Board index › Coping in life › Love and Dating

33 year old never been in a relationship- need help.

Page 10 of 13 [ 208 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 29,054
Location: Right over your left shoulder

05 Jun 2024, 12:47 pm

blitzkrieg wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
You could argue they were misled, but not that being misled denied their right to consent.


If someone is misled and doesn't have the relevant knowledge to proceed with an informed decision, is the consent they are giving somehow hampered by not being properly informed?

And being misled implies someone is being deliberately deprived of knowledge that they need to be able to provide informed consent.


You could argue that the consent is less than fully informed, but that's not a litmus test that automatically invalidates consent.

If you f**k someone without a condom because they promised they were on birth control and they weren't, you weren't the victim of non-consensual sex.

If I tell you I'm someone famous and we f**k and you discover I'm actually just some nobody, you weren't the victim of non-consensual sex.

Etc.


_________________
When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become king, the palace becomes a circus.
"Many of us like to ask ourselves, What would I do if I was alive during slavery? Or the Jim Crow South? Or apartheid? What would I do if my country was committing genocide?' The answer is, you're doing it. Right now." —Former U.S. Airman (Air Force) Aaron Bushnell


blitzkrieg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Jun 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 17,445
Location: United Kingdom

05 Jun 2024, 12:49 pm

TwilightPrincess wrote:
blitzkrieg wrote:
TwilightPrincess wrote:
Balance isn’t always a good thing. Sometimes people are legitimately wrong.

Well, even in cases where people are legitimately wrong, exploring what a person might have meant beyond their communicative abilities sometimes proves fruitful. We are on a forum for people with a communication disorder to varying degrees, after all.

People have made what they meant in this thread fairly clear, especially if one follows the discussion from the beginning.


I thought that FXE, IL and yourself were being very clear, but I thought some of what Nades said seemed to need clarification and that might just have been how he was communicating. Hence my proposing of what he might have meant, based on what he did say.



funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 29,054
Location: Right over your left shoulder

05 Jun 2024, 12:49 pm

TwilightPrincess wrote:
There are no laws which penalize people for not having sex or for being in sexless relationships. Nor are there laws which address missed opportunities..


So you mean we shouldn't talk about missed opportunities and rape like they're two sides of the same coin?

That's a crazy idear.


_________________
When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become king, the palace becomes a circus.
"Many of us like to ask ourselves, What would I do if I was alive during slavery? Or the Jim Crow South? Or apartheid? What would I do if my country was committing genocide?' The answer is, you're doing it. Right now." —Former U.S. Airman (Air Force) Aaron Bushnell


funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 29,054
Location: Right over your left shoulder

05 Jun 2024, 12:52 pm

blitzkrieg wrote:
TwilightPrincess wrote:
blitzkrieg wrote:
TwilightPrincess wrote:
Balance isn’t always a good thing. Sometimes people are legitimately wrong.

Well, even in cases where people are legitimately wrong, exploring what a person might have meant beyond their communicative abilities sometimes proves fruitful. We are on a forum for people with a communication disorder to varying degrees, after all.

People have made what they meant in this thread fairly clear, especially if one follows the discussion from the beginning.


I thought that FXE, IL and yourself were being very clear, but I thought some of what Nades said seemed to need clarification and that might just have been how he was communicating. Hence my proposing of what he might have meant, based on what he did say.


I think when someone appears to be saying something that might be really terrible, weighing in can sometimes end up putting the wrong words in their mouth, either sympathetically (they decide you're giving them a better hill to die on and take it) or unsympathetically (you end up making their view sound worse than they intended).

Not that I'm much better at not trying to lend someone a hand when they're flailing and potentially putting words in their mouth as a result.


_________________
When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become king, the palace becomes a circus.
"Many of us like to ask ourselves, What would I do if I was alive during slavery? Or the Jim Crow South? Or apartheid? What would I do if my country was committing genocide?' The answer is, you're doing it. Right now." —Former U.S. Airman (Air Force) Aaron Bushnell


blitzkrieg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Jun 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 17,445
Location: United Kingdom

05 Jun 2024, 12:54 pm

funeralxempire wrote:
You could argue that the consent is less than fully informed, but that's not a litmus test that automatically invalidates consent.


