Who should you fuck and why?
Attempt at getting this debate out of the OC thread before it spirals into a shit-posting war.
I expect dank meemees when the OC-thread bumps, god damnit.
I always get triggered when my fellow anarchists try to push their own sexual preferences like some kind of obligatory part of being a 'revolutionary'. why is this so fucking important? Are you secretly scared your acts are immoral and need others to validate your decisions?
How about I fuckt ure mum kiddo
#rekt
have at it m8.
Since I'm the guy you made this thread in reply to:
I don't fuck anyone. I have almost no sex life, and I'm pretty much okay with that. I don't want a relationship with anyone either.
I made the post because I was commenting on another meme, not because I was trying to "push" my own preferences on anyone. It has nothing to do with being "revolutionary" except for the fact that in many ways the concept of exclusivity in itself being good is cancerous bullshit that promotes the concept of property in itself being good.
Polygamy is shit.
The point of a relationship for me is finding a partner to trust my entire being to and find solace in this world. Sex is just an extra benefit that brings us closer together.
Fucking random people gives no long term satisfaction.
Well since I responded to that post in that thread:
I've tried poly before, and personally, it's just not for me. I don't feel bad about this because there's not really anything I can do as far as changing my preferences go without going through a lot of uncomfortable bullshit that would at the very least result in me alienating whoever is involved in the relationship.
That being said: I do think it is absolutely counter-revolutionary from an anarchist point of view to treat your partner(s) as property in any sense. You should always be mindful of your partner's needs and preferences and do everything possible to make sure that they're comfortable and being listened to. That already goes a long way towards abolishing the problems with monogamous heteronormative relationships, but there's nothing inherently wrong with preferring to be in an exlusive relationship as long as the two of you are on the same page about it and are going to keep the lines of communication open in case anything changes.
Monogamy on the other hand has a whole host of cultural traits and expectations associated with it, and what you expect from it may not be what the other person expects. To some it might just be only having sex with that one person, to others it might mean that you can't spend any time with/love anyone else other than your partner - to the point that neither person can even spend too much time with friends without it being weird. And there's usually also a sort of contractual understanding involved with monogamy where the two people involved are supposed to be with each other indefinitely,
So I can nevertheless appreciate some aspects of the polyamory critique or whatever you wanna call it. People should define relationships based on their own terms and not cultural expectations. I just think that their dogma about how we all have infinite amounts of love to give to everyone and that everyone can just work out together in one big ideal polyamorous relationship is fucking stupid. It might work for some people, but as far as I'm concerned, there is always going to be competition over spending time with a particular person, if not also competing for their affections, because there are going to be preferences as far as who someone likes the most, who someone has the best sexual chemistry with, etc.
But maybe that's just me. I certainly don't feel like I have the capacity for a poly relationship and certainly wouldn't myself want more than one partner, because frankly I just can't handle it. Other people are probably more social than myself and are perfectly fine with that, which is fine, but just don't fucking universalize your experiences and try to shame me for being "possessive".
That's pretty much my views on the matter.
this
I hope you actually read what I said on that other thread, by the way
And I don't know if you noticed, but traditional mono relationships are very much about two people trying to claim one another as property, rather than two people who come together for acknowledged mutual benefit
Whoever is willing to fuck you that you are willing to fuck. You should do it because you want to. Just don't confuse sex with love or being in a relationship.
Personally I'm fine with a sexually open relationship or group sex(BGG with the guy one girl dominating the other girl is fucking awesome), but I have a really hard time getting close to people so two partners would be the max for me and two is pushing it. To me, fucking isn't very intimate but stuff like cuddling is because through the magic of apps I can easily fuck but finding someone who I'm interested in spending time with who is interested or available with is much rarer. Now if some can't handle sex being open or are comfortable romantically loving a large group good for them, I don't work that way and trying to fit me into your box isn't going to work.
good post, mostly agree.
traditional like in arranged marriages where two families enter an economic relationship?
or like any type of monogamy? I'll assume the latter.
Treating person as property is one thing, but expecting them to live up to the mutual understanding of your relationship is another.
One should of course as the user said, be mindful of your partners needs, but that does not necessarily extend to sacrificing your own needs. The reality of a relationship does occasionally require a bit of self sacrifice from both (or more) parts, but it is perfectly fine to draw the line in the sand and say, no, I don't want you to fuck other people. If you can't agree on the fundamentals of a relationship, then it's better to not have it rather than stay stuck in a relationship that makes you miserable.
All sexual deviations are liberalism tbh fam. Some are just more tolerable forms than others.
Polygamy, or the even more corrupted term "polymary" is one such unacceptable sexual deviation. For the simple fact we know struggle goes beyond mere allocation of time and effort for pathetic wages… we struggle for more spiritual fulfillments as well. Existential purpose, and validation from others.
