Monogamous vs Polyamory

[LordFall]

Just now, Natasha Tori Maru said:

I don't know what you are talking about or who you are responding to here. It has nothing to do with anything I raised.

 

1 hour ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

@LordFall your compulsion to reply and grasp at the nearest source available is susceptible to recency bias that you are complicent in. 

Just the rapidity of your AI replies illustrates this is a reasonable inference. 

Unfortunately just stating

Doesn't mean you understood anything I said. And based on your reply, you didn't.

You have no idea even, how the AI you use, is programmed guardrail wise. It has its own bias built in by those people who created it.

And you reply so quickly, it is obvious you aren't deeply checking what it reports. Yes I am inferring that. But it is perfecting reasonable when the gap between posts is several minutes to an hour on rapid fire succession.

1) You accused me of replying quickly and thus not deeply checking what I say or what AI responds to me. I think that's a false assumption and if you can point out how that lead to me saying something false then feel free.

2) I don't think I'm falling pray to recency bias. Elaborate. 

3) I take guardrail and AI bias into account. I ask questions in a way that gives me info I can cross reference if it sounds off. I do it all the time since it does hallucinate at times. 

 

[Jirh]

6 hours ago, LordFall said:

Dude I named one Professor Marston. If you insist I do intellectual labor on your behalf here are a few more

Franklin D. Roosevelt & Eleanor Roosevelt - Literal US president 

Simone de Beauvoir & Jean-Paul Sartre - Famous Philosopher

H.G. Wells & Jane Eldridge - Famous Author 

Feel to look them up and the details of their polyamorous relationship. 

That's 4 in several billions.

[Ulax]

8 hours ago, Jirh said:

This proves my point actually.

I'm not saying monogamy is better. I'm saying monogamy, as it is, is hard enough and mostly failing. Polyamory only adds more hardships and complexity. So don't expect success. Go and fight feminism, and you may have a chance at your dream lifestyle, but maybe in a couple generations.

It's not like I don't want polyamory, I do. But I live in reality, not in my imagination. And in reality, it doesn't work. Monogamy hardly works anymore.

Bro go learn pickup for even like three months, and you'll realise your view of what's possible with women is a lie.

Yes if you just jerk off in your room and try and build a harem with sally and Jess from accounting its unrealistic. But you can get astronomically better with girls.

[Jirh]

2 minutes ago, Ulax said:

Bro go learn pickup for even like three months

Not interested. My results are good enough for me.

2 minutes ago, Ulax said:

and you'll realise your view of what's possible with women is a lie.

You don't know my view. You actually misunderstand it.

4 minutes ago, Ulax said:

Yes if you just jerk off in your room and try and build a harem with sally and Jess from accounting its unrealistic. But you can get astronomically better with girls.

Lol. Are you done with your assumptions?

[Ulax]

Just now, Jirh said:

Not interested. My results are good enough for me.

You don't know my view. You actually misunderstand it.

Lol. Are you done with your assumptions?

Come on man I'm obviously joking with the example. What are you? The joke police? 

3 minutes ago, Jirh said:

Not interested. My results are good enough for me.

Great. But you were expressing a world view before.

[Jirh]

Just now, Ulax said:

Come on man I'm obviously joking with the example. What are you? The joke police? 

I didn't laugh though. Must be tough for you picking up girls with humour 

Just now, Ulax said:

Great. But you were expressing a world view before.

Yeah. Divorce rates are higher than ever. People are hardly lasting in monogamous relationships. It's the reality.

[Ulax]

1 minute ago, Jirh said:

I didn't laugh though. Must be tough for you picking up girls with humour 

Glad my humour stands out to you

2 minutes ago, Jirh said:

Yeah. Divorce rates are higher than ever. People are hardly lasting in monogamous relationships. It's the reality.

Sure. That's why we do self-development. To become exceptions to the general rules.

[Joseph Maynor]

If you are so "high value" that you have multiple partners, I would love to pick your brain as to how you did this and why.  

