We all live in the society together. If a bunch of people in Austin got divorced, it would not affect my marriage firstly because it's not my marriage that failed and secondly because everyone recognizes that those marriages failed.
If the society stopped placing value on marriage, and everyone began to believe that it was trivial, transient, and basically pointless, that would affect my marriage very much. It wouldn't affect my relationship, and it wouldn't affect the values that I placed on my relationship, but it would certainly affect my marriage because A component of that marriage is the societal perception of it. A marriage is not just between two people on an island apart from everyone else in the society. A marriage is a public statement, that people have made a commitment to each other in public. It is a declaration to the society that these people have made a commitment to each other. If the societal response was "Who gives a shit", that would certainly affect me.
this is more clear to me
however, I don't follow the part about society needing to respond/validate your choices for them to have merit?
if Sarah and I make promises to each other, that's what matters
what someone else thinks of those promises, or whether they choose to make similar promises to someone themselves, has no bearing to my mind
by the same token, tho, why is there this drive to delegitimize marriage as an institution?
why are people responding with glee at the notion of this institution that is super-valuable to a lot of people being laid low and devalued by society at large?
if spool values his marriage and society at large values and respects his marriage and inveighs in various ways to support it then why is this a bad thing that needs to be subverted?
+2
Options
21stCenturyCall me Pixel, or Pix for short![They/Them]Registered Userregular
Time for me to work out because i want to be less disgusting in time for PAX East.
Deebaseron my way to work in a suit and a tieAhhhh...come on fucking guyRegistered Userregular
Yes, pls restaurant. Take my credit card information for a deposit and don't charge it.
And when I call to give it to you a second time, definitely give me your theory that whoever I gave the number too probably just lost track of it.
YOLO
i was going to say that spool's grandkids aren't going to roll their eyes at that old fuddy-duddy talking about marriage again
but maybe they will
i have trouble really being concerned because yes, social institutions have a lot of power that is often a social good, but i also dream of a pansexual polyamorous gender-fluid future where people can express themselves and their sexuality pretty much however they please without enduring the tremendous suffering that such fluidity causes now
one such expression could certainly be monogamy, and/or lifelong commitment! and i'm sure it would be.
i don't see this as problematic at all, and i think less social pressure toward marriage and lifelong commitment could be a very good thing, though ronya and his ilk might say it appears to be an economic good
+5
Options
TavIrish Minister for DefenceRegistered Userregular
the open mic i went to did not go well tonight
this thesis writing business is killing my soul
ugggggggh
+2
Options
y2jake215certified Flat Birther theoristthe Last Good Boy onlineRegistered Userregular
more like "meh"riage
maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
+3
Options
CindersWhose sails were black when it was windyRegistered Userregular
edited March 2014
Today, I wore a pushup bra. Roommates have yet to comment on boobs, bras or my clothing..
I am starting to get concerned about them. I don't feel anyone should be this oblivious.
We all live in the society together. If a bunch of people in Austin got divorced, it would not affect my marriage firstly because it's not my marriage that failed and secondly because everyone recognizes that those marriages failed.
If the society stopped placing value on marriage, and everyone began to believe that it was trivial, transient, and basically pointless, that would affect my marriage very much. It wouldn't affect my relationship, and it wouldn't affect the values that I placed on my relationship, but it would certainly affect my marriage because A component of that marriage is the societal perception of it. A marriage is not just between two people on an island apart from everyone else in the society. A marriage is a public statement, that people have made a commitment to each other in public. It is a declaration to the society that these people have made a commitment to each other. If the societal response was "Who gives a shit", that would certainly affect me.
this is more clear to me
however, I don't follow the part about society needing to respond/validate your choices for them to have merit?
if Sarah and I make promises to each other, that's what matters
what someone else thinks of those promises, or whether they choose to make similar promises to someone themselves, has no bearing to my mind
by the same token, tho, why is there this drive to delegitimize marriage as an institution?
why are people responding with glee at the notion of this institution that is super-valuable to a lot of people being laid low and devalued by society at large?
if spool values his marriage and society at large values and respects his marriage and inveighs in various ways to support it then why is this a bad thing that needs to be subverted?
probably because we've been real rude about who gets to participate for a while now, and still are in many parts of the country
it makes sense to me that the three general responses would be a) I don't care about your thing that you want to keep to yourself, b) fuck you, let me have that thing too stop being a dick, c) that thing and your exclusion is hurtful and I want to break it
+6
Options
Dark Raven XLaugh hard, run fast,be kindRegistered Userregular
Yes, pls restaurant. Take my credit card information for a deposit and don't charge it.
