Search results

I know this is a radical idea and all, but I would have just talked about the issue when it came up instead of letting it build to the point of resentment and anger. Been there, done that, really don't want the t-shirt. As Ceoli said, house rules are not the same thing as relationship rules...

If I say the sky is blue and you say "No, it isn't," you don't have to use the words "sky" and "blue" to still be talking about the blueness of the sky. That's what the pronoun "it" refers to and the conjugated to-be verb "isn't" refers to. Mono didn't have to actually use the phrase "new-agey"...

I did listen to what he said, I quoted it several times. That was necessary when pointing out the logical fallacy in his argument. Refer to http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=1327

I'm always amused, and a little confused, when people mistake "blunt" and "pragmatic" and "unemotional" language for "angry" and "hostile". I can be hostile. Just ask my sister about the fights we've had as kids (one involving slamming a door through a wall ... yes, through). I've never gotten...

LOL I now have this image in my head of Spock standing there saying "that's highly illogical" and someone jumping up and down, red-faced and sputtering, calling him a loose cannon.

That was an example of what angry writing looked like. I'm sorry if you took it personally, but if I am to be accused of "angry writing" then let's all be clear on what exactly angry writing is. Nowhere in my posts did I write anything that looked like that except to serve as examples. That...

Interesting that you chose to refer to a dictionary for the definition of a slang word, since slang words tend to be rather fluid in their meaning and change depending upon context and even region. I am often considered "mean" for simply having a different point of view and maintaining it...

=/= Besides that point, my writing is not angry. "YOU'RE A FUCKING MORON!!!!" is an example of angry writing. Note the use of capital letters for an entire sentence to indicate yelling, and the name-calling, with no content. Also note the multiple exclamation points commonly associated with...

I shared that because I am honest. I am not giving any personal attacks. I point out the truth and I call out bullshit where either happens to be, regardless of who is saying it. Again, I am not attacking Mono, because we're talking about the issue of whether one's monogamous wiring is...

First of all, his beliefs in the original question at hand (the new-ageyness of the book) are not fundamentally different from everyone else here on the board. Some people agreed, some people didn't. Second, his personal ability to read "new-age" in a given text is STILL not a product of his...

My "goal" is to point out logical fallacies. Mono made a non-sequitur. The word "insecurity" has been thrown around throughout the entire argument. However, you can replace "insecurity" with "close-minded" in my sentence and the point is still the same. "I repeat, strength actually IS a...

What part of "monogamous people are not inherently insecure" is "attacking the minority"? Last I checked, standing up for people was not included in the definition of "attack." :rolleyes: For the record, I'm an asshole because I'm an asshole, not because I'm poly.

So, saying that he's part of a group that is fundamentally and inherently different than us, and will see everything and read everything in a totally different light because of his biology, is the way to do that?

This is a false analogy because, and I repeat, strength actually IS a characteristic of the category, whereas one's insecurity is not a characteristic of the category of monogamous wiring. A better analogy would be to say that generally "women are not as good at math as men," however, there are...

I think what some of you aren't getting is not that we're objecting to the claim that some (or even a lot) of monogamous people are insecure. It's that it is one's monogamous "wiring" that makes them insecure. Making that claim contributes to the us vs. them mentality and further enhances an...

One's insecurity may lead one to be monogamous, but one's monogamous "wiring" does not lead one to be insecure. That just does not follow logically, nor in practice A leads to B =/= B leads to A

Oh my goodness. The "divide" is between people who want only one partner and people who want more than one partner. That's it. The "insecurity" of each group has nothing to do with whether they're mono or poly, since both groups are just as likely to feel insecure, or not.

I have to ask, is there a reason you seem to want us to agree that monogamous people are all inherently close-minded and insecure? Is there a reason you want for the poly people here in this thread to lump all monogamous people all over the world, of all cultures, all genders and all personal...

That's the friggin' point! It's not a poly vs. mono problem. It's that some people suck, and some people don't, and the definition of "suck" is totally subjective. I'll say it for you again... It has nothing to do with whether one is monogamous or polyamorous. That's a false divide, and you...

Do I need to start pulling out the quotes again? I quoted the line 3 times (and had 2 of them deleted) and STILL there's confusion. There was a reason I posted that quote 3 times in a row. Maybe they should have been left alone. And, since posters keep insisting on moving away from the...