Lindy West's FU brand of feminism met a man's ultimatum. And she caved. Her new book "Adult Braces" is a sad tale of self-erasure dressed up as progressivism.
Oh, don't forget, apparently part of how he guilted her into this was convincing her that it would basically be slavery and white aupremacy if she insisted on monogamy.
The Athenians showed the Melians that the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must (per Thucydides). It seems that the reviewers are not familiar with the TV show “Sister Wives” where the hook is religion, kinda. But polyamory is messy despite the context. We’re bordering on Belushi’s primal line from the Blues Brothers, “How much for the women?”
I don't see that there were any children in West's "marriage".
Something of a hazardous undertaking. From Google's AI: Approximately 40% to 50% of marriages in the United States end in divorce, though the rate has been declining since the 1980s. While the "50%" statistic is common, recent data suggests a lower, more realistic estimate of around 40% for first marriages, with higher rates for subsequent marriages.
And that, also from Google's Gemini: "The average (mean) duration of a first marriage that ends in divorce is approximately 8 years."
Clearly, some basic, if not fatal "incompatibilities" in most marriages. As you suggested, the tragedy is the probably quite negative impacts on any consequential children.
Jennifer [Says ...😉🙂]: Polyamory Is Just Cheating With Progressive Branding
"So let it be written, so let it be done."
That kind of depends on your definition of marriage, on what you take to be the "terms of the contract". Ones supposedly sanctified by church probably being the "ne plus ultra", the gold standard, one "designed" to encompass and support the sacred duty of procreation. Reminds me of my ex's comments, more than a few decades ago, about how it was in Catholic Quebec, probably during her parents' time. Basically and following some nuptials, if there wasn't some evidence, within a year or two, of a forthcoming new arrival then there would have been a Catholic priest knocking at the newlyweds' door solictously asking whether there was some problem he might assist in solving.
But many marriages these days are often more matters of convenience, are "designed" to address other needs and desires, some of which "society" has supported or endorsed -- gay marriages for example; precious little procreation happening there. Reminds me that my mother -- gawd rest her soul -- once noted that people, like horses, often work better in double harnesses.
So if Lindy West and her partners manage to make something that works for them, and doesn't shake the foundations of society -- and possibly contributes to the commonwealth, a hallmark of that religious gold standard -- then one might reasonably argue that society might recognize it as a legal marriage.
Though, as they say, the devils are in the details. Like questions of breach of contract, and broader protections that society grants to all of us as citizens. For example "marital rape" and under-age marriages used to be things that were accepted, but are now against the law. At least in most civilized [non-Muslim] countries.
Wow, I must really be some backwards old fart because I could NEVER engage in polyamory, swinging, or whatever you want to call it. If I’m in a relationship, I’m all in. I would never expect that partner to share me with someone else - I committed to that person. If that partner wants to open it up, then open it up on your own. My first wife cheated on me multiple times (Was in the Navy and on deployment- why I never knew about the first three until I caught her with the fourth and last one when I was on shore duty), claiming she wanted to “be open.” Well, yeah, I guess something was always open…
All forms of non-monogamy only work if both partners are all-in, 100%, and equally involved and invested. Any other way is a separation or divorce waiting to happen.
West is a stupid, fat, white woman who is married to a black guy who cheats. Sounds a lot like the ghetto folks.
Jen: I defer and usually applaud your views on matters where you are expert, or at least have personal experience: sports, corporate governance, advertising, running a business, etc But, best I can tell, you have no first-hand experience with polyamory, and your second-hand experience consists of observing some couples (you don't say how many) who engaged in polyamory and then broke up. Maybe it was cause-and-effect or maybe it was coincidental--couples break up for any number of reasons. And you may know couples who practice some form of polyamory consensually and don't advertise it, so their friends don't know about it.
It's best to be cautious about expressing strong moral or policy views on matters where we don't have a comprehensive picture of the landscape. I had the same reaction a couple of years ago when Alex Berenson expressed similarly strong (or stronger) views on his substack:
Certainly, there can be abusive behavior leading to polyamory, particularly where one partner is interested in having sex with other people and the other one isn't. But is that inevitable? There can be relationships where both are interested, or where one is and the other one doesn't object or doesn't mind much. Couples have disagreements over many issues, such as where to live, who works and who (if either) stays home, whether and how many children to have, politics, religion and upbringing of children, how often to have sex, who cleans the dishes or takes out the trash--the list is endless. If they can work them out, couples develop a stable relationship. If they can't, any one of these issues may result in abusive behavior and eventually lead to a break-up. Is polyamory all that different?
No i have no first hand experience. And really this is an assessment of West's views on the matter. She is trying to convince herself it is making her happy but it is clear that she's made this concession to keep the guy, and it is not making her happy at all. Which is quite sad.
I used to read her pieces circa 2010 buuuut with her having said stuff like this https://www.jezebel.com/transphobia-is-a-goddamn-embarrassment-to-us-all-5975828 I just can't feel sorry for her.
