Literally saving the world with poly

I don't follow. Please explain
Absolutely! I find your concepts very compelling — but I don't see how you can realize their true potential unless you use modern AI technologies such as large language models to create blockchain-based NFTs that actually, SCIENTIFICALLY PROVE which polyamorous matches are actually the best. As a former financial executive who has been apparently forced to promote this deep wisdom that literally goes to the root of how the world works or does not and why, I am sure you've considered how cutting-edge technologies can drastically improve the outcomes for everyone in this utopian-polyam/ygamous model.
 
The postpartum approach of the birthing parent "laying in" while family and friends look after them physically and emotionally is associated with positive parent/child bonding and extended breastfeeding. However, it shouldn't be encouraged for the birthing parent to stay immobile for that time how they used to as that is associated with increased risk of blood clots.

So in this sense, having a tribe around you dedicated to the positive wellbeing of parent and infant is a good thing. Nobody should be feeding your baby so often that you don't produce enough milk to independently feed them though. Breastmilk production is one of the few positive feedback mechanisms in physiology. If you don't feed your baby often enough, you won't produce enough milk to sustain them without supplementing.
 
The postpartum approach of the birthing parent "laying in" while family and friends look after them physically and emotionally is associated with positive parent/child bonding and extended breastfeeding. However, it shouldn't be encouraged for the birthing parent to stay immobile for that time how they used to as that is associated with increased risk of blood clots.

So in this sense, having a tribe around you dedicated to the positive wellbeing of parent and infant is a good thing. Nobody should be feeding your baby so often that you don't produce enough milk to independently feed them though. Breastmilk production is one of the few positive feedback mechanisms in physiology. If you don't feed your baby often enough, you won't produce enough milk to sustain them without supplementing.
Regarding your first paragraph. Thank you. I agree, being sedentary is not good especially after giving birth (usually). For clarification, I was not implying that someone should be inactive after giving birth, but thank you for pointing that out to others. Further, a very literally hands-on approach to comforting and satiating a pregnant woman or a woman having contractions and having birth promotes a much more relaxed mother allowing her body to respond much more favorably to the birthing process and leads to fewer negative outcomes. Polyamorous situation lends itself to that much better than a monogamous one.

Regarding your second paragraph, I agree that the mother should be breastfeeding to promote milk production and a positive healthy connection with her child, people in her family who also enjoy drinking breast milk (I am told but have not personally witnessed), and children born from other women. This creates bonds across potentially every member of the family and helps to satiate the new mother with a very hands-on connecting process. Supposably there are benefits to adults drinking a little breast milk as well, but I am not well versed in that. In general, healthy physical contact (without pedophilia etc) with the mother and other people in the family for various reasons makes her feel connected to everyone in the family who participates. The result is she feels cherished, cared for, and desired. All extremely important things from psychological standpoint. But if you go a step further, and do not just give her what she needs, but say she or with what she truly desires that is healthy for her, the mother bonds with the family members and it creates an atmosphere that cannot be duplicated in a monogamous relationship or even a very affectionate community. I mean that in every appropriate way and not in any inappropriate way.

Thank you for the very thoughtful comment.
 
As a former lactation specialist with over 25 years of experience, I will say you've got this part wrong. Maybe your wife resented "getting up in the middle of the night" to breastfeed her children. However, every mother is meant to breastfeed her own baby. Over the first weeks, the mother's body become attuned to her individual baby, through the process of supply and demand, making just the right amount of milk for that newborn. Also, she learns the baby's style of feeding, sleep patterns, and other needs. She also passes some of her own DNA to her baby through her milk.

In more traditional societies, mothers sleep with their babies in the same bed. There is no "getting up to feed" because baby is right there. She just gives baby what it needs and baby feeds and they both go back to sleep. Some mothers fall asleep as the baby feeds. Passing my baby around to my tribe mates seems like the last thing I'd like to do, especially in the middle of the night.

During the day, there might be a quick temporary babysitting situation where one mother might feed another woman's baby briefly, if baby is really desperate. And surely, if the mother dies, another woman might have stepped in to feed the orphaned child. Women in traditional societies will help raise all the babies, sure. The children might call their own mother Mommy and all the other women Auntie. Likewise, they have Daddy and then the Uncles. It takes a village. Other older children, grandmothers, and the men will also help to raise, feed, play with and teach the children.

