puporing

You missed one. Getting shamed for having many sexual partners. It isn't as bad in the past but the social stigma still exists in various places. Yes funny thing too that point fuels the first two points. I find lots of people justify #1 & 2 if someone is non-monogamous.

@Razard86 Great post! Love the point about us having both the Masculine and Feminine. I take so much joy from being able to embody both depending on what the situation calls for at any given time! I wish people could experience the joy I experience just by letting go of the need to latch onto one way of being and experiment more with life. There's such abundance and literal infinite ways to be (within the limitations of your current form). And I love experiencing/encountering masculine energy when it is expressed beautifully out there, it's literally irresistable.

That's a very holistic way of putting it! Totally dig what you're saying here. The trick is how we can evolve collectively to a point where all the ways of self-expression in our love life can be respected. Not dissimilar to the discussion of if homosexuality is a valid form of way of being not long ago, but just seems much larger because it would require a larger % of people involved as opposed to a minority.

I am saying you were not interested to discuss non-monogamy in the first place, nowhere have you stated any points of your own regarding why you favor monogamy. Instead you're just engaged in demonization and judgement of something you don't agree with/understand, and projecting a bunch of stuff claiming to know what I am and how I think. I don't engage with this because it's not about what was being said in the first place. I am still responding simply because I do not give in to bullies attempting to silence my voice.

That's not what you are doing. You started by name-calling like "satan" and directing a bunch of labels at me for expressing myself genuinely, with the intention of shutting me up. Why not take a look at how others have been expressing differing opinions?

How do you know I am not? I am not on a mission other than embodying the truths I experience. There's not much else "to do" and I have no goal. Speaking up by responding to the initial poster's question and later posts from others is part of how I want to live my life, expressing myself genuinely right now on this forum despite having to deal with bullies like yourself is how I want to live my life. You are attempting to stop me from living my life instead of just minding yours. You don't have to like what I say and you're welcome to express differring opinions, and I have repeatedly said I respect differring opinions. Instead you are following my posts constantly and resorting to labels and names. This is a space for people to be genuine and truthful and I hope it keeps being that way.

Just the opposite, my intention is to liberate and relieve people from what's keeping them from experiencing more joy/love/abundance, to whom it resonates with. I respect yours and anyone else's agency in their life and how you wish to live/be, it is all part of creation. You cannot understand what I'm saying because you don't have the direct experience I refer to so you choose to demonize and throw a bunch of labels around for what you cannot yet understand so that it is out of mind and out of sight.

I relate with all your points stated. It's a complex issue that involves much more than just 'overcoming' the interpersonal aspects too (survival element I sense is a big reason of why people continue to choose a more restricted form of love and relating). Like we don't currently have a sure way of raising children collectively that catches those that fall behind (ie, single moms), this means women are more prone to feeling this fear of being left to deal with the consequences - this fear drives people to be very possessive/competitive. I think women are more the driving force behind strict monogamy and it's because of the lack of support for women that is holding people back from considering other forms of relationships. People might rather stay with what they know also than venture out into the unfamiliar, or go through the process of deconstruction/questioning.

Yes you get it , the dissolution of a strong sense of seperation between people/groups. Long way to go but I have faith. Yeah you get it, most of us are still mainly driven by fear and the mindset of 'acquiring' things which some think of their partner and children as a form of acquiring and therefore don't want to deal with 'losing' such acquisitions. One thing that is probably required for this to happen is much more healing of generational trauma to get ourselves to be as complete/whole of beings as we can, self-actualizing, and have an economic system that secures the basic necessities for all of us. I just see the potential for more happiness, more truth, more love, and more joy. Because not everyone fits in the same shoes and I'm certainly not alone in this, have you considered people are just too afraid to even talk about this stuff because it always gets immediately shut down? Someone has to start the process of advocating.

