|
|
Why do you have a poster of yourself (is it?) and 2 dogs getting it on in your room?
|
On November 21 2012 23:08 Azera wrote: Why do you have a poster of yourself (is it?) and 2 dogs getting it on in your room? You're missing a comma. Or something. Any kind of syntax indicating these are two separate things.
|
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
|
On November 21 2012 23:41 Gene wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2012 23:08 Azera wrote: Why do you have a poster of yourself (is it?) and 2 dogs getting it on in your room? You're missing a comma. Or something. Any kind of syntax indicating these are two separate things. nono, please keep it the way it is, it's perfect
edit: seriously it's too good to have been accidental, hall of fame material right there, my god xD
|
United Kingdom14464 Posts
LOL best first 2 comments ever.
|
|
On November 21 2012 23:08 Azera wrote: Why do you have a poster of yourself (is it?) and 2 dogs getting it on in your room?
because taras awesome and because dogs are awesome and then a yellow dog getting it on with a pink dog is super awesome!!
I enjoyed the video. Open relationships are a very interesting idea. If you can accept your partner having sex with someone else, that's some good, accepting, uncontrolling love, non? OH but jealousy is so strong.
But what about... like if say one person is good for sex, but then the other person is good for emotional support? And then so the person who is good at supporting his/her partner emotionally has to stay around and be friends all the while knowing that their attraction to the friendship has hints of sexuality??
|
On November 22 2012 00:01 meteorskunk wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2012 23:08 Azera wrote: Why do you have a poster of yourself (is it?) and 2 dogs getting it on in your room? because taras awesome and because dogs are awesome and then a yellow dog getting it on with a pink dog is super awesome!! I enjoyed the video. Open relationships are a very interesting idea. If you can accept your partner having sex with someone else, that's some good, accepting, uncontrolling love, non? OH but jealousy is so strong. But what about... like if say one person is good for sex, but then the other person is good for emotional support? And then so the person who is good at supporting his/her partner emotionally has to stay around and be friends all the while knowing that their attraction to the friendship has hints of sexuality??
Thanks!
In regards to your last question, my answer is yes, just like a mother would be there for her child, or one of your guy friends would support you knowing that you have sex with a girlfriend. It's like I have a bunch of friends, and a few are good for filling that sexual void as an added benefit.
It's the same concept as having a girl who I love to gossip with and shop with, but then guy friends that are good for other things like playing video games.
I feel you are seeing it still as a committed relationship where one man is supporting me financially and is, for all intensive purposes, "in love" with me and I am just leading him on and sleeping with someone else, and it's not like that. I am very open with people and feel communication is king in any relationship, and hopefully that helps minimize any issues I have with guy friends who have feelings for me that I am not sleeping with.
Hopefully that makes sense!
|
On November 22 2012 00:12 TaraBabcock wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2012 00:01 meteorskunk wrote:On November 21 2012 23:08 Azera wrote: Why do you have a poster of yourself (is it?) and 2 dogs getting it on in your room? because taras awesome and because dogs are awesome and then a yellow dog getting it on with a pink dog is super awesome!! I enjoyed the video. Open relationships are a very interesting idea. If you can accept your partner having sex with someone else, that's some good, accepting, uncontrolling love, non? OH but jealousy is so strong. But what about... like if say one person is good for sex, but then the other person is good for emotional support? And then so the person who is good at supporting his/her partner emotionally has to stay around and be friends all the while knowing that their attraction to the friendship has hints of sexuality?? Thanks! In regards to your last question, my answer is yes, just like a mother would be there for her child, or one of your guy friends would support you knowing that you have sex with a girlfriend. It's like I have a bunch of friends, and a few are good for filling that sexual void as an added benefit. It's the same concept as having a girl who I love to gossip with and shop with, but then guy friends that are good for other things like playing video games. I feel you are seeing it still as a committed relationship where one man is supporting me financially and is, for all intensive purposes, "in love" with me and I am just leading him on and sleeping with someone else, and it's not like that. I am very open with people and feel communication is king in any relationship, and hopefully that helps minimize any issues I have with guy friends who have feelings for me that I am not sleeping with. Hopefully that makes sense!
sure does. thanks for the quick response. Your thoughts will help me out.
|
Are you aware that relationships are something that you build together, not something that happens when you meet your perfect match? That goes for sex as well.
