PSYCHOphancy Avatar

13 Notes

Blondie, Blondie, Blondie!

(Kindly read the title like the intro to a monster truck commercial. Thank you.)

It’s easy to overlook the pleasures of a comfortable, years-long relationship while writing. It’s not so that my life with Blondie is predictable or unexciting—I try to make sure it’s neither—but I suppose it makes for comparatively less salacious blog material.

But she’s an amazing person and, without question, the most important person in my life. She’s stepped out onto many shaky limbs with me, she’s stuck with me through countless wild adventures, she’s always been there when I’ve needed reassurance or companionship or backrubs.

We both drive each other up the walls sometimes, but I wouldn’t want it any other way.

I love you, my dear. :)

100 Notes

unicornwithaflamethrower:

goldstarbisexual:

in case anybody thought i was kidding, this is an anonymous lesbian message board

Holy crap

My dear friend label-less is pretty damn obnoxious (not to mention decidedly non-monosexual) so I’m not sure how becoming more like them solves anything. :P

unicornwithaflamethrower:

goldstarbisexual:

in case anybody thought i was kidding, this is an anonymous lesbian message board

Holy crap

My dear friend label-less is pretty damn obnoxious (not to mention decidedly non-monosexual) so I’m not sure how becoming more like them solves anything. :P

9 Notes

No labels? But I've already told everyone you're my wuvy-wuv! And I bought notebooks to write our names in with hearts around them. Lisa Frank notebooks. Nothing says commitment like sparkling multi-colored dolphins.

Asked by myfavoritevoodoodoll

Well, who could possibly say no to sparkly dolphins?

Also, I can’t wait til we get our matching tattoos.

7 Notes

1. Thanks for following me. I'm starting to question if I really am polygamist or not, and I just want to know how you came to that conclusion. I'm honestly curious, that's not meant to be rude in any way.

Asked by tinkerbellcrazed

Hey there. Not a rude question in the least!

First off, just to clarify terminology, I don’t identify as polygamist (given the root association of the word with marriage, and I personally think marriage is a completely unnecessary social convention). I more loosely identify as polyamorous, but believe I’m more of a relationship anarchist at heart.

As for how I came to the conclusion that I was at heart not monogamous… Honestly? That’s a tough question to answer. I suppose part of it had to do with watching all the marriages of my hypocritically religious family implode. Part of it no doubt had to do with the fact that I never really had a monogamous relationship in my early dating years.

I dated in high school and early college, but none of it really amounted to anything “serious” or, for that matter, really even exclusive. I had my first consensually open, serious relationship when I was around 20. It just felt right. Later on, I was in a few monogamous relationships—and I felt squeezed, confined, just not right. I think that led to various unhealthy behaviors, not the least of which was cheating on a couple of those partners.

At any rate, I’ve never viewed relationships as needing to fit within the “standard” boxes of romantic vs. platonic. It avoids a lot of the “OMG WHAT ARE WE???” relationship angst, which seems so utterly unnecessary to me. And many of my closest friendships have flowed quite naturally back and forth between romantic and platonic, or settled in some happy gray area in between.

So I don’t know if that’s really all that helpful. I never had a light-bulb-goes-on, Aha!-type moment that led me to prefer to reject monogamy. I think I’ve really just always leaned that way.

I also believe we’re pretty much all capable of loving many people in many different ways. The scariest part is deciding whether to break the social mold and allow ourselves to do it.

23 Notes

Polygamy, should remain illegal. If one wishes to live amongst others, go to Utah.

Asked by Anonymous

dancingalongthestars:

How about you stop sticking your nose in other peoples’ business and mind your own? It literally does not affect you unless you get into a polyamorous relationship (which seems to be very unlikely). Just because someone is polyamorous, that doesn’t mean that suddenly EVERYONE will want polyamorous relationships (and seriously, why is that a bad thing anyway? Love shared between more people? As long as it’s healthy for everyone involved, I don’t see a problem with it.)

Besides, do you realize how ridiculous that is? When it comes to love, everyone’s fine with people having multiple platonically loving relationships with multiple people (of same and different genders), but as soon as it turns into romantic love with multiple people then all hell breaks loose. I just don’t get it.

If you’re worried about the sanctity of marriage, then worry about your own. There are people who have married inanimate objects, yet they don’t get nearly as much flak for “ruining the sanctity of marriage.” Why the hell is polyamory such a problem to you? I’m genuinely curious.

