|
On August 15 2017 19:16 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2017 19:06 KungKras wrote:On August 15 2017 09:07 Thieving Magpie wrote:On August 15 2017 07:37 KungKras wrote:
Do you think the terran robot girl in BW that you see when you click on buildings is a pure robot or some kind of cyborg slave similar to the arco flagellants in warhammer 40k?
(I know she's a robot in SC2 but maybe the SC1 designers had a different vision) 100% thought she was a cyborg. Truly missed her presence. As much as I enjoyed SC2's individual mission maps (their designs were great) the world building was much more lacking due to the increased specificity of the mission briefings mixed with the intense abstraction of the sense of time. BW's abstraction of the mission briefings meant you had to piece together who you were, and where you are, and how much time has passed based on the exposition provided. The exposition then allowed your imagination to sync the current and prior missions together to form a narrative arc. The choice burdened system of SC2 made it feel that you were just wandering around taking your time instead of actually progressing through a narrative arc. If they had placed a time element to the campaign it would have made the forced decisions feel more impacting. Little things like making it so you could only choose X number of planets before it was too late. Or if your side missions were choices spread intermittently throughout a more rigid campaign structure would have given a sense of urgency and sacrifice whenever you had to do a side quest. Yeah she really looks like a cyborg. When I was a kid she made me think that terran were evil. But Terran ARE evil...
hahaha true 
|
Would it be possible to create a real Catdog? What design barriers need to be breached? Do we insert a shared ass hole, or does each half get one of their own? Do they have one asshole but a shared gastrointestinal tract? How far can science go?
|
One fine day, with a whoop and a purr, a baby was born and he caused a little stir.
|
Note: I only know stuff about humans, so this is purely extrapolation. Genetic compatibility, immunologic compatibility, more or less all of the organ-systems need to be in some way modified - especially the neurological, cardiovascular and gastrointestinal would likely cause issues (could potentially have two separate, but that poses some challenges in itself).
|
On August 15 2017 08:46 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2017 06:38 ComaDose wrote:On August 15 2017 06:32 Thieving Magpie wrote:On August 15 2017 06:29 ComaDose wrote:On August 15 2017 06:22 Thieving Magpie wrote:
The west is still a culture that dislikes consent and hence has cultural practices that encourages people to put themselves in states where they can't give consent. what? the west dislikes consent? yeah rape culture is still a thing but damn I dunno if you can characterize half the planet like that. You think all people drink to try and rape people? The west includes women (FYI) The west fetishizes many things--consent and lack thereof among them. As such, people often act or play with the idea of not giving consent before sex (such as getting drunk and then having sex) because of how much it is fetishized by the west as titilating. Hence also why confusion occurs where people fuck others and assume the lack of consent was implied consent. yeah of course I didn't mention genders or anything. why do you think its a more common fetish in the west than east? and I believe consenting adults are allowed to exercise their fetishes even if the fetish is playing with the idea of not giving consent. not sure how that leads to the conclusion that lack of consent is consent or how you can imply that goes for like half the planet. At what point did I state that the problem is half the planet? The fetish community places great importance in Vincent, going so far as to have everything from safe words to an already made script to dictate what the plan of action is in the engagement. As a community, because they are aware of the difficulties of communication at the heat of the moment, they understand the importance of pre-communicating expectations and logistics. The west has issues with even just bringing up the topic of requiring clear concent prior to engaging in sex. People such as yourself get fairly riled up about it. This is not a male/female issue, but a western issue. The east has their own issues. But being that I've lived in the US for the past two decades, it would be it would be unfair of me to pretend to have a good understanding of eastern practices of nonverbal communication. However, cultures I am both entrenched in, studied, and have peers in--that I can discuss. Now, just so we are in understanding, do you believe that there is misogyny, rape culture, and a history of violence against women in western culture? If you don't believe these things to be true then we might never come to an agreement, if you do believe these things to be true--then is it not possible that these historical truths could affect how humans within that cultural zeitgheist would behave with each other such that it perpetuates these historical truths?
... are you even replying to me or just rambling?
do you believe that there is misogyny, rape culture, and a history of violence against women in western culture?
yeah rape culture is still a thing
do you even read what other people write or do you just use it as a launch platform for your next ramble?
