“What's indecent or unethical about being honest and obtaining consent before acting? And how, pray tell, is that cheating. Further, please enlighten me how being honest and obtaining consent makes one an unfit parent?
Historians are mixed regarding barbarism and abuse towards women. In many instances, for example, women who became wives of kings plotted to kill the king to install their firstborn son as the new king. Further, there are matriarchal societies (both historical and current), in which polyandry is the norm; i.e., one woman has several husbands.
Then there are the Mosuo in China, who do not recognize marriage at all: women live in the family home, and can take a new lover each night. Their children are raised by the family without regard to paternity, and the fathers of those children do not get a claim of paternity. Descendancy is strictly matrilineal.
Where am I going with this, you may ask? I'm trying to show you that the modern western assumption that marriage is strictly about lifelong monogamy, and that anything else is unethical or incorrect, is quite simply wrong. It's neither historically accurate nor is it a contemporary universal truth.
In particular, modern polyamory is a fiercely egalitarian movement, most of whose leading lights are women (Anita Wagner, Dossie Easton, Janet Hardy, Tristan Taormino, Jenny Block, Deborah Anapol, et al). Women can have multiple lovers just as well as men can, and on the same terms: with the full knowledge *and* consent of their partners.”
“Why *NOT* get married? Marriage does not HAVE to be an exclusive arrangement.
"Commitment" and "exclusive" are not synonyms.
Yes, you have the right to your (historically uninformed) opinion. Marriage has been about lots of things; only relatively recently, and only in Western societies, has it become synonymous with fetishizing monogamy.”
“I know you like to argue with me, but I sense this is not the comment on which to do it.”
tbm126 on Nov 30, 2012 at 10:55:19
“I will gladly retract my statement if you can claim that your feelings for your children are the same as your feelings for your husband. I tend to not think sexually about innocent children, and I assume that all (relatively) mentally stable people do not as well (as per the AMA), and I give the benefit of the doubt that you are yourself mentally stable.”
“So relationships that A) aren't sanctioned by the state, B) do not result in children, and C) do not last a lifetime aren't legitimate in your eyes?
That seems to me to be a VERY narrow view. Do barren couples also have, in your eyes, "illegitimate" relationships? You claim to be an advocate for gay rights, yet gays and lesbians cannot meet your second test of "legitimacy" either. Inconsistent much?
I see you've utterly ignored my remarks about how she acquiesced to her mother's wishes.
What's important to me is defending the choices of consenting adults in the face of narrowminded prudes who think they know best for everyone. Do you count yourself among them?”
MarjorieMcK on Nov 27, 2012 at 23:24:45
“I count myself among those with manners. You can feel to count yourself out... as you have none. ”
“Why get married? Have you considered the possibility that she, like so many others, was raised to believe what you believe, and tried their damndest to live up to that idea, but found themselves unhappy doing it?
In such a situation, does it not make sense to change one's circumstances, or do you think it is better to suffer for the rest of one's life? In my view, relationships exist to serve the people who are in them, NOT the other way around.”
“She hasn't broken any promises, and she is not cheating. She asked her husband to modify their agreement, he agreed, and they both abide by the new agreement. "Cheating" implies breaking the rules, which she's not doing. They *changed* the rules. It's *their* relationship: they're allowed to do that.”
“If it's done with full awareness (and consent) by all, then how is it dishonest?
"The practice of adultery mocks the concept of marriage and undermines the stability of the Family."
An extraordinary claim (with ridiculous capitalization, too). Where is the requisite extraordinary proof?
Your comments are indeed your assumptions. What you voice is not "truth" (capitalized or not) merely because you say so. It is only truth if it is, in fact, true, and I've as yet seen no evidence to that effect.
Even accepting your definition of adultery, the only fitting response is, "So what?" If all parties consent, no harm, no foul.
Why bother to marry? Shared property, shared child-rearing, shared custody of children, disposition of property upon death, right to make medical decisions, considerable tax benefits, and so on.”
“Back up a second: a relationship is only "legitimate" if it is a marriage? Long-term, committed romantic partners aren't "legitimate" if they aren't married? The state gets to decide whose (consenting adult) relationships are or are not "legitimate?" Are you REALLY OK with that?
Gay and lesbian couples in most of the United States would take issue with that position. I'm sure each and every one of them consider their relationships "legitimate," and I agree with them. "Marriage" is a handy contract, with a lot of legal rights attached to it; however, it is not a certification of "legitimacy." What, like a person could have a counterfeit relationship? Please.
What was foolish about a) asking her mother if she could bring both her husband and her boyfriend, then b) acquiescing to her mother's wish that she not bring her boyfriend?”
MarjorieMcK on Nov 24, 2012 at 17:46:34
“Legitimate in that it was A) legal, B) created children and C) lasted.
The relationship with her lover was not legal, it created no progeny, and if she really loved him, it would have lasted. It did not.
Ergo, it was not legitimate.
And, if she felt the need to tell the entire world her mother was prejudiced for not wanting to host a dinner with her daughter's husband AND lover, yes... that makes the woman foolish. It also makes her selfish and self-centered... and rather spoiled.
So... why is it so important to you to praise a spoiled brat who wants to have sex with two men and who wants to parade her relationships in front of a mother who is obviously uncomfortable with it?
I see no issues with homosexual relationships here. If my son or daughter wanted to marry someone of the same sex, I'd have no problem with it. I would expect him/her to love and honor that person... and not insult them by flaunting another lover in front of them and the rest of the family.
And, she knew all along, just as we often know with our parents, that her mom would be against this. Why would you place your mother, a person you are supposed to love, in such an uncomfortable position?
“What's warped about honesty? Why are multiple loving relationships, in which people deal ethically and honestly with each other, and talk through their feelings instead of making assumptions and fighting when those assumptions turn out to be false, "unhealthy?"
Yes, you DO have to clarify why this is wrong. "Someone with a moral compass" does not necessarily share the same map you are using.”
“Your last remark from 11/23/2012 12:19PM was below the reply threshold, so I'm responding here:
"Can you tell me that you're talking about being IN love, not just talking about love?"
"Do you have that book and can you quote it to me? I'm afraid it's not sitting on my bookshelf."
It'll be in your public library, or if not, they can get it via interlibrary loan.
"And I'll specify again, since I feel that you don't want to acknowledge it, there is a vast difference between loving and being IN love."
Sure there is. The thing you don't want to believe is that a person can be IN love with more than one person at a time. In a society in which people are taught from the time that they are small that there's only one way to do things, suddenly finding oneself in love with more than one person causes no small amount of stress and confusion, let me tell you!
I didn't believe it either, until it happened to me.”
tbm126 on Nov 23, 2012 at 15:59:34
“Okay, then it looks like we're going to have to put this on hold until I check out your literature and get your facts. Have a good holiday.”
“How is she breaking a promise? She negotiated this with her husband, and she consented. No promise was broken, and no cheating is occurring (cheating means "breaking the rules"--their rules are different from yours).”
signheart on Nov 24, 2012 at 14:43:07
“If her way was not to spend her life with one man only, then why did she get married. I do not beleive she did not feel marrage was a promise to just be with that one person, that is the whole reason behind getting married, the conmittment. She just wanted to cheat and not feel bad about it. Sorry if you do not agree, you have the right to you're opinion, as I have the right to mine. She can have different rules, but getting marrried has vows, so she should have just lived with her now husband if she didn't intend to take those vows seriously. Have a nice day”