(Psst: I’m monoamorous, but my roots are in Park City. How about you shut up?)

Dear Dumbass Anon,image

34 Notes

ziemniakhearts:

Idk I just read this comment about how we aren’t evolved to be monogamous and I just…

Then why are we????

Like, don’t get me wrong, I don’t even give a fuck what other people do as long as they aren’t hurting anyone. So you know, polyamory it up in there.

I’m just wondering what the justification behind thinking humans aren’t evolved to be monogamous is?

Anyone care to clarify?

Well. The reality is that we’re not a monogamous species. That’s not to say there aren’t monogamous individuals, or even monogamous cultures**, and we do have a tendency to form social pair bonds (which is a very different concept from monogamy). But throughout the course of human history, monogamy has been the exception rather than the rule. There’s ample historical evidence and plenty of anatomical evidence (everything from the sizes/shapes of our penises to the chemical composition of vaginal secretions to how much noisier women are than men, on average, during sex) to support that. I’ll let Chris Ryan fill in some of the other details here.

**Many tie the rise in popularity of monogamy to the rise of agriculture, when ownership and inheritance of land started to become important. That seems to be the case somewhat, though most post-agricultural societies have been at least mildly polygynous. The spread of monogamy through the West seems to be quite inextricably tied to the spread of Christianity (even though it doesn’t seem that Jesus specifically urged monogamy, and certainly the Old Testament was totally cool with polygny).

Granted, when we are cultured to believe that people should be monogamous, and everyone around us seems to be monogamous (at least in some form; most people are serially monogamous), it’s easy to forget how different our society is from what has occurred throughout most of human history.

Further, even within a supposedly monogamous society such as ours, we are far less monogamous than many would think (for example, in one survey, 74% of men and 68% of women indicated they would consider having an affair if they knew they would never get caught [x]).

Understanding how we did evolve helps us to dispel the notion that monogamy is “right” and anything else is “wrong.” The implications of that are profound. How many billions of dollars do we pump into our therapists’ coffers because we’re totally unable to deal with our desires for someone other than our spouses? We’re taught that a single act of infidelity is supposed to lead to divorce, thus ripping apart entire families. We’re taught that if you truly loved your partner, if they really were THE ONE, you wouldn’t even think about straying; for that matter, the simple act of looking at another attractive person is cause for your partner to be jealous. We pile all these unrealistic expectations upon ourselves with the idea that the “solution” to our wandering eyes is to WORK HARDER on our relationships, rather than to simply accept that most of us are biologically wired to want to look around.

I also believe that by acknowledging that we aren’t living in a “correct” or “natural” state by being monogamous, we are better equipped to avoid passing judgment on other cultures whose practices may differ. Our species is a very versatile one, that can adapt to all sorts of situations—geographical, environmental, social, and cultural. Very few of us live in conditions that are similar to those in which we evolved, and I think understanding all of that is key to understanding other cultures, both present and past.

Finally, why wouldn’t we want to understand how we as a species evolved? We’ve spent a great deal of time studying the origins of other human behaviors: Why do we fall in love the way we do? Why do we engage in altruism? Why do we experience jealousy? Our sexual and romantic behaviors constitute one of the least objectively studied fields. We can’t learn about ourselves if we aren’t first willing to shed our preconceived ideas—including and especially the notion that we are a monogamous species.

4 Notes

butthurtwhiteboysonokc reblogged your photo “Apparently today is not my day for suffering fools.”

As a white dude, I’m not so sure how I’m supposed to feel about this. :P

26 Notes

Apparently today is not my day for suffering fools.

Apparently today is not my day for suffering fools.

38 Notes

Sometimes you say more by saying the wrong thing than you say by saying what you meant to say…

Sometimes you say more by saying the wrong thing than you say by saying what you meant to say…

18 Notes

Tumblr post juxtaposition of the day.

Tumblr post juxtaposition of the day.

180 Notes

typical-erinn:

This blog literally does nothing but post the same picture of Dave Coulier every day.  This picture.  Right here.  Every day. 
I followed as kind of a game I can play with myself while I’m scrolling through my tumblr dash.  So far I haven’t actually seen the picture on my dash, but today it finally happened.  
It’s kind of like finding a tootsie pop wrapper with the guy shooting an arrow at a star.  Like, ‘Yes, today will be a good day.’

typical-erinn:

This blog literally does nothing but post the same picture of Dave Coulier every day.  This picture.  Right here.  Every day. 