And when I call to give it to you a second time, definitely give me your theory that whoever I gave the number too probably just lost track of it.
YOLO
restaurants are hectic places. big titted hostesses, demanding customers, gordon ramsay screaming at you etc.
i was going to say that spool's grandkids aren't going to roll their eyes at that old fuddy-duddy talking about marriage again
but maybe they will
i have trouble really being concerned because yes, social institutions have a lot of power that is often a social good, but i also dream of a pansexual polyamorous gender-fluid future where people can express themselves and their sexuality pretty much however they please without enduring the tremendous suffering that such fluidity causes now
one such expression could certainly be monogamy, and/or lifelong commitment! and i'm sure it would be.
i don't see this as problematic at all, and i think less social pressure toward marriage and lifelong commitment could be a very good thing, though ronya and his ilk might say it appears to be an economic good
i don't see this as problematic at all, and i think less social pressure toward marriage and lifelong commitment could be a very good thing, though ronya and his ilk might say it appears to be an economic good
i've also said before that another multi-individual intergenerational institution has taken over the task; we call them "banks" in the context of investment, and "corporations" in the context of managing said investments.
my own concern is a lil different
we've said before, haven't we, that the problem with anarchy is that warlords can make better use of it than you can
and polygyny has, y'know, a historical track record
We all live in the society together. If a bunch of people in Austin got divorced, it would not affect my marriage firstly because it's not my marriage that failed and secondly because everyone recognizes that those marriages failed.
If the society stopped placing value on marriage, and everyone began to believe that it was trivial, transient, and basically pointless, that would affect my marriage very much. It wouldn't affect my relationship, and it wouldn't affect the values that I placed on my relationship, but it would certainly affect my marriage because A component of that marriage is the societal perception of it. A marriage is not just between two people on an island apart from everyone else in the society. A marriage is a public statement, that people have made a commitment to each other in public. It is a declaration to the society that these people have made a commitment to each other. If the societal response was "Who gives a shit", that would certainly affect me.
this is more clear to me
however, I don't follow the part about society needing to respond/validate your choices for them to have merit?
if Sarah and I make promises to each other, that's what matters
what someone else thinks of those promises, or whether they choose to make similar promises to someone themselves, has no bearing to my mind
Well for one thing, it is better for society if it's members respect the public commitments people make with each other, and don't try to undermine or subvert them. We need a signifier that this dynamic is in play, and social pressure to respect it.
Your promises to Sarah are critical to your relationship, but you both made your marriage vows to me as well, and that public commitment deserves my respect.
Yes, pls restaurant. Take my credit card information for a deposit and don't charge it.
And when I call to give it to you a second time, definitely give me your theory that whoever I gave the number too probably just lost track of it.
YOLO
restaurants are hectic places. big titted hostesses, demanding customers, gordon ramsay screaming at you etc.
Sounds like Jabba the Hutt's palace to me.
0
Options
Apothe0sisHave you ever questioned the nature of your reality?Registered Userregular
I don't understand how people have missed the prevailing point of spool's post.
Specifically that as someone who both supports gay marriage and believes deeply in marriage as an institution the deception of the radically progressive is infuriating.
Those who would say "it has nothing to do with traditional marriage" but secretly or, in other circumstances, celebrate it as a stepping stone in tearing down the patriarchy in general and marriage in particular.
Tl;dr don't lie to spool about your priorities. Spool doesn't support the destruction or trivialisation of marriage.