Nothing wrong with friends with benefits, but you're kidding yourself if you think that is better than being in a loving relationship.
|
On November 22 2012 00:21 deathly rat wrote: Are you aware that relationships are something that you build together, not something that happens when you meet your perfect match? That goes for sex as well.
Nothing wrong with friends with benefits, but it you're kidding yourself if you think that is better than being in a loving relationship.
That's what I am saying, I build these strong relationships over time with good friends. No title or piece of paper makes that happen, nor does the exclusivity, which are the only differences.
I understand that it's easy to equate what I am saying to the standard "friends with benefits" that is more of a shallow "one night stand" kind of relationship, and that's not what I have.
I have been best friends with my roommate for 7 years without secrets, restrictions, rules, and other unimportant traditions, and I would do absolutely anything for him. My newer FWBs are like your new dating scenarios, they are still growing into the potential strong friendship partnerships you speak of.
There's really no difference, other than a few logical tweaks that, IMO, make a relationship even stronger.
|
I find your blogs surprisingly endearing.
|
I think this is the first time I've ever heard someone say being non-committal is more logical.
The only issue I take with such a stance is: practicing casual sexual relationships doesn't prepare you for the day you finally decide you've found someone that meets all your needs and you finally need no one else. I suppose it would beg the question, in that do you fully answer every question one of your trusted fuck buddies asks of you?
If feelings ever start to shift with these friends, I'm not sure how they make the next step of fully trusting you, or you them. You've both started and will maintain a track record of not being "tied down" and all the other negative spins you placed on traditional relationships.
If you both have this attitude of not conforming with the typical relationship, and this "I'll do what I want, when I want to, and answer to no one," I really don't see where true trust can factor in there when you're both putting yourself above your relationship.
|
On November 22 2012 01:23 divito wrote: I think this is the first time I've ever heard someone say being non-committal is more logical.
The only issue I take with such a stance is: practicing casual sexual relationships doesn't prepare you for the day you finally decide you've found someone that meets all your needs and you finally need no one else. I suppose it would beg the question, in that do you fully answer every question one of your trusted fuck buddies asks of you?
If feelings ever start to shift with these friends, I'm not sure how they make the next step of fully trusting you, or you them. You've both started and will maintain a track record of not being "tied down" and all the other negative spins you placed on traditional relationships.
If you both have this attitude of not conforming with the typical relationship, and this "I'll do what I want, when I want to, and answer to no one," I really don't see where true trust can factor in there when you're both putting yourself above your relationship.
Like I said, finding "one person forever" to have sex with is illogical and against our biological make-up.
Aside from that one difference, I have already found my perfect person, and I spend all day every day with him pretty much, he's like my other half. I will not be getting married or changing my lifestyle. Ever.
I don't agree that you build trust by making huge compromises. The fact that my roommate and I agree with each other on what is important and can be ourselves fully while sharing our lives together as individuals makes us much stronger than with the traditional illogical rules associated with the religion-based marriage.
Most men lie to their wives about looking at other girls, porn, liking colleagues, etc., and end up losing that sexual desire, IMO big chunk of what it is to be full content in a relationship, and it withers.
With that said, I am well aware it's hard to understand my ideas. I have thought about them for year, and a lot. Most people just grow up being taught things. I grew up in a house where I was encouraged to figure out what want.
|
With all of the arguments here, I just want to say that I completely respect others' very personal prerogatives and beliefs on this topic. I am very confident and happy with mine as well, but I enjoy discussing things and exploring psychology and sociology's role in how people think.
Oh, and thanks for watching and posting!
|
What I read out of his comment is the idea that I'd be afraid one day what I want would change. For you, or for him.
I mean hell, the entire argument here is that what we want is at best a moving target.
|
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.
|
As a fellow poly person, (though I am married) I always love seeing other people endorse that lifestyle. Go you/us!
|
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 01:10 Gene wrote: I find your blogs surprisingly endearing.
Aww! Thanks! :D
|
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.
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 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.
Already replied to this. I work on my relationships as deeper friendships. They have emotions, just not the ones like jealousy that are put in place by society and due to upbringing.
If I'm 70 and ugly, that unconditional love and friendship I have with my roommate and others who I possibly got close to and shared my life with doesn't change.
I am seeing a common trend in either not listening, or not being able to grasp the optimized, or hybrid, ideas I have about relationships. It's not that I don't love people, or that I don't do all the things for and with the people I care for, it's that I find like-minded people who agree that we shouldn't let society's outdated morals tell us what we are supposed to do or be labelled as in a relationship!
Wrote this on my phone during down time at a shoot. Hopefully it's coherent! Haha!
|
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!
Poly person! That's sound so adorable! XD
|
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.
Yeah! Thanks for the suggestions! Will add them to the list and credit ya!
|
Hm, I feel kind of sad after that. Well, can only wish you luck, I understand that sort of lifestyle is pretty easy while one is young, wondering how fulfilling it will feel at the breaking of old age. On a practical note I guess men would have it easier to find young women to sleep with, at least that's the more common scenario in the majority of cultures.
There is nothing "illogical" about being with one person your whole life, also the emotional connection from sex is subjective and you can't compare it between people. For you it may only be a sense of physical pleasure, for others it may be a deep bond of emotion beyond words that validates ones feelings for each other. Nobody can tell me what music I like, or what I feel when listening to it, etc.
Overall, I'd give it a solid 5, but the lack of intelligent and constructive foundation for the points that come across made me feel it's not above average. Also you should probably seek counseling, and I say that with best intentions.
|
On November 22 2012 07:26 Salv wrote:Show nested quote +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.
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.
My point is that I go with what I naturally desire coupled with what I believe is logical and not just societal BS. It's a really personal subject and something you have to decide for yourself.
I couldn't imagine anyone-- especially a male-- being 100% happy with monogamy when emotions like jealousy and possessiveness are not involved, but if they exist, they should go for it!
I just preach the underlying topic that doing what makes you happy in life after doing a bunch of soul searching is key. Actually think about how you, as an individual, feel and why. Don't let others' values or the fear of not being settled down the way society says you should, at the time you should, make choices for you.
Hopefully, if nothing else, these videos I'm doing provoke thought, while being entertaining!
|
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~
|
I think that polygamy is a valid lifestyle choice, but not for everyone. The way I look at it is that relationships in general are a huge difficulty. There's the nice parts, but with it also comes drama and difficulties and hard work. And I can't imagine dealing with all that multiplied by 2 or 3. But hey, some people LIKE pain and suffering, so to each their own, I say.
Monogamy isn't anymore logical than any of the other options. Because nothing about relationships are logical. If we were being logical we'd realize there's nothing in it for us except a 90% failure rate and some temporary pleasure, and weighing the pros and cons say, "Well, it'd probably be more efficient to be single." But we're not logical creatures at all.
|
On November 22 2012 00:28 TaraBabcock wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2012 00:21 deathly rat wrote: Are you aware that relationships are something that you build together, not something that happens when you meet your perfect match? That goes for sex as well.
Nothing wrong with friends with benefits, but it you're kidding yourself if you think that is better than being in a loving relationship. That's what I am saying, I build these strong relationships over time with good friends. No title or piece of paper makes that happen, nor does the exclusivity, which are the only differences. I understand that it's easy to equate what I am saying to the standard "friends with benefits" that is more of a shallow "one night stand" kind of relationship, and that's not what I have. I have been best friends with my roommate for 7 years without secrets, restrictions, rules, and other unimportant traditions, and I would do absolutely anything for him. My newer FWBs are like your new dating scenarios, they are still growing into the potential strong friendship partnerships you speak of. There's really no difference, other than a few logical tweaks that, IMO, make a relationship even stronger.
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 10:12 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2012 00:28 TaraBabcock wrote:On November 22 2012 00:21 deathly rat wrote: Are you aware that relationships are something that you build together, not something that happens when you meet your perfect match? That goes for sex as well.
Nothing wrong with friends with benefits, but it you're kidding yourself if you think that is better than being in a loving relationship. That's what I am saying, I build these strong relationships over time with good friends. No title or piece of paper makes that happen, nor does the exclusivity, which are the only differences. I understand that it's easy to equate what I am saying to the standard "friends with benefits" that is more of a shallow "one night stand" kind of relationship, and that's not what I have. I have been best friends with my roommate for 7 years without secrets, restrictions, rules, and other unimportant traditions, and I would do absolutely anything for him. My newer FWBs are like your new dating scenarios, they are still growing into the potential strong friendship partnerships you speak of. There's really no difference, other than a few logical tweaks that, IMO, make a relationship even stronger. 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.