But this doesn't fit into your imagined scenario and sex fantasy of bare-breasted women passing their babies around to each other in the night, after they get done with the massaging and sexual touching and being observed by the men who then want to have sex with them.
First, your characterization of some goofy fantasy you dreamed up that you thought I was saying is a farce and completely inaccurate. Neither did I imply or state anything remotely like what you described in your comment regarding some sex fantasy thing. In fact, I believe I stated literally the opposite. That polyamory is not about sex, not mostly anyway. Would I put forth in my comment is not imagined. This is after a lot of research. This is not a sex fantasy. This is in fact part of a strategy called P-FACTS, a people-focused, adaptive, truly comprehensive, tactical, strategy that was brought to me by "official" people you would not believe if I told you.

I think you are trying to be conflicting instead of assuming I already knew what you said in your comment. Because I did. No one is saying a woman should not be breastfeeding her baby, if that's possible. What I'm saying, and maybe this is partly my fault for not fully explaining, but maybe you could have asked question instead of assuming which is the usual better way to go, that when a woman is in need of help of any kind, including but not limited to breastfeeding when it is detrimental to the baby, the mother, or the family to do so, it is great and often life-saving to have multiple mothers available to help. You clearly have an assumptive mind. Please check that. That is not an insult. That is simply a feedback. I framed my statement in a way that is colloquially understood and recognized as useful. Not knowing I would be scrutinized by lactation consultants. I believe everything in your comment is something I've already considered. Whether I accurately articulated my point well is arguable. I'm a finance investments guy, not a writer, expert on women's studies, or a sociologist. But I do work with people who contend that what I wrote is, whether you like it or not, much more in line with what I describe as our BioSelf targets, but that's a whole other topic I will be presenting in a different public forum at some point.
 
Absolutely! I find your concepts very compelling — but I don't see how you can realize their true potential unless you use modern AI technologies such as large language models to create blockchain-based NFTs that actually, SCIENTIFICALLY PROVE which polyamorous matches are actually the best. As a former financial executive who has been apparently forced to promote this deep wisdom that literally goes to the root of how the world works or does not and why, I am sure you've considered how cutting-edge technologies can drastically improve the outcomes for everyone in this utopian-polyam/ygamous model.
I don't know how you brought AI into this. There's nothing Utopian about this. There's imperfection in almost every human interaction, and I like that. I have no interest in your AI And I will not respond anymore your comments.
 
Regarding your first paragraph. Thank you. I agree, being sedentary is not good especially after giving birth (usually). For clarification, I was not implying that someone should be inactive after giving birth, but thank you for pointing that out to others. Further, a very literally hands-on approach to comforting and satiating a pregnant woman or a woman having contractions and having birth promotes a much more relaxed mother allowing her body to respond much more favorably to the birthing process and leads to fewer negative outcomes.
Yeah, this is common knowledge.
Polyamorous situation lends itself to that much better than a monogamous one.
Why?
Regarding your second paragraph, I agree that the mother should be breastfeeding to promote milk production and a positive healthy connection with her child,
Yes
people in her family who also enjoy drinking breast milk
Record scratch
and children born from other women.
Why?
This creates bonds across potentially every member of the family and helps to satiate the new mother with a very hands-on connecting process.
No. No mother has the responsibility to breastfeed any other human except her own child or children. She may still be breastfeeding a toddler when the next baby comes along, and do tandem nursing. This isn't common at all in Western culture but it is in traditional societies. The average worldwide weaning age is 4 years of age.
Supposably
Supposedly
there are benefits to adults drinking a little breast milk as well, but I am not well versed in that.
In ancient times, when an elder reached a very mature age, and was failing and not likely to live much longer, and could no longer deal with eating much table food, sometimes a nursing mother would provide them with some breastmilk to make them more comfortable, since it is the perfect food and perfectly digestible. But other humans wanting to breastfeed is called adult lactation fetish. It's a kink. No woman needs to maintain a larger than normal milk supply for other adults, unless she's into that kink, which is highly unusual.
In general, healthy physical contact (without pedophilia, etc.) with the mother and other people in the family, for various reasons, makes her feel connected to everyone in the family who participates. The result is she feels cherished, cared for, and desired. All extremely important things from psychological standpoint. But if you go a step further, and do not just give her what she needs, but say she or with what she truly desires that is healthy for her, the mother bonds with the family members and it creates an atmosphere that cannot be duplicated in a monogamous relationship or even a very affectionate community. I mean that in every appropriate way and not in any inappropriate way.
It's not clear here if you're still talking about breastfeeding everyone she knows, or just normal human handshakes, quick cuddles or hugs.
 
