You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
7 points

Right. The reductive part is assuming this problem would be solved by polygamy, when realistically there’s nothing at all showing that’s the case, except that there’s a guy who wants multiple women for different reasons. We only know that he wants that, but nothing of the motives and desires of the others, and thus it’s reductive to say “polygamy fixes this”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

Your change in verbiage from polyamory to polygamy demonstrates you have no interest in critical inquiry, you just want to argue.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

And your complete dismissal over a simple typographic error demonstrates that you never intended to have an actual discussion. I had actually edited my post to polygamy because I had, inaccurately, recalled you using that word. At the end of the day, polyamory and polygamy, yes they’re distinct. It doesn’t change my statement regardless of which is used, however.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

A typographical error would be like saying rihgt instead of right. Polyamory and polygamy are completely different words. You were poisoning the well. Go argue with teenagers who don’t know what a fallacy is.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Greentext

!greentext@sh.itjust.works

Create post

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you’re new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

  • Anon is often crazy.
  • Anon is often depressed.
  • Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

Community stats

  • 6.6K

    Monthly active users

  • 991

    Posts

  • 40K

    Comments