Comment author: therufs 14 January 2015 03:57:17AM 4 points [-]

Will she be appearing on the moderator list?

Meetup : Raleigh, NC (RTLW) Discussion Meetup

2 therufs 14 January 2015 03:47AM

Discussion article for the meetup : Raleigh, NC (RTLW) Discussion Meetup

WHEN: 07 May 2022 07:30:00PM (-0400)

WHERE: Durham NC 27701

The Triangle area LessWrong meetup is held the 1st, 3rd, and 5th Thursdays of the month, usually in either Durham or Raleigh. For dates, topics, and locations, please join our mailing list for the most up to date information, or email Ruthan.

Our next meeting will be 5/5, probably at a place, and we'll do a thing. If you'd like to influence the specificity of "place" and "thing", our scheduling document, Shotgun Rules for RTLW Meetings, can be found here.

Hope to see you there!

Discussion article for the meetup : Raleigh, NC (RTLW) Discussion Meetup

Comment author: VAuroch 09 January 2015 10:17:36PM 0 points [-]

Empirically, it is generally easier for women to find potential partners willing to date them than it is for men; this isn't necessarily useful to them unless their standards are low-ish, but if they're willing to sacrifice date quality, it's a tradeoff that's much easier for them to make.

This is massively exacerbated by the gender imbalance present in most fields that have a significant rationalist following, obviously.

Comment author: therufs 10 January 2015 01:24:27AM 1 point [-]

I'm curious about the extent to which rationalists have a strong enough preference for dating within the rationality community that they exclude non-rationalist potential dates.

Or, in another framing, to what extent the preference for a rationalist date outweighs other considerations, to the extent that not dating a non-rationalist is preferable to dating a non-rationalist.

Comment author: Kindly 08 January 2015 10:40:53PM 5 points [-]

Of course, women (and men) dating each other aside, women as a whole go on the same number of dates as men; however, this does not imply that the same number of women go on a nonzero (or non-low) number of dates as men. This would imply that a small fraction of men are dating a large fraction of women.

Comment author: therufs 10 January 2015 01:20:19AM 1 point [-]

Hmm. It'd be my guess that this effect diminishes as the number of dates/length of relationship increases; what do you think?

Comment author: gothgirl420666 05 January 2015 03:44:03PM 12 points [-]

This isn't strictly related, but I was thinking about polyamory today and I was wondering something.

I've never experienced polyamory in real life, and while aspects of it seem cool, there's a major concern I would have with it. I feel like I would deplore a situation in which I have only one partner who in turn has multiple partners. I wouldn't be able to shake the feeling that I was getting the raw end of the deal, like I had been duped into becoming a willing participant in a sort of public systematic cuckoldry.

Given that fact, I feel like any polyamorous relationship with a "primary" would be a constant battle of sorts to ensure that I have a greater than or equal to number of dating prospects as my partner. But as a man (the username is a dumb joke), I feel like this battle would be stacked against me, as women tend to have an easier time finding dates. I imagine that this is doubly true in a rationalist community where the men probably outnumber the women by a significant amount.

I'm not sure if feeling this way says more about polyamory, or my own selfishness and insecurities. Anyway, I would be interested in hearing from polyamorous people if this is an issue that ever comes up, and if so, how it's dealt with.

Comment author: therufs 08 January 2015 10:26:49PM 0 points [-]

women tend to have an easier time finding dates

I'm a little confused by what this implies. Are you observing that it's easier for women to initiate dating activities (plausible), or that women go on more dates than men (but while some women date each other, most don't)?

Comment author: atorm 07 January 2015 12:59:14PM *  0 points [-]

I know what you mean. For me it helped to come out to everyone I cared about. I wasn't able/willing to do so with family, and those interactions are more stressful than interactions with friends. The increased mental load of "don't out yourself" is not insignificant.

However, I'm surprised you've been poly for 20 months if you've found it to be net negative.

Comment author: therufs 08 January 2015 10:14:54PM *  0 points [-]

Yeah. For me I don't think so much in terms of "don't out yourself" (basically figuring this is impossible) as "will I be able to manage my relationship with this bystander with minimum future awkwardness" (which I have maybe unreasonably low priors for.)

(Also, not net negative; see above)

Comment author: therufs 08 January 2015 03:22:35PM 0 points [-]

Trying to notice and update on how much brainpower is used by/distraction is caused by looming unmade decisions, even fairly trivial ones.

Comment author: CBHacking 07 January 2015 12:58:41PM *  1 point [-]

The fact that you describe this as "my negative experience" instead of something like "the only negative part of my experience" suggests to me that you think you would be happier in a non-poly relationship which is otherwise the same as your current relationship in as many ways as possible. Is that so?

Leaving aside the fact that mono and poly relationship opportunities have limited overlap and therefore often aren't really comparable, would you convert your current relationship to a monogamous (monoamorous?) one if you could, even though that would require excluding some members of it? Or is the relationship you have now, with its multiple partners, something you would not risk losing for the sake of some conformity?

I ask because I really can't tell from your comment whether you're describing "being in a poly relationship is a negative outcome (but I stay in it anyway because it beats my available alternatives)" or "this is a significantly negative experience that I have had as a result of being poly (but the total outcome of the relationship is positive)" and the subject of the thread is outcomes more than specific experiences.

EDIT: grammar.

Comment author: therufs 07 January 2015 10:13:31PM 2 points [-]

Argh. No, my current relationship(s) are pretty great overall, and I was so enthusiastic about demonstrating that I was realistic about the downsides that I didn't really think about the outcomes vs. experiences thing.

Sorry for the confusion; will (try to) edit for clarity.

Comment author: therufs 07 January 2015 03:51:04AM *  3 points [-]

The main negative aspect of my ongoing experience (20 months so far) has primarily been in increased awkwardness around acquaintances and family members. I'm predisposed to that anyway, and actually doing something nonconformy (and not really having much sense of how acquaintances and family members feel about it, even those who are aware of the relationship) has heightened the phenomenon.

It's definitely net positive overall, though. :)

edit: deobfuscation

Comment author: passive_fist 04 January 2015 09:43:31PM -1 points [-]

Separation of factors is noble but in this case it's pretty much impossible. How do you separate someone's mental health from desire to be in a poly relationship?

I'd be more interested in the effects of various types of poly relationships. For instance, are poly relationships with one man and several women more stable and positive than one woman and several men? I suspect the answer to be yes.

Comment author: therufs 04 January 2015 09:47:18PM 0 points [-]

How do you separate someone's mental health from desire to be in a poly relationship?

I'm fairly certain you didn't mean it, but this is pretty insulting.

View more: Prev | Next