I followed as kind of a game I can play with myself while I’m scrolling through my tumblr dash.  So far I haven’t actually seen the picture on my dash, but today it finally happened.  

It’s kind of like finding a tootsie pop wrapper with the guy shooting an arrow at a star.  Like, ‘Yes, today will be a good day.’

11 Notes

Date update blah blah blah

  • Last night was my second date with a girl I wasn’t eagerly looking forward to seeing again after our first date. I was a little hesitant because we seemed to be very much on different planes, intellectually…but, on the other hand, she’s super cute. Last night turned out to be much better. Having had some time to re-orient myself to the idea that we aren’t going to be pondering the mysteries of the universe together, I enjoyed her company considerably more. So I drove down to her place in Long Beach; we had dinner & drinks at a decent BBQ place in Belmont Shores, and then hung out at her apartment until the wee hours of the morning. We didn’t wind up having sex because it was an inconvenient time of the month for her, but we have a third date next Wednesday and I think that’ll go much better. I’ll name her Bayou because she grew up in the deepest, deepest South (and still has a little bit of a Creole in her voice).
  • I had a bunch of different pairs of underwear show up yesterday. I’ve tried them all on and I think my quest for the perfect pair of underwear is working out well. So far my favorite seems to be the PACT trunk briefs. Their website also claims their production process is eco-friendly and sweatshop-free, which (if true) is a nice bonus. Alas, they are not cheap—although I got a special deal on the one pair I bought through Amazon Prime. I still have many more pairs to wear for a full day, though, so we shall see.
  • Not too long ago, I bought an old-timey safety razor with the idea that I could stop spending money on the fancy, $3-per-cartridge blades I’ve been shaving with for many, many years. So I’ve got the old shaving brush, a jar of shaving soap, and a whole bunch of double-edged razor blades. Turns out the old style razor blades give a great smooth shave, though unless extreme care is taken, that smooth shave is achieved by simply peeling off the skin. :O I’m debating whether to give straight razors a shot, but considering I shave my entire head and not just my face, I’m pretty sure that would only result in my death from anemia.
  • Stiletto is coming over tonight while Blondie is out seeing a friend of hers in the Valley. I haven’t seen her one-on-one in ages, so it’ll be great to catch up.
  • Voodoo, if you’re reading this: Hi. Miss ya. :)

15 Notes

Some days I actually get intelligent questions about my relationship status.
Today is not one of those days.

Some days I actually get intelligent questions about my relationship status.

Today is not one of those days.

75 Notes

I love the idea of polyamory but when I read your blogs, I worry about hurting my wonderful hubby whilst I selfishly pursue my desires. What 5 basic rules set the groundwork to making it work?

Asked by theblueangelstar

jeneepooh:

This is a great question. I think if you ask 10 poly/non-monagamous people this question, you will get 10 very different answers. I’d like to stress that what I share below is specific to me and my perspective on my relationships. I expect that Sir has a very different take. But you didn’t ask him, you asked me. Yay! :)

1. Be honest.
Seems simple, right? But it can be so hard. And so exhausting. Because not only should you be honest with your partners (all of them!), but you need to be honest with yourself. What are your motivations for wanting this type of relationship. How do you see it playing out? What are your limits? What are you afraid of? What hurts? What do you want to explore? What are you willing to explore? What are you willing to “let” your partner explore? (with you / without you). There is so much to think about. And you have to be honest about all of it, lest you travel down a path that isn’t right for you. My one caveat to this rule is that friends and family don’t always need to know about this part of your life. Sure, there’s a lot of relief that can come from being honest with those folks, but if sharing this part of yourself and your relationship will put you in any sort of danger, you need to decide whether honesty is worth the risk.

2. Communicate.

Talk about everything all the time. The first 2+ months after Sir and I agreed to try an open marriage, we talked constantly. There were times when we actually had to make a conscious decision to take a night off of talking, because every conversation was so intense. But it was a good intense. We were learning so much about each other! We’d been married 5.5 years and I think we communicated more in those first 2 months of being open than we had in all the years of our marriage leading up to that point. At some point not too long ago, I realized we’d stopped communicating as much as we’d been doing earlier on in this adventure. It was an important realization and wake-up call and we agreed to actively work on communicating. Once you become more comfortable in a situation, it can become easy to relax or get lazy. Make dates to talk about what’s going on and how you feel about it.