[Ulax]

Just now, Joseph Maynor said:

If you are so "high value" that you have multiple partners, I would love to pick your brain as to how you did this and why.  

 

[Joseph Maynor]

Why would anyone want or need multiple girlfriends?  Not just friends, but sexual relationships?

[LordFall]

2 hours ago, Jirh said:

That's 4 in several billions.

1/20 of adults in the United States are currently engaged in some form of consensual non-monogamy. I just named famous examples that you can lookup to know that they died satisfied with their choice. I also showed you a study showing that the rate of success of monogamous relationships and polyamorous ones are the same. 

46 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

Why would anyone want or need multiple girlfriends?  Not just friends, but sexual relationships?

That's such a confusing sentence to me. If you like having sex with women why would you not want to do it with multiple at once? And multiple at the same time? I can understand not wanting to juggle the complexity of dating multiple of them but sex is pretty straight forward. Are you low libido? 

Edited 12 hours ago by LordFall

[Hayato]

16 hours ago, LordFall said:

I'm not accusing you of this personally but especially because polyamory challenges social norms and established paradigms so directly I see a lot of unfounded dogma being throw around about it.

One more thing to add, some things that are labeled as dogma are not really dogma and have good reasoning behind them.

For example:

Don't drink alcohol.

Don't eat pork.

 

This could seem as outdated religious dogma to some, but science shows that alcohol is bad for the brain and liver and pork is bad for the liver, pancreas and adrenal glands. The ancient religious texts didn't have the latest science data, but they intuitively grasped some things.

For example social studies show that if you marry a person (regardless male or female) who has had 10, or more partners the chance of divorce is around 33-35%.

If you marry a person who has had 1, or 0 previous partners the chance of divorce is between 5-6%.

But anyways there is no right, or wrong, a relationship is just another opportunity for self-expression.

Do what works for you.

 

[LordFall]

5 hours ago, Hayato said:

Don't eat pork.

 

This could seem as outdated religious dogma to some, but science shows that alcohol is bad for the brain and liver and pork is bad for the liver, pancreas and adrenal glands. The ancient religious texts didn't have the latest science data, but they intuitively grasped some things.

Where did you get that from? 

Pretty confident that lean pork is not inherently more harmful than other red meats like beef or lamb.

From a nutritional and medical standpoint, pork is just a red meat. Like beef, the health impact comes down to processing (bacon/sausage with high sodium and nitrates vs. fresh pork loin) and fat content. I couldn't find any medical evidence that pork specifically damages the "pancreas or adrenal glands.

5 hours ago, Hayato said:

For example social studies show that if you marry a person (regardless male or female) who has had 10, or more partners the chance of divorce is around 33-35%.

If you marry a person who has had 1, or 0 previous partners the chance of divorce is between 5-6%.

But anyways there is no right, or wrong, a relationship is just another opportunity for self-expression.

Do what works for you.

Sure that's a fair statistic to consider. I think a of it has to do with conservative and religious people are shamed from divorces even if the relationship is toxic and people with higher partner counts are more confident in their ability to find another partner to build a relationship but there is also a case of hedonism and hoping ship when little issues occur. It's worth bringing up and understanding though. 

[Hayato]

47 minutes ago, LordFall said:

Where did you get that from? 

Pretty confident that lean pork is not inherently more harmful than other red meats like beef or lamb.

From a nutritional and medical standpoint, pork is just a red meat. Like beef, the health impact comes down to processing (bacon/sausage with high sodium and nitrates vs. fresh pork loin) and fat content. I couldn't find any medical evidence that pork specifically damages the "pancreas or adrenal glands.

The books "Liver Rescue" and "Cleanse to Heal" talk about this in detail. 

About the pancreas - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40990651/

About the adrenals - my mistake, science hasn't made a study about this yet.

But this is off topic, I was only giving an example.

Edited 4 hours ago by Hayato

[LordFall]

2 minutes ago, Hayato said:

The books "Liver Rescue" and "Cleanse to Heal" talk about this in detail. 

