Many have told me about “their god” and I take their word for it.

Resultantly I believe in all of “their gods”.

I’m following so far

And I drew a conclusion about that guy.

What do you mean “that guy”. I thought we just established these are multiple guys?

I think “god” is a piece of shit unworthy of praise and we should seek to destroy and erase it.

What do you mean “it”? Don’t you mean “them”?

I hate god and have no respect for god-fearing people and no tolerance for their “beliefs”

Why are you talking about a singular God here? It reads like you’re blaming Yahweh for Zeus’ sexual behaviour and you’re blaming Hanuman for the Great Flood.

These aren’t the same character. Each “God” claim needs to be evaluated separately.

For example why do you hate Persephene so much? Why is she a piece of shit. You claim to believe in her right Your reasons shouldn’t include examples from the Bible.

Which supernatural make-believe system (read: religion ) is tolerant of my supernatural make-believe system?

You might find company among the Satanic Temple or other Satanists.

You said “Buddhism” was ruled out but you didn’t actually clarify so until you present your reasoning I’d say Buddhism, Taoism, Confucianism and Jainism all lacking God’s are partially compatible.

I mean to be fair there’s not going to be a great answer because this isn’t a real question but a gotcha. And I say that as an atheist.

You obviously don’t actually believe in all the gods, your earlier language shows you haven’t thought enough about what that means and force them all into the same one God.

The Hittites believed in “all the gods” and absorbed every new God of neighbors they conquered. But they truly believed in these gods, not as a gotcha question but they really believed in the power of these entities.

Regardless of personal moral views on their behavior, outwardly taunting that being seems silly in light of genuine faith.

Appreciate that!

Yeah this is a new concept for me. If it genuinely works and these family units are happy that is amazing for polyamorous people, I never knew you could do that!

I wouldn’t want to project my baggage on them or try to discourage that relationship if they can find happiness and love that’s what life’s for.

I was just worried about potential harm if it didn’t work out cause I know that situation would hurt me.

If that harm isn’t there and I’m just straight ignorant I do get where the downvotes are coming from. Clearly I’m at least 20x more ignorant than I thought so…

Do you tell everyone everything about your lives? Do you not know anyone who prefers privacy?

If it’s taboo to talk about polyamory but it’s not taboo to talk about and dye your hair, then that is honestly a bit of a clue to me as to which one society considers more normal.

But to answer your question…

Yeah that open relationship couple I mentioned basically no one knows about. I’m one of 4 people in our wider friend group who they knew they could trust would be chill about it.

They’re definitely not comfortable letting everyone know.

Wow, something you can physically see is obvious compared to something you have to be told about! I’m shocked. Shocked, I say. To the core.

Why are you mocking me about it? I didn’t create the blue hair dye analogy. It clearly has flaws, which is part of why I responded to critique the analogy. It’s a bad comparison, I agree.

Yes, polyamory is less visible than blue hair. You’re right it would be harder to spot. That would be really important to take into account this visibility bias.

In fact I did take it into account, and despite that I felt at the time it’s still a lot more common to dye your hair.

The Kinsey Institute reported (going off memory here) that about 10% of Americans have been in poly relationships, and about 15-20% are interested, with about 5% actively in a poly relationship.

Yep someone posted a study showing similar numbers on a different comment. That seems to corroborate the same stat.

There are definitely way more than you think, since you’re basing it solely on people you know being interested in telling you about it.

Yep, about 20x more than I thought. Crazy!

I think you’re right. We have to make assumptions to answer OPs question on whether she should be uncomfortable in light of so much missing info.

More information on how the boys feel about this arrangement would be really helpful in alleviating some of my fears, but the post is based exclusively on information from the daughter’s POV so there’s really no choice but trying to fill in the blanks to try to put the answer together.

I think that OP is intelligent enough to look into her own situation and decide whether my assumptions are applicable or not and discard my comment if the boys are really aware and content about this arrangement.

1 out of 9 people (10.7%) have engaged in polyamory at some point during their life

Sorry, is that strictly consenting polyamorous relationships?

People who cheat on their partners aren’t being thrown in there are they?

If not, I should eat my hat, that’s a way larger number than I could have imagined.

Edit: yes it appears that they’re talking about consensual non monogamy. That’s really interesting it really is more normal than I thought.

It is unfortunate that this doesn’t shed light on the success of those relationships and only whether or not they happen.

I would still suspect they’re less healthy and more complex to navigate on average compared to monogamy but we have no way to make a claim on that one way or the other it seems.

… How would you possibly know they are poly aside from blatantly seeing them make out in front of you?

They could tell me? Lol. Do you have small talk with your acquaintances?

Of all my friends, family and acquaintances I have one non binary friend who is polyamorous but not currently in a poly relationship and one friend who is not poly but has an open relationship.

Compared to people I know who have dyed their hair blue, they do not seem as statistically frequent.

If you have a study on population size or something you could easily change my mind.

This is all built on the bias of personal anecdotes because I’m not very familiar with polyamory because I basically never hear of it being tried except online.

If it’s more common than I suggest please enlighten me.

I’d guess it’s under 0.5 percent of relationships just completely out of my ass to give you a target to disprove and shoot down if I’m that blatantly wrong.

Man I have never felt more out of touch than reading this thread.

Those poor boys have feelings, they really like this girl, and instead of being upfront with her feelings with them she’s going to take advantage of both of them and their inexperience to force them into such a damaging and toxic relationship.

