wants & needs

I forget if we had scheduled anything, but we ended up basically just spending the whole time with me getting lost in the details of its body, talking out loud through my thoughts and ideas, and using its reactions to further analyze it. I enjoyed overwhelming it with my focus. I hope it enjoyed being my subject.

The call was the direct result of a prior conversation where it asked me what my impression of it was and I spent like fifteen minutes walking through my analysis and left it struggling to speak.

polyamory being less about "being someone who experiences multiple romantic attractions simultaneously" and more about rejecting the core assumptions of monogamy as bolstered by the societal regime of heterosexuality. similarly i tend to think plurality is less about "experiencing multiple selves" and more about rejecting the core assumptions of singularity as bolstered by the societal regime of saneism.

i think how you organize your experiences of attraction and relationships can conform to the monogamous model quite easily, and forcing it to do so is generally socially beneficial to you, thus if your experiences lean closer it's easy to let them just stall and not do further introspection. but introspection and self-critique is always useful, so i recommend more elaborate analyses at every opportunity. thus, i think the "no assumptions, figure it out yourself" model of polyamory that prioritizes granting tools over making assumptions tends to be more useful. of course, if your relationships can conform to monogamy, you receive increased legitimacy, legal benefits, heightened trust from monogamous ppl, and less weird questions, among other things. so like, i think i can really only make claims and arguments about tools of self analysis.

similarly, i think how you organize your experiences of identity and selfhood can conform to the singular model quite easily, and forcing it to do so is generally socially beneficial. i think generally 'plurality' is first understood as only describing those who are totally unable to conform to this model, but i think as with all deviation from the norm, more questions than "are you totally incapable of conformity" should be asked. in all of my experiences, i have seen time and time again that some level of apparent plurality seems to be a normal expected part of the human experience. worksonas, code switching, drunk identity, hell even some subspaces all seem to exist on the same spectrum as plurality. but, over and over i see these different states of self be basically insulated from introspection or individual analysis by a rejection of plurality/assumption of singularity. when performing analysis of the self, i think one must not ask "is this correct", but rather "is this useful".