RTV #2: Why I Don't Have a Boyfriend - Page 2

On November 22 2012 01:10 Gene wrote:
I find your blogs surprisingly endearing.

On November 22 2012 01:55 TaraBabcock wrote:
Like I said, finding "one person forever" to have sex with is illogical and against our biological make-up.

On November 22 2012 05:30 EG.lectR wrote:
I'm curious...what happens when you're 40 and losing your attractiveness, struggling to find your friends with benefits, and have now a list of sexual partners who, because you so greatly feared words like tradition or standard, are now married and want to distance themselves with someone [like yourself] who views sex as a "make it or break it" and casual part of a relationship? I would assume those emotions that you tried to hide, and viewed as distinct from your sexual encounters, would return to remind you that you cannot separate yourself from your experiences. They define you, and sexual experiences are not distinct from this.

I have no interest in going into this topic deeply due to the sheer nature that I do not know you nor do I feel an online forum is the best platform for this type of discussion, but your definitions and worldview on this subject are contradictory and are not without emotion. The fact that you reference words like tradition and standard and relate them to a negative tone makes me question your approach's clarity.

Relationships take work. Real relationships are not built on sex because sex is fleeting. Real relationships acknowledge commitment and hard work because of the fact that we are human. We make mistakes...we are wrong many times...and if you are thinking that marriage is simply a piece of paper, that speaks to your lack of self-control and commitment to another person. If you can't commit to "a piece of paper," then doesn't that say, "Oh...I like you or maybe I love you, but not enough to make it official. Not enough to bind myself to you"? That's not love nor is it really even like then. That's you trying to escape because you don't like restraints or pressure upon your life. You're saying that point, "My needs need to be met before yours."

When you're at that point, you want a "carefree" life...ones which do not exist on this earth. When you engage in the mindset that you have, it's not even a moral issue, it's a common sense issue.

On November 22 2012 05:59 Rathwirt wrote:
As a fellow poly person, (though I am married) I always love seeing other people endorse that lifestyle. Go you/us!

On November 22 2012 07:01 Sinensis wrote:
You should do your next random topic video about why nerd guys turn you on. Or your favorite outfits while laddering; this could spawn an entire mini-series of topics about various outfits for various activities. Those are the best two I could think of that fit in with your theme of pandering to sex for publicity.

On November 22 2012 07:26 Salv wrote:


Two things to this:

1 . You're employing the naturalistic fallacy. Let's just say for the sake of argument that finding one person and marrying them was completely against what's biologically ingrained into us. That doesn't make it bad or wrong, so appealing to what is natural is kind of arbitrary and irrelevent.

2 . Being with one person actually isn't going against what is biological for us. There wasn't/hasn't been just one successful strategy for human mating. A prominent strategy has surely been for the man to fuck every woman he can and create as many children as possible, but there is something to be said for staying with one person - that has been a successful evolutionary strategy as well - you cannot call one illogical.

On November 22 2012 10:12 Stratos_speAr wrote:


As someone who practices "standard" relationship practices, I don't see anything wrong with your practice of open relationships, but I think you're pretty much failing to understand monogamous relationships, why they work, and why people adhere to them. You make it sound like people just follow these traditions like a bunch of sheep, with no good logic or reasoning behind them. You say that the values that lead to monogamy and marriage are "outdated" and merely a product of our upbringing, and this is how you justify an open relationship. Honestly, I think this is an incredibly naive and immature way of looking at the world.

There are a lot of pragmatic reasons that people follow the traditions of monogamy and marriage: Marriage gives huge legal benefits (far past just filing taxes); monogamy is a very strong and effective way to build trust; for men, monogamy ensures that a child is yours, and I'm sure you can think of other practical reasons. But beyond this, it seems like the relationship experiences you described in high school (ignoring the fact that high school relationships tend to be rather shallow) simply moved too fast in the wrong directions. The point of monogamy and marriage is to make that next step emotionally beyond just friendships; it's not just a trusting relationship with your best friend, but it goes far beyond the relationship of a best friend; it's a soul mate (or whatever phrase you want to use, if you're not into the spiritual crap). You're essentially saying that someone is so much better than even a best friend that you're willing to be monogamous to make your relationship that much stronger. Sure, monogamy is "pushed onto" relationships from the start, but, again, this is most likely because it's the most surefire way to build trust between two partners. Another thing to note is that monogamy (at least for one side in a relationship, see polygamy) is near-universal. It's not just something that you see in western cultures; you see monogamy as a cultural value all over the world.

Furthermore, your language leaves the impression that you are short-changing the value of the physical aspect of a relationship. Physical intimacy is something that brings two people together because you're basically willingly putting yourself at your most vulnerable and open with someone else, both emotionally and physically. Physical intimacy without this aspect is severely lacking in many ways. Part of the reason that monogamy is so important to many is that by being willing to open yourself up to others, you are telling a significant other that you don't believe that they are that special or significant (alternatively, you could just be cheapening the value of physical intimacy, and truly not believing that it is that important, and that is a problem as well).

I don't think that open relationships are a bad thing at all (even if I would never do it); however, if you're going to engage in these discussions, you need to truly understand monogamy (the what and why), and come up with a more cohesive reasoning. Honestly, your reasoning just sounds like another version of the hipster "too cool for it" attitude. If I am raised in an entirely Christian community and decide to go Buddhist, it does me no good to create a strawman of what I think Christianity is and pronounce my views as superior to that conception of Christianity; I need to actually understand what Christianity is, and then decide that I feel like Buddhism is the better path for myself. In terms of your relationship decisions, you're merely doing the former.

On November 22 2012 08:21 Silentness wrote:
Illogical to have sex with only one person? SHIT that's what porn is for. It's not cheating if it's on a screen.

/SIGNED/ ~married man~

On November 25 2012 15:22 StarStruck wrote:
Tara,

I could have summed up that entire video in one sentence: "I'm a firm believer in open relationships."

People would get it and you wouldn't really have to elaborate. All of that could have been done in a Tweet too if people have been heckling you about being single.

On November 25 2012 16:38 rangi wrote:
Tara,

Do you plan to have children? If so, do you see this relationship style working after you have a child?

On November 25 2012 16:17 TaraBabcock wrote:


This is an elaboration video series. Also, what I do is NOT open relationships, and that's where I think people are getting stuck, failing to see the difference between what I do and all of the existing "titles" out there.

On November 27 2012 01:44 StarStruck wrote:


It would fall in that category if you still had the bf and there's nothing wrong with it.

You simply don't want a relationship to get boring or to the point where you feel tied down. You won't find anyone who doesn't dislike the nagging. That's part of life.

Everyone goes through shit. It comes down to who's shit you can cope with that makes the relationship everlasting.

You don't like filing taxes together and have insecurities about any type of traditional marriage. There are ways around that too. If you ever find that special somebody I recommend looking at a common-law marriage instead. Common-law marriages are great.

On November 27 2012 01:50 TaraBabcock wrote:


Wrong. I'm glad you can tell me all about myself though! GG! >.>