Polyamorous means you like to have sex with multiple people. It seems the label is needed so polyamorous people can find each other. Normally the pathway is to go to a disco so we assume neo-polyamour means you're lazy in addition to being fickle and will only look online. (CNN: Polyamorous community welcomes OkCupid feature for open relationships)
Since the journos are inventing the words, we have a request for more granularity because polyamorous doesn't tell us if someone likes to have sex with multiple people serially or all at once. It's important to differentiate so we know if we're with an orgiastic polyamorous partner or a regular one. Do we need to bring circus clowns into it or will the trapeze alone be enough.
Bisexual has been big for some years since undecided must be too vague for people who use the word. It seems if one is bisexual then one must inevitably by polyamorous but maybe some call themselves monogamous because they only nail one person at a time.
(Ed: are you judging these people?)
Hell no. We can't even figure out what they are with all these fookin' labels. That OkCupid site is reported to support twenty-two different genders and twelve sexual orientations. Let that li'l thought noodle around yer noggin a little bit.
(Ed: I'm striking out after two genders)
Yah, same here. We can get up to four if we count transgender going either way. We're assuming gender is your actual corpus whereas sexual orientations are with which other genders you like to do whatever you do. We're not surprised no-one gets laid when they have made it so confusing. You would need a Star Trek Field Guide to understand it.
(Ed: is there such a thing as a Star Trek Field Guide?)
No idea.
We have got to get Caitlyn Jenner into this since the journo coverage of her has been spectacularly awful. Unknown if they even have a gender for her when she's a woman on top and a man on the bottom. Whether that's a gender or a fookin' aberration is your call.
(Ed: why judge it?)
Because it's grossly unethical medicine. Hollywood has taken one of the deepest, irreversible decisions a human can make and turned it into a medical surreality sideshow. It's not just bad medicine, it's a fucking disgrace.
Mostly the neo-journos need a word for a bad sequel. The sexual revolution was fifty years ago and all that's come with this one is sexual confusion, disillusion, disunion. They could do with listening to some Marvin Gaye.
Since the journos are inventing the words, we have a request for more granularity because polyamorous doesn't tell us if someone likes to have sex with multiple people serially or all at once. It's important to differentiate so we know if we're with an orgiastic polyamorous partner or a regular one. Do we need to bring circus clowns into it or will the trapeze alone be enough.
Bisexual has been big for some years since undecided must be too vague for people who use the word. It seems if one is bisexual then one must inevitably by polyamorous but maybe some call themselves monogamous because they only nail one person at a time.
(Ed: are you judging these people?)
Hell no. We can't even figure out what they are with all these fookin' labels. That OkCupid site is reported to support twenty-two different genders and twelve sexual orientations. Let that li'l thought noodle around yer noggin a little bit.
(Ed: I'm striking out after two genders)
Yah, same here. We can get up to four if we count transgender going either way. We're assuming gender is your actual corpus whereas sexual orientations are with which other genders you like to do whatever you do. We're not surprised no-one gets laid when they have made it so confusing. You would need a Star Trek Field Guide to understand it.
(Ed: is there such a thing as a Star Trek Field Guide?)
No idea.
We have got to get Caitlyn Jenner into this since the journo coverage of her has been spectacularly awful. Unknown if they even have a gender for her when she's a woman on top and a man on the bottom. Whether that's a gender or a fookin' aberration is your call.
(Ed: why judge it?)
Because it's grossly unethical medicine. Hollywood has taken one of the deepest, irreversible decisions a human can make and turned it into a medical surreality sideshow. It's not just bad medicine, it's a fucking disgrace.
Mostly the neo-journos need a word for a bad sequel. The sexual revolution was fifty years ago and all that's come with this one is sexual confusion, disillusion, disunion. They could do with listening to some Marvin Gaye.
No comments:
Post a Comment