I have a question about saving the world through poly:

Do the men get to massage each other and have sex together, too? And when a woman sees them coordinating and collaborating in life, as well as in bed with other men if they desire that, she adores and desires the man even more because she finds his masculine coordination and collaboration with other men very attractive, whilst she is allowed to be a feminine woman and a wonderful mother?

You don't mention anything about that in your original post.

(By the way, we have no intention of banning Albert Ross, as you requested.)
 
Last edited:
This is in fact part of a strategy called P-FACTS, a people-focused, adaptive, truly comprehensive, tactical, strategy that was brought to me by "official" people you would not believe if I told you.
So, this truly is social engineering, and by those with a (significant?) measure of power.

So, how are the most biologically and temperamentally suited members of this modern caveman-esque community going to be selected if not by DNA analysis? And of course AI would be the most effective way to screen the thousands if not millions of applicants for this new society. Or will people apply, or be screened covertly then invited to join if that screening was successful?

How many such social units do you intend to create, and with how many people in each one?

Of course, then there's the need to have a universal basic income for each social unit so that there is no need for rivalry between units. And most importantly, no risk of hardship. Sometimes even the Very Best Men™ befall accidents, and with the sorry state of US healthcare, the risk to the childbearing women would be too great. Or would these social unit sizes mean that there is double redundancy built into the income earners, although I'd think there would have to be at least a two to one ratio male: female so there is always a father figure in the home as well as one going out to work. So if there are, say, half a dozen women, there should be a dozen men to work for income, maintain the property, and parent the children so they don't grow up overly attached to just women.

Will post pubescent youth be assigned to a new unit (to prevent inbreeding) or do they choose? Do they get a year away, like the Amish, to experience the rest of the world? Obviously, there will be some issues around early career position as youthful male workers have yet to prove themselves to be Very Best Men™ - I trust they will not be assigned to a biologically compatible woman until they have succeeded in business. Or the arts, of course. This new society will need its own cultural leaders, historians and futurists, musicians and artists. And the trades, we must not forget this need for expert craftsmen or else risk having to outsource needful things to BetterMen™.

Three to one is sounding more realistic. Especially so the domestic labour won't fall exclusively to the childbearing women. After all, men are the Very Best Chefs, too.

As for the domestic labour that isn't creative...well, I suppose that could all be outsourced to non-society members. Just the laundry, mind. Goodness knows public education would be the worst thing ever. God forbid one of the young people fall for someone unsuitable!
 
Last edited:
Thank you, Evie. This is the point I was trying to make when I got sidetracked thinking about NFTs! 😅
Of course, Albert, you're welcome, it was rather obvious to the most casual, yet literate, reader that your inquiry regarding AI was just to smooth the way into this designer society.

I'm curious as to what will be done with the aged who refuse to believe they are no longer Very Best Men™? Logan's Run, anyone?
 
And what about the women who are too old to breastfeed?
Carousel accepts everyone.

But if we aren't going to...recycle...their physical vessels whilst healthy enough to do so, then we must recognise that women elders are the ones who manage the day to day governance of the community. With more wisdom and patience than their younger counterparts, they will generally keep the peace. I know that the reference to the Aunties at the Marae will be lost on non-New Zealanders, but even if you are not Maori (as I am not) the reputation of the Aunties at the Marae is legendary. Then, there's the Kuia (the grandmothers) who have a role only really known to those who live it.

Of course, there could be issues that need to be taken to the Man Among Men™ - such as if two childbearing women were fighting over who was the actual mother to the baby. Then, out with the sword! Chop that baby in half for equal shares! Oh no, that was just a trick, now the real mother is revealed. All is well again.
 
Last edited:
This has been fun, but I must away to work. Clearly, as a childfree woman who is the primary earner in my nesting relationship and pays for my own travel in my long distance relationship, I, nor my partners, would fit the criteria as Very Best Men™ or Child Bearing Woman. Away with me, away to carousel since I am perimenopausal and without offspring. Away with my partners, and their partners, and their partners' partners, because our way of being polyamorous isn't saving the world. Clearly, if we are not a part of the solution, we are a part of the problem.

