It’s A Laugh-A-Minute Lifestyle
Theirs is a “non-hierarchical” relationship, so the whole cancer thing didn’t count when there’s third-party shagging to be had:
Readers may recall the numerous polyamory ‘cope’ videos we’ve seen here over the years, in which clearly neurotic and unhappy people try to convince themselves, and us, that they’re totally cool with their chosen lifestyle miseries. Often while on the verge on tears.
we’re reaching levels of polyamory cope that shouldn’t even be possible pic.twitter.com/Cc3fdxxhwn
— pagliacci the hated 🌝 (@Slatzism) August 8, 2023
“Imagine them there, embracing you.” Instead of that other slag.
every video I see from this polyamorous woman sounds like she’s on the verge of tears and trying to convince herself that everything’s okay pic.twitter.com/ksO9coMzk2
— pagliacci the hated 🌝 (@Slatzism) February 8, 2024
You know, I don’t think her expression quite matches her words.
And then there was the time the Guardian’s lifestyle section brought us assurances of the “really positive energy” of polyamory, despite an unfolding catalogue of unhappy complications, displays of selfishness and insecurity, and despite recurring use of the words jealousy, resentment and anger.
And we mustn’t forget the tale, via New York magazine, of the Brooklynite comedian and podcaster named Billy, his girlfriend Megan, and his girlfriend Megan’s other boyfriend Kyle. An exhaustingly self-consciousness three-way entanglement resulting in a series of grimly farcical situations that were framed, rather coyly, as “relationship difficulties.”
The above, I should add, was one of several attempts by New York magazine to portray unfaithfulness and cuckoldry, and the consequent anxieties, as the very zenith of a progressive lifestyle.
As when a betrayed husband, Michael Sonmore, boasted, unconvincingly, that he “finally became a feminist” thanks to his wife’s nocturnal sexual adventures with a chap named Paulo. A wife who was “embracing herself” and becoming empowered, we were told, while her children, aged six and three, wondered where their Mommy was.
Update:
Oh, and needless to say, further complications sometimes arise:
I’m more concerned with the dead teeth. pic.twitter.com/SlBT9hsbg4
— Liberacrat™️ (@Liberacrat) September 4, 2025
So, if the rota systems, pecking orders and endless crying don’t strike you as appealing or the foundation of a happy life, that can only be because you, a filthy heathen, aren’t sufficiently sophisticated.
Should you wish to express encouragement, there are tip jar buttons below.
As always, when I hear about polyamorous arrangements, I must ask: “Which ones are the sociopaths”?
Only a sociopath would value lack of attachment in sexual relationships. Only a sociopath would imagine that the problem with infidelity is that you do it in secret (hence “ethical non-monogamy”). Only a sociopath would consider it a virtue to be indifferent to his wife’s cancer, because “non-hierarchy.”
I feel sorry for the dependent personalities who get sucked into these things by their sociopath partners. They’re told that if they balk at the arrangement, it’s because they’re prudish and backwards and closed-minded and a disappointment.
Instead, they go through a meat grinder while their sociopath parters live it up.
Laughed. Not sorry.
Have one on me, barkeep.
Well, it does, I think, capture the essence of the thing. The fundamental lie.
Bless you, sir. May you invent a device to teleport the accumulated filth from your rugs and carpets into the hair of your enemies.
[ Studies blueprints. ]
[ Ponders possibilities of a filth teleporting device. ]
I think it’s safe to say that the hospital incident, above, doesn’t reflect well on the phenomenon, or on the kinds of personalities the phenomenon attracts.
Is today’s word ‘microexpressions’?
Well, quite. There’s a lot going on in that face.
The words hostage video also come to mind.
One of these might suffice in the meantime. Couple with a slot for mail in the front door and everything is coming up roses.
It’s not without appeal, but I do like the stealth of instantaneous filth teleportation. So the target gets up one morning to discover that their formerly immaculate bathroom is now somehow covered in a deep and bewildering layer of fluff and hair, for instance.
