“All the decent men I’ve ever date are opposed to open relationships, while the men I’ve slept with who say they fancy the idea don’t ever stick around…” That’s because you’re a slut, dear.
Decent, sensible men don’t want the town bicycle. Decent, sensible men definitely don’t want the diseases likely to be transmitted by the town bicycle.
If you’re easier than remedial math, don’t be surprised if your dating pool is dominated by guys who took remedial math.
“Decent” men, i.e., the kind who will commit to a serious relationship, will naturally expect their partner to make a commitment, too. And men who are “open to an open relationship” will not demand a commitment, but they will not feel obligated to commit, either. So it’s catch-22.
Well, duh.
The author clearly doesn’t know the first things about capitalism, monogamy, scarcity, struggle, belief, gain, expense, generosity, abundance, and sharing. She likely doesn’t understand someone else or herself, either.
Still, she had me at liberatory.
This critique applies to a lot of gay men too.
Maybe not strict monogamy, but tone-down the serial velocity and the three-ways — emotional as well as physical. And dare I suggest to emphasize the “relationship”-part of open relationship, rather than the “open”-bit.
I especially support the last few paragraphs by the Author. Who wants to go through life fighting STD’s all the time?
…or how much of your hard earned money is going into her boyfriends pocket, you know, “sharing” and all that.
Also at the link:
The distortion carries over to the Electoral College, where each state’s number of electors is determined by the size of its congressional delegation. This would matter less if the United States weren’t so geographically polarized. But America is now two countries, eyeing each other across a chasm of distrust and contempt. One is urban, diverse and outward-looking. This is the America that’s growing. The other is white, provincial and culturally revanchist. This is the America that’s in charge.
That, honey, is by design.
Typical newspaper: what we need is another lefty columnist with nothing original to say. At least The Guardian has something new and/or interesting to say now and then.
Actually, socialism is based on a premise of scarcity (whether real or false), and an idea that everything you earn must come at someone else’s expense. Wealth is treated as a zero sum game, and resources have to be rationed by the elite intelligentsia.
And the Electoral College is needed to prevent a few urban areas from controlling what is supposed to be a nation-wide election. The candidates run for President of the United States, not for President of New York City and Los Angeles County.
“easier than remedial math” Love it.
I don’t suppose anybody got her name?