This is not a male/female issue
yeah of course I didn't mention genders or anything.
again.... who are you having a discusion with if you dont read what they write.
At what point did I state that the problem is half the planet?
The west
is the west not approximately half the planet?
People such as yourself get fairly riled up about it.
okay wow i just came here for discourse but im feeling really attacked right now.
you managed to say a lot of things for some reason, little of which i ever disagreed with but i would like to redirect you to the question i actually asked.
the west dislikes consent?
where did you come up with this idea?
we went through fetishes, then you said maybe the east does too, but im wondering what made you start to call this half of the planet rapists.
EDIT: i can see you nitpicking the half the planet thing so to make things simpler why are you calling people that live in these countries rapists ![[image loading]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b3/The_Western_World.png/1280px-The_Western_World.png)
|
On August 15 2017 18:48 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2017 09:01 Thieving Magpie wrote:On August 15 2017 07:17 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On August 15 2017 04:53 Thieving Magpie wrote:On August 15 2017 04:17 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
First you have to define every word in that sentence. Then you have to evolve and adapt every single word. Only then can we acheive true enlightment. To answer your question, look to the changer of ways, that way the path is to follow, and so the opening occurs, the fluidity is expanded. If you are disinterested in discourse it is easy enough to simply stop speaking. If your goal is to ridicule you could simply keep it at PMs and not clutter the thread. I can be disinterested in your comments regardless, but you could at least keep your illogical comments away from the main site. That's strange. I thought you view that being cognizant and curious about why things are perceived truths is fruitful to the evolution of human understanding. That being willing to think about why we think about things in certain ways leads to a deeper understanding of ourselves. Being unwilling to accept the fluidity of human perception and understanding is mundane and simplistic. But here you are insulting and trying to shut down discourse of others. Wherein, you show yourself, as being the one truly disinterested in discourse. I can't be the only one finding it mildly amusing that you claim to have an open mind, yet seems intent on telling everybody else to shut up and trying to drown out everybody else's posts by sheer volume. I have gone days without responding, only to pick up the continuing conversation, whilst you yourself continue to insist that everybody is wrong, you hold the one truth, and spew your verbal diarrhoea everywhere. Defining the core topic of a discussion is not only important--but is the starting point of all dialogue. Until the both of you know what the topic being discussed is, there will always be empass. You are convoluting that convention by asking for definitions of base sentences at their core. And as much as linguistic phenomena's interaction with grammatic architecture interests me as a subject matter, deflecting the conversation away from its core topic in an attempt to feel intellectually superior is not only in poor taste, but does nothing to move dialogue forward. Hence why I asked that if your goal is to simply change topics without ever sticking to the subject at hand, please do so in PM so as to prevent your structureless dialogue from disrupting this thread with incoherencies. That is the opposite of silencing you by the way--unless people asking you to speak in private is what you would consider censorship. Another thing--how does asking people what they mean count as holding myself as the one truth? If I held myself to one truth I would simply be telling you what I think is true without asking for clarification, testing new argumentations, or even trying to restructure the argument as new data comes into being. That's the point of discussion--to ask questions, to ask people to look at the words they use, the truths they hold infallible and asking them why it is they think that way. It requires re-exploring things assumed to be true and actually looking at it again, not with your biased history of conclusion, but with new eyes. Don't play innocent and coy all of a sudden. We both know that you have no interest in discourse from your attempts to disparage and insult everybody else. There is no starting point of dialogue as your very dialogue is an attempt to halt discourse. In this forum, in this thread, most people are able to communicate as they use commonly used definitions, or clarify their definitions, and so communication is faciliated. In your case, you appear to have a deliberate policy of personal definitions, known only to yourself, to only be communicated one way. Wherein, this is communicated, so the dialogue can move forward, you act like a spoilt brat, stubbornly sticking to your unchanging set defintions, to the extent that you change every single other meaning of word to fit your own rigid template, in this case claiming not only a personal definition of warlord, but that of to lead, and of war itself, and every word in between used, claiming that you are the one true seeker of truth, calling everybody else stupid, when they are trying to communicate what could had been an interesting topic of discussion, but due to your egotistic urge to spew garbage, descends into your insulting of everyone else. Don't you feel ashamed or embarrassed for yourself thievingmagpie? Or are you truly oblivious? That you are the blind man you claim everybody else is?
