millennials. No wonder you don't understand how a relationship works.
Keep fucking people to your heart's content, just don't blame others when you can't settle and people see you as human trash, because you brought it upon yourself

Is Laurie in this thread?

Has someone tweeted it to her?

youtube.com/watch?v=oj9dA6E3fJw

>Keep fucking people
Yep that's what I do. Fuck people. All the time. "Old fucker" they call me. I am certainly well experienced in the art of fucking.

Someone should write it to her

...

Honestly, I feel bad for women because they do tend to do exactly this. It's so easy for them to make "friends" with a guy who just wants to fuck, or who is trying to keep his options open for a fuck, or who just sees having female friends as "Not Being a Loser," that they mistake all sorts of intimacy for real friendship and real appreciation of their company.

Women usually get their main source of real companionship in life from their partner, which is kind of OK but they miss out on the kinds of intense friendships that men can have, which would be undermined by romantic or sexual aspects entering in. And when they're not in a relationship, they kind of hop between fairweather FWBs whose interest in them is obvious.

Women think men who are trying to fuck them telling them they're interesting is genuine. That's just sad as hell.

>The clothed parts of my relationships with people who got to fuck me were the most rewarding :^) I bet Steve enjoyed the clothed parts the most, too!

There's so much anger and resentment in this thread. Where does it come from? Why do you all care so much? It's honestly confusing.

Posting a link to a WIKI article about bloody "psychoanalytic literature" is probably the least argumentatively compelling thing you could ever do. If you don't understand why then it is certainly you who is the child here, at least in IQ terms.

You literally posted a wiki article about psychoanalytic literature as an argument or a point in a response to a small snippet of quote. It sort of boggles me that you think this is a legitimate tackling of the issue.

Yeah, I bet they're virgins too. Who hurt them? I bet it's because they can't get laid haha. Only virgins who can't get laid would care so much about another person's behaviour. Ethics is for pathetic virgins. Virgins are so pathetic.

This.
Her idea of "Polyamory" - or whatever the fuck it is - is a pure product of neoliberalism.

>it's about ethics in videogame journalism!!!11!!

>Having been polyamorous for almost a decade
What does it mean? She's a slut?

lol you got me.

Wait... no.

I wonder what will happen to her in her late 30s.

At this pace, a position at the UN and a Nobel peace prize or something like that.

And she'll still be alone and miserable.

Polyamory must be like having a lot of friends but no truly close friends. You kid yourself into thinking that you have a close intimate relationship with each of your friends but really it doesn't go beyond a few laughs, some conversation, and seeing each other once a week or every few weeks.

Spot on. But hey, she's a "millennial" so of course she needs a new and unnecessary label, what else would she base her identity on?

>Women usually get their main source of real companionship in life from their partner, which is kind of OK but they miss out on the kinds of intense friendships that men can have
U wot m8? Women typically have more close friends than men. It's more common for men to have their spouse as their only confidant.

I feel like that's an American problem, at least out of western countries.

Hey look, another thread where people can't think about polyamory without bringing jealousy and/or cheating into it.

It can be difficult to imagine, even for me, but there are those who make it work. It's not for me, personally. I have issues regarding jealousy, and I'm incredibly possessive too. Still, if the terms of polyamory are made clear before going into it - and people abide by those terms - what's the problem? Of course, if the terms aren't made clear, that's when you get axe murders/etc.

It's easy to confuse or conflate with cheating/etc, as both involve having sex/etc with more than one person, but the context is wildly different.

It's not even comfortable to think about polyamory/etc. But frankly, that's on me. If it works for you, or anyone else, it works.

The trouble arises when people try to 'push' it onto others or society. Same for monogamy. Stop giving a fuck.

Fuck off

Are you a woman? Is that why you think the gross sex-acquaintanceships men have with women are "close friendships?"

All of my FWBs and girlfriends, and all the girls I've ever tried to turn into FWBs or girlfriends, thought I was their "close friend." I wouldn't have been talking to them if they hadn't been a girl. Some of them, I talked to for years, because it's not that big a deal to keep in touch and socialise, for the same reason you occasionally socialise with not-very-close acquaintances (from work or whatever). Some of them I still talk to even though I haven't been trying to bang them in forever, because it's just habit and they're just sort of "there."