I'm trying to be as nice about it as possible but honestly put it this way: if I'm expected to go out there and "date". To find a consenting partner, it's going to be my and only my partner. No bull is going to share in the work I had to put in. And you might think that sounds capitalist but it's the opposite, a worker is never appreciated for his sacrifice, that's the problem. Where is mine out of this whole ordeal? Why do we cooperate in a society that watches us rot away in one bedroom apartments with swollen blue balls?
And mind you, this works culturally different for somewhere like China than it does for America. The men are different, the women are different. So polymary is not some derogatory filth worth punching someone in the throat for uttering like it is here as it's just completely unheard of. Even Japan who has men on suicide watch constantly for their cunt women are not thinking about such things as their situation is different.
I'm just giving you a prime example. Know anything outside of a happy marriage with a man and a woman is just drinking a poison and telling everybody else "hey… I'm fine, therefore poison is safe to drink."
Meanwhile your organs are probably shit cause of it and you don't even realize.
As long as women have choice over who their partner is, monogamy will not survive. This is a fact.
If you're pro monogamy, you must be pro arranged virgin marriage.
My romantic experience is limited, but I think I'd be okay with an open relationship, and I'd personally appreciate being able to pursue other people - as long as there's clear communication. I've never explicitly suggested it with any guys I've dated but they've all expressed the sort of "no I'd get really jealous if that were me" and "that sounds dishonest". Most people aren't interested in open relationships/polygamy, and many of the ones who do only want open relationships for themselves. Relationships are for the benefit of both people - compromising comfort, guilt, jealousy for the sake of someone else's pleasure makes no sense to me. The only morality that matters in this sort of personal stuff is basic decency and respect.
below are not my views, but those of schopenhauper in his aphorisms. i'm just typing down this redpill style shit for the lulz but see if our friends with monogamous inclinations can provide a reply to all this without steering anywhere from their original views. yes, i am playing the "advocatus assidui".
Now, wouldn't the monogamists please explain how they are not living with a false consciousness? you're not the donald and you're not the sultan of brunei; explain yourselves. &inb4: but the normies! girls, guys, the dominant ideas have always been those of the ruling class. so: cul8er in the nextest kibbutz.
You're never getting a wife and will die alone.
rip thread
i c it has achieved so much enlightenment it entered nirvana.
...
fuck off normies
feel bad for you fam
I've only dated unattractive, chubby, mcdonalds worker type women. And I've turned every single one of them radical left.
I don't care about face at all, only tits and ass. So I'll really date anyone
Why does anarchy and communism get grouped together so often? Anarchists are the only group of people more edgy and retarded then fascist pigs.
You need to read more you retarded nigger.
Ok, buddy. Whatever you say.
Spooky.
Enter into and engage in relationships that make you happy and you find fulfilling. If that means a monogamous relationship with a member of the opposite sex with the goal of having 2.5 children, then go for it.
Define this. What would constitute treating someone as property. Would kicking your spouse out because they cheated on you qualify?
I'm monogamous because I don't feel good otherwise. I don't need to justify it, just like I don't need to justify my preference of the color red.
...
I have fantasies about me and my partner saying we are each other's property.
Well really it's that such women are 100% of the time completely apolitical. So if you are an even slightly thoughtful leftist you can easily influence them.
Woops, that flag shouldn't be there. I'm no Christian
Nigger, if you're too lazy to read a wikipedia article before posting you should kys.
...
and of the Donald?
Polygamy is fine, like prostitution, in a world with equal genders and without economic exploitation.
Unfortunately both seem to be coercive toward women and should be prohibited by law.
That anarchist was probably shitposting tbh. As long as both partners or how ever many partners there are, all consent and know exactly what's going on, they should be free to do what they want provided it doesn't have much of an effect on anyone else.
I'd still be looking for a monogamous relationship and frankly I don't think I could date one of those androgynous "fight gender norms" types. But if someone else is looking for something else, I don't really feel like that's a problem.
...
Yeah it's really bizarre. There is a women that use to post here that blamed capitalism and the "patriarchy" for her boyfriend breaking up with her after he caught her cheating on him with multiple other men. It really feeds into that right wing strawman about leftists being losers that blame capitalism for their own inadequacy.
...
I'm talking about the institute of marriage as it stands. It's primarily a property-exchange system, as may be expected from what it was evolved from.
Whoever you want to fuck. Outside of spooky right-wing reactionism I see no reason why anyone should care who/how many people someone wants to fuck consensually. Odds are social pressure for monogamy/marriage will die down along with other "traditional" concepts.
Isn't that always what it was? If anything it's true nature has become more and more obscured by romantic bullshit is time has gone on.
That is kind of my point.
This is why we should return to the tribal family form, in which everybody fucks with each other
I don't think that did much good for the black community…
What?
Then I agree, using church or state as an arbiter in ones sexual relations is obviously not very anarchistic.
Seems everyone is pretty much on the same page, except nazbol. Good, all is well in the kingdom.