|
|
Arcax
Promising
Famous Hero
Its quite hot inside...
|
posted February 21, 2010 01:15 AM |
|
|
She wasnt your wife, but...
I sometimes miss medieval times and its laws 
____________
|
|
ohforfsake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted February 21, 2010 01:23 AM |
|
|
If you love her, then give her the decency of getting to choose what she wants.
I honestly never understood why it was so demanding that laws even were written that you could not have several wifes, not to say girl-/boyfriends.
Of course it is somewhat of a chock when you don't expect it, stuff like that should be talked about pre-hand, but now you know, and the card is in your hands, I'd say let her choose what she wants, and if you love her, it doesn't really matter, does it?
Also a smiley. 
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
Elvin
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Endless Revival
|
|
posted February 21, 2010 01:24 AM |
|
|
Yes it does, you cannot trust such a person.
____________
H5 is still alive and kicking, join us in the Duel Map discord server!
Map also hosted on Moddb
|
|
ohforfsake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted February 21, 2010 01:33 AM |
|
|
Depending on what you exactly mean. I'd say that is jumping to conclusions. Of course not saying one haven't learn anything, because one certainly has. Now you know what to expect. If what someone calls love is dependent on variables whose expected values where changed due to this new information, then I understand people are leaving eachother, though to me it seems rather superficial.
One more smiley!
Edit: An example. In the simpsons you see an episode where two persons falls in love with eachother and are going to get married.
Now they're deeply devoted for eachother in their love, at least that is what they claim when they try to defend that they are the same sex and wants to get married.
After some struggle from one of the head characters, she accepts that her sister is getting married to a woman, just to realise this "woman" is a man.
Then when the lesbian sister finds out, the roles reverse, but instead of accepting that love and gender is independent, she refuses to get married to a man.
So for her it is not independent, which to me makes it very superficial, as it is not the acts that defines the person, but born with trademarks said persons have no saying about.
Not that it is not up to people to decide, it certainly is, but the point is, stuff like this is in my opinion really superficial and one should maybe consider how they look at love if this is enough to ruin it for them, maybe they've made it a bit too egoistic?
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
Arcax
Promising
Famous Hero
Its quite hot inside...
|
|
posted February 21, 2010 01:51 AM |
|
Edited by Arcax at 01:52, 21 Feb 2010.
|
Quote:
I honestly never understood why it was so demanding that laws even were written that you could not have several wifes, not to say girl-/boyfriends.
Im missing penalties for unfaithful wifes 
There was a note in some daily newspaper that struck me some time ago. In Netherlands there's already a threesome "marriage" of 1 hetero man and 2 bisexual women. How convienient.
But I dont think it will comfort MightyMage ekhem...
____________
|
|
Azagal
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Smooth Snake
|
|
posted February 21, 2010 02:27 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Now you know what to expect.
Ehm no? If you have a relationship with a person it's about trust amongst other things. I mean nothing against being a Renegade but the social norm of having a relationship with one person at a time kinda makes sense if you ask me. You can hardly exspect that you partner is seeing someone else as is just as intimate with them as they are with you. That's called "cheating" for a reason.
And of course it'll matter no matter how much he loved her. Elvin is right that's just something that changes things. Like hell I'd forgive someone who played me like that.
____________
"All I can see is what's in front of me. And all I can do is keep moving forward" - The Heir Wielder of Names, Seeker of Thrones, King of Swords, Breaker of Infinities, Wheel Smashing Lord
|
|
phoenixreborn
Promising
Legendary Hero
Unicorn
|
|
posted February 21, 2010 02:32 AM |
|
|
There is a difference between an open relationship with communication between the central person and the different partners and a relationship where one partner is hiding and concealing other relationships.
This could have unfortunate consequences. For example, suppose Father had another relationship on the side and didn't share all details with that side person.
____________
Bask in the light of my glorious shining unicorn.
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 21, 2010 04:21 AM |
|
|
Quote:
I honestly never understood why it was so demanding that laws even were written that you could not have several wifes, not to say girl-/boyfriends.
yes I don't see any problem with it. as long as there is love, respect, trust...
The girl may really be a liar, or maybe she was just afraid of how people may judge her. people are often very narrow-minded.
|
|
william
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
LummoxLewis
|
|
posted February 21, 2010 04:52 AM |
|
|
Quote:
If you love her, then give her the decency of getting to choose what she wants.
If you love somebody and they do something like this, you leave them. There is NO other choice in the matter. You just don't do this kind of stuff if you're with someone, and if you do, then you're messed up.
____________
~Ticking away the moments that
make up a dull day, Fritter and
waste the hours in an off-hand
way~
|
|
Mytical
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
|
|
posted February 21, 2010 07:20 AM |
|
|
Yes, open and honest relationships are one thing. Deceit is another altogether. I am not a person who comprehends Jealousy, but I do understand being lied to. It is VERY difficult to trust somebody after that. I am sorry you had to go through that MM. At least now you know, and you can move on and find somebody WORTH your time and effort.
Yes, I am all for second chances..but that is just me. You have to do what you feel is right MM.
