2026-09-02 20:53 UTC
Replies (8)
-
@TinyTimmyTokyo@awful.systems 2026-09-02 21:25
I don’t know the answer, but I’ve always assumed it’s because it’s just something Yud is really into.
-
@CinnasVerses@awful.systems 2026-09-02 21:42
There are a lot of attempts to push polyamory on white-collar and chattering-class culture, but many men in the USA seem to push it so they can tell their primary partner “I sleep with my groupies because I am polyamorous” and tell their groupies “who cares that you have a boyfriend, how about polyamory?” It also lets insecure men show off that they have not just one hot babe but several, and we know many rationalists are desperate for the rest of the world to recognize their genius. The problem, to be clear, is not necessarily with polyamory, just with people who use it as a way to get a gang of domestic servants. I still have scars from events like the ones documented at allegedlythewebsite.org So many men in the skeptic and adjacent blogosphere used “sex-positivity” to mean “I can hit on you and encourage you to bottom at kink events, and you can’'t say I am creeping you out or you are looking fro a job not a playmate.” Similar dynamics are common in academia.
-
@Architeuthis@awful.systems 2026-09-02 21:43
Interesting question because I bet it’s bound to coincide with when the cult dynamics really began to take hold. Like this isn’t your grandpa’s swingers group, it is vertical workplace polyamory^1^ with an implicit understanding that if members in good standing don’t get sufficient amounts of ass they might get distracted and become inefficient, costing the universe untold billions in unrealized far future lives. It’s very easy to imagine a scenario where they just slapped the polyamory brand on an already established culture of culty sex shenanigans. I swear the claudism was unintentional
-
@scruiser@awful.systems 2026-09-03 03:08
I don’t exactly why, but based off the dates of various classic lesswrong posts I know it has existed since before 2010 in rationalist culture. As to inexact reasons why… some key big name starting rationalist (i.e. Yudkowsky for sure, but probably a few others) were into polyamory. (Probably for the obvious reasons of getting to sleep with more people.)
-
@rook@awful.systems 2026-09-03 06:01
I reckon it goes way back to the movements that produced them. My first thought is ayn rand: In 1954, her close relationship with Nathaniel Branden turned into a romantic affair. They informed both their spouses, who briefly objected, until Rand “sp[u]n out a deductive chain from which you just couldn’t escape”, in Barbara Branden’s words, resulting in her and O’Connor’s assent. You can see how “The most rational thing is that I fuck your spouse” would appeal to the less wrong folk. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayn_Rand#Atlas_Shrugged_and…
-
@blakestacey@awful.systems 2026-09-03 15:38
“Polyamory” is the excuse that abusive men use now the way they used “free love” in the 1960s. I know people who make the poly thing work; they’re honest and communicative, traits that I do not associate with lesswrongs.
-
@TrashGoblin@awful.systems 2026-09-03 18:39
I always assumed it was a package deal with the California Ideology.
-
@protectedinfoil@awful.systems 2026-09-04 16:48
EY has recapitulated a ton of bullshit he learned as a teenager hanging out on the Extropians listserv with older shitty libertarian dudes. The archives are like a proto-LW, with conversations about race and intelligence, sex and kinks, gender differences, armchair geopolitics, etc, mixed in with fantasizing about the glorious transhuman future. I don’t know that anyone was using poly as a term at that point, but everything I’ve read about the Extropians suggests they were eager early adopters of bullshit Evo-psych ideas about men having “evolved” to fuck lots of women.