The how-the-fuck quality is rather important. I mean, if we’re veering into supervillainy, we might as well do it with flair.
“It gets easier with time.”
NARRATOR: It did not get easier with time.
[ Eyebrows rise ] Wait–blogspot is still around??
One to add to that definitive list of blessings and benedictions…wherever it went to.
Timely. Just saw a meme where one person claims “I’m polyamorous” and another person states “That’s a lot of syllables for ‘whore.’
In the posts linked above, I used the term glorified slutting by emotional inadequates.
Also, commonplace grubbiness.
I stand by my decision.
From the thread:
This really is two sentences.
[ Post updated. ]
Because you can never have enough complication and woe in your love life.
[ Finishes last-minute tinkering with tomorrow’s Ephemera. ]
Horns, the latest fashion.
It’s not just the poly thing. That’s a manifestation of the larger problem. The vast majority of people in western civilization, many on the right included who are just not as prominent or noticeable, have lost themselves in a belief that their perceptions are reality. They have developed an extreme, yet for most unearned, confidence in themselves because they rarely pay for the mistakes that they make. Part of this is that they see so many fictional examples of the things that they want for themselves and because these things work out or exist in the fictional tales, they must be doable in the real world. It’s like they have become actors unknowingly playing a role in an absurd play that they don’t know they are in.
When you look at so many famous actors who, with all their money and fame still manage to screw up their lives, become drug and alcohol addicted or get into bizarre religions or cults, there’s a reason for that. They are not the people that you see on the screen. Deep down, almost unconsciously, they know that. Especially the method actor types. This same mental twisting going on constantly in their lives does long term damage to the psyche. With the Narratives that regular people are constantly fed, in the schools and universities, via the news media, etc. which themselves have been corrupted by this fiction, the cycle reinforces itself.
There’s rather a lot to unpack in that short clip. Wear gloves. Masks might be a good idea also.
But enough about MBAs . . .
It’s as if Sexus, Nexus, and Plexus were serious novels taken seriously by serious people. Only worse.
Or lawyers. Thus the kinds of people on the right of whom I speak.
I’ve often marvelled at the dramas and complications of other people’s romantic entanglements, but the people seen and quoted above do seem bent on achieving some kind of Complication Singularity.
I was once told by a friend that The Other Half and I are the most married people she knows.
I think I can live with that.
Band name.
I’m reminded of an Olympics a decade or so where the various announcers just couldn’t stop talking about one of the skiiers’ alternative lifestyle.
He was something like 22 years old, and he was at the Games by himself, because his wife of (gasp) three years was at home talking care of their two year old and their newborn. His parents were likewise not attending because they were helping his wife from being overwhelming by their two grandchildren.
Viewers listening to these announcers were perplexed as to what exactly was “alternative” about this. A couple had met in high school, gotten married, and had babies.
It wasn’t until the announcers talked about the other athletes and their “partners”, “baby daddies” and “baby mommies” that viewers noticed that the wonderfully progressive announcers had never once used the words “husband”, “wife”, “mother”, or “father”.
The sportscasters from the big cities viewed a young married couple with children in the same way that Jane Goodall viewed gorillas, or Democrats view young men – as curious objects for study that they’ve never encountered before in their entire lives.
“Non-hierarchical”. Huh. I’m just wondering, mind, what that might have to do with civilized behavior in the face of someone close needing an ER trip.
No, dont tell me. I bet words like “heteronormative”, “interrogating”, and “toxic whiteness” are involved.
Amiright ? Do I win a prize?
Said she.
In 2024, the New York Times ran no fewer than 26 articles on polyamory.
The fact that the term “baby daddy” had to be invented is a bad omen. Children suffer a great deal in “fluid” relationships, not least because the highest risk of abuse or murder of a child is the mom’s boyfriend.
I’m not entirely convinced by madam’s happy dance.
Such a wealth of misery encapsulated in 13 seconds.
