• sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    All that complicated logic should in theory apply to all those relationships as well, but it does not.

    It does though.

    Your friends could say they don’t like your partner.

    Your partner could say they don’t like your friends.

    Your partner could love or hate the idea of you fucking one of your friends, etc.

    When you involve sex and/or deep commitment as a partner, like, a life partner… emotions and condiserations get more complex and of greater magnitude.

    So… the more people you are partnered with, the more people there are with strong and complex emotional considerations going all ways.


    But anyway, none of this addresses my original critique:

    You have not demonstrated that broadly, monogamous relationships are unethical, de facto, 100% of the time.

    I don’t think nonmonogamy nor monogamy are inherently, de facto, all the time unethical.

    I just think that nonmonogamy is more difficult to do ethically.

    You said monogamy is unethical.

    Do you still hold this view?

    If so, why, for what reasons?

    • 🍉 Albert 🍉@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Yes, I still believe that monogamy is inherently unethical, as it involves one partner having the power to concent for their partner. Also it is the norm and state/religious enforced. Some norms are important, but they should at least be questioned rather than accepted uncritically.

      You are free to disagree, but I am happy if at least you honestly questioned it. If you do so and still disagree, then that’s fine.

      no norm should be accepted uncritically.

      • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        You are confusing a subtype of monogamy with all possible variants of monogamy.

        You’re describing patriarchichal, state/religiously sanctioned and ordained marriage.

        I’m describing two people who are just having a relationship with each other, who discuss and agree to how that relationship works.

        Doesn’t have to involve religion or even the state.

        Just a commitment between two people, none over the other, both as close to equal as possible.

        I’ve gone to significant lengths to explain how yes, monogamy is often formalized in a fucked up way… but it doesn’t have to be.

        • 🍉 Albert 🍉@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          hey, if you seen in other threads in this conversations, my main goal is for people to question normative monogamy. even if I still disagree with monogamy, and you still agree with it, I’m just glad you didn’t absorb that concept uncritically.

          one of my issues is that it is the norm, therefore the default, and socially considered the expectation, and even the only proper way.

          nothing normative should be inetenalise uncritically. even if you agree with it after thinking about it.