You being insulted by my statements does not make my statements malicious. As Stephen Fry says: "It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights." because, as he continues "It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so fucking what."
For me to ask people why they think their understanding of things is clear to them is the opposite of rigidity--what could be less rigid than someone wanting to learn more from others. What is could be less rigid than being willing to point to the inconsistencies of supposedly common understandings to try and find the deeper truth to that subject? To ask people to think of their assumptions past just their statement and to ask them how they actually use those definitions moving forward, how do their definitions work when put into practice, and how do they respond when resistance or variance occurs to that definition in order to see whether or not their understanding is wrought from their deeply thinking about the topic or simply from their assumptions of a topic is the whole point of research. To assume you don't know what you know, and to question what is assumed to be unquestionable.
If people find it offensive to do that, it is not my responsibility to make them feel better about themselves.
|
|
|
On August 15 2017 22:49 ComaDose wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2017 08:46 Thieving Magpie wrote:On August 15 2017 06:38 ComaDose wrote:On August 15 2017 06:32 Thieving Magpie wrote:On August 15 2017 06:29 ComaDose wrote:On August 15 2017 06:22 Thieving Magpie wrote:
The west is still a culture that dislikes consent and hence has cultural practices that encourages people to put themselves in states where they can't give consent. what? the west dislikes consent? yeah rape culture is still a thing but damn I dunno if you can characterize half the planet like that. You think all people drink to try and rape people? The west includes women (FYI) The west fetishizes many things--consent and lack thereof among them. As such, people often act or play with the idea of not giving consent before sex (such as getting drunk and then having sex) because of how much it is fetishized by the west as titilating. Hence also why confusion occurs where people fuck others and assume the lack of consent was implied consent. yeah of course I didn't mention genders or anything. why do you think its a more common fetish in the west than east? and I believe consenting adults are allowed to exercise their fetishes even if the fetish is playing with the idea of not giving consent. not sure how that leads to the conclusion that lack of consent is consent or how you can imply that goes for like half the planet. At what point did I state that the problem is half the planet? The fetish community places great importance in Vincent, going so far as to have everything from safe words to an already made script to dictate what the plan of action is in the engagement. As a community, because they are aware of the difficulties of communication at the heat of the moment, they understand the importance of pre-communicating expectations and logistics. The west has issues with even just bringing up the topic of requiring clear concent prior to engaging in sex. People such as yourself get fairly riled up about it. This is not a male/female issue, but a western issue. The east has their own issues. But being that I've lived in the US for the past two decades, it would be it would be unfair of me to pretend to have a good understanding of eastern practices of nonverbal communication. However, cultures I am both entrenched in, studied, and have peers in--that I can discuss. Now, just so we are in understanding, do you believe that there is misogyny, rape culture, and a history of violence against women in western culture? If you don't believe these things to be true then we might never come to an agreement, if you do believe these things to be true--then is it not possible that these historical truths could affect how humans within that cultural zeitgheist would behave with each other such that it perpetuates these historical truths? ... are you even replying to me or just rambling? Show nested quote + do you believe that there is misogyny, rape culture, and a history of violence against women in western culture? do you even read what other people write or do you just use it as a launch platform for your next ramble? again.... who are you having a discusion with if you dont read what they write. is the west not approximately half the planet? okay wow i just came here for discourse but im feeling really attacked right now. you managed to say a lot of things for some reason, little of which i ever disagreed with but i would like to redirect you to the question i actually asked. where did you come up with this idea? we went through fetishes, then you said maybe the east does too, but im wondering what made you start to call this half of the planet rapists.
I see the confusion then.
There are 1.5~ Billion people in the west. Add another 144 million if you add Russia. There are 4+ Billion in Asia.
So when you say "Half the planet" then I think you mean women because western culture is not half the planet. There are isn't simply 2 geographical divides in cultural shifts. "Western Culture" and "Eastern Culture" varies differently from "Middle Eastern" Culture, "African Culture," and even "Islander Culture"
So when you say half, it's really hard for me to assume that you meant anything other than women. Which makes your argument that I am accusing "half" the planet that I am accusing men. So of course you would seem super defensive to think my comments about western culture would be an attack on men--hence why I even started the comment of: "The west includes women (FYI)"
You then use this as an argumentative case: "I believe consenting adults are allowed to exercise their fetishes even if the fetish is playing with the idea of not giving consent."