Goodbye, cruel world.
 
(usually)
Never. If you have to be for medical reasons, they give medication to reduce the risks of embolism.
For clarification, I was not implying that someone should be inactive after giving birth, but thank you for pointing that out to others.
I didn't think you were. I was actually pointing out the real research you're twisting to support your weird theories. Yes, we should do more in the West to support new parents. No, this doesn't have to be through polyamory.
Further, a very literally hands-on approach to comforting and satiating a pregnant woman or a woman having contractions and having birth promotes a much more relaxed mother allowing her body to respond much more favorably to the birthing process and leads to fewer negative outcomes

If you mean that feeling safe and comfortable is associated with better birth outcomes, then yes. Again, this can be achieved by friends, family, partners, Doulas and midwives.
Polyamorous situation lends itself to that much better than a monogamous one.
No having a "village" is how this happens. Polyamory is in no way a necessity.
and children born from other women
This isn't necessary. It's a way that groups of people can engage in communal living but it's not necessary or even advisable given it means the mother misses a feed. This interrupts milk supply.

This is fairly common knowledge for Afabs who have either had children or supported nursing parents. Many of us have been in that role for friends, partners and siblings.
In general, healthy physical contact (without pedophilia etc) with the mother and other people in the family for various reasons makes her feel connected to everyone in the family who participates.
This is so strange. I thought we were talking about adults having babies and feeding them. Not children. Why would paedophilia be mentioned?
The result is she feels cherished, cared for, and desired.
You can't assume that everyone will feel the same about something. People who have just given birth usually want feel supported. What it takes for them to feel supported differs between individuals.

Just like when people are ill. Some want to be fussed over - others want to be left the hell alone. You need to ask them and follow their guidance. Not yours.
that cannot be duplicated in a monogamous relationship or even a very affectionate community. I mean that in every appropriate way and not in any inappropriate way
The last thing I've seen new parents want is people (often including the co-parent of the baby) engaging in non-platonic touch. They're often overstimulated with touch as they have a baby on them the whole time.
 
First, your characterization of some goofy fantasy you dreamed up that you thought I was saying is a farce and completely inaccurate. I did not imply or state anything remotely like what you described in your comment regarding some sex fantasy thing. In fact, I believe I stated literally the opposite: that polyamory is not about sex, or mostly not, anyway.
Why add the stuff about men watching women sexually touch each other, with desire in their hearts, which somehow makes them better men?
What I put forth in my comment is not imagined. This is after a lot of research. This is not a sex fantasy. This is in fact part of a strategy called P-FACTS, a people-focused, adaptive, truly comprehensive, tactical, strategy that was brought to me by "official" people. You would not believe it if I told you.

This was not obvious, dude.

By the way, I took the liberty of correcting your spelling and punctuation. You're welcome. :)

It is not natural to ask a woman to get up in the middle of the night and breastfeed her baby every night while the baby grows strong. It is more natural to share that duty with other women on an informal rotation.

No, it is not more natural to share your middle of the night breastfeeding duty with other women. If you think it is, you better restructure your entire society. Back to the drawing board!

Women love other women's bodies and being touched and massaged. But men aren't as inclined to do that.

First of all, some women don't love to touch each other's bodies, because they aren't gay (female homosexuals).

Next, I am not sure if you mean 1) men are not as inclined to touch and massage women's bodies as other women are, or that 2) men are not inclined to touch and massage other men's bodies.

If its #1, you're crazy. Men love to touch women's bodies. A "massage" can be offered but, of course, often turns into massaging a couple areas not usually treated by an actual massage therapist.

If you mean #2, men don't like to touch other men's bodies, I guess you've never heard of male homosexuality either, and so have no right to design a utopia.

That's because, as primates, we evolved for millions of years in a polyamorous environment, where woman-to-woman contact, be it sexual or not, was readily available anytime.

Anytime? You imagine that in the Neolithic Era, a horny woman could just ask another woman to stop tanning leather or drying fish immediately, and get busy and give her an orgasm right here, right now?

That way a woman gets all the emotional and other care she needs from people who are more genetically wired to give that to her, in the best way, usually by other women.

Women are good at identifying and handling emotions, I'll give you that. It might be hardwired; it might be cultural. That doesn't get the men off the hook, however. Men repress their emotions during war. Men that repress their emotions, their normal growth pains, sadness, loneliness, etc., cause wars.

