Are you not not going to watch the Oscars this year?

[tree_]

it seems like being polyamorous feels as unthinkably impossible as being a murderer to Tree

I bring good news! it is not!

Interesting take, given how I've said multiple times I think it's OK to be polyamorous or polygamous. And coming from you!

[macphisto]

If I'm polyamorous and cheat on my wife, I should be free of consequences. My sexual identity trumps any societal constructs.

[Jorge]

This thread sucks now

[Ms Harmless]

it seems like being polyamorous feels as unthinkably impossible as being a murderer to Tree

I bring good news! it is not!

Interesting take, given how I've said multiple times I think it's OK to be polyamorous or polygamous. And coming from you!

I didn't mean you think it's wrong, I just mean that maybe you feel it's way outside the realms of possibility for you

[tree_]

So, are you telling me that I could identify as a murderer without ever actually attempting to murder anyone?

that's an interesting question given the number of people who'd say someone with a criminal desire should already be condemned as a criminal

but in any case, again, is it OK to murder? no

is it OK to "go outside a monogamous relationship"? potentially, yes, let's talk about baby

Morality aside, could one correctly, technically identify as someone who does certain things who doesn’t actually do those things?

I certainly will not speak for Ms. H but if y'all will allow an outside opinion here, I will say... yes. There are countless gay/lesbian identifying people who, for a variety of reasons, do not act on being gay/lesbian. But that's different than "murderer" which is the example you keep bringing up.

One can imagine killing a person and never kill a person. This person is not and should not be defined as a murderer. However, a person can be gay and not act on being gay. That person is still gay. So it's not a 1 to 1 comparison. The differential should be obvious.

Oops. I agree with this. I'm trying to figure out how someone can say they are polyamorous or polygamous without actually committing the act

You have an impulse. Society/your community/you religion/fear/perspective tells you not to act on those desires/impulses. You don't act.

You said you understand the difference between gay and murderer. How is this different for you?

It's pretty simple.. you have an impulse to murder but you don't murder, so you're not a murderer. You have an impulse to have multiple relationships but you don't, you're not actually polygamous. But if you're gay and don't act upon it, then you're still gay.

[Ms Harmless]

This thread sucks now

no it's great, shush

[epilogue]

If I'm polyamorous and cheat on my wife, I should be free of consequences. My sexual identity trumps any societal constructs.

As usual, you seem to need to misreprent/misunderstand actions and consequences. Never change.

[epilogue]

So, are you telling me that I could identify as a murderer without ever actually attempting to murder anyone?

that's an interesting question given the number of people who'd say someone with a criminal desire should already be condemned as a criminal

but in any case, again, is it OK to murder? no

is it OK to "go outside a monogamous relationship"? potentially, yes, let's talk about baby

Morality aside, could one correctly, technically identify as someone who does certain things who doesn’t actually do those things?

I certainly will not speak for Ms. H but if y'all will allow an outside opinion here, I will say... yes. There are countless gay/lesbian identifying people who, for a variety of reasons, do not act on being gay/lesbian. But that's different than "murderer" which is the example you keep bringing up.

One can imagine killing a person and never kill a person. This person is not and should not be defined as a murderer. However, a person can be gay and not act on being gay. That person is still gay. So it's not a 1 to 1 comparison. The differential should be obvious.

Oops. I agree with this. I'm trying to figure out how someone can say they are polyamorous or polygamous without actually committing the act

You have an impulse. Society/your community/you religion/fear/perspective tells you not to act on those desires/impulses. You don't act.

You said you understand the difference between gay and murderer. How is this different for you?

It's pretty simple.. you have an impulse to murder but you don't murder, so you're not a murderer. You have an impulse to have multiple relationships but you don't, you're not actually polygamous. But if you're gay and don't act upon it, then you're still gay.

Cool. Now imagine that gay and polyamorous are the same.

[macphisto]

If I'm polyamorous and cheat on my wife, I should be free of consequences. My sexual identity trumps any societal constructs.

As usual, you seem to need to misreprent/misunderstand actions and consequences. Never change.

Please wokesplain it to me then. I'm here to learn.

[tree_]

it seems like being polyamorous feels as unthinkably impossible as being a murderer to Tree

I bring good news! it is not!

