Can Men Handle Dating Smarter Women?

[psychokind]

EverPhoenix wrote:

it also depends on what your explicit definition is. if you expect your (many) partners to be faithful only to you, then it is unfair. if you realistically expect them to pursue such relations with others, and have no issues with that, then i dont see where the problem is.

that said, polygamy can't work (for serious relationships), because there are only three options, and they all suck:

a) your partner is allowed to have another partner too. you're a loser, get it right!
b) your partner isn't allowed to have another partner but you do. how could someone weak like that be a good parent and have good genes?
c) you're all in love with each other, so at least one is bisexual/homosexual. raising the chances of your child to get mobbed or to bisexual/homosexual itsself - poor child.

[tay120n64]

Valerie Valens wrote:

Yeah, I personally don't see any reason why it would be patently wrong. The same rules of fidelity apply too.

It's not that it would be wrong (provided your beliefs, religious or otherwise, do not state so), but that the odds of multiple people having the emotional maturity needed to handle loving multiple people intimately (ideally, not succumbing to ideals of jealousy, possession, exclusivity, and other similar desires, yet still being sincere), and also being interested in wanting multiple partners is astronomical.

How many truly emotionally mature individuals want a relationship with multiple people?

It's not really a question of ethics but of coincidence.

[Jason Tandro]

I would never be in one, and I'll be the first to admit my ignorance towards the "rules" of that sort of relationship, but I agree with Valerie. Just because it's not the norm does not make it automatically wrong.

[Miss Prime Blue]

I have no issues with people who are in polygamous relationships. As long as that's what they -both- explicitly agree on, that's fine. It's just not for me.

But as for the topic in the article, I guess it depends on the man. If he's insecure or just a dbag, then that would be a relationship doomed.

[Jason Tandro]

Miss Prime Blue wrote:

But as for the topic in the article, I guess it depends on the man. If he's insecure or just a dbag, then that would be a relationship doomed.

Like dudes with what we affectionately call "small guy" complex. You know, the tiny dudes who constantly need to be reminded out how good they look and the second you say anything that isn't fantasically flattering their egos get shattered.

I have a friend like that. Tough body but fragile mind, weak heart, and touchy self-esteem.

I think having an internal auditing system of your faults is key, and as long as you know you're a total asshole, you can still consider yourself well-adjusted.

And that's the key to my arrogance, I suppose.

I suppose I tend to think that everybody should think and respond to things the way that I would, which I foolishly assume is logical. But who am I to make that decision?

So I guess the point I'm trying to make is live your life, let others live theirs, don't try to domineer your partner or presume to understand their emotions and you'll do okay.

[Miss Prime Blue]

Jason Tandro wrote:

Miss Prime Blue wrote: But as for the topic in the article, I guess it depends on the man. If he's insecure or just a dbag, then that would be a relationship doomed. Like dudes with what we affectionately call "small guy" complex. You know, the tiny dudes who constantly need to be reminded out how good they look and the second you say anything that isn't fantasically flattering their egos get shattered.

Somehow, i've managed to be well-adjusted and not be an asshole.

But, you may be referring to these guys:



Quick! say something about their waxed eyebrows and fake tan, they can't handle it if you don't!

Perfect dating material, amirite?

[inferiare]

I've come to the conclusion that guys (and girls) who look like that on purpose are being fake ganguro girls. Wow.

[Miss Prime Blue]

inferiare wrote:

I've come to the conclusion that guys (and girls) who look like that on purpose are being fake ganguro girls. Wow.

I always think they've got a weird fetish for oompa loompa's.

[inferiare]

"Yeaaaaaaaaah, sing that oompa loompa song! Yeah that's the way!"

[Jason Tandro]

@ MPB: Oh come on now, we're all just varying degrees of assholes. Ain't a one of us perfect... Except Raini, of course.

But yes, that was pretty much what I was talking about! My friend is not from Jersey, but he is Italian so he's pretty close. And the more time passes the more he tries to emulate "The Situation".

I mean seriously:

Situation: Oh hey kids! Wow what great Halloween costumes. Here have some Red Bull and vodka!!!

[Manibrandr System]

tay120n64 wrote:

Valerie Valens wrote: Yeah, I personally don't see any reason why it would be patently wrong. The same rules of fidelity apply too. It's not that it would be wrong (provided your beliefs, religious or otherwise, do not state so), but that the odds of multiple people having the emotional maturity needed to handle loving multiple people intimately (ideally, not succumbing to ideals of jealousy, possession, exclusivity, and other similar desires, yet still being sincere), and also being interested in wanting multiple partners is astronomical. How many truly emotionally mature individuals want a relationship with multiple people? It's not really a question of ethics but of coincidence.

There is also an element of cultural and social norms, almost everyone is taught at an early age that relationships is a strictly monogamous deal and straying from that is abominable or strictly taboo. That said, I am pretty close friends with one who is actively pursuing a polygamous relationship.

[psychokind]

Jason Tandro wrote:

Here have some Red Bull and vodka!!!

+champagne

you never heard of wodkaSEKTbull (wodkaCHAMPAIGNbull in english)?

[EverPhoenix]

psychokind wrote:

Jason Tandro wrote: Here have some Red Bull and vodka!!! +champagne you never heard of wodkaSEKTbull (wodkaCHAMPAIGNbull in english)?

ive never heard of it but ill definitely have one next time i have the chance. any specific ratios? or just however it feels at the time

[psychokind]

EverPhoenix wrote:

psychokind wrote: Jason Tandro wrote: Here have some Red Bull and vodka!!! +champagne you never heard of wodkaSEKTbull (wodkaCHAMPAIGNbull in english)? ive never heard of it but ill definitely have one next time i have the chance. any specific ratios? or just however it feels at the time

whatever you feel like. it's only to get horribly drunk, especially to fill up girls. use sweet champagne if you can, the less bull you need for it to taste sweet the better

[Miss Prime Blue]

psychokind wrote:

EverPhoenix wrote: psychokind wrote: Jason Tandro wrote: Here have some Red Bull and vodka!!! +champagne you never heard of wodkaSEKTbull (wodkaCHAMPAIGNbull in english)? ive never heard of it but ill definitely have one next time i have the chance. any specific ratios? or just however it feels at the time whatever you feel like. it's only to get horribly drunk, especially to fill up girls. use sweet champagne if you can, the less bull you need for it to taste sweet the better

Good thing I don't like alcohol. Especially beer.