Which makes it important to show you a big difference between the fetish community, and the non-fetish community. Consent in the fetish community is important--even in pretending not to give it. Consent in the non-fetish community is understood as a gray area and people will argue its normal to get drunk and fuck without assessing consent prior or during.
This is where confusion comes from, as when there is miscommunication, one will side with cultural expectations and the other will side with what they actually said. Because we are not in a culture that emphasizes clarity on this--we assume that its a super gray area when it shouldn't be. That is a simplified starting point on western culture's influence on consent. It gets deeper once rape culture and misogyny in the west gets included as well.
And yes, I did know you had said you agree rape culture exists. It's the reason why I said: "if you do believe these things to be true--then is it not possible that these historical truths could affect how humans within that cultural zeitgheist would behave with each other such that it perpetuates these historical truths?"
As for the east--I don't have enough knowledge of what they do there. Same with Africa, same with the islands of fiji and somoa. I will not assume that they act one way or another until I learn more. If you know much about rape culture in those places--please enlighten me.
|
see edit and answer the question please.
EDIT: or are you retracting your statement that the west dislikes consent and rephrasing it as "is it not possible that these historical truths could affect how humans within that cultural zeitgheist would behave with each other such that it perpetuates these historical truths"
and possibly not including literally everyone in those countries as rapists.
|
On August 15 2017 23:23 ComaDose wrote:
see edit and answer the question please.
EDIT: or are you retracting your statement that the west dislikes consent and rephrasing it as "is it not possible that these historical truths could affect how humans within that cultural zeitgheist would behave with each other such that it perpetuates these historical truths"
and possibly not including literally everyone in those countries as rapists.
The culture that pervades those areas have a history of misogyny, violence against women, and encourage a cultural resistance to transparent and clear consent. Women in that country are made to understand that history of violence towards women. The women are then shown a rape culture that often places burden of survival on them. Who shares responsibility of wrongdoing with not just the rapist but also within the topic of the woman's clothing, language, friendliness, and social status.
As such, when the culture tells women they shouldn't be super clear on consent, who are told violence will happen to them, who are shown over and over attacks on women who report rapes--it creates a culture that only has one primary conclusion on what it encourages.
There are people within that culture who attempt to resist that, who ask for there to be more transparency in communication, who ask for stricter and more enforced laws against violence (usually domestic), people who point out how much western culture infantilizes women, belittle women, and kill women. People who want this cultural norm of the threat of rape and violence to not be considered normal within the west. But the existence of resistance to these norms is not proof of the absence of these norms.
Western culture, for the most part, is just culture. The West, is merely an archaic imperialist term. Demarcations of social group who have historical and modern issues with women. Do not confuse western culture with The West (global) nor with The West (US National) for they are all very different things.
|
On August 15 2017 21:44 Ghostcom wrote:
Note: I only know stuff about humans, so this is purely extrapolation. Genetic compatibility, immunologic compatibility, more or less all of the organ-systems need to be in some way modified - especially the neurological, cardiovascular and gastrointestinal would likely cause issues (could potentially have two separate, but that poses some challenges in itself).
Iirc, and maybe there have been episodes that touch on this, but isn't CatDog a closed system, gastrointestinally speaking... like... I don't ever recall episodes of them relieving themselves....
|
On August 15 2017 23:59 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2017 23:23 ComaDose wrote:
see edit and answer the question please.
