430
Healthy ruleationships (thelemmy.club)
submitted 4 days ago by to c/onehundredninetysix@lemmy.blahaj.zone
94 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3 points 3 days ago (1 child)

Notice the sign says “I love McCheating on my wife”. Not “I love McLying to my partners.” My issue is with monogamous domineers

I guess what I am trying to understand is what part you are being critical of? That the wife would choose to divorce their husband because of his infidelity? Or the concept of marriage being a legal concept?

Something I hope we disavow.

Obviously, but I fail to see why you chose to specify western/American law/culture when we see similar social/legal constructs all over the globe regardless of their attitude towards polygamy.

But the opposite situation is what transpired here:
monogamous domineers expected honesty in a sexually liberal society.

What is your definition of a sexually liberal society? Regardless, the socially acceptable mores do not inherently apply to the dealings between two consenting adults who have defined the bounds of their own relationship.

Otherwise this wouldn't be public shaming McChat event

I don't really understand what you're implying here. Imo she felt hurt and shame about her husband breaching the terms of their relationship and felt the urge to lash out at her husband. Now I don't really condone that behavior, but I can understand why someone would feel that way if I shared the same belief system.

“the divorce papers are finalized! 😁✌️×4 😭” “omg bae, when my cray fae in crime tells me ‘not to worry about it kitten’”

Also didn't understand what you're going for here, but I suspect that is mainly due to me being middle-aged.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] 2 points 3 days ago (1 child)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 days ago (1 child)

    That the relationships were as fickle as a McChat. I am unsure why you keep being confused these are USian mongamists. They expect an honest exclusive partner, and found out he was dishonest inclusive partner.

    Okay, so the overall criticism is about sexual exclusively in general, but specifically when tied to legal ramifications. I guess I can understand that, but to be honest, I don't really know if I agree that sexually inclusive relationships are any less fickle. I also don't think the fact that they are western/American really is relevant considering sexual exclusivity isn't really unique across different cultures.

    That partners are liberally free to have sex with whatever they want?

    I think the confusion I had was because in different post it wasn't exactly clear if you were assigning criticism towards both partners, a single partner, or the concept of monogamy.

    is morally irreprehensible in a liberal society.

    This is something I still don't think I would fully agree with, but I can see your point of view. I personally think it's perfectly fine if two consenting adults want to agree to enter a monogamist relationship.

    Yet they still chose to downrank my comprehension of the mcnogamist domineers spectacularizing a relationship situation. It didn't have to be a public event at all. But they liberally choose to.

    Like I said, I personally don't think it's very tasteful, but I wouldn't read too much into it as a comment about monogamist domineering. To me I would more attribute it to people being messy bitches about their personal business.

    I can boomer-translate it for you:

    Lol, yeah...... Would not have guessed there was that much information conveyed in a couple sentences. You are really making me feel my age.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] 1 point 3 days ago (1 child)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 days ago

    then we wouldn't have never seen this picture, at all. In a restaurant, with a branded theme. You have to admit the theatrics are unnecessary, no?

    Yeah, I already said it was trashy..... That does not affect how fickle inclusive relationships are? I think you could reasonably claim that breakups in inclusive relationships are less dramatic, but I wouldn't say they break up any less frequently.

    Then don't use law, or theatrics to reinforce this

    For one, I never argued in favor of the theatrical aspect. Secondly I don't think the law is utilized to reinforce it, at least in countries with no fault divorces.

    Yet bigamy is illegal, in all US states. Meaning that the majority do force monogamy on others against others.

    Just because you cannot legally marry more than one person at a time does not mean you cannot engage in sexual inclusivity. Nor does that mean I agree with all aspects of marriage laws in the US, or that I think bigamy should be illegal, but that isn't exactly what we've been discussing.

    Then please educate yourself some more, because I am older than you, and I can still keep up😊

    Lol, I'd hardly say that not being on snap chat qualifies as being uneducated...... Though I would be impressed if you were actually older than me, probably not a lot of people older than me on snapchat.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent