Article / Archive
Polygamy, polyamory, and every other version of “open relationships” may present themselves as progressive, enlightened, or even natural, but strip away the romanticized justifications, and what’s left is a system designed to compensate for people who wouldn’t be able to attract or keep a high-quality mate otherwise.
For all the lofty justifications—whether it’s religious doctrine or “relationship anarchy”—these systems consistently breed dysfunction rather than stability and fulfillment. The best men and women don’t need them. The best relationships don’t come from them. And the people who champion them the loudest? Let’s just say…they’re rarely the ones anyone is fighting over.
Now, before someone rushes to type out a rebuttal, let’s clarify: are there some exceptions? Sure. Have there been powerful, wealthy men throughout history who successfully gathered a harem of beautiful women? Of course. Has an attractive woman ever claimed that she doesn't mind being in an "open" relationship? Sure. But for the overwhelming majority of cases, polygamy has been a desperate workaround for people who don’t fare well in an open dating market.
https://x.com/maslxrd/status/1602769877583945729
In fundamentalist Mormon compounds, girls are “assigned” to older men because all the younger, more desirable men have been pushed out. In cults, women are “spiritually called” into plural marriage, which is just a manipulative way of saying they have no real choice.
And then we have postmodern polyamory, which isn’t much better. In this scenario (which is just rebranded, commitment-phobic polygamy for progressives), both men and women are deeply dysfunctional. Over the years, progressive ideology has systematically dismantled traditional relationship norms, insisting that exclusivity is outdated and commitment is restrictive. But instead of creating a utopia of "free love" and limitless possibilities, they’ve backed themselves into a corner where the pool of desirable partners keeps shrinking—and the people left embracing this idea are often the ones no one else truly wants.
Neither system results in happiness. Neither results in stability. Neither is something functional, high-quality men or women seek out when they actually have options.
https://x.com/Slatzism/status/1748370998733222362
Contrast this with polygamy and polyamory, where the structure itself ensures that no one is ever fully committed to anyone. These systems incentivize unstable dynamics, leaving people in a constant state of competition, jealousy, and insecurity.
At its core, monogamy doesn’t just create better relationships—it creates better people. It teaches patience, commitment, and personal responsibility. It rewards self-discipline and emotional intelligence rather than the ability to juggle multiple partners. And perhaps most importantly, it ensures that people choose who's best, rather than just choosing often.
But in real life? The San Francisco swingers party crowd looks less like a Calvin Klein ad and more like a Craigslist gathering for people who haven’t seen a gym (or a shower) in years. The illusion only works on screen. Out in the wild, the reality of these arrangements is far less glamorous—because the people who actually have the option to be exclusive? They choose to be.
People who are attractive, well-adjusted, and looking for a lifelong spouse aren’t chasing just anyone. They’re securing the most beautiful person who is also actually willing to commit to them exclusively. And that’s the keyword here: exclusivity. High-value people don’t want to share with others, and they're not in a position where they would need to.
https://x.com/nypost/status/1499113220937764866
The truth is, that men and women who are attractive, successful, and capable of real commitment don’t need multiple "partners." They choose monogamy because they can. A desirable person can win over another incredible person and build a happy, stable life with them. Those who can’t? I guess it makes sense why they might prefer an entire system—be it religious, cultural, or social—to convince multiple mediocre people to settle for them instead.
So the next time someone starts glorifying polygamy or polyamory as a superior lifestyle choice, take a good look at their relationships, their emotional stability, and their ability to build something meaningful with one person. If they had the option of true commitment with someone of actual quality, would they still be trying to convince you that sharing a partner is the key to happiness?
Probably not.
Polygamy, polyamory, and every other version of “open relationships” may present themselves as progressive, enlightened, or even natural, but strip away the romanticized justifications, and what’s left is a system designed to compensate for people who wouldn’t be able to attract or keep a high-quality mate otherwise.
For all the lofty justifications—whether it’s religious doctrine or “relationship anarchy”—these systems consistently breed dysfunction rather than stability and fulfillment. The best men and women don’t need them. The best relationships don’t come from them. And the people who champion them the loudest? Let’s just say…they’re rarely the ones anyone is fighting over.
