Love, Relationships, and Honesty

[Pope Lecherous]

Why is it that i have taken this scenario... these circumstances... to make an ass of myself?  I look that way to myself in my mind's eye.  I'm sure others see that i'm a fool with their mind's eye too.  Hopefully no one notices. i mean, it's not like i care haha   ha   ha yea...

Have i fell off?  Have i lost my mojo?  making a chick believe she wants me...  That's not really what this is about though.  It was the hesitation.  The fear was really what bothered me.  I already have a girl.  It's natural to want more.  More secksing into as many cooters as possible.  That's in the hardware.  Oh yea,  I can deny that, the physical pleasures.  Perhaps elevate my being to a higher plane. Separate myself from the animal.  Sounds gay, nm.

Scared of being who i used to be?  Does that make sense?  Social standards would deem a move in that direction moral de-evolution.  Ain't that presumptuous?  Monagamy is right, even for the polyamorous.  This standard came when it was beneficial to the tribe, nowadays it don't seem to be necessary.  The standard is still in place. 

People sure get some fucking thrill out of seeing themselves on the moral highground, don't they?  Having an inflated sense of self-worth based on abstaining from doing what is wrong is bullshit.  It's the equivalent of a guy saying "I take care of my kid" ::pats self on back:: only to follow up with, "I pay my child support." 

If you hear that i want you to say, "Nigga please"  Go ahead, you know you want to.  We're upfront about race now. Didn't you hear?

Let's guess.  HINT: You've absorbed enough bullshit your entire lives from this group.  HINT: The same people who brought you War and everything else awesome. HINT: They're the ones who decided what's right, wrong, good, bad and most importantly what is best for me and you, him, her, and shim over there.   

You guessed it.  It was THEM.   I didn't attend that fucking meeting.  Didn't get the memo.  WE didn't do it and upon further investigation THEY also (big surprise) deny all responsibility.  The term "Locus of Control" is the first that comes to mind.

So yea, who gives a fuck what they say, right?  ::Bunches of "Yea" from the background and some face palmage too:: We obviously know this group is fucked up. srsly FUCKED.  Guess what.  We're a part of that shitty group, as far as survival goes.It's been crafted that way it seems.  Living off the grid is possible, but it's pretty much trading one cage for another.  These police, this govt... they have dominion over me.  In reality do they?  Maybe (probably) not.  But as long as we're playing their game we're losing. 

WANTING the American Dream is the first step to losing the game.  You lost from the get-go nigga, game over.  Spend the rest of your life Paying The Bills so you can get closer to that goal.  Good fucking Luck.  They may have no actual grip on me, but i feel it down there in my sack.  The feeling is quite real and personally, i prefer them handled gently... that's to say,  it's uncomfortable.  I don't like it.  You don't likey.  When you fill up your tank.  When you find negative 3, already-worthless dollars in your checking account.  When you wake up to do the same shit job, only to go home feeling like you haven't accomplished anything but avoid an ass-chewing.  It feels like that, in the balls.  Have you ever experienced this?


I know the solution though.

A group of people that have resources, a fearless leader, and hordes of foot soldiers.  If that fails, underground bunker a la Blast From The Past.  It had chris walken in it. nuff said

[Aufenthatt]

Welcome to the commune

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I see nothing wrong with polygamy, as long as everyone involved knows about it, consents, and is an adult by the standards of the area they live in (ie, the legal age of consent, anywhere besides Saudi Arabia, Kentucky, or Tennessee).  The last is the most important of the three...and yes, I am prepared to logically and morally defend that point, for anyone who thinks I'm being an old prude.

And you're totally right about the American Nightmare.  Buy into that, and they own your ass.

[Pope Lecherous]

I see nothing wrong with polygamy, as long as everyone involved knows about it, consents, and is an adult by the standards of the area they live in (ie, the legal age of consent, anywhere besides Saudi Arabia, Kentucky, or Tennessee).  The last is the most important of the three...and yes, I am prepared to logically and morally defend that point, for anyone who thinks I'm being an old prude.