Interesting take, given how I've said multiple times I think it's OK to be polyamorous or polygamous. And coming from you!

I didn't mean you think it's wrong, I just mean that maybe you feel it's way outside the realms of possibility for you

Sure, because it's not something I want in my life. But I don't see what that has to do with the meat of this discussion.

[Ms Harmless]

So, are you telling me that I could identify as a murderer without ever actually attempting to murder anyone?

that's an interesting question given the number of people who'd say someone with a criminal desire should already be condemned as a criminal

but in any case, again, is it OK to murder? no

is it OK to "go outside a monogamous relationship"? potentially, yes, let's talk about baby

Morality aside, could one correctly, technically identify as someone who does certain things who doesn’t actually do those things?

I certainly will not speak for Ms. H but if y'all will allow an outside opinion here, I will say... yes. There are countless gay/lesbian identifying people who, for a variety of reasons, do not act on being gay/lesbian. But that's different than "murderer" which is the example you keep bringing up.

One can imagine killing a person and never kill a person. This person is not and should not be defined as a murderer. However, a person can be gay and not act on being gay. That person is still gay. So it's not a 1 to 1 comparison. The differential should be obvious.

Oops. I agree with this. I'm trying to figure out how someone can say they are polyamorous or polygamous without actually committing the act

You have an impulse. Society/your community/you religion/fear/perspective tells you not to act on those desires/impulses. You don't act.

You said you understand the difference between gay and murderer. How is this different for you?

It's pretty simple.. you have an impulse to murder but you don't murder, so you're not a murderer. You have an impulse to have multiple relationships but you don't, you're not actually polygamous. But if you're gay and don't act upon it, then you're still gay.

is a person with no partners because they just haven't found any, monogamous by default?

[tree_]

So, are you telling me that I could identify as a murderer without ever actually attempting to murder anyone?

that's an interesting question given the number of people who'd say someone with a criminal desire should already be condemned as a criminal

but in any case, again, is it OK to murder? no

is it OK to "go outside a monogamous relationship"? potentially, yes, let's talk about baby

Morality aside, could one correctly, technically identify as someone who does certain things who doesn’t actually do those things?

I certainly will not speak for Ms. H but if y'all will allow an outside opinion here, I will say... yes. There are countless gay/lesbian identifying people who, for a variety of reasons, do not act on being gay/lesbian. But that's different than "murderer" which is the example you keep bringing up.

One can imagine killing a person and never kill a person. This person is not and should not be defined as a murderer. However, a person can be gay and not act on being gay. That person is still gay. So it's not a 1 to 1 comparison. The differential should be obvious.

Oops. I agree with this. I'm trying to figure out how someone can say they are polyamorous or polygamous without actually committing the act

You have an impulse. Society/your community/you religion/fear/perspective tells you not to act on those desires/impulses. You don't act.

You said you understand the difference between gay and murderer. How is this different for you?

It's pretty simple.. you have an impulse to murder but you don't murder, so you're not a murderer. You have an impulse to have multiple relationships but you don't, you're not actually polygamous. But if you're gay and don't act upon it, then you're still gay.

Cool. Now imagine that gay and polyamorous are the same.

Gay means an attraction to a particular sex. Polyamory is the act of having multiple simultaneous relationships. Murder is the act of having killed someone. A desire for something doesn't make you the thing, by definition. I mean, having a desire to be gay doesn't make you gay, you're either gay or you're not. It's not an act. You could even have sex with someone of your own sex and not be gay. You can't murder someone and not be a murderer.

[macphisto]

If I'm polyamorous and cheat on my wife, I should be free of consequences. My sexual identity trumps any societal constructs.

As usual, you seem to need to misreprent/misunderstand actions and consequences. Never change.

Please wokesplain it to me then. I'm here to learn.

Sure, it's simple: go fuck yourself.

You lack impulse control and have a very poor temperament. Be better.

[Ms Harmless]

it seems like being polyamorous feels as unthinkably impossible as being a murderer to Tree

I bring good news! it is not!

Interesting take, given how I've said multiple times I think it's OK to be polyamorous or polygamous. And coming from you!

