Nope, that's just degeneracy.

>>5211807
I'm experimenting with being a third member in a couple and this is what my heart tells me. It's just frustrating trying to fall in love with both of them

I was in love with two people. I think it's possible.

>>5211783
Nah, you're just a kek. Sorry.

>>5211827
I'm the one doing the keking in this situation I think.

>>5211818
You can't force yourself to be in love with two people, it doesn't work like that.

Even if you were poly and capable of loving two people romantically and sexually, you don't really have control over who you love so you can't force yourself to fall for a couple.

But many people are just flat out incapable of being in love with two people, that's why the majority of society is monogamous.

>>5211953
I know, it's just frustrating because sexually I'm leaning on one member of the couple but I love the other guy too and I don't want this to hurt him, and this completely freezes me, and I don't know what to do.

Yeah you can, just don't try and force it. If it works it works.

>implying love exists

This thread has great replies.

If you believe that love is picked by chance, which I think I believe at the moment, the chances of three people falling in love with eachother is crazy small. The caring way of loving someone, on the other hand, can of happen for two people I'd say

>>5211783
Sure it is. Not for everyone, probably, but I find it's easy to love many people.

I don't have the time or energy to spend on more than one person, though, when it comes to serious dedicated life-partner stuff.

>>5217837
this is too good to be true

>>5217837
>women