EDIT: or are you retracting your statement that the west dislikes consent and rephrasing it as "is it not possible that these historical truths could affect how humans within that cultural zeitgheist would behave with each other such that it perpetuates these historical truths"
and possibly not including literally everyone in those countries as rapists. The culture that pervades those areas have a history of misogyny, violence against women, and encourage a cultural resistance to transparent and clear consent. Women in that country are made to understand that history of violence towards women. The women are then shown a rape culture that often places burden of survival on them. Who shares responsibility of wrongdoing with not just the rapist but also within the topic of the woman's clothing, language, friendliness, and social status. As such, when the culture tells women they shouldn't be super clear on consent, who are told violence will happen to them, who are shown over and over attacks on women who report rapes--it creates a culture that only has one primary conclusion on what it encourages. There are people within that culture who attempt to resist that, who ask for there to be more transparency in communication, who ask for stricter and more enforced laws against violence (usually domestic), people who point out how much western culture infantilizes women, belittle women, and kill women. People who want this cultural norm of the threat of rape and violence to not be considered normal within the west. But the existence of resistance to these norms is not proof of the absence of these norms. Western culture, for the most part, is just culture. The West, is merely an archaic imperialist term. Demarcations of social group who have historical and modern issues with women. Do not confuse western culture with The West (global) nor with The West (US National) for they are all very different things.
how is this a western thing? marital rape is still legal in a lot of places but not in the west. yes women had a tough racket for all of history everywhere and its still a thing in the west but its a lot better in the west than most places.
when you say "the west dislikes consent" it implies they like it less than the rest of the world...
|
On August 15 2017 19:10 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2017 09:20 Epishade wrote:
Hey guys, I need some advice for a girl problem I have.
Michelle is really nice. Nicest girl I know. And very good looking too. She's like a 9/10 if I had to rate her, and I've never dated anybody else who looks as good as her or has the personality to match. Our sex life is great too and we just mesh together so well. There's one problem though that makes me hesitant about staying in a relationship with her. She got a great job at a nursing school up near Toronto, where her family lives, but we've lived together in North Carolina our whole lives. She applied there, not really thinking she'd get in, mostly just because her family suggested she try it anyways and see what happened. I'm not sure I'm ready to just pack up and move to Canada though, as much as I want to support her in her future career. Her husband tells her it's a great career move too, and I wouldn't want to stop her from pursuing her dream. But I just feel that it would be selfish of me to tell her she couldn't go and that could lead to feelings of resentment toward me anyways for stopping her from moving forward in her career. Any advice? 10/10. Would read again!
Lol at least some people got my joke.
|
On August 16 2017 00:06 ComaDose wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2017 23:59 Thieving Magpie wrote:On August 15 2017 23:23 ComaDose wrote:
see edit and answer the question please.
EDIT: or are you retracting your statement that the west dislikes consent and rephrasing it as "is it not possible that these historical truths could affect how humans within that cultural zeitgheist would behave with each other such that it perpetuates these historical truths"
and possibly not including literally everyone in those countries as rapists. The culture that pervades those areas have a history of misogyny, violence against women, and encourage a cultural resistance to transparent and clear consent. Women in that country are made to understand that history of violence towards women. The women are then shown a rape culture that often places burden of survival on them. Who shares responsibility of wrongdoing with not just the rapist but also within the topic of the woman's clothing, language, friendliness, and social status. As such, when the culture tells women they shouldn't be super clear on consent, who are told violence will happen to them, who are shown over and over attacks on women who report rapes--it creates a culture that only has one primary conclusion on what it encourages. There are people within that culture who attempt to resist that, who ask for there to be more transparency in communication, who ask for stricter and more enforced laws against violence (usually domestic), people who point out how much western culture infantilizes women, belittle women, and kill women. People who want this cultural norm of the threat of rape and violence to not be considered normal within the west. But the existence of resistance to these norms is not proof of the absence of these norms. Western culture, for the most part, is just culture. The West, is merely an archaic imperialist term. Demarcations of social group who have historical and modern issues with women. Do not confuse western culture with The West (global) nor with The West (US National) for they are all very different things. how is this a western thing? marital rape is still legal in a lot of places but not in the west. yes women had a tough racket for all of history everywhere and its still a thing in the west but its a lot better in the west than most places. when you say "the west dislikes consent" it implies they like it less than the rest of the world...
I have a lot of positive and negative assumptions about Cultures outside of my own; I don't want to misrepresent them due to lack of research.
I also don't think "it could be worse" or "but other cultures hurt women too" is a good enough reason to stop striving to be better.
Like I said prior, apologies for misunderstanding you earlier.
|
On August 16 2017 00:28 Epishade wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2017 19:10 Acrofales wrote:On August 15 2017 09:20 Epishade wrote:
Hey guys, I need some advice for a girl problem I have.