All of these women thought we were close friends, and it always weirded me out when they did, because if they had actual friends, they should have been able to tell the difference. They should have been able to tell that I was just tolerating the vast majority of them, that flirting was very common in our conversations. Even the few who were semi-decent personality-wise were still just chat partners at best. And not a single one of them comes close to even the mediocre friendships I have with men, where actual bonding takes place.

You may say "well, that's just you," and accuse me of having unhealthy relationships with women, or of being predatory, or something. But I'm a pretty well-adjusted and social guy and most of my friends agree on this. It's common knowledge: Women are boring, for the most part, and they're not very loyal / they don't bond very deeply. So they don't make great friends. They're interchangeable socialites that you can maybe date or fuck.

>But I'm a pretty well-adjusted and social guy and most of my friends agree on this. Women are boring, for the most part

time to suck cock, faggot.

Goethe's Stella

I top only.

I have never ever seen a person who knows less about women than you do you absolute imbecile..

The reason why they called you a very close friend is because they want to make you feel better, show you they cherish the relationship and make it clear that you are just friends...

If they're actually flirting they're obviously into you, you complete autist. If anything you are the one who can't decode the signals.

Just because you are told that you're "muh closest friend" doesn't mean it's fucking true. The world doesn't revolve around you.

Meanwhile I can have non-superficial relationships with women because I'm not on the spectrum...

The fact that you think you can only really have deep friendships with men is just sad. I feel sorry for you.

maybe you then need to try some of that polyamory. I heard they like guys who only top.

If I ever run across even *one* woman who's into being super promiscuous, open relationships, making a huge deal of being sexually liberated etc. who isn't also a psychological trainwreck I might change my mind about this stuff. It's all fun and games until they get drunk and the mask slips a little, then you realise they haven't even fooled themselves.

She's getting cucked.

>The reason why they called you a very close friend is because they want to make you feel better, show you they cherish the relationship and make it clear that you are just friends...
Except I put my penis in a lot of those. And a lot of them go insane when we cool off, because they thought it was something more than it was.

>If they're actually flirting they're obviously into you,
Yes. That is why I flirt back, and occasionally have sex with some of them. Being "into" each other is exactly what I am talking about here. It's not friendship.

>Just because you are told that you're "muh closest friend" doesn't mean it's fucking true.
I said "close," not "closest." But a lot of girls these days are genuinely lonely as fuck, for exactly the reasons I mentioned in my first post. They know that men only like them for sex, and they hate their fake-ass female friends, so they get stuck in a spiral of trying to get the feeling of being wanted and appreciated from men who are getting casual sex or the possibility of casual sex out of them.

>The fact that you think you can only really have deep friendships with men is just sad.
I had one with a woman after about ten years of searching. I'm pretty sure she's a genius and she has all kinds of weird personality disorders that force her to have actual depth somehow. But even then, she's self-admittedly boring and a basic bitch, and acknowledges that women don't have real hobbies that lend to mutual striving, the way guys do.

I tried that. It ruined my first relationship because she thought my wanting to bang other girls meant that she was unattractive or something.

Now I just don't date.

>Are you a woman?
No.
>Is that why you think the gross sex-acquaintanceships men have with women are "close friendships?"
Are you an idiot? Is that why you read things people didn't write? Or why you seem to be unaware of women having female friends?

>Are you an idiot? Why aren't you aware that I'm right and you're not?!

How will I ever recover?

>you're an orange, am overrated fruit

How will I ever recover?

you are a woman
opinion discarded

jesus christ why do I come here. I really made a mistake somewhere along the line somewhere in 2004. Fuck

Sorry to disappoint, but you're wrong.

So just because some hoe told you that females can't have hobbies that 'lead to mutual striving'?

You're generalizing, you're using anecdotal evidence and you're wrong. You know it.

The way you just assume all girls have 'fake ass friends' reveals your delusion. You like to think men have more 'genuine' friendships in order to feel superior.

Maybe the reason you are surrounded by vapid, basic as fuck hobbyless bitches is because you're part of the club my dear friend.

jesus fuck, the new statesman has fallen so far

every time laurie penny publishes an article, the ghosts of george orwell, james joyce and virginia woolf cry out in anguish

Christ. I'm a radical leftie and agree with polyamory in theory (kissless virgin so can't say for sure), but she is making me reconsider. There's something so smug and self-assured about the young liberal/left that is so off-putting that I want to run in the opposite direction.