Now, before someone rushes to type out a rebuttal, let’s clarify: are there some exceptions? Sure. Have there been powerful, wealthy men throughout history who successfully gathered a harem of beautiful women? Of course. Has an attractive woman ever claimed that she doesn't mind being in an "open" relationship? Sure. But for the overwhelming majority of cases, polygamy has been a desperate workaround for people who don’t fare well in an open dating market.
https://x.com/maslxrd/status/1602769877583945729
The Cycle of Dysfunction in Polygamy and Polyamory
Polygamy, traditionally speaking, has been a system that forces people to settle for a situation they wouldn’t have chosen under normal circumstances.In fundamentalist Mormon compounds, girls are “assigned” to older men because all the younger, more desirable men have been pushed out. In cults, women are “spiritually called” into plural marriage, which is just a manipulative way of saying they have no real choice.
And then we have postmodern polyamory, which isn’t much better. In this scenario (which is just rebranded, commitment-phobic polygamy for progressives), both men and women are deeply dysfunctional. Over the years, progressive ideology has systematically dismantled traditional relationship norms, insisting that exclusivity is outdated and commitment is restrictive. But instead of creating a utopia of "free love" and limitless possibilities, they’ve backed themselves into a corner where the pool of desirable partners keeps shrinking—and the people left embracing this idea are often the ones no one else truly wants.
Neither system results in happiness. Neither results in stability. Neither is something functional, high-quality men or women seek out when they actually have options.
https://x.com/Slatzism/status/1748370998733222362
Monogamy Makes for Better Mate Selection
One of the greatest advantages of monogamy is that it naturally leads to better mate selection. The expectation of exclusivity forces both men and women to be more deliberate, more discerning, and more invested in the long-term compatibility of their choice. This more effectively weeds out dysfunctional behaviors because people know that commitment means more than just a temporary arrangement—it’s a real investment in their future.Contrast this with polygamy and polyamory, where the structure itself ensures that no one is ever fully committed to anyone. These systems incentivize unstable dynamics, leaving people in a constant state of competition, jealousy, and insecurity.
At its core, monogamy doesn’t just create better relationships—it creates better people. It teaches patience, commitment, and personal responsibility. It rewards self-discipline and emotional intelligence rather than the ability to juggle multiple partners. And perhaps most importantly, it ensures that people choose who's best, rather than just choosing often.
Be Honest: You’ve Never Seen a Good-Looking Polycule
Hollywood loves to glamorize non-monogamy, but reality tells a very different story. In movies and TV, threesomes and polyamorous relationships are always portrayed with attractive people—the effortlessly sexy women, the ruggedly handsome guys, all entangled in a scene dripping with cinematic perfection.But in real life? The San Francisco swingers party crowd looks less like a Calvin Klein ad and more like a Craigslist gathering for people who haven’t seen a gym (or a shower) in years. The illusion only works on screen. Out in the wild, the reality of these arrangements is far less glamorous—because the people who actually have the option to be exclusive? They choose to be.
People who are attractive, well-adjusted, and looking for a lifelong spouse aren’t chasing just anyone. They’re securing the most beautiful person who is also actually willing to commit to them exclusively. And that’s the keyword here: exclusivity. High-value people don’t want to share with others, and they're not in a position where they would need to.
https://x.com/nypost/status/1499113220937764866
The truth is, that men and women who are attractive, successful, and capable of real commitment don’t need multiple "partners." They choose monogamy because they can. A desirable person can win over another incredible person and build a happy, stable life with them. Those who can’t? I guess it makes sense why they might prefer an entire system—be it religious, cultural, or social—to convince multiple mediocre people to settle for them instead.
Final Verdict: Polygamy and Polyamory Are for the Undesirable
At the end of the day, polygamy and polyamory aren’t the natural order or the best path to happiness—they are convenient justifications for people who would struggle in a normal, functioning relationship dynamic.So the next time someone starts glorifying polygamy or polyamory as a superior lifestyle choice, take a good look at their relationships, their emotional stability, and their ability to build something meaningful with one person. If they had the option of true commitment with someone of actual quality, would they still be trying to convince you that sharing a partner is the key to happiness?
Probably not.
It’s never who you want to be polyamorous 