You all seem to be trying to find a reason to yell at spool.
the feeling is that the primacy of marriage and monogamy in our culture puts pressure on people to conform, and hinders people's expression of other ways of being in relationships - marriage is ideologically dominant and pushes other ideas to the margins. it's hard to even hear about other ways of loving people. so a lot of people are happy at the idea that marriage is giving up some of its market share.
i was going to say that spool's grandkids aren't going to roll their eyes at that old fuddy-duddy talking about marriage again
but maybe they will
i have trouble really being concerned because yes, social institutions have a lot of power that is often a social good, but i also dream of a pansexual polyamorous gender-fluid future where people can express themselves and their sexuality pretty much however they please without enduring the tremendous suffering that such fluidity causes now
one such expression could certainly be monogamy, and/or lifelong commitment! and i'm sure it would be.
i don't see this as problematic at all, and i think less social pressure toward marriage and lifelong commitment could be a very good thing, though ronya and his ilk might say it appears to be an economic good
Yeah, monogamy/lifelong commitment isn't going away as the dominant social paradigm anytime soon. And that's good! (for the most part).
That said, the overwhelming societal pressure that monogamy/lifelong commitment is the ONLY ideal that ALL people MUST strive for under EVERY circumstance is toxic. Marriage is for many people. Most people, even! But it damn sure isn't for everyone, and our society will be better off once we stop trying to pretend that it is.
i also dream of a pansexual polyamorous gender-fluid future where people can express themselves and their sexuality pretty much however they please without enduring the tremendous suffering that such fluidity causes now
Tell me more about this bizarre fever-dream. Was there public nudity and prostitution and donkey shows?
I don't understand how people have missed the prevailing point of spool's post.
Specifically that as someone who both supports gay marriage and believes deeply in marriage as an institution the deception of the radically progressive is infuriating.
Those who would say "it has nothing to do with traditional marriage" but secretly or, in other circumstances, celebrate it as a stepping stone in tearing down the patriarchy in general and marriage in particular.
Tl;dr don't lie to spool about your priorities. Spool doesn't support the destruction or trivialisation of marriage.
You all seem to be trying to find a reason to yell at spool.
I am having a very calm conversation with spool to better understand his perspective and share my own
skippydumptruck on
+2
Options
CindersWhose sails were black when it was windyRegistered Userregular
saying that marriage is a contract between three entities - two partners and l'état - seems fine to me if you also accept the idea that states may legislate changes in what constitutes a marriage and oblige people who disagree to accept that definition
+5
Options
Irond WillWARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!!Cambridge. MAModeratormod
We all live in the society together. If a bunch of people in Austin got divorced, it would not affect my marriage firstly because it's not my marriage that failed and secondly because everyone recognizes that those marriages failed.
If the society stopped placing value on marriage, and everyone began to believe that it was trivial, transient, and basically pointless, that would affect my marriage very much. It wouldn't affect my relationship, and it wouldn't affect the values that I placed on my relationship, but it would certainly affect my marriage because A component of that marriage is the societal perception of it. A marriage is not just between two people on an island apart from everyone else in the society. A marriage is a public statement, that people have made a commitment to each other in public. It is a declaration to the society that these people have made a commitment to each other. If the societal response was "Who gives a shit", that would certainly affect me.
this is more clear to me
however, I don't follow the part about society needing to respond/validate your choices for them to have merit?
if Sarah and I make promises to each other, that's what matters
what someone else thinks of those promises, or whether they choose to make similar promises to someone themselves, has no bearing to my mind
by the same token, tho, why is there this drive to delegitimize marriage as an institution?
why are people responding with glee at the notion of this institution that is super-valuable to a lot of people being laid low and devalued by society at large?
if spool values his marriage and society at large values and respects his marriage and inveighs in various ways to support it then why is this a bad thing that needs to be subverted?
probably because we've been real rude about who gets to participate for a while now, and still are in many parts of the country
it makes sense to me that the three general responses would be a) I don't care about your thing that you want to keep to yourself, b) fuck you, let me have that thing too stop being a dick, c) that thing and your exclusion is hurtful and I want to break it
gay marriage has been legal in mass for about 10 years now. it's an obviously inevitable tide rolling across the US that gives gay people in particular and liberals in general something to celebrate in terms of positive social change. and because there are 50 states, falling like dominoes, it's a gift that just keeps on giving.
i guess i could have seen what you're talking about like twenty years ago or even ten. but it doesn't make any sense now.