Your post could have been one short sentence and had the same (null) content level.

Go change your tampon and come back.

>that I want to run in the opposite direction
As you should.

As a radical leftie, what you should ask yourself is: what would Jesus do?

>my employer is extracting my surplus labor and ignores safety concerns
>better turn the other cheek

>There’s something profoundly millennial about polyamory, something quintessentially bound up with my fearful, frustrated, overexamined generation, with our swollen sense of consequence, our need to balance instant gratification with the impulse to do good in a world gone mad.

Couldn't continue passed this bit of sentimental sick. This is a classic penny trope, to situate her experience at the centre of an angsty moment of generational self-examination, the voice of which she elevates herself to be. Absolute fucking rot.

Sometimes I think she must take such nonsensical rhetoric even half-seriously, and that's when I find her most insufferable. She's not as bad as Lindy West (who is the absolute worst for smug self-righteousness), but this shite is still difficult to take.

Getting a working class job would do a world of good to moderate such writing, I think.

Is this ironic?

the unbearable lightness of being by Milan kundera

More like unionize.

>I'm 18 years old and just learned a bunch of meme-phrases in my mandatory Introduction to Marxism module

Wait like 10-15 years before making your decision on polyamory. Watch as a billion 30-50 year old women who were raised on "free love" bullshit have mental fucking breakdowns as they age.

The way women have worked for a long time is that they are daddy's little girl when they're a kid, then they're the toast of the town when they're a pretty young maiden, then they're their husband's special treasure, then they're a mother, then an old crone overseeing a large family. In every phase, women are important, but more importantly they are wanted and taken care of by some kind of family.

The thing is, women aren't very bright. They don't know about this cycle. It just happens to them. They think any one phase of the cycle that they happen to be in is "life." A young pretty woman thinks that YOU are living the same life she is, that you feel wanted and worshiped all the time, because that's just "life." That's the way "life" is.

Capitalism came along and told them that they don't need marriage, that they shouldn't have kids until they're 57, etc., because capitalism was interested in creating perpetually adolescent mindless consumers of Forever 21 fashion. They think that they have a lifetime of being pretty and exciting and desirable and worshipable, so they can afford to wait until they subjectively feel like having a kid or getting married, never mind prudence or foreplanning.

The thing is, nobody gives a fuck about women after their youth and beauty fades aside from their husband and children, which they are no longer having. They are trying to live forever on credit that is only good for a few years, that was given to them just so they could invest it in a family.

Seriously, just wait and watch. A billion ageing hags with hipster tattoos are going to be subtly coming apart at the fucking seams because they are starting to clue in that they aren't getting 65,000 messages per week on Tinder anymore. Go on any dating site and look at the oceans of unhinged over-the-hill broads who are trapped halfway between
>I'M STILL SEXY AND ATTRACTIVE EVEN THOUGH I'M 38. I'M TIRED OF BOYS. I'M READY FOR MEN. DON'T EVEN FUCKING THINK ABOUT MESSAGING ME IF YOU AREN'T RICH AS HELL AND SUPER HANDSOME. I DESERVE THE ENTIRE WORLD. I WILL FOREVER COMMAND THE SAME SEXUAL CAPITAL THAT I DID AS A 16 YEAR OLD. GIVE ME MONEY RIGHT NOW!!!!
and
>Please :( I can't take it anymore someone please just love me :( God I fucked up so bad by not having a kid oh god I'd give up all these ironic Pokemon tattoos just to have had a baby before my womb shrivelled up

>meganboyle.mp4

That's not giving the emperor what belongs to the emperor.
No.

This sounds like a character I'm writing. Could anyone please direct me to spaces on the internet where I could read the inner thoughts of women like this?

Why is antiwoman shitposts so fucking long.

*are

>That's not giving the emperor what belongs to the emperor.
No, that would be refusing to pay taxes.

Pretty much. It's one of those meaningless tumblr buzzwords like genderfluid.

we'll be waiting for you over on /pol/ m8

That is actually pretty reasonable and makes a lot of sense.