It is so fucking hard being in love with your best friend at that age and not wanting to lose the friendship and blaming yourself for your own feelings for the fact that this unhealthy non monogamous relationship is destroying them on the inside but they still care about the person who’s taking advantage of them.

Do we just not care about what’s going to happen to these young men’s hearts when all the jealousy and resentment comes to roost?

Or do we not think about it?

Not believe it’ll happen because we insist this is actually a healthy dynamic?

There’s nothing wrong with being poly and going out into the poly community to find a relationship where consent is understood.

It’s another thing to convince your two closest friends to become poly as minors in maybe their first relationships.

Do they really understand and consent to a thruple, or do they just have feelings for their friend and are told this is how they can shoot their shot?

What is the thought process on being unable to see the “poor decision”? It seems so obvious. Am I just old and brainwashed by society? This seems wrong in this specific situation. This seems like it will end in pain and heartbreak and the daughter is being selfish and uncaring towards her friends feelings and needs to understand that.

If she’s poly that’s okay, but this doesn’t seem like the cleanest most consenting poly couple here. This seems like a bunch of kids being idiots about their first attempts at love who could use some gentle guidance on how to treat people in a relationship.

It’s definitely not as normal as dying your hair blue if were comparing percents of population. It’s a lot more rare.

While I fully support the right for consenting adults to express love however they want, I can’t help but feel this dynamic is incredibly unhealthy and I worry about the kids.

I seriously doubt it’s “normal” for these types of relationships to be successful. The power dynamic is just so off. Humans are jealous creatures.

Maybe that’s my biases, I don’t actually know, but if i saw successful polyamoric couples walking around anywhere close to the rate i see blue haired people that would go a long way to changing my mind.

Clever bait

That seems unnecessarily harsh.

I find the built in controls with visual studio supremely convenient.

After using git init --bare for the remote repo I use the built in git controls for branching and switching out as well as syncing and pushing. Why not, the button is right there and it’s literally faster.

What about roman numeral i?

His job sent him

But times change and the cost of free tier users surpasses that of paying users. Should the company continue providing the same level of service for free tier users?

“Times changing” here seems to be the central trick to the argument.

What’s interesting about enshittification is that as the company gets more and more profitable there seems to be more and more excuses as to why these free features are so costly.

It’s very easy for a company to put out a statement that times are changing and that the free tier is unaffordable. Is that always true? Who’s to say?

I’m sure sometimes it is true but the doubt is why arguments like this will never go away.

Also, what other term than entitlement would you use for somebody gets something for free, is not promised that it will stay free forever, the free offering is cancelled or limited, and the user starts complaining?

What other term than incompetent would you use for a company that puts out a free product, attracts a bunch of free users, abruptly cuts access for those features and puts it behind a paywall, and then acts surprised when those same users complain about it.

If you want to make a business move go ahead, it’s your right, but accept the complaints from your user base you predictably pissed off.

the regress problem states that all human knowledge is axiomatic.

it is true for literally every single possible proposition.

Okay so it’s clear you understand why I brought it up and that it’s true.

I don’t know why the rest of the comment is phrased so angrily but if you’re just saying I’m right I don’t know how to respond to it lol.

asking him to overcome this problem is so fucking far outside the scope of what you’re arguing about as to be ridiculous, you look silly.

I wasn’t asking him to overcome it, I was astonished he would claim he could overcome it because it’s as obviously true as we both claim.

Not sure why I look silly if you keep telling me how absolutely right I am in all contexts lol

Just because its easy to get a bunch of humans to agree say murder is wrong, doesn’t mean you can call that objective.

The reason humans and ants differ so much in morality is because of the difference in the subjective experience of being a person versus being an ant.

If morality is subjective, you’d expect creatures with similar subjective experiences to agree with each other.

You’d expect one subjective blob of rules to conform to human biology/sociology and a separate blob of subjective rules to apply to antkind with no real way to interface between the two.

Absolute moral rules can be discovered through logical deduction.

Can you elaborate?

I don’t believe that’s possible unless you take an axiomatic approach which would obviously be a moral relativist approach since we can just disagree on the choice of axioms themselves and prevent any deduction.

How do you overcome the is-ought problem?

Yet you, and every other human still engage in moral behaviors.

Just human? I mean, sure do, but we’re leaving out a huge array of animals who also engage in rudimentary moral behavior.

You have some prescriptive intuition buried deep inside you.

Of course, we evolved to be social animals did we not? What else would you expect but inate instinctual “rules” when they’d lead to a clearly fitter society.

The ability to describe the components, inputs and outputs of that intuition is the entire conversation.

Right, and just like the variation in genetic material this variation in inputs and outputs that we all have which are wholly unique to us as individuals and while remarkably similar to others raised in similar environments, also remarkably unique in subtle ways.

I agree this is the entire conversation. And the obviousness of this fact, that moral expression is subtly unique to each individual, is the ultimate answer to the question.

If you are raised in a subjectively different environment, then the rules you learn to behave by will be subjective to that environment.

“Morality is subjective” is the inevitable conclusion of a secular, empiricalistic worldview.

Essentially, now that we are in a scientific world disagreement is resolved through experiment.

Disagreement not resolvable through experiment is removed from the realm of science, and is called falsifiable and is seen as subjective.

If you and I disagree, there are no scientific tests we can run to resolve moral issues.

And since we can’t point to a God or objective moral laws, it doesn’t even matter if one theoretically exists because it’s inaccessible and infalsifiable. Effectively it doesn’t exist for us.

Both of us are following different moral standards, the “rules” in your head are not the same rules that I’m subjective to.

You’re morals are subjective to your experience, it simply is a fact.