And when a man sees her coordinating and collaborating in life, as well as in bed, with other women, if she desires that, he adores and desires her even more, because he finds her giving and feminine coordination and collaboration with other women very attractive, whilst he is allowed to be a masculine man and a wonderful father. These are our masculine and feminine inclinations that evolved in a polyamorous environment.

Please explain to me how I got what you said wrong:

But this doesn't fit into your imagined scenario and sex fantasy of bare-breasted women passing their babies around to each other in the night, after they get done with the massaging and sexual touching and being observed by the men who then want to have sex with them.

You said "desire." I said, "want to have sex." Same thing.
I think you are trying to be conflicting instead of assuming I already knew what you said in your comment. Because I did. No one is saying a woman should not be breastfeeding her baby, if that's possible. What I'm saying (and maybe this is partly my fault for not fully explaining, but maybe you could have asked questions, instead of assuming, which is usually the better way to go) is that when a woman is in need of help of any kind, including, but not limited to breastfeeding, when it is detrimental (to the baby, the mother, or the family to do so), it is great and often life-saving to have multiple mothers available to help.

You clearly have an assumptive mind. Please check that. That is not an insult. That is simply a feedback.
Assumptive, a rare word meaning accepted as real or true without proof. Do you mean I assumed I understood you when I didn't? Please point out what I got wrong, especially about the sexual touching and the passing of babies around between lactating mothers.
I framed my statement in a way that is colloquially understood and recognized as useful...
No, you really didn't.
... not knowing I would be scrutinized by lactation consultants.
Some women have specialized knowledge about and experience with female biology. Surprise! I also breastfed three children without asking friends to be my wet nurse.
I believe everything in your comment is something I've already considered.
Please.
Whether I accurately articulated my point well is arguable. I'm a finance investments guy, not a writer, expert on women's studies, or a sociologist.
Oh really? You don't say. Why then are you creating this society in your mind, over six years, partly based on women touching each other and nursing each other's kids while the men watch them with increasing desire in their pants?
But I do work with people who contend that what I wrote is, whether you like it or not, much more in line with what I describe as our BioSelf targets, but that's a whole other topic I will be presenting in a different public forum at some point.
Nice cop out.
 
And what about the women who are too old to breastfeed?
Just to reassure you, ref, some women are never too old too breastfeed. Just as (some) men can become new fathers in their 70s, 80s and even 90s (although that's pushing it), as they still have enough testosterone to achieve erection and ejaculation with sperm in it, so some women, when their breasts are stimulated, even well post-menopause, can begin to produce milk. This is a way nature provides to help babies survive if the mother doesn't. Grandmothers who have not been pregnant or nursed in years, as well as women who have never been pregnant, can produce at least a partial milk supply when a baby is brought to the breast often enough. There are even documented cases of fathers lactating for their infant when the mother dies. Men have breast tissue too.

I personally have worked with adoptive mothers who began pumping with a breast pump about a month before adopting, and had at least some milk for their adopted infant when they they were united.
 
I don't like your attitude. So I'm not going to reply. I thought this was a genuine polyamory site was wonderful people involved but it seems to be a bunch of people with screws loose and something to prove that is rather unpleasant and directed it anyone different. I'm going to start my own polyamory site and then some. I'm not going to bless you with my presence or information on this form. Feel free to make fun of me, but you won't survive a minute on the forum I'm going to build now.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just in case you delete, mountainclimber (you formatted incorrectly, btw), you said:

I don't like your attitude. So I'm not going to reply. I thought this was a genuine polyamory site was wonderful people involved but it seems to be a bunch of people with screws loose and something to prove that is rather unpleasant and directed it anyone different. I'm going to start my own polyamory site and then some. I'm not going to bless you with my presence or information on this form. Feel free to make fun of me, but you won't survive a minute on the forum I'm going to build now.

Blessed be, brave warrior.
 
Just in case you delete, mountainclimber... (You formatted incorrectly, btw.), you said:



Blessed be, brave warr

Just in case you delete, mountainclimber... (You formatted incorrectly, btw.), you said:



Blessed be, brave warrior.
You have no idea who you're talking to. No one has ever been that dismissive and insulting to my face in my entire life. You have a small brain and it shows.
 
Back
Top