“Polyamorous sex is the most quietly revolutionary political weapon in the United States.” Most of the guys in this article are even more beta than they sound. But guys can weaponize this through game and through being in the superior position.
“Polyamorous sex is the most quietly revolutionary political weapon in the United States”
The Red Quest 
I read the first link (as much of it as I could stomach) and I can only concur with Nash’s comment to the second link that poly in the US must be a “shitshow”. If consensual non-monogamy wants to become widespread, it needs to distance itself from these new-age-nooky nutjobs. Indigo wants to change the world by making others refer to her as “them” (but using the personal pronoun when talking about themself!), and screwing a few lame-ass soyboys who couldn’t even construct an IKEA bookshelf, let alone a coherent society. SMH
LikeLike
Cool, masculine guys doing poly, don’t want to come out to the world as doing poly, for obvious reasons. They don’t want to humiliate themselves, humiliate the women they’re with, or disrupt their jobs and lives. Cool, masculine guys doing poly do it under the radar, in private conversations. They (we?) don’t want to be activists and don’t want to be associated by the kind of losers who appear in qz.com articles.
Most people want to associate with cooler and higher-status people, and no one willing to speak up for being poly is either. That’s because open and poly are too disruptive to the normal social order. So the only people who speak up are freaks, outliers, etc. Being publicly non-monogamous under your real name is a good way to lose a lot of real-world jobs, paying real-world rent.
There aren’t good, public spokespeople for this. Maybe there never will be. Cool women don’t want to be publicly non-monogamous because, if they do, they kill their ability to get one guy to commit to them, even as a primary partner. Coming out as publicly open is just saying, “Hit it and quit it.” Cool guys don’t want to perceived as a “cuck.” There is not much benefit to being super public and many costs. So who gets quoted? People with nothing to lose. Kooks and weirdos. Anyone remotely mainstream, stays away.
A few of my friends know a little about what I do. Almost none from the mainstream world know it all.
Almost no hot chicks will want to be with a publicly “poly” guy. Their friends will make fun of them. But a lot more chicks than you’d think will go for this sort of thing if it’s pitched to them properly. A guy who gets women will understand the female need for covert sexual behavior. So that kind of guy will not want to be publicly poly.
A publicly poly guy is almost all drawback and almost no gain. So what kind of guy will do it? Right.
Think about chicks on vacation. When they’re away from most friends and family, they’ll do things they won’t do at home, because those things are less likely to to affect their reputations. Similar thing here.
LikeLike
You’re absolutely right, of course. I have zero interest in being a publicly-identifiable activist, a Sexual Freedom Warrior. I don’t advertise my non-monogamous lifestyle – “Don’t ask, don’t tell” works best with society as a whole as well as with girls. Many of the latter are surprisingly receptive to discreetly open arrangements, even in the conservative society in which I live. Or perhaps it’s the enhanced power differential here.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m not 100% averse to being more public, but the cost-benefit is NOT there. Anyone who disrupts the social order, pays a price. That is why prostitutes and most playboys stay beneath the surface. Chicks HATE being outed as sex workers.
For society to work, we all have to believe certain unlikely things, things some call “lies.” But if you push at society enough, some of the truth is revealed, and the possibilities for the player become clearer.
LikeLike