That was the shitty part of my whole experience.  Given those 3 conditions it's not wrong, no question about it.  Albeit one of the conditions wouldn't have been met, (2/3 not too bad)  i was rewarded with that feeling.  A response to my TV conditioning.  My social (USMC) and cultural (American/Dominican) conditioning outweighs that though, so the feeling quickly faded but lasted 0.68 seconds, sir... For an android, that is nearly an eternity.  No my name is not Data, Yes i am an android for the Corps.

And you're totally right about the American Nightmare.  Buy into that, and they own your ass.

Yet here i am, not exactly doing what i say.  I am trying to avoid the American dream.... Considering re-enlisting for the fat ass bonus and because i NEED some skills i can sell (besides my loose and worn out, man whore-ish body)  Though the path i take is convoluted, i'm avoiding college (a place i'm not made for) and i'm financially stable enough to pursue the education i want.  After that i'll live in a foreign nation, with a foreign women, and make foreign looking kids and teach them english, japanese, and spanish so in case i go to home depot i can deliberately offend as many people as possible by speaking a combination of languages.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

That was the shitty part of my whole experience.  Given those 3 conditions it's not wrong, no question about it.  Albeit one of the conditions wouldn't have been met, (2/3 not too bad) 

Which one?

[Pope Lecherous]

That was the shitty part of my whole experience.  Given those 3 conditions it's not wrong, no question about it.  Albeit one of the conditions wouldn't have been met, (2/3 not too bad) 

Which one?

1/3 people not knowing wassup.  In retrospect, i could say it was "the potential to be shady" that made me think twice about going through with it.  What bothered me more was mentioned above and not clearly mentioned above.  In the end it didnt happen.  But i have another 12-14 months out here.  I've overcome the urges, but they still sit in my mind.

You may be thinking, how could one consent if they dont know (bringing me down to 1/3)?  Consent is given when they get with me, but it's in the fine print of the agreement.

sad? little by little i will get closer to my buddha nature

[The Good Reverend Roger]

That was the shitty part of my whole experience.  Given those 3 conditions it's not wrong, no question about it.  Albeit one of the conditions wouldn't have been met, (2/3 not too bad) 

Which one?

1/3 people not knowing wassup.  In retrospect, i could say it was "the potential to be shady" that made me think twice about going through with it.  What bothered me more was mentioned above and not clearly mentioned above.  In the end it didnt happen.  But i have another 12-14 months out here.  I've overcome the urges, but they still sit in my mind.

You may be thinking, how could one consent if they dont know (bringing me down to 1/3)?  Consent is given when they get with me, but it's in the fine print of the agreement.

sad? little by little i will get closer to my buddha nature

So, being completely dishonest with people who like or love you is "getting closer to your Buddha nature"?

  <--- You, making excuses.

And the "fine print"?  Oh, yeah, they were supposed to read your mind, right?  It's their fault for not somehow KNOWING that they were in a "polygamous relationship" (to wit, you cheating on them). 

Let's cut to the chase:  You cheat on them, blame them for not knowing, and then insist that we legitimize this, via your rather incoherent rant above.  In short, you're a dishonest shithead that will eventually stop being able to fool people, and die miserable and alone.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

A "poly" relationship built on deceit is a bullshit relationship, and no different in that respect than if you bought wholeheartedly into the American Lie and lived in a suburb with Tami and 2 fat children.

It ain't polyamory if one of the partners doesn't know, it's just callow, common cheating.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Before you start, "It's society's fault for not accepting polyamory!"

No, it's you being a liar and a coward. Thanks for tainting the good name of people who actually practice plural love by trying to use polyamory to justify  your philandering.

But at least you're not a pedo.

[Template]

I have concluded that the "fine print" to which Pope Lecherous referred is in fact his penis.

I would not condescend to this dickery, except that he suggests that the body on its own can make a contract.

Monkey prick.

[Pope Lecherous]

Let's cut to the chase:  You cheat on them, blame them for not knowing, and then insist that we legitimize this, via your rather incoherent rant above.  In short, you're a dishonest shithead that will eventually stop being able to fool people, and die miserable and alone.

I never acted on any of these feelings.  I'm pretty sure i made it clear when i said "In the end it didnt happen." 
As far as your statements are concerned
"You cheat on them"  Not in this case and:
I have cheated on women, oh well.  Getting closer to my Buddha Nature was saying, it's clear that these behaviors don't lead to great relationships and i'm correcting myself little by little.  Behavior is easy to fix.  The desire is something that has to be worked on.

