I actually agree with that. I mean, one reason you can have increased sexual permissiveness is because people are just throwing society away because they don’t see the value of it anymore. But I think that @sudo_not had it right about concentration of wealth with this one. When wealth is too concentrated society I think it objectively isn’t serving people, and the feeling that it should be thrown out with the bath water comes from that.
Right now I’m imagining neo-conservativism as a scorched earth defense of conservativism. Conservatives being convinced to burn society down behind them so that the progressives can’t corrupt it.
It could be both! The band could be part of the branding.
Given my parents got a divorce because of infidelity, and current family squabbles are over MORE infidelity to the point I about hate being around my family…
I have nothing in way shape or form resembling respect for Ashley Madison. They prey on people too cowardly to try facing the fact their marriages are failing and need to be fixed, they encourage this sort of behavior, and profit from it.
In short. They are scum. Legally allowed to exist scum, but still. Scum.
As for Sex before Marriage. Taking my relegiose views out of it.
Le’ts just say generally it’s a bad idea unless you want to commit to sharing in the responsibilities of possibly having a kid. I see sex as exceedingly intimate and not something done casually. Others will disagree with me, but form it is an act that might bring another person in the world. I don’t want to be part of it with someone I despise or cannot see myself working with for the next twenty or so years so any theoretical children will have a good and stable life (I know single parenting is a thing that can work, but I do not want to add to that statistic.)
Yeah, he sounds like a prize. But if giving someone else a blowjob is so important to you, and/or you think so little of the partner you’ve chosen that you’re willing to have an affair, why the hell are you still with him?
There might be some corner cases where there’s really no way out, but the more common answer to that question is “It’s easier to have an affair than to have an honest conversation.”
Ideally, you have two people who care about each other have a conversation about changing the way they live their lives because one of them isn’t happy. If you can’t have that conversation, you’re probably better off without that person who doesn’t care if you’re happy or not.
Those things that bind you together aren’t there to excuse a violation of trust. People get apartments, kids sleep at grandma’s for a few weeks, finances get re-structured. It happens all the time. It’s not the end of the world to have to get out of a relationship, it’s the beginning of a new and better world! One where you don’t feel like shit every time your husband tells you how disgusting he thinks blowjobs are.
Again, there are definitely exceptions, but folks are very adept at excusing their own behavior as well.
I would first say that it’s not because their partner is having sex with other people, it’s because their partner is lying about having sex with other people. Companion marriage is a thing, swinging is a thing, monogam-ish is a thing. There’s lots of ways to stay in a committed relationship with somebody and still get your rocks off elsewhere if what is important is staying together.
I’d next say that the idea of “breaking up their kid’s home life” is kind of a canard. What’s going to be more traumatic for some kids: Their parents fighting and sniping and playing passive-aggressive games and sneaking and lying? Or their parents agreeing that they work better apart than together and maybe going through a rough few months and being happier for it on the other side? What’s a better example? What’s a better home life? (All happy families are alike, amirite?)
There may be circumstances that keep you in a marriage long after its expiration date, but having children aren’t automatically one of those reasons.
In a nightmare scenario, it might not be! Heck, even short of a nightmare scenario - I can imagine a lot of monogam-ish couples saying, “Look, anything I don’t know about, I don’t care about.” And disclosure long after the fact when it’s irrelevant isn’t necessarily constructive, either. I also think a lot of people are just trying to excuse being awful to each other, though.
I mean, sure, when the lady’s plucking your pubes from her teeth she’ll tell you her husband is a horrible BJ-hating monster and you helped her realize her dream you big strong powerful man you because that’s part of the thing you’ll all tell yourselves when you go back to the people who maybe don’t understand that they’ve even done anything wrong because instead of confronting his sex negativity you went and broke trust.
If you can’t have a conversation about sleeping with other people BEFORE you sleep with other people, you should at least try to have a conversation about why you can’t have a real conversation with your trusted partner before you go do it again.
Deception opens a bunch of possible situations for this woman and her family that are as bad- probably worse- than just being honest with him.
If her husband finds out, she’s in the exact same boat except it is made worse because she has been willfully dishonest. What if one of the children finds out? If divorce is hurtful to kids, it’s also pretty painful to discover that one parent has been deceiving the whole family.
Even if they don’t find out, while the false solution festers in the dark, nobody is taking care of the fact that this relationship has some pretty insidious issues. A husband who solely decides that sex is out of the equation for both of them hardly sounds like an affectionate, low-conflict marriage. She obviously resents that decision and that in itself is a conflict, albeit muted. People can have sympathy and concern for her situation without going as far as agreeing that adding deception to this mess is in any way a good thing.
There are all sorts of aspects of my life I would and do compromise for the sake of a marriage that contains kids. Communication alleviates them all (with those few exceptions where you just -know- that your partner is better off not knowing, exceptions that good communication teaches you)
I’m happy for the communication I have & know I could deal with far worse in our relationship & still not even begin to consider separation, because kids. There are other features of our relationship that have the same effect.
