Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)LA
Posts
0
Comments
183
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • As someone who would like to do this, how well do you actually pay attention to what is going on? I'd do so much more reading if I didn't have to go back and reread paragraphs several times over because I simply can't pay attention, let alone if I'm doing something else entirely

  • My best drinking story is one told to me by my parents, because I don't even remember it. See, it was actually my birthday party in which I got very drunk. Also, I was 2

    So apparently these old boomers thought "Oh it's only one tiny sip, she'll be fine. doesn't matter that she's 2", but they all had that same idea, and after a few "one tiny sips" I was one tiny drink toddler. Thanks mom and dad. Probably didn't help my brain develop very well :/

    Anyway, that's the best drinking story I have because I don't drink. Not even because of this; I just don't much care for the taste or the feeling, so yeah

  • Yeah, I just think the poly relationship has more places where things can go wrong. In a monogamous one, you need to two people who like each other and are compatible. In a poly, even with only 3 people, you need A and B to be compatible, A and C, and C and B. Adding one extra person into the mix complicates the relationship 3-fold depending on the nature of those relationships. They don't all have to be in a relationship with one another, but you're still adding more avenues for drama and collapse in one relationship, not to mention how one relationship could impact the other. If A is having drama with C, the frustration of that failing connection could also impact their relationship with B. I think it's easier to fail not by any sort of moral failing of polyamorous people, only that the nature of those relationships is inherently less stable through its myriad of moving parts

    But there is for sure an element of bias, where heteronormativity gets a pass for being the standard

  • I'm monogamous myself, but personally know two different polyamorous relationships. 1 is pretty damn good, and the other is rife with drama. Besides that, I tangentially know of others, and all of those are rough, though since I'm hearing of these from mutual friends and acquaintances, I could just be getting the juicy drama and none of the good parts. Could very well be that my info on those are bad

    It does seem to mirror the general expectation, though, that most are unstable, and I wouldn't call it surprising. Relationships are complicated, and anything that has more moving parts is going to be more complicated. I'm not trying to suggest here that monogamy is the way to go by any means--different people have different wants and needs, and some people are just good for polyamory. I just think that a working arrangement like this is tough to pull off

    Besides, this gets asked a lot about polyamorous relationships, but there are so many fucked heteronormative relationships, and you never see the argument that monogamy is wrong, so yeah. Just whatever makes you happy

  • I didn't know the versions would be so different, but it makes sense. There's no way they'd get away with selling Mt. Dew in Europe without getting rid of at least some of the alien blood and nuclear waste. I swear, if you put it next to a geiger counter, it makes a droning sound

  • I'm a lover of the romantics. I don't have any one favorite, but I like me my Liszt, Brahms, Chopin, Mussorgsky, Schubert. Not that I don't like others. Mozart, though not a romantic, is one of my favorites

  • Honestly, I just chose Dr. Pepper for something anticlimactic. I do like Dr. Pepper, but it's not my favorite beverage or anything. Still could be a genetic thing, though. My dad hates Pepsi because to him it just tastes like soap

    If I'm gonna hate a soda, it's gonna be Mountain Dew. That shit tastes and looks like it was harvested from the fertile grounds of Chernobyl

  • Yeah, it's who I suspect gets most of the taxidermy stuff. I mean, if you do it yourself, I guess there's a pride in your craft thing, but it really does seem like insult to injury to go and kill something then display its carcass as a trophy. Seems barbaric. Really, the only kind of taxidermy I could support is vulture culture stuff, where the subjects are ethically sourced (read: Found on the side of the road already dead). Still weird if you go overboard, but there's a grey area where you can have something between "propped up elk carcass designed to look alive" and "collection of pinned butterflies"

  • For real. I have a plaster cast of my dog's paw print and that's enough. It seems morose. You wouldn't do that with a relative, right? "Sure am glad I got Grandpa stuffed and mounted here, next to the TV. It's like he's still with us"

  • I'm not really answering the spirit of the question, but have y'all ever thought about how weird taxidermy is?

    "Dang, this space in my house needs some decoration. Missing something. I think I'll put a posed carcass there"