@Spence94 You create the world you want to see. Right now people are not at the place where they want what I describe and that's fine I don't expect to see this in my life-time, it's more of a vision I would like to see and feels good to see so I put it out there sometimes, it's like my dreamboard. I am not saying "open relationships" should be the norm, I am saying that they should be part of the "norm". I want people to be how they want to be that's most true to them (eg, so they can def still be monogamous) and an environment conducive to individuality and true "self-expression". What is true now is that lots and lots of people (I'm not talking about those that are happily together though I recognize this is subjective what happiness is) operate on fear of being alone/abandonment/financial deprivation/inadequacy to name a few to stay in their restrictive 'monogamous relationships' even though some clearly want to express/experience love outside as well and the current environment is very limited/not-accepting for this kind of way of being. Or they could be happily together but still desire to be with others, there are just so many possibilities that are not part of the narrative right now.

Both are allowed to. I'm referring to a different way of living/relating than what we have at this point in time - for society as a whole to change where men and women are allowed freedom to be themselves and communicate their desires/wishes and be the responsible and sole agents of their lives without shame/guilt - which can mean anything, that loving someone is not conditional upon seeing someone everyday/week, living together or apart, how many partners you are 'in love with' at a given time.

Sometimes in your life, you may not want to be in a monogamous situation and just want to have some fun. Whereas most people that's not where their minds are at and it becomes this suffocating thing when you just want to have a good time in the moment. Men are often pretty good with just having some fun and not something too serious/long term, but they don't allow women to do the same when a woman wants that, so it is a real struggle. Maybe I just need to hit Vegas soon rofl.

Finding men who are okay with loving multiple women if it happened to them.

Maybe it's a reminder of being a bit lonely? And also if you feel more ashamed of it as opposed to taking joy and pleasure. That's mostly conditioning. Also orgasms can in my experience induce an opening experience which can reveal the inner emotions/feelings that have been bottled up and away from your everyday consciousness - similar to some psychedelics in that. But it sounds like you are pointing mostly to guilt.

Also aphrodisiac effects lawl.

Totally depends on how you carry yourself.. If you're otherwise confident and calm let's say, it's pretty attractive, or can be seen as more masculine/mysterious. If you feel insecure about it and that affecting how you come off then probably will make it less attractive.

I guess if you keep 'flirting' when she's obviously not into it then yeah it's turning into 'harassment'. It's usually fine if you're just doing it to test the waters and generally okay at reading social cues.

Very subjective thing what makes someone feel it's "sacred". You can have the most crude and vulgar kind of communication and that's your "sacred" in that moment.

This tells me it could be a sign of a deeper issue to look into as well... Without spoiling too much it could be childhood-related which can make us pin a lot of hope in romantic prospects - and thus when they don't work out it can be soul-crushing rather than just move on and continue our exploration/adventure. We may be hoping to meet some kind of unmet need for love/validation/to be seen. This is something you can work out through spirituality/self-therapy and/or with healers. I've been there (it's still not easy) and know what it's like to be on a 'hamster wheel'. Just thought I'd add this you can ignore it if it doesn't seem to apply .

Prob she just didn't feel that way about you and felt creeped out by it. I'm sorry you had to go through that. I'm not sure about your situation but some women feel really unsafe too and that could be a factor. There was a time when a guy was semi-stalking me and it made me feel really unsafe even if from his perspective it was maybe 'loving' but it was clearly not reciprocated and he kept doing it (stalking and saying suggestive stuff). I don't know the details but sounds like best to move on..

Communicate first, and if still nothing and you don't feel good about the situation, it means you don't share the same values on this..

Err, I would err on the side of, communicating your test status (if you have them regularly when changing partners often), and if you aren't sure, it's best to be safe than sorry. Taking chances with STDs doesn't sound too fun to me but seems like most people don't care about this until it's "too late".

I am a 50-year-old white man. Just kidding, hmm there're others I would rather meet before those ones.

Hayashi Yasunori ('yasu') Not possible: Frederic Chopin, Michael Jackson

LOL some kind of glitch happened there... or could it be on purpose... ? nah.