I was having this discussion with a female friend of mine, she said no but I told her she was over romanticizing the concept of love and that things in life happen that get in the way of monogamous love (distance, differences, passing, life circumstance etc) What do you think? Can you be in love with somebody and still fall for someone new?Disclaimer: this has nothing to do with cheating or justifying cheating. The example I’d use is a man who loves his wife but is deployed overseas and ends of falling in love with a stranger from that land, while still loving his wife at home
>>34844738>can you genuinely love two womeni hope you love someone else besides your mother
>>34844738Some men can. Most can't. This is why Ethical Non-Monogamy works brilliantly for some people and not at all for most others.
>>34844738>The example I’d use is a man who loves his wife but is deployed overseas and ends of falling in love with a stranger from that landWould it be actually love or just infatuation?
Not at the same time.>things in life happen that get in the way of monogamous love (distance, differences, passing, life circumstance etc)That's understandable for someone who doesn't drink the disney koolaid
>>34844788So it may be hard for me to explain, but the “type” of love is different between the women. One is home. Nothing will ever change that, you will protect and provide for her no matter what happens. In the end, she is forever The other is the more “recognizable” love, the emotional intensity, the feelings, the infatuation, the longing for I suppose the question is if the aforementioned is love or “infatuation”? What if sex was not involved? Wouldn’t it confirm it wasn’t just lust?
A man can love up to 9 women. After that, it's impossible to keep track. There's science behind this.
>>34844827
>>34844777>Ethical non-monogamyThis shit is rooted in biology, not on ethics. A man can care about any partner. Can care about multiple partners. A woman just selects a man, she doesn't select multiple, she may select one at a time. After five millions of years of rape women can only truly care about the safety of their children, while men can care about protecting a small group of females. But never, a man never cares to protect other adults in his territory, those are competition.
Islam says yes, but to be realistic there will always be a favourite
>>34844738>distance, differences, passing, life circumstance etcTrue love overcomes those things. You just don't know or have true love
>>34844777The vast majority of people can barely handle a relationship with one person, let alone others. Adding sanctioned cheating doesn’t really solve any issues
>>34844738>can a man genuinely love two women?Yes.>can a woman genuinely love two men?No. They have a hard enough time with oneThe worst part of the internet was men collectively realizing that they’re actually the emotional party and that women genuinely don’t give a fuck with an antisocial detachment. Very very few women actually have to go out of their way to learn how to control their emotions. Almost all men do. They’ll try to tell you that’s because men are stunted or repressed but in actuality it’s because men have emotions and women largely do not.
>>34846312The more accurate way of saying that would be that men have emotions which significantly extend beyond self. Women obviously feel things like fear, desire, and envy. They just have a problem with treating other people (primarily men) like humans instead of objects. Thats hard to do when you experience excessively internally driven emotion so cut them some slack.
>>34844738No you can only ever truly love one person.We're very limited beings due to our flesh bodies. Our bodies were carved by natural selection especially in recent 1M years to value those closest to us. Anything else is a haphazard mental illness akin to psychopathy.
>>34846312The only emotions men are able to feel is wanting sex and rage if they don't get it
>>34846398As somebody who exclusively experiences emotions regarding self, of course you can only understand male emotions through the lens of yourself and how you think you are treated. Thank you for affirming my post
>>34846398Every time you’ve ever thought a man overreacted to you, you absolutely did something to cause it yourself. You are allergic to social responsibility and taking accountability for what you say, however, so you frame it as men being bad while you dindu nuffinYou did. Every single time.
>>34844866(NTA) None of this true.Did you know, for example, that if you study what kind of face people find most attractive, men give fairly consistent answers over time, while women give different answers depending on whether they're ovulating or not? At ovulation they're more attracted to masculine faces, and the rest of the time more attracted to androgynous faces. The likely reason for that is that it's a good reproductive strategy to have a betabux provider for your kids who will actually stick around and not abandon you, but to have an alpha Chad father the kids and make them genetically healthy. Humans are also unique among primates in that we're the only species where there is no visible sign that the female is fertile. The likely reason for that is that if a male can tell when a female is fertile, he can make sure no other males have access to her during that time; but if he can't tell, and he can't watch her all the time, it makes it easier for her to sneak off and get pregnant by somebody else, and it's a good reproductive strategy to be able to do this.It's also quite well established that women, more than men, tend to get bored of a single partner from about two years in, hence all the marriages with dead bedrooms. They're not designed for lifelong monogamy, they're designed to pair up, get pregnant, have the kid, wean it, and then move on to a new partner. (The end of the "honeymoon phase" is about when the first kid would be weaned if we were living in stone age conditions).
>>34846304>The vast majority of people can barely handle a relationship with one person, let alone others. This is certainly true. It takes an unusually sophisticated and highly evolved kind of person to be able to handle multiple relationships; most people can't.>Adding sanctioned cheating doesn’t really solve any issuesThis, however, is just gibberish. Infidelity is called "cheating" because it is literally that: behaviour that is against the rules of the relationship. But if something is allowed within the rules then, by definition, it is not cheating. If something is cheating then it can't be sanctioned, and if it is sanctioned then it can't be cheating.
>>34846561 >It takes an unusually sophisticated and highly evolved kind of person to be able to handle multiple relationships; most people can't.I so wish I were intelligent and sophisticated enough to be into p*lyamory
>>34844738Depends what you mean by love, sure you can have multiple crushes at once but that ain't genuine love that's childish desire or infatuation
