What is Lundiachans opinion about wifu sharing ? Is it based or is it just another Jew invention ?
>>294277 it is very based and has precedent in our glorious Dharmic history. I think I saw a tweet about some Mahabharata character talking about how monogamy wasn't always the norm and people being sexually free (as in outside of marriage) was the norm. even by the Mahabharata times, a woman having multiple male partners wasn't seen as that bad of a thing.
>>294279 so anyway, as I kept saying before getting banned by faggot jannies, my big sister. I imagine what it would be like to just be one of the two or more cute little brothers of my loving big sister. she would absolutely adore her beloved little brothers. she would kiss good bye every one of them individually. she would tell each of us how much she has always loved us. as one scholar talking about a concept similar to Advaitism said: the lover and the beloved are just illusions, all that exists is the surpeme reality of Love. so it would be between us.
>>294277 BASED. Didn't know this was a thing. When will everyone become this based ? Imagine being able to openely have sex with whoever one likes. What a based world it would be. This could be a permanent solution to many problems like cheating, bored with same patner etc. This is a revolutionary idea
>>294288 STDs will only become rarer with the advent of polygamy. people would be more likely to take precautions against it and get checked up regularly. there would be no stigma around it. and it isn't like fucking random people in the street, it's more about having a sexual relationship with the people you already know and love very well. polygamy is based, anon. only monogamous people can be cucks, as only they can be cucked. their no possibility of getting cucked if people having multiple partners is the norm. no more incels. no more resentment of not being able to get a virgin waifu, as everyone would be expected to lose their virginity to an experienced succubus.
>>294277 I love exhibitionism and my wife being force fucked by other men against her wishes. But I hate cuckoldry because its consensual among all parties.
>>294292 >people would be more likely to take precautions This is an argumentum ad consequentiam. You are making giant assumptions from the first statement and then ranting on from there. This operates on the assumption that people will behave perfectly. Same can be said of rest of the post.
>>294291 Condoms costs. Medical procedures costs even more. Nobody is going to bother with the latter for a one night stand. No slum dweller is going to care about the first hence why single motherhood is at record levels among niggers.
>>294297 this isn't assumptions, but proven research. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26395880/ "CNM (consensually non-monogamous) partners reported more lifetime sexual partners than individuals in monogamous relationships. In addition, compared with monogamous partners, CNM partners were more likely to (i) report using condoms during intercourse with their primary partner; (ii) report using condoms during intercourse with extradyadic partners; and (iii) report having been tested for STIs. Approximately one-quarter of monogamous partners reported sex outside of their primary relationship, most of whom indicated that their primary partner did not know about their infidelity. The percentage of participants reporting previous STI diagnoses did not differ across relationship type." Monogamous people are getting cucked behind their backs with the same, if not higher, rates of STIs.
>>294283 https://www.natgeotv.com/za/special/genius-albert-einsteins-theory-of-infidelity >"WHEN A MAN FORCES HIMSELF TO REMAIN MONOGAMOUS, IT IS A BITTER FRUIT FOR EVERYONE INVOLVED." Einstein being total chad
>>294300 >proven research Sociology isn't science and there's nothing 'proven' in your article >Participants (N = 556) were recruited for an online survey of "attitudes toward sexual relationships." Jfl. Are you for real? Only thing your article proves is among those 513 people, monogamous people practiced less safe sex, nothing else. This is not surprising considering monogamous people operate on the assumption their partners don't cheat and trust them. While polygamous knows their partners genitals is a walking petridish of STD microbes and just being safe. If anything it proves team monogamy right, if you don't want STDs, don't fuck with people whom they have no idea about their history. Also what about the other non monogamous participants who weren't practicing safe sex? Are you just going to ignore them. Also online survey? Lmao indeed.
>>294298 >Believe it or not You have to be either underage or just a chamaar newfag to be surprised by that fact
>>294304 here's another one: https://www.academia.edu/download/39124623/1-s2.0-S0091743515002030-main.pdf "The utility of monogamy (in practice) as a strategy for preventing sexually transmitted infections (STIs) was investigated. By reviewing recent literature surrounding monogamous relationships and sexual behaviors, the authors determined that monogamy might not prevent against STIs as expected. First, the authors elucidate the ways in which public health officials and the general public define and interpret monogamy and discuss how this contributes to monogamy as an ineffectual STI prevention strategy. Second, the authors provide evidence that individuals' compliance with monogamy is likely to be low, similar to rates of compliance with other medical advice. Lastly, the authors draw upon recent research findings suggesting that people who label themselves as monogamous are less likely to engage in safer sex behaviors than people who have an explicit agreement with their partner to be non-monogamous. Future research and clinical directions to promote sexual health and destigmatize sexual behaviors are considered." instead of asking me to prove things even after I've presented two papers, why don't you try to prove your baseless claim that monogamy reduces STI rates?
