quote:

---

Everyone wondered WTF when Lyinar Ka`Bael wrote:
Let me throw up a situation. A woman is physically and mentally abused for many years. She finally gets away from it. Afterward, rather than questioning why she stayed and not holding her to some measure of responsibility in staying, society compliments her strength in enduring so much.

What if someone else sees that and reads it as "I should be as strong as that woman. I can take this" and never tries to get out of the situation?

---

There's a lot of steps between "not scold" and "compliment".

quote:

---

The Burger had this to say about Reading Rainbow:
so you're stipulating that you can only love a single person in any capacity and that loving more dilutes it? What about your love fro children? Are you only ever going to have a single child? And are you saying that there is only one person that is perfect for you, and you would not settle for less? What if 'deth were to accidentally die tomorrow, in a horrible accident? Would you remain loveless for the rest of your life or would you go find someone else you could love 5 or 10 years down the road? Is there only one perfect match for each person?

---

I think romantic love and love for children are horses of different colors. If something happened to Deth, then I wouldn't want another man. I would have friends. I would have my life, because I'm my own person without him. But the hole that could never be filled would always be there. I would always compare any other man to him and they couldn't measure up.

It wouldn't be fair to myself, or anyone I was with, to live like that. So I would remain alone romantically.

Again, I'm very biased. But I don't feel that once someone has the person that completes them, they would settle for any less in someone else.

quote:

---

Veruca Salt thought this was the Ricky Martin Fan Club Forum and wrote:
Well... IMO there is such a thing as moving too fast and some things might be better saved for a later date. Whatcha think?

---

Well, of course early in a relationship. Deth and I took a while to get to our level of openness.

But after you're past that. Do you think subjects would still be taboo just out of human nature?

quote:

---

Zaza had this to say about Jimmy Carter:
There's a lot of steps between "not scold" and "compliment".

---

Would you scold someone because they made no move to get out of the situation?

quote:

---

So quoth Lyinar Ka`Bael:
Would you scold someone because they made no move to get out of the situation?

---

If more than them were hurting, yes.

Otherwise, no.

Either way, I'd do my outmost to try and convince them to get out of it. If I went "YOU IDIOT! LEAVE HIM!" they'd be likely to defend him against what I said, and it'd just dig the hole deeper, while shattering my chance to help.

quote:

---

Zaza attempted to be funny by writing:
If more than them were hurting, yes.

Otherwise, no.

Either way, I'd do my outmost to try and convince them to get out of it. If I went "YOU IDIOT! LEAVE HIM!" they'd be likely to defend him against what I said, and it'd just dig the hole deeper, while shattering my chance to help.

---

Why just more than them hurting?

quote:

---

How.... Lyinar Ka`Bael.... uughhhhhh:
Why just more than them hurting?

---

Because if a woman with children is allowing her children to be beaten as well, she's no longer just responsible for herself - she's failing in one of the most important responsibilities there is.

And the children can't just pack up and leave.

In such a case, I'd scold her, then call social services to get the kids taken away from them.

[ 01-20-2003: Message edited by: Zaza ]

quote:

---

Lyinar Ka`Bael wrote this then went back to looking for porn:
Well, of course early in a relationship. Deth and I took a while to get to our level of openness.

But after you're past that. Do you think subjects would still be taboo just out of human nature?

---

Nah.

quote:

---

Zaza had this to say about Jimmy Carter:
Because if a woman with children is allowing her children to be beaten as well, she's no longer just responsible for herself - she's failing in one of the most important responsibilities there is.

And the children can't just pack up and leave.

In such a case, I'd scold her, then call social services to get the kids taken away from them.

---

You wouldn't scold her for not reaoizing she deserved better and removing herself from the situation? Again, wouldn't this promote laziness and acceptance of bad behaviors?

quote:

---

Veruca Salt had this to say about Duck Tales:
Nah.

---

Okay, so you think once you're past that point, there is absolutely nothing they could not say to you? Meaning past that point, there's no reason for cheating?

quote:

---

Lyinar Ka`Bael had this to say about Cuba:

You wouldn't scold her for not reaoizing she deserved better and removing herself from the situation? Again, wouldn't this promote laziness and acceptance of bad behaviors?

