(via societyville)

my sex-negative, conservative professor for feminist political theory is discussing open relationships now in the context of rousseau and natural law; she is explaining how simone de beauvoir and jean-paul satre did not have “a real relationship” and clearly “weren’t actually in love” because their relationship was nonmonogamous. and how their relationship was obviously trivial. I am just dying in my seat here, but nobody’s even paying attention in this class to give a fuck.

only one kid attempted to defend polyamory, saying ”the relationship should be defined by only the people involved, and as long as everyone consents, anything is okay, including open relationships”

to which the professor responded: “what if i’m okay with 11 year olds?”

like fucking duh, 11 year olds can’t consent. and I’m personally offended by her being completely dismissive of a sartre and de beauvoir, one of the most famous and devoted couples in philosophy, who called their relationship their “greatest achievement” and who were utterly committed to one another in a way that I’m sure this professor can’t even comprehend. years ago, talking about satre and de beauvoir’s love and openness with a girl I once had a deep connection to (when we were both in separate open relationships) is such a part of my feelings on sexuality, and it informed my own philosophy on sex and attraction so much that it’s appalling to hear that relationship so slandered.

I’m always taken aback sex-negative feminists, particularly ones that totally discount and delegitimize love of any variety unless it’s some kind of jealous possession game. it’s so ignorant I want to vomit. I (and the dozens of other people I know with polyamorous experience) am capable of both monogamy and nonmonogamy, and I would hardly say that the love I feel for someone is dependent on what they do with their genitals; whatever I can’t even deal with this, I’m going back to facebook.