>>294308 you can't fool me, ichan. but don't worry I'll let you suck my dick for free even if you aren't underage.
>>294307 >Here's another one Again whats the point? All it still says is that monogamous people might cheat and spread diseases that way. It still isn't proving that all non monogamous people behave perfectly and avoid STDs like your original argument assumed.
>>294312 >STDs will only become rarer with the advent of polygamy. people would be more likely to take precautions against it and get checked up regularly. that's the original comment. where does it say that polygamous people behave perfectly? where does it say that STDs would disappear? it simply says they'll become rarer, and unlike what the comment being replied to was assumed, polygamy won't lead to explosion in STDs.
>>294314 Your articles suffer from something called selection bias. All of them took data from a culture that practiced monogamy. Of course in a culture the normal is monogamous sex, and only richer people have polygamous relationships, of course people are going to be take more precautions when it comes to sex with other people and hence it might seem monogampus people catch more STDs especially when they are committing infedility. Coupled that with the aforementioned trust issue, people become more reluctant of using precautions while having sex. However can same be said of a culture that normalizes polygamy and even poor people has multiple partners an year? Do you think everyone in that participating society will be able to practice safe sex and availed effective precautions?
>>294307 there's like a billion things wrong with being a whore ( man or woman ) STDs are one of them.
>>294279 yeah, it was acceptable i could give more light but the thing, our history was not repressed, it now handled by those who want to make the current repressed and silently live like cattle
>>294307 Also Hussey read your paper. First of all they only specifically reviewed "recent literature". This is again another instance of selection bias, of course in a culture where one night stands are part and parcel of regular life, not even monogamous people will be safe from STDs. Also their definition of monogamy is twisted muttmerican definition of 'one partner at a time'. And it specifically talks about people who cheated and caught themselves herpes. None of these people are actually 'monogamous'. They are all polygamous people with an unaware partner. Nobody was claiming monogamous people don't cheat nor they can't catch STDs. Of course if you've multiple people as sex partner ls, you're more at risk of STDs that monogamous people have. Please provide me a study that actually only selects actual monogamous people and proves they are at greater risks, not whitoids who identify as "monogamous".
>>294319 Okay but atleast the middle class or rich people with chad intellect who take proper precaution can participate in polygamy. Why don't people adopt it in large numbers then atleast ? Maybe not everyone but many can. I see waifu sharing as an absolute win
>>294279 It isn't. The ideal Indian love stories/couples are monogamous. Think Ram and Sita. People who practice polygamy aren't exactly shown to be virtuous people. They are the kind of guy who sells their wife as property in a moment's whim for some gambling game and then afterwards plunge your country into one of its worst wars in history because a moment's dopamine hit excited you.
>>294324 >middle class and rich people Lmao no. As I said, not even rich niggers are going to bother screening everyone they slept with. And monogamy is exclusively the creation of the middle class. The death of monogamy will be the mark of the death of the middle class.
>>294331 >reddit niggers >middle class Bhangis who wallow themselves in student loan debts, work as some part timer in some mall and lives in some crappy 1 BHK apartment on rent don't usually call themselves 'middle class'. They are more likely to identify themselves as a working class instead of middle class.
>>294332 If redditoids can do it anybody can do it. I am a waifu sharing convert now thnx to this thread
>>294323 there is no such thing as monogamy is real life. there are only unsatisfied partners and a 5-25% chance of getting cucked. and that holds for India too. if not physically, toull get mentally cucked as your wife dreams of the chad cocks from the youth she couldn't (or could) get before her parents forced her to arrange marry.
>>294390 You are projecting too much incel-kun. Have you considered that maybe not everybody is as shallow as you are and don't see each other as fuck toys?
>>294277 Things get interesting when you know our scripture gives the permission. your wife can sleep with 3 different with your permission and society can't call her a hoe. >legendary