Relationships that are cut and dried, super defined, are more baffling to me than complex, confusing, ever evolving ones.
This is known to logicians as the “false equivalence” argument. Because the set X contains an element e with the property y, and it contains another element z, this does not imply that z has property y.
[edit - unless of course X is explicitly defined as the set of all elements having property y. Before a mathematician jumps in…]
With regard to the term “casual fallacy,” I requested you use “acausal” because “causal” and “casual” scan almost identically when being read. This causes confusion. I wasn’t saying you were wrong, I was saying that it would help me understand your comments if you used terms that did not look so much like each other visually.
Before you say anything about “careful reading”, consider the notion that your interlocutor may have mild dyslexia or something similar.
The entire founding of the USSR was predicated on throwing out the old systems, including traditional views of family.
You are eliding over most of Japanese history to make this claim. It is simply not true. Try reading about the Tokugawa era as compared to the previous era.
I completely agree,but I feel much the same way about Facebook.
The thing is, not all of the people using AM are bad people, and some of the people condemning them here seem to have a very simplistic (or bronze age myth induced) view of human behaviour, which in my view is simply not helpful or socially beneficial.
I have absolutely no idea. Is there a reason why this hypothetical person needs to answer that question? My partner doesn’t want me to do X, I want to do X so much I am doing it behind my partner’s back. If X = blowjob then we have grounds for divorce and a clearly wronged party. If X = non-sexual activity then we have a complex situation where people’s feelings are in conflict. That’s my complaint. Suppose it was a vegetarian partner and a secretly non-vegetarian partner. Can we not imagine that B wants to be with A even though they are sneaking meat on the side?
Or it’s the beginning of a new and worse world where you have food security issues. Change isn’t always good and things don’t always work out for the best. Sometimes the shitty life you have is the best one you can manage in this shitty world, but people who end up on the shit end of those kinds of changes don’t usually get to tell their stories.
I’m not pretending that all marriages are good for the children. I’m speaking from a clearly stated scenario in which an otherwise functioning and happy marriage isn’t working for one partner because of the sex. I’m also not talking about people who would end marriages because they were lied to but of people who would end marriages because of the sex. This (plausibly fictional) person has already had counselling and already knows the consequences of further infidelity. Talking about it has already happened, and having sex on the side with full disclosure is not an option.
Kids are not a canard. I am thinking of my own children. Honestly, staying together for the kids makes perfect sense as long as both parties are capable of behaving like adults.To me, that includes being able to have honest conversations like the one you are suggesting. If you can’t behave like adults and can’t have honest conversations then lying for the sake of your children doesn’t seem that far fetched.
If, after being successfully deceived for years, I found out that my partner was having an affair the entire time, and I said, “How could you do this to me?” and they answered, “Well, I wanted to keep raising the kids together and I knew you would divorce me if you knew, so I decided that the eventual pain you would feel over this revelation was worth the stability in the mean time,” I’d be mad at them for doing the thing they did, but, to me, the lying about it part would be the part that made sense.
There are a LOT of people (predominantly from deeply conservative religious backgrounds) who believe that sexual relations other than marital P-in-V intercourse are perverse and evil. I don’t find it far-fetched at all that a woman might grow up with such a belief, marry a man with such a belief, and later grow curious about–even obsessed with–this “blowjob” thing that they’re always talking about in raunchy secular media, but still be terrified to even broach the subject with her husband lest he think that she is a perverted, wicked whore.
This is a confusing claim to me. Athens at the time was coming down from the height of its military influence; during the Peloponnesian War it ultimately proved unable to maintain its league of subjects, and when that came apart there were some horrible revolutions by people who wanted to revert from the radical democracy it had developed.
But after this crisis, was Athenian society in the next century really so much worse than in the previous one? The city went back to being prominent, even a notable power again until the rise of Macedonia, and remained an important center of trade and culture for centuries. The power of the state may have declined, but is that the same as society declining?
I agree with almost all of your post, which I think reflects the complexity of the real world. But I have to point out that in some jurisdictions the statement above is incorrect,and only penetrative sex constitutes adultery. (You might get stoned to death for it, but it wouldn’t be adultery.) It is said that at one time French women with marriage contracts used to permit their lovers only anal sex because of how the contracts were worded.
The point about this was that adultery was regarded with horror in some societies because it might mean that a man paid for the upbringing of a child who was not his. It was about property rights, in fact, rather than sex.
Point made. Not everyone there is a married guy looking for hookups, just like not every christian wants to bomb abortion clinics or deport everyone not christian (I know this because I am christian and enjoy hearing the different viewpoints as it makes me have to reevaluate and refine my own views.) It’s just the place seems to cater specifically to married people. so my respect for them is rather non-existent.
I’m not condemning the people that use the service so much as the service itself.
The founding of the USSR has nothing to do with the fall of said country. I can’t find any evidence atm that anything beyond economics, nationalism, and mismanagement were primary movers.
When it comes to Japan, sexuality is a thousand year old tradition that neither predates or postdates a fall–it just is and has been.