____________
Message received.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 21, 2010 09:38 AM |
|
|
Yes, but that's EXACTLY the question: DID she actually lie?
I have to repeat it: if this went on for a year or so, with NEITHER of the boys becoming suspicious, then you have to conclude, that she didn't give any of them reason to be suspicious or jealous or even unhappy or feel awkward or something. Which may simply mean, the girl was happy with her two relationships and may have loved them both - her way.
Cheating - or breaking trust - applies only to something BOTH have an explicit understanding about. I don't think there is something like an UNSPOKEN understanding, morals are too different for that, cultures, backgrounds and so on.
For example, there used to be a time, when there was an unspoken understanding about boys paying bills for girls when they date. Now, if two people meet, could the girl really TRUST the boy to pay for her?
Just because Hollywood and so on are selling love as something that works with exclusivity - one and only one -, doesn't mean, all people feeel that. "Love" isn't universally defined as being something you can feel exclusively for one person only.
When I read the reactions here I wonder what people have against the muslims...
Anyway, we just don't know yet, whether MM was explicitely lied to or whether he FEELS lied to. For him, subjectively, this will make not much of a difference; he'll feel cheated either way. But if the dust settles, it will make a difference in the long run: it's a big difference, whether you trust people to outright lie or whether you trust people to have secrets they don't tell voluntarily.
The first case means that you can't trust someone, no matter what that someone says, which is bad. The second case means only, that if something is important to you, you shouldn't assume it's equally important for someone else, but make sure it is.
I think, that's a pretty important distinction.
|
|
Mytical
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
|
|
posted February 21, 2010 09:50 AM |
|
|
Jolly, Lies of omission is still lies. If she didn't come out and say "Hey I have another relationship", that is deceit. Regardless how you dress it up or try to make it look nice. Which I am pretty sure she didn't. Of course, you may not see it that way, and that is your thing. Most people don't see it your way though. Simply by not telling the two about it she was lying, regardless if she said "You are my one and only" or not.
____________
Message received.
|
|
Elvin
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Endless Revival
|
|
posted February 21, 2010 10:00 AM |
|
|
Hey did I tell you I have been snowing another guy for two years? No? Nevermind you know now  But I still love you more, why don't you trust me? Ok there was also that guy and the other but I didn't particularly love them so it's ok plus you were away that week, did you want me to get lonely? HEY WHAT WAS THAT SLAP FOR YOU SHOULD RESPECT MY DIFFERENT CULTURE!
____________
H5 is still alive and kicking, join us in the Duel Map discord server!
Map also hosted on Moddb
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted February 21, 2010 10:15 AM |
|
|
JJ, it would be fair only if she told MM from the very beginning that her view of relationship is different. Otherwise, it's not.
It's fair to expect what we usually understand by "relationship" in our culture by default, don't you think? that includes monogamy and no cheating.
If someone else thinks otherwise, ie. wants ten boyfriends at the same time, fine. She just should have the courtesy to say it.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
Mytical
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
|
|
posted February 21, 2010 10:24 AM |
|
|
Let us take me for example. I am upfront when I tell people I don't understand jealousy. If they want to have other relationships, lovers, whatever I am fine with that. All I ask in return is that they are upfront about it to me. It is a different point of view, and very few people actually understand that point of view. Which is why I make sure I explain it to people if I am interested in pursuing a relationship with them. I don't expect them to tell me they prefer a monogomous relationship, because that is a more widespread and accepted view. After I explain my different view to them, most either say "No, I want a monogomous relationship" or "I understand and want the same." (ie a non-monogomous one).
____________
Message received.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 21, 2010 10:26 AM |
|
|
The law sees this different.
The rule is, if you don't tell what you don't have been asked, you haven't lied, and there is not even a discussion about this.
Example: Two people meet. They never talked about family. They marry. After marriage it shows, that one has two children. Cheating?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The impression is that in love a person shouldn't actually keep quiet about something that might very probably be of great interest for the other - but that assumes, BOTH HAVE THE SAME INTERESTS.
Which you can't. You can't assume the same interests. The same UNSPOKEN understanding of love and so on. Which is why your point is wrong: it assumes too much.
If there ARE different interests - and it is safe to assume that in this case - answering only questions ASKED and not those NOT asked, is perfectly ok.
You have to see the practical side as well: if a girl dates 2 boys she can at most spend half of all available time with one of them. That would probably amount to no more than 3 days/evening/nights with one of those. Now, if *I* was deeply in love with someone, I naturally would WANT to spend more time with her - which wouldn't be possible, wouldn't it? Which woulöd lead to questions as a matter of course, wouldn't it?
Take my daughter, for example. She started college last year, and met a guy she liked. They started to do things together, spend time with each other, go to the movies, to bars, to parties with each other, talk, phone, chat - all without actually getting intimate. The guy, I learned, have had a girlfriend at that initial stage, but was leaving her due to "intellectual gap" or something like that. Once my daughter and him started to spend a growing amount of time with each other, he finished his relationship for good - he simply hadn't the wish to spend time with her anymore.
Now, he and my daughter are heppily dating each other, and since there are college holidays now they spend 5 days in each others company, using the other 2 to get things done they need a clear head and some focussed time to do, but keep in touch via mobile, chat and so on.
