4 ms·
For posterity, here is Jordan Peterson responding to the numerous articles that misinterpretation his usage of the phrase "enforced monogamy": https://jordanb
by frenchpress123 8y ago
For posterity, here is Jordan Peterson responding to the numerous articles that misinterpretation his usage of the phrase "enforced monogamy":
https://jordanbpeterson.com/media/on-the-new-york-times-and-enforced-monogamy/ https://jordanbpeterson.com/media/on-the-new-york-times-and-...
- digi_owl 8y agoSo it is yet another example of "context insensitivity" from readers/critiques...
- k__ 8y agoThis doesn't make any sense. Monogamous relationships remove 2 people from the dating marked, non-monogamous ones remove none.
- dragonwriter 8y agoExclusive relationships remove 2 or more whether they are committed monogamy, committed polygamy (polygyny or polyandry), or committed two-sided polyamory (the last seems the most rarely attested, if it is a thing at all outside of fiction, and is included only for the same of excessive completeness.) Committed polygamy does so asymmetrically with regard to gender, particularly, a committed polygynous relationship removes more women from the pool than men, and thus can be seen (from a numbers-game perspective) as disadvantaging not-yet-attached men more than monogamous commitments.
- k__ 8y ago"committed two-sided polyamory" That's the one I'm talking about. I'm living it for 10 years now and know many living it too. The public awareness doesn't seem to be high in that case, but I have the impression most monogamy-proponents simply leave it out because it falsifies their points entirely.