---

I refer to my above post about helping and the effects of scolding.

quote:

---

This one time, at Zaza camp:
I refer to my above post about helping and the effects of scolding.

---

Perhaps not while the abused is in it, but afterward. Something like "We feel for this person and we're sorry they suffered, but they suffered because they allowed it."

Do you think that's too harsh? Do you think it will make people more responsible, stronger, and more possessing of common sense? Or do you think a person currently in the situation might be afraid to leave even then because they were scolded for letting it happen?

quote:

---

Lyinar Ka`Bael said this about your mom:
Perhaps not while the abused is in it, but afterward. Something like "We feel for this person and we're sorry they suffered, but they suffered because they allowed it."

Do you think that's too harsh? Do you think it will make people more responsible, stronger, and more possessing of common sense? Or do you think a person currently in the situation might be afraid to leave even then because they were scolded for letting it happen?

---

I think a person who gets out of the situation will in nearly all cases realize how completely foolish they were to stay in it. After all, most people don't like to be beaten.

So I don't think an afterwards scolding is needed.

Addition: Instead what should be pointed out is that life is much better without the abuse, and that it's the responsibility of those abused to throw it off - without adding a scolding to it.

[ 01-20-2003: Message edited by: Zaza ]

quote:

---

Lyinar Ka`Bael had this to say about John Romero:

Okay, so you think once you're past that point, there is absolutely nothing they could not say to you? Meaning past that point, there's no reason for cheating?

---

Pretty much. And if they feel differently, and have to hide whatever problem suddenly showed up, and cheat... then I guess we weren't as close as I thought we were.

[ 01-20-2003: Message edited by: Veruca Salt ]

quote:

---

Zaza enlisted the help of an infinite number of monkeys to write:
I think a person who gets out of the situation will in nearly all cases realize how completely foolish they were to stay in it. After all, most people don't like to be beaten.

So I don't think an afterwards scolding is needed.

Addition: Instead what should be pointed out is that life is much better without the abuse, and that it's the responsibility of those abused to throw it off - without adding a scolding to it.

---

Well, I mean more general attitude toward the first case and how it would affect other people in the same situation. What sort of image should be given, to empower people and make them realize they're worth more than what they're taking?

quote:

---

Nobody really understood why Lyinar Ka`Bael wrote:
Well, I mean more general attitude toward the first case and how it would affect other people in the same situation. What sort of image should be given, to empower people and make them realize they're worth more than what they're taking?

---

That they can have much more than this.

quote:

---

This one time, at Veruca Salt camp:
Pretty much. And if they feel differently, and have to hide whatever problem suddenly showed up, and cheat... then I guess we weren't as close as I thought we were.

---

So you're prety much an advocate of doing all to prevent it? You can't prevent everything, of course, but you think at least if you do all you can, that you tried and it's okay to end it?

quote:

---

Zaza had this to say about Jimmy Carter:
That they can have much more than this.

---

How do you suggest that image best be displayed? What could we as society do to assure the right image comes out?

Zero-tolorance. I hold the belief that any relationship worth pursuing is based entirely on trust for one another. Pesco and I have known each other for going on about three years now and we have been dating for about...9, 9 and a half months now. So profound is the trust we exhibit (I am talking about this relationship from the standpoint of most people my age, high school seniors, who view 2 months as being profoundly long) that we don't even blink when one of us goes off somewhere with a person of the opposite sex. I go to the gym frequently with a buddy of mine, etc, etc, and no issues arise.

Now cheating, that's about the worst thing anyone can do to me, I would think. I rely very heavily on trust and the belief that I am respected enough not to be lied to. In my view, cheating would be an end-all of the relationship right there. Most of the time I am fairly objective and can handle the forgive-and-forget policy, but if I were ever cheated on, I would doubt I could ever look at the offending party without reaching for a baseball bat.

If I were in the relationship where someone cheated on me, its obvious there is no reason to trust anymore. And without trust, there is no relationship worth saving.

