Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
But some of them are (both ways) and who are we to judge if it works?Looks like some of the uptight people on this page need to look up ethical non-monogomy, and just relax.
Each to their own, but imo marriages/partnerships shouldn't be about women needing permissions or ownership either way... peace out dudes.
Yes, indeed - tolerance for what a woman/wife might wear without requiring them ask a husband/partner for permission, is where I think this discussion started?
What about tolerance for a highly functioning couple that doesn’t fit defined roles?
God boys deserve tolerance.
Oh ok no problem. Jesus never existed, just made up. It's quite embarrassing. If aliens land and it's Christmas time, they will ask who this is for. For Jesus. Who's he. Nobody. Just a figment of all our imaginations.
The onus is on you to prove something, not on others to disprove your claims.
So you're advocating husbands needing to give their wives permission for what to wear... or just being contrary? Just for clarity....
You think nothing your spouse does could affect you? Why even be married ffs
Obviously. Just like equating sexually touching someone without consent to causing them physical harm. These are all acts along a continuum of unwanted behaviour. Why not compare them? Is Dylan Brown's crime worse than punching someone in the head? Is it worse than telling them you're going to kill them?
If a couple are living the swingers lifestyle, surely they should both consent to it? Otherwise it's not 'ethical non-monogamy', it's just non-monogamy.
Marriage is about belonging to each other. Otherwise you might as well just be roommates.Each to their own, but imo marriages/partnerships shouldn't be about women needing permissions or ownership either way... peace out dudes
This is a discussion thread about sexual assault. It’s obviously a topic you don’t take seriously so you should move on I think.
I didn’t say that. But nice try.
It's just about setting boundaries. You don't always know what behaviour your spouse is comfortable with, but they should be able to tell you. They're human beings ffs. They have feelings too.
You seem to seriously struggle with English comprehension. Try reading and understanding a post before responding with such utter crap.
This discussion has headed into a very weird space mate.
I am able to read between the lines. It is impossible for one half of a marriage to decide to choose ethical non-monogamy. They would literally need permission or else deal with the consequences. Avoiding consequences by hiding the non-monogamy makes it unethical.
Potato