3. Listen.

When you have so much to talk about, it can be really hard to stop and just listen. But you learn so much when you stop waiting for a pause, and just listen to what your partner is sharing. There will be things said that you may not understand or you don’t agree with. Some things may hurt or confuse you. Other things will seem so obvious you’ll be surprised you never thought of them before. Then there will be things that you feel you hear over and over and over and over. And over. You’ve got to listen to it all. If a message is on repeat, there’s a reason.

4. Make rules if it feels right.

Early on, we wrote up a list of 20 or so “rules” or “guidelines” for what felt right to us. Among those rules were things like “our bed is our bed” and “always practice safer sex.” Most of the rules were things that we knew we agreed on, but at the time, it felt right to write down. Some of the rules were more important to me because they afforded me some sense of security. After about 6 months, we revisited the rules and realized that some had changed a little, while others were no longer important. Recently, we talked about the list and agreed that we didn’t really need it any more. The rules had served a purpose. Not so much as something to abide by, but rather as something that offered (mostly me) comfort. What underlies drafting a set of rules, though, is #2 above: communication.

5. Be respectful.

Respect yourself, your desires, and your limits. Respect your partners, their desires, and their limits. Respect your partner’s (partners’?) partners. Even if you and your initial partner decide that you are primaries and no one else will ever be as important (hey, some people are hierarchical with their relationships - I don’t judge), remember that the other people have feelings, too. We’re all human and just because someone enters into a relationship with my husband knowing that he’s married, that doesn’t give me the right to be disrespectful to them. Nor does it allow me to make unfair demands at his partners’ expense. If he has plans with someone, I need to respect those plans and the time he has allotted for that person. I also expect that my partners will be respectful of the time I give them and not constantly cancel or reschedule because I’m married and always have that “backup.” I may not be looking for another husband, but that doesn’t mean that the people I date are throw-aways, nor do I want to be a throw-away to them. Kilo once noted that he’d felt like an accessory to my marriage. I was horrified because I’d tried so hard to convey how important he and our relationship was to me. But whether there was something I did that I wasn’t aware of doing, or his own neuroses (and Kilo IS super neurotic), he always felt like #2 to Sir as #1. Maybe there are people who specifically look to be “secondaries.” And, sure, each relationship is going to be very different. Some will be FWB, others will be just sex. Whatever you agree on as the parameters of your relationship, you should make sure that you are respectful of that.

So those are MY rules: be honest, communicate, listen, make rules if it feels right, and be respectful. There’s so much more one can say about open relationships and polyamory. What I’ve shared above is specific to me, though others may agree with some of it. Know that however you proceed, whatever thoughts or experiences you have, there is a giant community of people here on Tumblr who are eager to share, listen, and support.

This is beautiful.

16 Notes

OKCupid experiment

doctorharleenq:

psychophancy:

doctorharleenq:

psychophancy:

So, I’ve got a small experiment running on OKCupid that I’ll explain in more detail later, once I have enough data in. The short & sweet of this is to see if women are more likely to respond to messages written by women but sent from a male account, than they are likely to respond to messages…

Since I couldn’t put this all into a reply: I’m sorry, but why do this. You’re wasting the unconsenting participants’ time. Some of us are on dating websites to actually date and meet people, not to be used as statitics, to be tested by every asshat who thinks that womenz r evul, or to be hit on relentlessly and then screamed at when we say no. Kindly fuck right off.

You leap to rather hasty conclusions about my motives. Have I ever said or implied that “womenz r evul”? Uh, no. Anyone who has taken the time to read through my posts should be able to understand that—gasp!—I too am on OKCupid to actually date and meet people.

As a guy, online dating is essentially a trial-and-error numbers game. Women’s average response rates to men’s messages are consistently in the single digits. And that’s totally understandable, given that there are plenty of guys who act like absolute tools, and women have every fucking reason on earth to be skeptical of men. So, like most guys, I wind up throwing a lot of darts that miss the target. Add being non-monogamous to the mix and it can approach the point of being an exercise in futility.

Being a psychology-studied, analytical geek, and preferring not to waste my own time, I’m therefore curious to learn the most effective and efficient ways to go about doing so. What methods yield the greatest likelihood of a reply? What methods generate the most replies in the least amount of time?

So if there is a pool of women I might conceivably have some interest in talking to and/or potentially dating, it is absolutely in my best interest to examine what methods—the characteristics of the messages I send, what aspects of users’ profiles I should comment on, etc.—work most effectively in my attempts to make contact with them.