Michelle is really nice. Nicest girl I know. And very good looking too. She's like a 9/10 if I had to rate her, and I've never dated anybody else who looks as good as her or has the personality to match. Our sex life is great too and we just mesh together so well. There's one problem though that makes me hesitant about staying in a relationship with her. She got a great job at a nursing school up near Toronto, where her family lives, but we've lived together in North Carolina our whole lives. She applied there, not really thinking she'd get in, mostly just because her family suggested she try it anyways and see what happened. I'm not sure I'm ready to just pack up and move to Canada though, as much as I want to support her in her future career. Her husband tells her it's a great career move too, and I wouldn't want to stop her from pursuing her dream. But I just feel that it would be selfish of me to tell her she couldn't go and that could lead to feelings of resentment toward me anyways for stopping her from moving forward in her career. Any advice? 10/10. Would read again! Lol at least some people got my joke.
Uncertain where the joke is. Have had friends go through these options before (different locations, similar circumstances) where does the joke lie?
|
i very much doubt they were similar circumstances
|
On August 16 2017 01:53 IgnE wrote:
i very much doubt they were similar circumstances
Is polyamory uncommon where you're at? Because I've seen this happen before. Except it was moving to Idaho, not Canada. And she was pissed about them leaving.
|
On August 16 2017 01:36 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2017 00:28 Epishade wrote:On August 15 2017 19:10 Acrofales wrote:On August 15 2017 09:20 Epishade wrote:
Hey guys, I need some advice for a girl problem I have.
Michelle is really nice. Nicest girl I know. And very good looking too. She's like a 9/10 if I had to rate her, and I've never dated anybody else who looks as good as her or has the personality to match. Our sex life is great too and we just mesh together so well. There's one problem though that makes me hesitant about staying in a relationship with her. She got a great job at a nursing school up near Toronto, where her family lives, but we've lived together in North Carolina our whole lives. She applied there, not really thinking she'd get in, mostly just because her family suggested she try it anyways and see what happened. I'm not sure I'm ready to just pack up and move to Canada though, as much as I want to support her in her future career. Her husband tells her it's a great career move too, and I wouldn't want to stop her from pursuing her dream. But I just feel that it would be selfish of me to tell her she couldn't go and that could lead to feelings of resentment toward me anyways for stopping her from moving forward in her career. Any advice? 10/10. Would read again! Lol at least some people got my joke. Uncertain where the joke is. Have had friends go through these options before (different locations, similar circumstances) where does the joke lie
Her husband tells her it's a great career move too is the joke.
|
On August 16 2017 02:05 Epishade wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2017 01:36 Thieving Magpie wrote:On August 16 2017 00:28 Epishade wrote:On August 15 2017 19:10 Acrofales wrote:On August 15 2017 09:20 Epishade wrote:
Hey guys, I need some advice for a girl problem I have.
Michelle is really nice. Nicest girl I know. And very good looking too. She's like a 9/10 if I had to rate her, and I've never dated anybody else who looks as good as her or has the personality to match. Our sex life is great too and we just mesh together so well. There's one problem though that makes me hesitant about staying in a relationship with her. She got a great job at a nursing school up near Toronto, where her family lives, but we've lived together in North Carolina our whole lives. She applied there, not really thinking she'd get in, mostly just because her family suggested she try it anyways and see what happened. I'm not sure I'm ready to just pack up and move to Canada though, as much as I want to support her in her future career. Her husband tells her it's a great career move too, and I wouldn't want to stop her from pursuing her dream. But I just feel that it would be selfish of me to tell her she couldn't go and that could lead to feelings of resentment toward me anyways for stopping her from moving forward in her career. Any advice? 10/10. Would read again! Lol at least some people got my joke. Uncertain where the joke is. Have had friends go through these options before (different locations, similar circumstances) where does the joke lie Her husband tells her it's a great career move too is the joke.
Oh! It's a puritan joke, I get it. Apologies. I sometimes forget poly relationships are not as common outside of liberal areas. Definitely got me there
|
On August 16 2017 01:58 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2017 01:53 IgnE wrote:
i very much doubt they were similar circumstances Is polyamory uncommon where you're at? Because I've seen this happen before. Except it was moving to Idaho, not Canada. And she was pissed about them leaving.
so she was considering moving to idaho?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
