Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Zanderax t1_j1jfx3t wrote

Reply to comment by ccattbbugg in From sexual union to the divine – the teachings of Ibn al-‘Arabi by ADefiniteDescription

Just two?

−30

ccattbbugg t1_j1k5mtm wrote

I dunno watchu doing tonight Santa? Need a chimney to come down?

7

Zanderax t1_j1k60ph wrote

I've got plenty already but thanks for the offer :P

2

ccattbbugg t1_j1k82ky wrote

That's alright, you get out there and show em the real North Pole

5

PacificBrim t1_j1kpjds wrote

Aaaaand you lost me

0

Zanderax t1_j1kptsj wrote

Whats wrong with dating multiple people at once? How does it affect you?

1

PacificBrim t1_j1kq7v5 wrote

It's not what I would consider the "greatest union". More often than not, they end poorly and there's always some kind of imbalance. People can make them work but I think there's a special kind of commitment and trust between 2 dedicated partners that isn't present in polyamory.

4

Zanderax t1_j1kqj0r wrote

Id partially agree. Polyamory does have more inherent risk but it also has more reward if you get it right. There is definitely more room to get it wrong. Id disagree though that there is anything inherent wrong or worse about multiple person relationships than 2 person.

Edit: also polyamory doesn't need to be one relationship with more than 2 people. It can also be a single person being in multiple one on one relationships at the same time.

5

panonius t1_j1lfzqp wrote

Ok, I'll bite. Explain how polyamory will optimize reproductive success for all involved in the relationship compared to an exclusive pairing. Please do gloss over the problem of inheritance.

−3

Zanderax t1_j1lggw2 wrote

You've made the incorrect assumption that the only measure of success for a relationship is reproduction. Relationships can be sucessful without children, I'm in multiple sucessful relationships, I have no children, and I'm sterile.

2

panonius t1_j1li3q2 wrote

Yeah, you could argue that a successful career need not involve money. However telling people they were wrong to assume that money is the expected reward sounds either dishonest or entitled.

−3

Zanderax t1_j1lipcu wrote

Thats doubly wrong and a terrible example that further proves my point. Assuming money is what defines a sucessful career is also a really bad assumption. It actually might be a worse assumption than assuming a sucessful relationship is one where you have kids.

A sucessful career is one that is fulfilling, challenging, worthwhile, and makes a difference. Sure money is involved and its a primary motivation for some but its hardly the first thing people think of when they think about a sucessful career

2

panonius t1_j1lkz9f wrote

Mhm, and all that talk about being paid a livable wage is just people focusing on the wrong things in life right?

0

Zanderax t1_j1ll3w5 wrote

Notice how its a "living wage", i.e. a wage on which people can live while working and pursuing their career. The living wage is the bare minimum a job needs to pay to ensure the person doing it can continue living, its not a measure of success.

You're really bad at making arguments.

2

panonius t1_j1lm2y9 wrote

Nah, you are just arguing in bad faith. What you are defining is defined as subsistence wage. Living wage is defined as a minimum to live a basic but decent life. Also saying that money is not a measure of success anywhere in the western world is 100% bad faith.

1

Zanderax t1_j1lmgml wrote

Im not arguing in bad faith at all. Im pointing out the flaws in your arguments and you dont like it.

Reproduction is not the only measure of a sucessful relationship and for many its not a measure at all. Polyamorus relationships can be sucessful, some with children, some without children. As I said I personally have multiple sucessful relationships without children and I will never have children.

Additionally for same sex relationships naturally born children isn't possible and so clearly can't be the only measure of success.

2

[deleted] t1_j1lq4io wrote

[removed]

0

[deleted] t1_j1lq97j wrote

[removed]

1

BernardJOrtcutt t1_j1qy4w4 wrote

Your comment was removed for violating the following rule:

>Be Respectful

>Comments which consist of personal attacks will be removed. Users with a history of such comments may be banned. Slurs, racism, and bigotry are absolutely not permitted.

Repeated or serious violations of the subreddit rules will result in a ban.

This is a shared account that is only used for notifications. Please do not reply, as your message will go unread.

1

BernardJOrtcutt t1_j1qy532 wrote

Your comment was removed for violating the following rule:

>Be Respectful

>Comments which consist of personal attacks will be removed. Users with a history of such comments may be banned. Slurs, racism, and bigotry are absolutely not permitted.

Repeated or serious violations of the subreddit rules will result in a ban.

This is a shared account that is only used for notifications. Please do not reply, as your message will go unread.

1

augustamunhoz t1_j1jhiol wrote

I love you 👏👏👏

−3

Zanderax t1_j1ji6ej wrote

I love you too but not exclusively!

−3

outlaw-s-t-a-r t1_j1k19yr wrote

I consider myself pc and progressive but this shit is exhausting.

24

Zanderax t1_j1k1si3 wrote

The existence of polyamory is exhausting?

−3

outlaw-s-t-a-r t1_j1kia5i wrote

You’re heart is in the right place, but your methods will not move the needle towards the right direction.

Best of luck!

5

Zanderax t1_j1kj3ac wrote

Im not sure I understand. What method are you talking about? I'm just talking about polyamory, i.e. dating multiple people at once.

0