Oh. My. God. :O
Andy. Beverly Hills. Atheist. Polyamorous/relationship anarchist. Kinkster. I like things. Let's fuck.
Seems pretty tough to find other poly people even in larger areas. Do they have much for meet up groups in LA?
There are quite a few meetup groups in LA. I don’t have any really solid numbers because there is some overlap, but throughout Southern California, membership seems to number well over a thousand people. The semiannual poly pool parties in West LA attract several hundred people every time.
And there’s a fairly sizable contingent of people on OKCupid and Tumblr, and probably many other sites if I were to go looking, who aren’t in any of the meetup groups.
So I’m fortunate to be in an area with a pretty large and relatively visible contingent of poly folks.
Not a great deal of goings-on in the ol’ dating life at the moment. I’ve been sending some more messages on OKCupid and have gotten the usual smattering of replies back. I think I’ve hit on a not-quite-copy-and-paste-but-take-a-fairly-standard-template-and-fill-in-some-personal-commentary formula that will allow me to churn out decent messages fairly quickly. Time shall tell if it’s anything that will work.
I haven’t talked to Bayou much after last Wednesday. But then, I’ve been entirely unmotivated to do so. I suppose things with her will fade out. I just don’t feel enough of a connection to try to get the sex thing right with her. Not with her all the way out in Long Beach, at least.
I’m supposed to get coffee with Auburn’s husband one of these days, and I suppose I should also get together with Auburn as well.
A couple days ago, Voodoo posted a video on Facebook of herself singing a song she had written and it’s been in my head since. Jeebus I love it when a girl can sing. :D
Carmen is hosting a party on Saturday night so I’ll be seeing her there. Blondie’s out of town so I’ll be going stag. Carmen’s been dating a poly guy who will be there with his wife. It turns out I somewhat peripherally know the wife; she had messaged me on OKCupid a couple summers ago and she had made some hints about her being interested in me, but she’s not someone I have any interest in. The poly world in L.A. is pretty big, but somehow it’s still pretty tiny sometimes.
I had a surprise evening with Blondie tonight, as her date wound up canceling late in the day. We didn’t do much besides have dinner at home and then walk to one of the local fro-yo shops, but it was a nice evening nonetheless. She’s pretty fucking awesome. <3
It’s almost 2:30 in the morning. I should probably call it a night and head off to bed.
Let’s play a game.
Type the following words into your tags box, then post the first automatic tag that comes up.
Well that was disturbing.
I wish the mere suggestion that monogamy isn’t ideal for every member of the human race wouldn’t send some monogamous people into fits of rage.
No one’s telling anyone that you have to consider other partners if you don’t want to, all people are different. No one’s taking away monogamy as an option and no one’s saying all monogamy is inherently broken, it’s a suggestion that maybe monogamy isn’t for everyone and that people should make their own decisions instead of following something blindly. If one thinks critically and makes their own decision and they still came to monogamy as the right solution, then it’s the right solution for them.
Half of all marriages end in divorce, but that also means that half do not. Monogamy works for some, but for the moment it’s understood an enormous blanket solution for everyone. We don’t want to eliminate monogamy, we want to shed light on non-monogamy.
Will it come off as manipulative to play a game of “How would you feel if I dated/slept with ____”? We’re getting started with poly again and he isn’t very good about communicating his needs, but I need to know his boundaries.
This one will be short and sweet:
1.) If you’re worried about whether something seems manipulative, it probably is. That kind of conversation isn’t necessarily manipulative (and should happen in any healthy poly relationship) - but if you’re doing it to trick, wheedle, coerce, etc. - then there’s a problem.
2.) If he’s not very good at communicating his needs, he’s not ready to be in a poly relationship. The onus is not on you to cajole him into communicating his needs and boundaries. If you’re this worried about how to have this basic conversation, the relationship is not ready to be opened up.
This issue here is not how to word specific questions - it’s the fact that you can’t have a clear, open, honest conversation about needs and boundaries. That needs to be solved, not patched over.
The last thing a couple who’s new to poly should ever think about doing is to bring unsuspecting new partners into a situation where the existing relationship has major communication issues. Remember that when one of you invariably fucks something up, it’s going to wind up hurting more than just the two of you.
Penn and Teller: giving no fucks since ever.
Desert Bus is the worst game ever. Which means it’s fucking AWESOME and I INSIST everyone play it. Especially if you’re drunk or high.
Have any helpful links for colorful fitting men’s undies? I’m looking for a good gift, and your style is superb.
To be honest, it’s all either from randomly clicking around on Amazon & eBay, or from Target.
Sex at Dawn constantly reminded me of a line from the novel Nice Work by David Lodge (1988):
"Literature is mostly about having sex and not much about having children; life’s the other way round."
Sex at Dawn is almost all about sex and not much about children, yet evolution is very much about reproduction - variation in reproductive success is evolution.
I have thoughts. Prepare to hear them.
TL;DR - “Sex at Dawn” is so deceptive, it’s hard for me not to think Christopher Ryan and Cacilda Jetha are willfully misrepresenting the facts to push their agenda. Polyamorists deserve better advocates.
Y’know, it’s funny. Granted, I’m not all the way through Sex at Dusk, but thus far I’ve found Dusk to be every bit as problematic as Sex at Dawn. I’ve scribbled some more detailed notes that I might go into later, but here’s a very quick glossing over of my complaints:
The first thing Lynn Saxon does in the book—literally the first thing—is to attack Chris Ryan and Cacilda Jetha’s professional credentials. Yet, absolutely no information is available on who Lynn Saxon is and even if he/she/they is a real person writing under a real name. As someone who spent more than a dozen years in scientific fields, I find this hugely problematic because one’s qualifications to speak on a topic are vastly important. All we have is Saxon’s self-proclaimed expertise in the field of evolutionary biology to go by.
So, as far as I’m concerned, that sets the tone for the rest of the content. To me, Dusk reads as a personal vendetta masquerading as scientific rebuttal. Saxon’s sneering, condescending language toward Ryan and Jetha far surpasses the mockery that Saxon accuses Ryan and Jetha of using in Dawn.
Dusk is poorly and haltingly written, and prone to tangents that really do nothing to address the points the author is trying to make. Much of the arguments Saxon uses (at least in the first several chapters) seem utterly irrelevant, almost nitpicky. And, in fact, some of the things Saxon uses to rebut Dawn seem to be inadvertently supportive of Dawn.
Are there problematic aspects of Sex at Dawn? Absolutely, and any reader should be cautioned against believing what’s in there, word for word. Short-term social pair bonding does seem to be more the norm among humans, and I don’t necessarily buy the idea that early humans were little other than orgiastic hedonists (reproduction is an energy-intensive and risky activity in the wild, although it seems it would be less energy-intensive and risky—for males, at least—if physical competition between males was not an issue). But I would say that there are equally problematic aspects of Sex at Dusk that warrant scrutiny. Virtually every piece of written work—literary, journalistic, and even scientific—comes with a bias. Saxon’s biases are just as clear as Ryan and Jetha’s.
So, thank you for your well-reasoned critique, and I encourage everyone to click “Read More.” Honestly, in 16 paragraphs, you’ve done a much better job of summarizing the weaknesses in Sex at Dawn than Lynn Saxon did in 350 pages. If polyamorists deserve better advocates than Ryan and Jetha, then supporters of the “standard narrative” equally deserve better advocates than whoever Lynn Saxon really is.