Nope, this is a degenerate arrangement and that's all there is to it, specifically because a kid was brought into it. The kids by definition had no choice but to be born into this shit and have no defences against the shit they're going to have to see.
Sorry, y'all, but by not forcing his harem to have its collective tubes tied Adam has directly created at least one more behaviour-issue kid/teen/adult whose psych issues the rest of us will have to pay taxes to manage. Never mind the problems of the poor bastards they hook up with and fuck up as they go down.
There isn't an actual family here. Just a sharehouse of three single parents to two kids. Complete with all three single parents being uncommitted sluts who can still bang who they want when they want because social conventions don't real, y'all, and even having a / sign available to answer the question "Who will I fuck tonight" doesn't satisfy.
Particularly hilarious is his suggestion that they can all see other people, but supposedly nobody has the time. I promise you at least one of his harem has plenty of time and therefore cock on her hands.
Just because it doesn't look like the standard Appalachian incestville that most polyamorists create doesn't make it any more stable. The fact both the women have straight teeth and no librarian glasses makes the arrangement
less stable, not more. When did you last encounter a hard 8 or so who was not fucked in the head in some major way?
"But she's pretty, so the arrangement will work out." Show me her three parents, then. More likely for each of the women it's one -- which is where the problem really originates.
As for the suggestion polygamy is "natural" or "semi-natural?" Nope. Darwin already ruled on that one, the polyamorous among our human ancestors went extinct.
https://phys.org/news/2010-11-fossil-fin...cuity.html
Quote:Quote:
The team found that the fossil finger ratios of Neanderthals, and early members of the human species, were lower than most living humans, which suggests that they had been exposed to high levels of prenatal androgens. This indicates that early humans were likely to be more competitive and promiscuous than people today. […]
Emma Nelson, from the University of Liverpool’s School of Archaeology, Classics and Egyptology, explains: “It is believed that prenatal androgens affect the genes responsible for the development of fingers, toes and the reproductive system. We have recently shown that promiscuous primate species have low index to ring finger ratios, while monogamous species have high ratios. We used this information to estimate the social behaviour of extinct apes and hominins. Although the fossil record is limited for this period, and more fossils are needed to confirm our findings, this method could prove to be an exciting new way of understanding how our social behaviour has evolved.”
(Reference came from Heartiste.)
Let's remember Neanderthals are said to have had bigger brains than humans did, that they were supposedly "smarter" and more "enlightened" than good old homo sapiens.
Like it or not, postmodernism is dead. Science keeps on showing that human beings are epigenetically programmed to thrive under some societal conditions and not under others. Polyamory is in the latter category. For what it's worth, I tried Googling "high achievers who came out of polyamorous households." Didn't come back with any names, though did come back with lots of leftie advocacy in favour of them. Some of the pessimists among us go so far as to say it's late-stage self-destructive behaviour for a civilisation. I don't think that's far off the mark; this sort of arrangement only exists under two conditions: where there's an excess of resources or a crippling shortage of them. Prominent and common polyamory is a sign there is a big fucking problem with your civilisation, not a sign that it's "advanced" or "tolerant".
Remissas, discite, vivet.
God save us from people who mean well. -storm