Like I've stated, I don't think I have the speech skills to really give my ideas enough credit, and to show just how much I have thought about this and how long I have practiced both and how far superior my way is... for me. If you really feel that that's what traditional relationships are to you, and that's what they do for you, then good for you. I have no qualms with what others do, or letting others live their lives. This is not a persuasive video, only a video where I talk about what I do and think.
This is my first video where I try to fully encompass a serious issue, and if you haven't watched my streams or followed my career, then I guess you don't know that one of my weaknesses is being terrible at taking my thoughts and expressing them vocally coherently. Writing is another story. So for anyone who thinks I am "just sounding spoiled, or like a hipster", I assure you, I am 100% content with my decision and I have researched, given this a ton of thought, and looked deep within myself to know that what I am doing is the right thing for me.
With all that said, like I've said earlier, I think the human race and society as a whole absolutely loves to argue things that go against what media, their upbringing, and social stigmas and norms tell them to do, even if it is correct. I think they are often stuck in their ways, and have a hard time getting out of a rut when they are presented with new ideas. So while I respect and couldn't care less about others' sticking to tradition, I am not 100% convinced that you guys have actually given this enough logical and emotional thought, nor have you guys tried it out to know.
I love optimization, it's one of my favorite things about StarCraft, and many other topics, like beauty and fitness. If I can find the perfect TvP timing where I can absolutely crush and avoid Collosi, or if I can get the perfect diet that makes me feel great while I stay in shape, it makes me happy, and excited to learn more. This is the same thing I have applied to my sexual relationships and other aspects of my life. I have tried both sex without any strings at all, and monogamous relationship, and I have found a middle ground that works perfect for me.
Wow, TL;DR! Not even going to proof-read this!
|
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~
Damn, here I was watching porn for the great production value! O.O
|
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 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.
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.
|
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 16:38 rangi wrote: Tara,
Do you plan to have children? If so, do you see this relationship style working after you have a child?
I will not be having children, but that is a whole topic with reasoning that differs entirely from my relationship choices. Maybe I should make an RTV topic about children one day-- I'll add it to the list.
I definitely think, with all that said, that my relationship style would be much better for the child than the traditional family. I would, like my parents did for me, have my own beliefs, but encourage my child to find their own personal beliefs based on facts, what makes them happy, and experience.
|
On November 25 2012 16:17 TaraBabcock wrote:Show nested quote +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. 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.
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 01:44 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 16:17 TaraBabcock wrote: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. 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. 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.
Wrong. I'm glad you can tell me all about myself though! GG! >.>
|
What happens in the case that you get pregnant to this "hybrid" relationship style? Didn't watch the video atm, lol just read the comments and kinda understand whats going on.
First 2 comments made this thread worth it.
|
On November 27 2012 01:50 TaraBabcock wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2012 01:44 StarStruck wrote:On November 25 2012 16:17 TaraBabcock wrote: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. 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. 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. Wrong. I'm glad you can tell me all about myself though! GG! >.>
What?
I'm repeating stuff you actually said in the video? So how is that wrong and how am I telling you about yourself? lol
I haven't even met you.
The only thing I said in my last post is you might like to look into common-law if you ever met the right kind of guy.
._.
I don't know how that falls under me telling you about yourself.
|
|
On November 27 2012 03:16 Mementoss wrote: What happens in the case that you get pregnant to this "hybrid" relationship style? Didn't watch the video atm, lol just read the comments and kinda understand whats going on.
First 2 comments made this thread worth it.
I don't want children.
|
You have a nice voice although your make up is terrible. At first I wanted to write that you look like a mess but then I clicked on a follow-up video where you don't wear make up and actually I find you attractive.
I've watched the first video(no bf) and I liked the topic and I also enjoyed how you talked about it. I agree with you and I think that for a boy the qualities that I look for when finding a fb are pretty much the same - sexual attraction and trustworthiness. I find it unfair though, that is far easier for a girl to find a sexually attractive fb than for a boy. My view on the social programming(getting married, having babies, monogamy) that comes from our parents/ancestors is that the world has changed tremendously in the past 10-20 years. I mean we got now internet, so much information, everything is so global, interconnected and that means the society had to change aswell. But the things change just so fast now it isn't even possible to root the necessary ideas, because most older people won't/can't relate to it. So maybe in like 20-30 years something may actually change in the common view, although I might be too old then to even care.
Ok, will watch some more later on.
|
|
|
|