I don't understand how people have missed the prevailing point of spool's post.
Specifically that as someone who both supports gay marriage and believes deeply in marriage as an institution the deception of the radically progressive is infuriating.
Those who would say "it has nothing to do with traditional marriage" but secretly or, in other circumstances, celebrate it as a stepping stone in tearing down the patriarchy in general and marriage in particular.
Tl;dr don't lie to spool about your priorities. Spool doesn't support the destruction or trivialisation of marriage.
You all seem to be trying to find a reason to yell at spool.
There's literally no way to actually destroy two people entering in to a permanent monogamous relationship outside of declaring it illegal and actually enforcing that.
Which, frankly, would be a ridiculous fear.
+3
Options
CorehealerThe ApothecaryThe softer edge of the universe.Registered Userregular
i also dream of a pansexual polyamorous gender-fluid future where people can express themselves and their sexuality pretty much however they please without enduring the tremendous suffering that such fluidity causes now
Tell me more about this bizarre fever-dream. Was there public nudity and prostitution and donkey shows?
i try to express myself colorfully and i am accused of taking illegal drugs
I don't have to listen to all of these wild allegations!
I like your new av, btw.
+2
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
Here's how I'd tell my kids about gay people.
"Some boys like boys and some girls like girls the same way that boys like girls and girls like boys."
SUCH DIFFICULT
SO PARENTING
I mean honestly if your approach with it is as casual as anything else you teach your kid, they won't regard gay people as any better or worse than anyone else. Shining a special spotlight on it may have your kid consider it in the wrong light, as in "Something is up."
there is a reason 60s free love communes wound up generating so much abuse
there are a lot of utopian ideas that founder on the rocks of "people are assholes"
but the free love communes didn't generate that abuse because of an inherent problem or vulnerability in polyamory. they generated that abuse because they were marginal communities of marginalized people adopting a marginalized ideology.
oversight and transparency prevent abuse. when a community must isolate itself to exist and become insular to protect that existence, it grows more and more vulnerable to internal exploitation and abuse.
legitimizing those lifestyles will allow people to participate in the larger community without fear of reprisal or alienation, which also allows them to participate in and benefit from the mechanisms that the larger community has to protect its people.
+7
Options
Nova_CI have the needThe need for speedRegistered Userregular
Posts
by the same token, tho, why is there this drive to delegitimize marriage as an institution?
why are people responding with glee at the notion of this institution that is super-valuable to a lot of people being laid low and devalued by society at large?
if spool values his marriage and society at large values and respects his marriage and inveighs in various ways to support it then why is this a bad thing that needs to be subverted?
ALSO, speaking of PAX East...
Only 18 pages of cards left to cut!
Victory whoop!
Check out my site, the Bismuth Heart | My Twitter
And when I call to give it to you a second time, definitely give me your theory that whoever I gave the number too probably just lost track of it.
YOLO
but maybe they will
i have trouble really being concerned because yes, social institutions have a lot of power that is often a social good, but i also dream of a pansexual polyamorous gender-fluid future where people can express themselves and their sexuality pretty much however they please without enduring the tremendous suffering that such fluidity causes now
one such expression could certainly be monogamy, and/or lifelong commitment! and i'm sure it would be.
i don't see this as problematic at all, and i think less social pressure toward marriage and lifelong commitment could be a very good thing, though ronya and his ilk might say it appears to be an economic good
this thesis writing business is killing my soul
ugggggggh
maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
I am starting to get concerned about them. I don't feel anyone should be this oblivious.