“Nature, Mr. Allnut, is what we are put in this world to rise above.” — Rose Sayer
“It’s the way I register despair.” — Eleanor of Aquitaine
This is what university theatre/dance departments are turning out as graduates these days. There’s more sincerity in some of the “interpretive” dance numbers you’ve posted in the past than this ladies bad disco moves.
The layers of ick here are many — vocal fry, the ‘dead-naming’ conceit, the fact that he looks like he hasn’t bathed in a couple of weeks and HOLY FLOSSING, BATMAN … that dude hasn’t seen a dentist in years!
This came to mind:
And as someone quips in reply,
Well, quite.
Yes, to get to that moment, quite a lot of things had to go horribly wrong.
A big but low-key compliment.
Oh, I’m still collecting them in case David ever wants to do a line of greeting cards or something.
While I do like country music, I have never liked the taste of beer. And as with the whole polyweirdness, everyone told me oh that’s normal, just keep drinking more of it and you will grow to like it. Why would I want to spend hard-earned money on something I hate and continue consuming it, all in the hopes that one day I will grow to like it? Never made any sense to me, and so I never developed a taste for beer.
The poly mess is just as stupid, but why they choose this one thing is that unlike country music or beer, poly, like the trans thing, requires the approval of other people to be successful. And because the number of people naturally inclined to like or believe in it is rather small, a good portion of other people are required to prop the whole enterprise up. Thus the coercion, the pressure, the hyperbole, the constant drumbeat.
Why, it’s almost as if nature intends us to pair off.
Radical, I know.
Why, it’s almost as if nature intends us to pair off.
You have to wonder where these people think new humans come from.
Pathetic bastards.
Except it doesn’t. Homo sapiens sapiens is not monogamous by nature, the way swans and wolves are. We’ll f*ck anything that moves. There’s an oxytocin-generated pair bonding effect that results from mating and breeding with a specific person, but it wears off after approximately seven years (the Seven-Year Itch is actually a thing). Not concidentally, that’s about how long it takes for a child to reach the point of being able to forage for itself and avoid the sabretooth tiger. And even then, that pair bonding effect is weak at best.
Polyamory has always been around. Harems, concubinage, the side chick, whatever term you want to use, societies have found ways of making them work. The reason polyamory doesn’t work is that the people in it are deeply damaged and insecure (or sociopaths, as dicentra noted). They want it both ways: the financial and emotional security of a permanent monogamous relationship, and the ability to soothe the desperate self-loathing with casual sex.
I really wish I could find a copy of When Two Won’t Do, because it’s the apogee of this hideous lack of self-awareness. One of the polyamorous women commits suicide as a result of her husband’s dalliance with the writer/director, and the response of everyone involved amounts to no more than “well, that’s a shame”.
That may be so. The culture we live in is definitively monogamous though. And the polyamorous dream always seems to be to throw off all that culture, those 2000 plus years of tradition. Poly proponents see themselves as entirely rational beings who have dispensed with all that, and of course as you note, they are anything but.
It’s fair to say that we have many instinctive drives, which sometimes conflict.
But monogamy is far better for raising children–and for spousal life satisfaction. Note that much of child rearing involves teaching children to suppress their baser impulses in favor of long-term happiness.
“Nature, Mr. Allnut, is what we are put in this world to rise above.” — Rose Sayer
That may have been true prior to the 1960s or so, when there were strong legal and social consequences for infidelity. But it isn’t now, and hasn’t been for two generations. What is a rapper, drug dealer, or tech billionaire with a dozen baby mamas but the padishah of a harem? Marriages can be dissolved on a whim, some large percentage of married women admit to having a “backup plan”; we are not in any sense living in a monogamous culture.
Humankind is not monogamous by nature. That more needs to be enforced and reinforced.
It should also be noted that monogamy has significant one-off advantages in that it reinforces the virtues of loyalty and honor. Those two very important traits seem to have fallen by the wayside along with monogamy.
From what I’ve seen it’s still very much a niche belief and way of life, given extra attention by some very vocal poly advocates who are quite happy to parade in front of national and international media in a kind of very modern version of an old-fashioned freak show.The prominence given to the belief is deceptive.