I didn't mean you think it's wrong, I just mean that maybe you feel it's way outside the realms of possibility for you

Sure, because it's not something I want in my life. But I don't see what that has to do with the meat of this discussion.

it doesn't, really, except that I'm struggling to see why murder is being compared with monogamy but being gay is not; your choice to navigate the terms like that is arbitrary, or maybe it isn't, maybe it's revealing

if you've chosen not to practice polyamory, that doesn't mean you couldn't (if you wanted to) say you were naturally drawn to polyamory, and polyamorous

[epilogue]

If I'm polyamorous and cheat on my wife, I should be free of consequences. My sexual identity trumps any societal constructs.

As usual, you seem to need to misreprent/misunderstand actions and consequences. Never change.

Please wokesplain it to me then. I'm here to learn.

Sure, it's simple: go fuck yourself.

You lack impulse control and have a very poor temperament. Be better.

I will be better when you go fuck yourself.

[tree_]

So, are you telling me that I could identify as a murderer without ever actually attempting to murder anyone?

that's an interesting question given the number of people who'd say someone with a criminal desire should already be condemned as a criminal

but in any case, again, is it OK to murder? no

is it OK to "go outside a monogamous relationship"? potentially, yes, let's talk about baby

Morality aside, could one correctly, technically identify as someone who does certain things who doesn’t actually do those things?

I certainly will not speak for Ms. H but if y'all will allow an outside opinion here, I will say... yes. There are countless gay/lesbian identifying people who, for a variety of reasons, do not act on being gay/lesbian. But that's different than "murderer" which is the example you keep bringing up.

One can imagine killing a person and never kill a person. This person is not and should not be defined as a murderer. However, a person can be gay and not act on being gay. That person is still gay. So it's not a 1 to 1 comparison. The differential should be obvious.

Oops. I agree with this. I'm trying to figure out how someone can say they are polyamorous or polygamous without actually committing the act

You have an impulse. Society/your community/you religion/fear/perspective tells you not to act on those desires/impulses. You don't act.

You said you understand the difference between gay and murderer. How is this different for you?

It's pretty simple.. you have an impulse to murder but you don't murder, so you're not a murderer. You have an impulse to have multiple relationships but you don't, you're not actually polygamous. But if you're gay and don't act upon it, then you're still gay.

is a person with no partners because they just haven't found any, monogamous by default?

Monogamy is a practice. You practice monogamy. One can be inclined to want to practice monogamy. They are not monogamous by default.

[epilogue]

So, are you telling me that I could identify as a murderer without ever actually attempting to murder anyone?

that's an interesting question given the number of people who'd say someone with a criminal desire should already be condemned as a criminal

but in any case, again, is it OK to murder? no

is it OK to "go outside a monogamous relationship"? potentially, yes, let's talk about baby

Morality aside, could one correctly, technically identify as someone who does certain things who doesn’t actually do those things?

I certainly will not speak for Ms. H but if y'all will allow an outside opinion here, I will say... yes. There are countless gay/lesbian identifying people who, for a variety of reasons, do not act on being gay/lesbian. But that's different than "murderer" which is the example you keep bringing up.

One can imagine killing a person and never kill a person. This person is not and should not be defined as a murderer. However, a person can be gay and not act on being gay. That person is still gay. So it's not a 1 to 1 comparison. The differential should be obvious.

Oops. I agree with this. I'm trying to figure out how someone can say they are polyamorous or polygamous without actually committing the act

You have an impulse. Society/your community/you religion/fear/perspective tells you not to act on those desires/impulses. You don't act.

You said you understand the difference between gay and murderer. How is this different for you?

It's pretty simple.. you have an impulse to murder but you don't murder, so you're not a murderer. You have an impulse to have multiple relationships but you don't, you're not actually polygamous. But if you're gay and don't act upon it, then you're still gay.

Cool. Now imagine that gay and polyamorous are the same.

Gay means an attraction to a particular sex. Polyamory is the act of having multiple simultaneous relationships. Murder is the act of having killed someone. A desire for something doesn't make you the thing, by definition. I mean, having a desire to be gay doesn't make you gay, you're either gay or you're not. It's not an act. You could even have sex with someone of your own sex and not be gay. You can't murder someone and not be a murderer.

Forget what you understand about contemporary definitions. And take a few days to just imagine that they are the same.

[wease]

[epilogue]

[epilogue]

Aparently 74 pages is my limit.