(Also, that would freak me out... as technically, when you sleep with one person, you are sleeping with everyone who that person has been with, by way of STDs.)

quote:

---

Lyinar Ka`Bael had this to say about Captain Planet:
How do you suggest that image best be displayed? What could we as society do to assure the right image comes out?

---

That's a too big question for my brain at 2am. I'll pick this up tomorrow, unless you mind.

quote:

---

Lyinar Ka`Bael had this to say about John Romero:
If it hurt to cheat, what caused you to do it?

---

Why? Because I was miserable where I was at that time, and I'd spent a total of three years being on the opposite side of the coin, so to speak. It doesn't make what I did any more right, but I had my reasons.

quote:

---

ACES! Another post by Azakias:
My view on cheating:

Zero-tolorance. I hold the belief that any relationship worth pursuing is based entirely on trust for one another. Pesco and I have known each other for going on about three years now and we have been dating for about...9, 9 and a half months now. So profound is the trust we exhibit (I am talking about this relationship from the standpoint of most people my age, high school seniors, who view 2 months as being profoundly long) that we don't even blink when one of us goes off somewhere with a person of the opposite sex. I go to the gym frequently with a buddy of mine, etc, etc, and no issues arise.

Now cheating, that's about the worst thing anyone can do to me, I would think. I rely very heavily on trust and the belief that I am respected enough not to be lied to. In my view, cheating would be an end-all of the relationship right there. Most of the time I am fairly objective and can handle the forgive-and-forget policy, but if I were ever cheated on, I would doubt I could ever look at the offending party without reaching for a baseball bat.

If I were in the relationship where someone cheated on me, its obvious there is no reason to trust anymore. And without trust, there is no relationship worth saving.

(Also, that would freak me out... as technically, when you sleep with one person, you are sleeping with everyone who that person has been with, by way of STDs.)

---

Ah, a new viewpoint slightly. It's a honesty issue with you, as many others say, but you also factor in respect?

quote:

---

Zaza stopped staring at Deedlit long enough to write:
That's a too big question for my brain at 2am. I'll pick this up tomorrow, unless you mind.

---

*laughs*

Not at all. I look forward to your ideas.

quote:

---

Xyrra had this to say about Reading Rainbow:
Why? Because I was miserable where I was at that time, and I'd spent a total of three years being on the opposite side of the coin, so to speak. It doesn't make what I did any more right, but I had my reasons.

---

What kept you in the situation if you were miserable?

quote:

---

Lyinar Ka`Bael obviously shouldn't have said:
What kept you in the situation if you were miserable?

---

I was young, stupid, and thought I was in love. I think there's quite a few people who know that situation quite well enough.

quote:

---

Xyrra's account was hax0red to write:
I was young, stupid, and thought I was in love. I think there's quite a few people who know that situation quite well enough.

---

Did you have some of the problems mentioned before? Lack of communication, etc?

quote:

---

Azakias had this to say about Matthew Broderick:
(Also, that would freak me out... as technically, when you sleep with one person, you are sleeping with everyone who that person has been with, by way of STDs.)

---

Agreed. That's my problem with the concept of an "open" marriage. Person A is in a relationship with Person B. Person B exercises the option of an open marriage, and sleeps with Persons C and D, Person C only sleeps with person B, but Person D, sleeps with Persons E, F, and G.

Person A is now reasonably exposed to whatever STD's Person B, C, D, E, F, and G have been exposed to. I would not want to be Person A.

And why get married in the first place if you're not done sewing your proverbial "wild oats" hmmm? You don't want exclusivity? Fine. Don't soil the concept of marriage. Love whoever. Don't bring into a marriage something technically illegal (IE Adultery) just for the kick of kinky sex.

quote:

---

Ja'Deth Issar Ka'bael's fortune cookie read:
Agreed. That's my problem with the concept of an "open" marriage. Person A is in a relationship with Person B. Person B exercises the option of an open marriage, and sleeps with Persons C and D, Person C only sleeps with person B, but Person D, sleeps with Persons E, F, and G.

Person A is now reasonably exposed to whatever STD's Person B, C, D, E, F, and G have been exposed to. I would not want to be Person A.