Certainly some further explanation of my methodology would demonstrate that I’m not wasting anybody’s time any more than I would simply by writing them myself. I’ll spare the gory details, but the bottom line is I’m not messaging anybody who I wouldn’t have at least some interest in talking to in the first place. Because I completely agree that wasting anyone’s time is an inconsiderate, dickish thing to do.

So please, do explain how that makes me an asshat.

Psychophancy was so kind as to send me fanmail, which I’ll put here for the purposes of transparency, and my own reply to that. And then I’m giving up on this hopeless discussion to close my account so I don’t become the unwitting victim of one of these “experiments.” A /republican/ might find me.

If my reply to your reblog comes off as harsh, I apologize. Not being snarky doesn’t come naturally to me. ;) But I wanted to say that I totally get where you’re coming from. And as far as wasting anyone’s time, you’re spot on. I have made a very deliberate point of only messaging people I’d want to talk to anyway. Considering my response rate before I even conceived of my experiment, it’s clear I’ve already been wasting plenty of their time to begin with. :/

My reply: Quite honestly, I don’t give two pence about what the point of your “experiment” is. Guess what, I’m a psych major. And the first thing we’re taught is that you need to give your participants informed consent. Since if I remember right, you’re a kinkster as well, consent should mean twice as much to you. If I read your reply right, you’re only “experimenting” with women you’d be messaging anyways- so why even go through with it except to give yourself an air of self importance or have hard numbers so you can point to them when someone doesn’t reply back and go “well, 78% of women like you replied back, so obviously you’re wrong.” Ever since those stupid experiments on Cracked, everyone with an internet connection and a free hand thinks they can use online dating for ‘higher purposes’.

Remember children: profiles on the internet have living, breathing people with rights behind them! Don’t be jerks and use the anonymity for your own self-serving purposes. I mean, not that we don’t have our own purposes in mind at all times. But. Let’s face it. Sometimes you have to have *shudder* morals.

Oh, please.

Pretty much anyone who has done something and had mediocre results has said “Gee, I wonder if this would work better if I did it a different way instead.” Maybe you’re sending out crappy messages. Maybe you decide your profile is too sparse or too cynical. Maybe you decide people might find a different profile picture more attractive. So you try something different. Maybe that works better, maybe it doesn’t. Eventually you figure out what works most successfully for you. If you’re not learning and adapting to things based on your experiences, then you’re failing at something.

The only thing that’s different is that I’m going about examining it methodically.

Now. If you’re going to make the argument about “informed consent” for “experimentation” purposes, you should actually understand when consent is necessary and at what point it is given. In fact, informed consent is not required in a considerable percentage of social science studies—particularly those where consent is not possible to achieve and where the risk of physical, emotional, or economic harm is nil. (Never mind that this is not an institutionally supported, scientific study that will result in publishable data.) In fact, many of the studies used in introductory psychology courses did not involve consent; consider Santos’ panhandling studies to demonstrate the pique technique, or almost any study evaluating the bystander effect in a public setting. I spent thirteen years of my life working the field of research ethics and have served on Institutional Review Boards; I think it’s safe to say I know what I’m talking about here.

So, no. Figuring out what works best for me in the online dating world is not a sociobehavioral research study.

And yes, consent is critically important in kink, where the very real possibility of physical or emotional harm to the participant exists. But to draw a direct comparison between a BDSM session and an entirely benign email that conveys some variation of the message “Hey, you seem pretty cool and I’d love to get to know you if you’re interested” is beyond ridiculous.

So, no. Online dating is not BDSM.

But here’s something online dating is similar to:

As a business owner, I’ve run print advertisements and Google AdWord campaigns off and on for several years. Typically, when I have new marketing ideas, I test them out, on a small-scale basis, on different demographics or geographical areas. I then look at that data. With particular respect to internet advertising, I can not only see what keywords drive the most visitors to my site, but I can also see how much time those visitors are spending on my site and determine the conversion rate (i.e., how many of those visitors choose to give me their business).

Am I “experimenting” with these people with whom I hope to establish a business relationship? Well, sure. Do I feel bad about doing so? Nope. Do I need their consent? Not a chance.

So, yes. Online dating is, for better or worse, quite closely aligned with advertising and marketing. We all want to make ourselves look appealing so that the people we want to talk to will want to talk to us as well. We want to maximize our efforts and not waste our resources (in this case, mostly time).

But you’re above all that. Congratulations.