Oh, don't forget, apparently part of how he guilted her into this was convincing her that it would basically be slavery and white aupremacy if she insisted on monogamy.
I could not agree more. All of these "progressive" ideas are really just misogyny dressed up in a different outfit.
The Athenians showed the Melians that the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must (per Thucydides). It seems that the reviewers are not familiar with the TV show “Sister Wives” where the hook is religion, kinda. But polyamory is messy despite the context. We’re bordering on Belushi’s primal line from the Blues Brothers, “How much for the women?”
Yups. Cheating is cheating. Cheat on your wife and you cheat on your children. Why won't psychologists tell this truth to their patients?
I don't see that there were any children in West's "marriage".
Something of a hazardous undertaking. From Google's AI: Approximately 40% to 50% of marriages in the United States end in divorce, though the rate has been declining since the 1980s. While the "50%" statistic is common, recent data suggests a lower, more realistic estimate of around 40% for first marriages, with higher rates for subsequent marriages.
And that, also from Google's Gemini: "The average (mean) duration of a first marriage that ends in divorce is approximately 8 years."
Clearly, some basic, if not fatal "incompatibilities" in most marriages. As you suggested, the tragedy is the probably quite negative impacts on any consequential children.
This. All of it. 💪
Jennifer [Says ...😉🙂]: Polyamory Is Just Cheating With Progressive Branding
"So let it be written, so let it be done."
That kind of depends on your definition of marriage, on what you take to be the "terms of the contract". Ones supposedly sanctified by church probably being the "ne plus ultra", the gold standard, one "designed" to encompass and support the sacred duty of procreation. Reminds me of my ex's comments, more than a few decades ago, about how it was in Catholic Quebec, probably during her parents' time. Basically and following some nuptials, if there wasn't some evidence, within a year or two, of a forthcoming new arrival then there would have been a Catholic priest knocking at the newlyweds' door solictously asking whether there was some problem he might assist in solving.
But many marriages these days are often more matters of convenience, are "designed" to address other needs and desires, some of which "society" has supported or endorsed -- gay marriages for example; precious little procreation happening there. Reminds me that my mother -- gawd rest her soul -- once noted that people, like horses, often work better in double harnesses.
So if Lindy West and her partners manage to make something that works for them, and doesn't shake the foundations of society -- and possibly contributes to the commonwealth, a hallmark of that religious gold standard -- then one might reasonably argue that society might recognize it as a legal marriage.
Though, as they say, the devils are in the details. Like questions of breach of contract, and broader protections that society grants to all of us as citizens. For example "marital rape" and under-age marriages used to be things that were accepted, but are now against the law. At least in most civilized [non-Muslim] countries.
Wow, I must really be some backwards old fart because I could NEVER engage in polyamory, swinging, or whatever you want to call it. If I’m in a relationship, I’m all in. I would never expect that partner to share me with someone else - I committed to that person. If that partner wants to open it up, then open it up on your own. My first wife cheated on me multiple times (Was in the Navy and on deployment- why I never knew about the first three until I caught her with the fourth and last one when I was on shore duty), claiming she wanted to “be open.” Well, yeah, I guess something was always open…
All forms of non-monogamy only work if both partners are all-in, 100%, and equally involved and invested. Any other way is a separation or divorce waiting to happen.
West is a stupid, fat, white woman who is married to a black guy who cheats. Sounds a lot like the ghetto folks.
Jen: I defer and usually applaud your views on matters where you are expert, or at least have personal experience: sports, corporate governance, advertising, running a business, etc But, best I can tell, you have no first-hand experience with polyamory, and your second-hand experience consists of observing some couples (you don't say how many) who engaged in polyamory and then broke up. Maybe it was cause-and-effect or maybe it was coincidental--couples break up for any number of reasons. And you may know couples who practice some form of polyamory consensually and don't advertise it, so their friends don't know about it.
It's best to be cautious about expressing strong moral or policy views on matters where we don't have a comprehensive picture of the landscape. I had the same reaction a couple of years ago when Alex Berenson expressed similarly strong (or stronger) views on his substack:
https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/on-polyamory-ethical-non-monogamy
Certainly, there can be abusive behavior leading to polyamory, particularly where one partner is interested in having sex with other people and the other one isn't. But is that inevitable? There can be relationships where both are interested, or where one is and the other one doesn't object or doesn't mind much. Couples have disagreements over many issues, such as where to live, who works and who (if either) stays home, whether and how many children to have, politics, religion and upbringing of children, how often to have sex, who cleans the dishes or takes out the trash--the list is endless. If they can work them out, couples develop a stable relationship. If they can't, any one of these issues may result in abusive behavior and eventually lead to a break-up. Is polyamory all that different?
No i have no first hand experience. And really this is an assessment of West's views on the matter. She is trying to convince herself it is making her happy but it is clear that she's made this concession to keep the guy, and it is not making her happy at all. Which is quite sad.