Search results

In my opinion, even if you are hardwired to be non-monogamous at a genetic level, that doesn't excuse you from responsibility to act ethically if you want to call yourself poly, and it doesn't mean anyone else is obliged to participate in a poly relationship with you.

1. Neither. Nobody is holding a gun to my head, forcing me to chose from only those two options. I would break up with the one(s) unwilling to embrace non-monogamy, and start afresh, ethically. 2. I don't feel solitude from being poly. I'm not sure why you assume that's the default. 3. On or...

Remember, it's not just your wife's privacy at stake here; there's someone else involved too. Your wife's partner is entirely within their rights to expect privacy within their own relationship.

This thread is a duplicate of one in the Press and Media Coverage section. Please make your responses on that one.

This thread was accidentally caught up in a spam sweep, and MsEmotional was banned. That has now been rectified, so hopefully she'll be back again soon.

Moderator note: Enough's enough. Petty bickering isn't a good look, so either get back on topic or post elsewhere.

Have your husband and his on-again-off-again partner individually apologised for cheating on you and taken reasonable steps to regain your trust? There's no magic formula to suddenly make you ok with him hooking back up with her, but that would seem to be a first step.

I don't think I've ever heard the term used over here, but thanks for playing. If you managed to miss gamergate and it's associated political fallout, good for you.

Alas, this is true.

"Social justice warrior" may be used as a point of pride, but "SJW" is a pejorative used by gamergaters and right-wing trolls. I'm disappointed to see it in use here.

It means that word choice reveals a lot about a person.

Oh dear. It's all about ethics in video games journalism then, is it?

Lets try this another way. If you build a shopping centre, you can't just build stairs at every entrance and then claim to be treating everyone the same because you don't see disability. The point isn't "Amazon are racist", the point is that not thinking "treat everyone the same" all the way...

No. You may be thinking of my reply to a similar question (possibly Al99's?), where I mentioned some of the details in the post rauhajoule quoted.

Because without somewhere obvious for people to post their "looking for our third" ads, they'll end up all over the rest of the site. The idea that we should try to turn into OkCupid is ridiculous. You didn't suggest it, but you have to admit it's what our constant trickle of one-off "looking...

I suspect the reason nobody's put any effort into building a working dating area is that this isn't intended to be a dating site. (edit: What Magdlyn said) It's like complaining that you can't get decent hot pancakes at the supermarket. There's entire shelves full of food, but nobody's selling...

The ignoring is usually an unintended side effect. You may, for example, deliberately create an algorithm that treats everyone in exactly the same manner with respect to race, but which uses some other data in its calculations which has the same effect. For example (from Are Algorithms Building...

I believe the original intent of the Dating & Friendships area was to keep drive-by personal ads from popping up all over the place and to act as a unicorn hunter containment zone. Actually hooking people up with each other was at best a tertiary consideration.

Another place I posted in some years ago used "(g)you" to denote that it was a general "you" rather than a direct reply. It cut down on the confusion, but often felt a little laboured. I think the word you're after is pedantry, but it would be pedantic to point that out when "pedanticism"...

I used to be like your daughter, and cringe now at some of the "but I don't see race" proclamations I made in discussions on the subject. Until we somehow end up in an actually post-racial society, all that "colour blindness" does is let you ignore the context. I can get away with being colour...