And why get married in the first place if you're not done sewing your proverbial "wild oats" hmmm? You don't want exclusivity? Fine. Don't soil the concept of marriage. Love whoever. Don't bring into a marriage something technically illegal (IE Adultery) just for the kick of kinky sex.

---

Some hold the opinion that marriage should not just be an institution of two people, but can be many. Do you agree with a multiple person marriage? Or do you think marriage should be retained as it has been?

I feel that if there is cheating in a relationship, then there is a severe lack of one specific thing: Communication.

I personally believe that any problems in a relationship need to be worked out as soon as they become problems. If my SO feels there is something missing and that cheating will give it to her, then I think we need to have a talk first. Once the action is taken on its own, to me, that's an instant relationship killer.

It's never alright to cheat, in my opinion.

I don't believe in the attitude of, "Well, I'm no longer satisfied with who I'm with, so I'll stay with him until I can find someone better by sleeping around with everybody." I feel that if there is such a problem in a relationship, it needs to be handled, and if the relationship needs to end, then I feel that it should end BEFORE any party goes to sleep around with other people.

To me, there is no excuse for cheating.

If two people in a relationship agree that they are to be in a relationship with each other, but are free to have sex with other people, then I don't suppose it is cheating. Good for them.

I won't be a person in such a relationship, though.

I believe that sex is a sacred act that bonds two people who really care for each other together. Personally, it's made me sick to see how it's been cheapened over the last two decades.

[Edit: don't=won't]

[ 01-20-2003: Message edited by: Densetsu ]

quote:

---

Densetsu obviously shouldn't have said:

I believe that sex is a sacred act that bonds two people who really care for each other together. Personally, it's made me sick to see how it's been cheapened over the last two decades.

---

It's more than the last two decades...

During the 60's and 70's, there was massive sexual and chemical experimentation. Early in the 20th century, there were enormous swing parties where people danced, drank, and fucked, many people, many ways.

During the victorian era, when any reference to sexuality was strictly taboo, there were huge orgies behind closed doors. The victorian era is arguably the most depraved era of recorded human history, look into it sometime, it's quite kinky.

Throughout human history, people have been extremely sexually active, to the point of being lewd, to various degrees of openness, and still the current generation always persists in thinking it invented all the different ways to enjoy oneself sexually. Sex cannot be "cheapened" because it was never really sacred.

quote:

---

Lyinar Ka`Bael thought this was the Ricky Martin Fan Club Forum and wrote:
I think it would be better to say openly cheapened, Burger. Sex is much more in your face these days, and is held in less esteem by society than it has been in the past.

---

What she said.

[ 01-20-2003: Message edited by: LOG ]

quote:

---

Lyinar Ka`Bael thought this was the Ricky Martin Fan Club Forum and wrote:
I think it would be better to say openly cheapened, Burger. Sex is much more in your face these days, and is held in less esteem by society than it has been in the past.

---

so as long as the problem stays hidden from vue, and isn't offending anybody, it's no longer a problem, and we can just ignore it?

Cheating and infidelity, defined as sleeping around with someone else without your partners knowledge and/or consent is bad. Sex outside the relationship is ok so long as the other party knows and agrees. The couple agrees to try a 3 way or it's a political marriage and both parties accept that they don't love each other and pursue other romantic venues. Presumably, if the partner agrees to such a thing they are aware of the risks, such as STDs.

My personal preference on the subject is one of monogamy. I would consider the act of cheating, and cheating it would be as I would never agree to them having sex with others, a violation of the relationship.

I will also say that I do not agree with the government having any part in marriage. I had a big long "speech" as to why typed up, but decided it was too rambling.

quote:

---

When the babel fish was in place, it was apparent Lyinar Ka`Bael said:
Some hold the opinion that marriage should not just be an institution of two people, but can be many. Do you agree with a multiple person marriage? Or do you think marriage should be retained as it has been?