Which is something I think, is natural - you WANT to spend more time with each other.
The bottom line is - if you can't spend as much time with the one you love as you would like to (and feel, the other one should like to as well, otherwise...), wouldn't it then be natural to ASKm, what the hell is making it impossible for her to meet more than 3 time a week and not phone or anything the rest of the week?
@ Doomforge
I think this answers your post as well. They have a reason why they say, in love everything is allowed. You don't give the person you date a novel with everything you did or do? If you are a 20-year-old girl who starts dating a boy, would you tell him right away, you've lost count of the boyfriends you had, but slept with at least 10? That you took part in a porn movie two years ago, since you needed the money and was on some drug, but that you are clean now and just passed an aids test, so everything is fine?
|
|
Mytical
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
|
|
posted February 21, 2010 10:34 AM |
|
Edited by Mytical at 10:54, 21 Feb 2010.
|
Ah the old "The law says this so it must be correct" argument, which is not really a valid argument. Many laws have been not only a BAD idea, but just WRONG in history.
However this is not the thread to get into that. You are free to believe and do whatever you like Jolly. If you are in a relationship with somebody, and do not inform them of something they could have no idea to even ask about..you are being deceitful. Lets take Aids. You get intimate with a partner who happens to have aids, but oops you didn't ask. So you would be fine with that?
____________
Message received.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 21, 2010 10:52 AM |
|
|
Quote:
If you are in a relationship with somebody, and do not inform them of something they could have no idea to even ask about...
Wrong assumption, again. Why could they have no idea to even ask about? As I explained, people have interests, and if ONE person dates ONE, but that one dates TWO, their intertests will clash AUTOMATICALLY, because one is barred from spending the time with the other he wants to - which will lead to questions AUTOMATICALLY.
Quote:
Lets take Aids. You get intimate with a partner who happens to have aids, but oops you didn't ask. So you would be fine with that?
The law, you have so much disregard for, has a clear position with this question - if you have aids and get intimate with someone it's endangering that person's health and life, so it's a crime.
Strictly spoken, if there was no such law (keep that prerequisite in mind, please) - if you meet someone you don't know and want to get intimate: would you just close your eyes and dive into it, unprotected? I mean, the other person could have aids without knowing it, so "trusting" the other person isn't right anyway, is it?
On the other hand, if someone HAS aids and knows it (still under the prerequisite that there wasn't such a law!), and takes all available protective measures WITHOUT saying anything about having aids... I mean, sure, that seems a bit unfair - but that's just because there could happen something really bad (which is why there IS a law).
So the bottom line here is, that you can't compare these two things.
|
|
Mytical
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
|
|
posted February 21, 2010 10:54 AM |
|
Edited by Mytical at 10:59, 21 Feb 2010.
|
Oh and actually Jolly, you are mistaken about the Law thing. Omitting you are still married IS illegal, and has serious reprocussions. So even the law sees that lies by ommissions are bad
And what about this? Doesn't endanger the health, but the law is VERY strict about it.
Edit: And you are assuming again Jolly. I have no problem with the Law. The fallacy that something is ok because the Law says it is I do however. Slavery was LEGAL at one time, remember. Backed by a LAW. That did not make it right then OR now.
____________
Message received.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 21, 2010 11:27 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Oh and actually Jolly, you are mistaken about the Law thing. Omitting you are still married IS illegal, and has serious reprocussions. So even the law sees that lies by ommissions are bad.
You are wrong. If you were right, the jails would be full of married people having an affair. Omitting you are married is NOT illegal - except when you marry again, but then not the omission is illegal, but the double marriage.
Quote:
And what about this? Doesn't endanger the health, but the law is VERY strict about it.
See above. You are wrong. Plain and simple.
Quote:
Edit: And you are assuming again Jolly. I have no problem with the Law. The fallacy that something is ok because the Law says it is I do however. Slavery was LEGAL at one time, remember. Backed by a LAW. That did not make it right then OR now.
You are the one who is assuming, because YOU are the one saying: ALTHOUGH the law does NOT say something is wrong, it IS wrong. That's you, not me.
You are mistaking two different things, though. LEGAL (as opposed to right) is the only thing it makes sense to trust (because if if someone isn't true to the law you can't expect honesty anyway, so asking about that would net lies only, anyway). That is, if you EXPECT honesty, you must expect LAWFULNESS as a matter of fact or you have to become partners in crime.
Everyting else is SUBJECTIVE - which means, that within the borders of what IS NOT ILLEGAL - people may have different and SUBJECTIVE opinions and interests, and you should make sure about those that are IMPORTANT for you, because you can't rely upon "congruence of values".
Basically, the point is, if the law says, that something is ok, AND YOU DON'T, if it is an important point for you, you should make sure that the other one is seeing this the same way. You can't just RELY on it. Is that so difficult to undderstand?
Look at your slavery example. There was a time that law says it ways ok. Right/wrong, then, was a subjective thing, but if you found slaverywrong and met someone at that time, you would have had to check whether he had no problems with having slaves, wouldn't you?
|
| |
|
|
This Popular Thread is pages long: 