probably because we've been real rude about who gets to participate for a while now, and still are in many parts of the country
it makes sense to me that the three general responses would be a) I don't care about your thing that you want to keep to yourself, b) fuck you, let me have that thing too stop being a dick, c) that thing and your exclusion is hurtful and I want to break it
Use it. USE IT.
restaurants are hectic places. big titted hostesses, demanding customers, gordon ramsay screaming at you etc.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXpxnxAL62A
our relationship will blaze briefly and gloriously like a supernova
then be consummated
i've also said before that another multi-individual intergenerational institution has taken over the task; we call them "banks" in the context of investment, and "corporations" in the context of managing said investments.
my own concern is a lil different
we've said before, haven't we, that the problem with anarchy is that warlords can make better use of it than you can
and polygyny has, y'know, a historical track record
Well for one thing, it is better for society if it's members respect the public commitments people make with each other, and don't try to undermine or subvert them. We need a signifier that this dynamic is in play, and social pressure to respect it.
Your promises to Sarah are critical to your relationship, but you both made your marriage vows to me as well, and that public commitment deserves my respect.
Marriage is public!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=u2m6sHROA3U
Edit: not sure how "man and wife. Just say man and wife" dovetails into this conversation.
maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
Sounds like Jabba the Hutt's palace to me.
Specifically that as someone who both supports gay marriage and believes deeply in marriage as an institution the deception of the radically progressive is infuriating.
Those who would say "it has nothing to do with traditional marriage" but secretly or, in other circumstances, celebrate it as a stepping stone in tearing down the patriarchy in general and marriage in particular.
Tl;dr don't lie to spool about your priorities. Spool doesn't support the destruction or trivialisation of marriage.
You all seem to be trying to find a reason to yell at spool.
Yeah, monogamy/lifelong commitment isn't going away as the dominant social paradigm anytime soon. And that's good! (for the most part).
That said, the overwhelming societal pressure that monogamy/lifelong commitment is the ONLY ideal that ALL people MUST strive for under EVERY circumstance is toxic. Marriage is for many people. Most people, even! But it damn sure isn't for everyone, and our society will be better off once we stop trying to pretend that it is.
Tell me more about this bizarre fever-dream. Was there public nudity and prostitution and donkey shows?
I am having a very calm conversation with spool to better understand his perspective and share my own
gay marriage has been legal in mass for about 10 years now. it's an obviously inevitable tide rolling across the US that gives gay people in particular and liberals in general something to celebrate in terms of positive social change. and because there are 50 states, falling like dominoes, it's a gift that just keeps on giving.
i guess i could have seen what you're talking about like twenty years ago or even ten. but it doesn't make any sense now.
I don't have to listen to all of these wild allegations!
and the gengars who are guiding me" -- W.S. Merwin
There's literally no way to actually destroy two people entering in to a permanent monogamous relationship outside of declaring it illegal and actually enforcing that.
Which, frankly, would be a ridiculous fear.
LoL. And things.
Today I wore thigh highs.
They are kinda fantastic.
Not that I wore a skirt or anything.
I like your new av, btw.
"Some boys like boys and some girls like girls the same way that boys like girls and girls like boys."
SUCH DIFFICULT
SO PARENTING
I mean honestly if your approach with it is as casual as anything else you teach your kid, they won't regard gay people as any better or worse than anyone else. Shining a special spotlight on it may have your kid consider it in the wrong light, as in "Something is up."
I do not have children.
you raccoon eyed slut
there are a lot of utopian ideas that founder on the rocks of "people are assholes"
but the free love communes didn't generate that abuse because of an inherent problem or vulnerability in polyamory. they generated that abuse because they were marginal communities of marginalized people adopting a marginalized ideology.
oversight and transparency prevent abuse. when a community must isolate itself to exist and become insular to protect that existence, it grows more and more vulnerable to internal exploitation and abuse.
legitimizing those lifestyles will allow people to participate in the larger community without fear of reprisal or alienation, which also allows them to participate in and benefit from the mechanisms that the larger community has to protect its people.
They are gonna be hella confused.