About the pancreas - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40990651/

About the adrenals - my mistake, science hasn't made a study about this yet.

But this is off topic, I was only giving an example.

It is 100% on topic, you just proved my point on dogma. 

Those books are by Anthony William apparently known as the  "Medical Medium," who claims he gets his medical advice from a spirit. There is no documented legitimacy to it. 

That PubMed study is on fat intake/hypertriglyceridemia-induced pancreatitis (dietary fat levels), doesn't have anything to do with specifically pork being bad for the pancreas. 

See how quick it is to sneak up on you? My friend go date and fuck multiple people and have a great life. You seem to have a religious background and so do I my family on my dad's side is Muslim and my dad doesn't speak to my brother for being gay and I haven't told him I'm bi yet who knows what'll happen when I do. Fuck dogma and ideology. 

[Hayato]

17 minutes ago, LordFall said:

That PubMed study is on fat intake/hypertriglyceridemia-induced pancreatitis (dietary fat levels), doesn't have anything to do with specifically pork being bad for the pancreas. 

This is a quote from it: "Pork was associated with chronic pancreatitis (OR = 3.652, P = 0.048)"

18 minutes ago, LordFall said:

Those books are by Anthony William apparently known as the  "Medical Medium," who claims he gets his medical advice from a spirit. There is no documented legitimacy to it. 

Truth can stand on its own without any evidence. The multiple success stories of people reversing their chronic illness using his information could be considered as legitimacy. 

20 minutes ago, LordFall said:

See how quick it is to sneak up on you?

I don't see this as a confrontation, just people exchanging ideas.

21 minutes ago, LordFall said:

have a great life.

Thank you! I will do my best to follow this advice.

27 minutes ago, LordFall said:

You seem to have a religious background

Actually I don't. 

35 minutes ago, LordFall said:

my family on my dad's side is Muslim and my dad doesn't speak to my brother for being gay and I haven't told him I'm bi yet who knows what'll happen when I do.

Thank you for sharing, hopefully the situation will improve somehow.

[LordFall]

17 minutes ago, Hayato said:

This is a quote from it: "Pork was associated with chronic pancreatitis (OR = 3.652, P = 0.048)"

Truth can stand on its own without any evidence. The multiple success stories of people reversing their chronic illness using his information could be considered as legitimacy. 

I don't see this as a confrontation, just people exchanging ideas.

Thank you! I will do my best to follow this advice.

Actually I don't. 

Thank you for sharing, hopefully the situation will improve somehow.

Fair enough, and I respect your calm approach to the discussion.

To quickly clarify the mechanics on the study so we don't leave bad data hanging: that observational study looked at a population in China where pork is by far the primary source of high-fat meat, salted pork, and processed pork. That's a confounding variable (high dietary fat and overall lifestyle), not a biological property unique to clean pork loin causing pancreatitis.

It's not confrontational, I just want to make sure that we do indeed kill the bias where it stands and highlight the truth. 

17 minutes ago, Hayato said:

Truth can stand on its own without any evidence. The multiple success stories of people reversing their chronic illness using his information could be considered as legitimacy. 

There are multiple ways the immune system works that we don't understand. Some people get cured by prayer. Maybe God literally heard their prayer and magically cured them cuz fuck it here's a blessing for you. Maybe it was a new diet that they adopted that changed it that their doctor didn't see coming and they pray all the time anyway so they just assumed God cured them.

To have a process that's consistent overtime and produces expected results in multiple different people is what medicine considers legitimate. 

You haven't shared your own dating story, how are you finding the quest for love? 

Edited 3 hours ago by LordFall

[Natasha Tori Maru]

@LordFall I'm not interested. I know when to pick my battles and I've said my piece. 

[QVx]

This one is pretty easier to answer, you need to do what is right for you; that can change over time or for many people remain the same.

[Schizophonia]

Pork is super tasty and cheap; don't listen to muslim psyop.

Edited 4 minutes ago by Schizophonia