"Blame them for not knowing"  No that didnt happen. Ever.

"We legitmize this" No Roger.  Think twice before accepting other peoples values and think about how yours came to be.  Nothing mindblowing.  No profound truth, just basic PD/BIP shit.

It ain't polyamory if one of the partners doesn't know, it's just callow, common cheating.

That was the negative feeling i had that i wanted to express.  The rant was adressing that the people who defined this as "wrong" are fucked up in so many dimensions, so why does this matter?  While being deceitful obviously has negative impacts upon certain types of relationships, you should second guess your conditioned response when it comes to ALL matters because of reasons we have already established.

I know my writing comes out slightly disjointed, but that's the way it flows.  Please dont be hasty with your judgement of me.

I have concluded that the "fine print" to which Pope Lecherous referred is in fact his penis.
I would not condescend to this dickery, except that he suggests that the body on its own can make a contract.
Monkey prick.

Small penis joke.  That made me laugh.  But seriously,  i do what i enjoy doing whether "other people" say it's right or wrong.  I don't go ou tof my way to hurt people.  I only care about myself and a handful of other people.  So what?

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

It ain't polyamory if one of the partners doesn't know, it's just callow, common cheating.

That was the negative feeling i had that i wanted to express.  The rant was adressing that the people who defined this as "wrong" are fucked up in so many dimensions, so why does this matter?  While being deceitful obviously has negative impacts upon certain types of relationships, you should second guess your conditioned response when it comes to ALL matters because of reasons we have already established.

I am not at all clear on what you're trying to express. It SOUNDS like you're trying to say that, because the societal norm that decided multiple partners is fucked up, therefore the idea of honesty with your partners is also meaningless, because the same fucked-up cultural norm decided both?

If so, that makes no sense. It kind of sounds like you're trying to come up with an apologia to excuse deceit when it's convenient/beneficial for YOU.

[Pope Lecherous]

I am not at all clear on what you're trying to express. It SOUNDS like you're trying to say that, because the societal norm that decided multiple partners is fucked up, therefore the idea of honesty with your partners is also meaningless, because the same fucked-up cultural norm decided both?

I don't immediately dismiss the consensus.  Because even though there is obviously friction between individuals and communites, things on the micro-level arent that bad... At least not nearly as bad as they are closer to the macro level.  Given that, i just pause and try to determine the origin of a given "social norm" and more importantly benefits of adopting such a value.  Because sadly, the ends sometimes do justify the means, so accepting an argument based on false premises is ok when it may lead to a better situation for the greatest number of people.

If so, that makes no sense. It kind of sounds like you're trying to come up with an apologia to excuse deceit when it's convenient/beneficial for YOU.

I've considered that.

[Aufenthatt]

I am not at all clear on what you're trying to express. It SOUNDS like you're trying to say that, because the societal norm that decided multiple partners is fucked up, therefore the idea of honesty with your partners is also meaningless, because the same fucked-up cultural norm decided both?

I don't immediately dismiss the consensus.  Because even though there is obviously friction between individuals and communites, things on the micro-level arent that bad... At least not nearly as bad as they are closer to the macro level.  Given that, i just pause and try to determine the origin of a given "social norm" and more importantly benefits of adopting such a value.  Because sadly, the ends sometimes do justify the means, so accepting an argument based on false premises is ok when it may lead to a better situation for the greatest number of people.

Thats utilitarianism, and hedonic calculus is infinitely flawed.
Destroy the value of the individual and you have defeated the objective.
There is nothing, but a network of individuals.

[Pope Lecherous]

Thats utilitarianism, and hedonic calculus is infinitely flawed.
Destroy the value of the individual and you have defeated the objective.
There is nothing, but a network of individuals.

You're correct.  However, only when applied to all actions.  For me, i split it in 2.  Actions that effect the masses or have a large impact could call for that model, and that's when i would apply it.  When it comes to actions requiring moral decisions on a small scale (handful of people effected) then that decision is based on something entirely different.  I try to be good to those i care about, even if it comes at a great cost to myself, because that's just the way i roll. This system works.