This is a transcript of a discussion from my Discord server.
The forward ( > ) symbol indicates “responded to”.
Example: Freddy > Jason (Freddy responded to Jason)
does mark passio talk about marriage? my brother wants to know what he thinks of polygamy or cheating.
ⒶMP3083 > neverbornneverdie
I think bbblackwell has shared some insights on cheating and anarchy relationship before. You might want to wait until he pops in here.
I don’t think cheating is looked upon good whitin anarchy. Sure you’re free to do it if you choose so but you did promise someone else to be loyal to them you practically broke a mutual agreement. If you want to do stuff w other peeps then you shouldn’t both promise each other to not do that or at least have the honisty about it before the fact.
No man owns a woman, and vice versa. Both partners have one important thing in common: autonomy.
bbblackwell > neverbornneverdie
I actually wanted to call and get Passio’s thoughts on that topic as well, but I’m not available to do that when his show is live. I wanted to ask how he felt the principles of relationship anarchy jibe with the essential union at the foundation of family and child-rearing.
“Cheating” implies someone being deprived of something they were due, like correct change, or fair play during a poker game. You can’t cheat someone by exercising your natural right to associate with whoever you like, however you like.
They were never due your refraining from that behavior. The only reason they think they were is because of cultural indoctrination, and the only reason they find the idea appealing is because of ego-insecurity.
It’s particularly disturbing that there should be a negative connotation forced upon something decidedly positive; as in nearly every case of “cheating” the “cheaters” deemed their interaction to be of a particularly exhilarating nature. What kind of self-loathing monster would try to emotionally coerce someone away from exploring positive interactions with others? Certainly not one who “loves” you—or themselves.
Oaths are a denial of future consent and thus invalid. When one snaps out of their daze and recognizes this after having made an oath, they should make their partner aware of their new, more lucid perspective. To not do so would be lying, and that IS a form of cheating. This doesn’t necessarily imply you have to act on that new perspective.
Love is not a limited resource, be it familial, neighborly, romantic, or sexual.
Abdul > bbblackwell
I think cheating only applies if some promise/oath of loyalty was made. Breaking that oath would be akin to lying, so I think that’s where the immorality lies. However, whether making such oaths in the first place is a good idea is something that can be questioned, but at the same time, someone feeling like they need to “cheat” in their relationship implies that that they are not getting their needs met properly in that relationship. Otherwise, what is it that they think they’re getting from someone else, that they can’t get in their current relationship? That too is something that needs to be questioned.
I think it’s morally questionable to knowingly do something (which you may very well have the right to do) that you know will hurt someone else close to you (be it emotionally/psychologically). The most moral thing to do (imo) would be to negotiate the terms of the current relationship, before venturing onto someone else. Not only then would it not be “cheating” (because your intentions will be known), but it offers the opportunity to clarify what everyone’s needs are in the relationship, and to arrive at some mutual agreement (whatever that may be).
bbblackwell > Abdul
Certainly. But it’s also worth questioning what the causal factor of the hurt is. In most such cases, it lies with the one who’s hurt, not the one doing the perceived harm.
I’ve known many people who were “hurt” by their partner spending “too much” time with friends, or by not joining in their interests to the desired degree, or not “supporting” them by going along with whatever ridiculous compulsions they fall victim to, etc.
Presenting a falsehood is always wrong unless it’s in defense (just as stabbing people is always wrong by the same measure), but I think in many cases it is a form of defense because the partner is implicitly and unjustly leveraging emotional coercion to control the other person by way of unrealistic expectations.
Oaths of loyalty are always misguided because they not only deny future consent, but they proclaim to hold a certain course with no knowledge of what lies on the road ahead. Anyone who accepts such an oath as binding is doing wrong to the person swearing the oath, just as much as the person making it is doing wrong to the person they make it to (and both also do wrong to themselves as well).
RELATED TOPIC: Are Written Contracts A Valid Form of Agreement?
Join our Discord community!
Let’s have a LIVE chat!
1st BITCHUTE: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/amp3083/
2nd BITCHUTE: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/amp3783/