---

I personally don't see the point of a multiple person marriage. Polygamy inevitably results in one "favored" spouse over the others, even if they all claim it's in balance. Furthermore, there has to be a logical cutoff point. Guy A has a harem of women. But each of those women has the option of marrying more men, and those men have the option of marrying more women. Even assuming you don't 1. get into bigamy (in this case, you marrying someone else's wife or husband), and 2. none of you have kids (thus avoiding incestuous abuse and inbreeding problems), it starts to sound a lot less like a marriage and a lot more like one of those cults that uses sex (amongst other things like drugs and threats of violence) to indoctrinate it's members.

So there would have to be a limit. But the whole point of polygamy is that you don't limit yourself to one spouse. So it ends up contradicting itself in ideology, whereas a monogamous marriage is fine unless you commit a crime (Adultery).

It has little to do with "societal norms" or the claim that people can't change their evolved nature or whatever. People who are polyamorous or polygamistic like to say that it's unnatural for one person to stay with one person, but it's just not true. Humans as a race have evolved into a monogamistic race. It's not like cats and dogs. They (cats especially), have a variable genetic code. Kittens may look absolutely nothing like either parent. Several generations of cats can be bred from a parent with a genetically-inherited trait (like blindness or deafness) with no sign of it showing up, even if the cats are inbred. In humans, congenital defects like blindness and deafness are often carried from parent to child even if both parents don't carry the trait. Welcome to reality, folks. Humans aren't meant to breed with a dozen members of the opposite sex.

And if it's just sex with multiple people you want, then why get married? Have a binding ceremony or whatever done. Legally, you are not married. There have been cases of polygamists who have claimed younger "wives" as their children to get them covered in health benefits granted from family insurance. Legally you can have one spouse. Anything more is against the law. Anything more, in a widespread situation, would play hob with the entire insurance system.

It's not what marriage is. Freedom to change? hey I'm all for that. The majority of people see marriage as a bond between two people, monogamistically, legally and spiritually. Polygamists are in the vast minority. Democracy works. They're in the wrong as defined by the majority.

Polyamory is another confusing concept. You're in love with two people? Or you're bisexual? Hey good for you. I'm heterosexual. I love one person with all my heart. I accept that a bisexual person is just as likely to fall in love with a guy as they are with a girl. But believing you have the right to fall in love with one of each and keep both? Uh...no. Sorry. You are not special. If you think being bisexual makes you any more special than heterosexuals or homosexuals, you're wrong. If you think the rules of societal norms don't apply to you, you're wrong. Likewise, heterosexual or homosexual polyamorists are in the wrong. Same reason. You are not special. You want to be accepted like everyone else, fine. Everyone else is like this. A marriage is between two people. You choose one person to live your life with. If you want to continue getting jiggy with other people, don't get married. Open relationships are unnatural and dangerous in the modern world. Period.

If you're into bisexuality for the kinky sex with both genders, you're part of the bisexual community who makes the rest look bad. It's just like extremist religious fanatics who make an otherwise viable belief system look insane and dangerous.

Of course, I have no problems with monogamistic homosexuals or bisexuals. They choose to be with one person, abide by all the tenets, and should be allowed all the benefits.

But if you want kinky three-ways, don't drag it into a marriage. Grow a spine, make a definitive choice about how you're going to live your life.

quote:

---

Ragabash had this to say about (_|_):
My general feeling on the topic

Cheating and infidelity, defined as sleeping around with someone else without your partners knowledge and/or consent is bad. Sex outside the relationship is ok so long as the other party knows and agrees. The couple agrees to try a 3 way or it's a political marriage and both parties accept that they don't love each other and pursue other romantic venues. Presumably, if the partner agrees to such a thing they are aware of the risks, such as STDs.

My personal preference on the subject is one of monogamy. I would consider the act of cheating, and cheating it would be as I would never agree to them having sex with others, a violation of the relationship.

I will also say that I do not agree with the government having any part in marriage. I had a big long "speech" as to why typed up, but decided it was too rambling.

---

How do you feel about the way marriage affects the government? Like taxes, health and life benefits?

However, I personally wouldn't tolerate cheating.

I mean, how could you look at your loved one again if they had desires for other people? I'd personally find it maddening.

And depressing.

And a real bad situation. I'd probably just give up there, but I dunno.. I couldn't think of a better answer to that lil' problem.