Finally! Proof!

Unhappiness is a product in our modern consumer culture. How can they sell you something to make you happy unless you are unhappy? They manufacture unhappiness through advertisement and other manipulative practices like limited time offers to create FOMO.

The people that associate non-determinism in QM with free will in humans are the ones that get my goat. Even if QM shows non-determinism there is no evidence of any mechanism that allows humans to control that non-determinism through some kind of soul to make free choices.

Im not arguing in bad faith at all. Im pointing out the flaws in your arguments and you dont like it.

Reproduction is not the only measure of a sucessful relationship and for many its not a measure at all. Polyamorus relationships can be sucessful, some with children, some without children. As I said I personally have multiple sucessful relationships without children and I will never have children.

Additionally for same sex relationships naturally born children isn't possible and so clearly can't be the only measure of success.

Notice how its a "living wage", i.e. a wage on which people can live while working and pursuing their career. The living wage is the bare minimum a job needs to pay to ensure the person doing it can continue living, its not a measure of success.

You're really bad at making arguments.

Thats doubly wrong and a terrible example that further proves my point. Assuming money is what defines a sucessful career is also a really bad assumption. It actually might be a worse assumption than assuming a sucessful relationship is one where you have kids.

A sucessful career is one that is fulfilling, challenging, worthwhile, and makes a difference. Sure money is involved and its a primary motivation for some but its hardly the first thing people think of when they think about a sucessful career

You've made the incorrect assumption that the only measure of success for a relationship is reproduction. Relationships can be sucessful without children, I'm in multiple sucessful relationships, I have no children, and I'm sterile.

I do wonder if I'm wasting my time engaging in good faith phlisophical arguments on this sub as many people just seem both ignorant and bigoted.

Ill talk specifically about the US because it is the most well known but you will find similar experiences throughout the world. The 1960s civil rights movement has been sanitised by modern education white media as a peaceful transition, it was anything but. Race riots were getting out of hand and the unrest spread across the United states. Turns out when you systemtically discriminate against a group of people for long enough those people get sick of it. When they get sick of it for long enough they justifiably become violent.

The civil rights act wasn't an act of compassion or a concession made to the civil rights movement because it was the right thing to do. It was fought for and won by violence.

Id partially agree. Polyamory does have more inherent risk but it also has more reward if you get it right. There is definitely more room to get it wrong. Id disagree though that there is anything inherent wrong or worse about multiple person relationships than 2 person.

Edit: also polyamory doesn't need to be one relationship with more than 2 people. It can also be a single person being in multiple one on one relationships at the same time.

Whats wrong with dating multiple people at once? How does it affect you?

Couldn't disagree with this more. They had to criminalise discrimination because it was destroying society.

I think there are just a lot of social conservatives in this sub who get angry at queer people existing and women having rights.

Why? What's wrong with me being polyamorus? How does it affect you?

Im not sure I understand. What method are you talking about? I'm just talking about polyamory, i.e. dating multiple people at once.

Couldn't agree with that more!

Its not an assumption, historical evidence indicates that progressive positions such as gender equality and queer acceptance were much less in the past than the present. Queer people and women in history faced oppression and progress on their acceptance is quite recent.

Obviously this depends on the time and place in history you are talking about but generally acceptance of women and queer people was much lower

I've got plenty already but thanks for the offer :P

By oppression I mean anything that prevents people from living as they wish. At the extreme end this can be laws and extra-legal actions like lynching or mob violence. Towards the more moderate end can be housing, medical, and employment discrimination or social ostracisation.

In many countries it is still illegal to be gay and the punishments can be prison or death. Presenting with non-traditional gender identity in public leads to mob violence and death. Apostasy is still a crime in many countries. Clothing is legally regulated in many countries, especially for women. In many places sex outside of marriage is still illegal. Drug use is still criminalised in most of the world.

These are the kinds of things that I mean when I say oppression. A free society is one that allow everyone to live their lives as they wish without interference from others. An oppressive society is one that regulates how people live their lives and punishes those who dont conform.

The existence of polyamory is exhausting?

Im just talking about queer acceptance and equal rights for all. I dont think queer people or women in conservative Muslim are happy being oppressed. If oppression of minorities is part of your culture then yes I am comfortable saying that part of your culture is bad.

Its not a western thing, lots of western countries are still queerphobic and misogynistic. Its just at this moment in history most western countries are more progressive than non-western countries. That's a recent phenomenon though, 50 years ago western societies were pretty oppressive to queer people and women as well.

The ideal is freedom for all. Every culture should be accepted as long as they can coexist. If your culture is oppressive and stopping people from living their life the way they want then thats not good.

Thats a fair and reasoned argument. I would definitely prefer regressive Muslims to become more progressive even if it they dont fully reach equality and fairness. Its moving in the right direction but should still be open to criticism.

Not in polyamory!

I dont see how that is uncharitable. The article frames children as being essential to a woman's existence and hetero relationships as being the best form of relationship.