Legally I imagine you would be right. Morally, I think if a person intentionally deceives someone and deprives a person of the ability to give informed consent, then a lack of consent would be present, even if that would not be legally recognised as a lack of consent.

I mean, it makes sense, logically, even it it isn't recognised legally.



IsabellaLinton
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Nov 2017
Gender: Female
Posts: 72,422
Location: Chez Quis

05 Jun 2024, 12:56 pm

blitzkrieg wrote:

I thought that FXE, IL and yourself were being very clear, but I thought some of what Nades said seemed to need clarification and that might just have been how he was communicating. Hence my proposing of what he might have meant, based on what he did say.



No one disagrees with Nades that the OP had a right to break up.
We've all said that.
Staying in an unhealthy relationship only creates resentment.

It's acceptable imo for the OP to say he was disappointed about no sex.
I was disappointed about no sex in my relationships too.
s**t happens.

What's not OK is assigning motive to this woman we don't know.
It's not OK to paint her as a sociopath who prays on disabled men.

If there's court records for that, then maybe.
In the absence of proof, it's all just butt-hurt whinging and slander.

For all we know his ex is a transwoman.
Maybe she's cis female but has cancer.
Maybe she's the traumatized victim of abuse.
Maybe OP didn't turn her on (sorry OP).

We have no idea what her reasons were.
The buck stops there.


_________________
I never give you my number, I only give you my situation.
Beatles


Nades
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Jan 2017
Age: 1934
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,013
Location: wales

05 Jun 2024, 1:02 pm

funeralxempire wrote:
Nades wrote:

Sounds like not respecting the right of others to consent to me.


Go on... make your case if you have one.

Tell me how anything that isn't actively contributing to the goal is denying the ability to consent to attempting the goal.


Can you actually tell me how preventing two people from having sex and potentially "eliminating" chances of sexual activity is respecting consent? This is a very intriguing concept.

Anyway

My original post was about what appears to be a woman who decided to settle down with a man with autism and either not taking his desires into account or just assuming he was OK with long term celibacy because he was vulnerable.

There could be many reasons why she decided to do that, but the fact she seemed to make no effort to address those problems both before or during means its hard to give her benefit of the doubt.

I'm my eyes, that's not respecting his sexuality and prevented him from finding more suitable people.

This thread is straying way out of line with the topic of even what I originally posted.



funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 29,054
Location: Right over your left shoulder

05 Jun 2024, 1:04 pm

blitzkrieg wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
You could argue that the consent is less than fully informed, but that's not a litmus test that automatically invalidates consent.


Legally I imagine you would be right. Morally, I think if a person intentionally deceives someone and deprives a person of the ability to give informed consent, then a lack of consent would be present, even if that would not be legally recognised as a lack of consent.

I mean, it makes sense, logically, even it it isn't recognised legally.


I agree that if someone's demonstrating a pattern of dishonest or manipulative behaviour it's fine to be critical of that and mindful of how it impacts consent, but we also don't have that here.

What we have here is assumptions and that's probably not the best basis for making conclusions about OP's ex's character.


_________________
When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become king, the palace becomes a circus.
"Many of us like to ask ourselves, What would I do if I was alive during slavery? Or the Jim Crow South? Or apartheid? What would I do if my country was committing genocide?' The answer is, you're doing it. Right now." —Former U.S. Airman (Air Force) Aaron Bushnell


blitzkrieg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Jun 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 17,445
Location: United Kingdom

05 Jun 2024, 1:06 pm

funeralxempire wrote:
blitzkrieg wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
You could argue that the consent is less than fully informed, but that's not a litmus test that automatically invalidates consent.


Legally I imagine you would be right. Morally, I think if a person intentionally deceives someone and deprives a person of the ability to give informed consent, then a lack of consent would be present, even if that would not be legally recognised as a lack of consent.

I mean, it makes sense, logically, even it it isn't recognised legally.


I agree that if someone's demonstrating a pattern of dishonest or manipulative behaviour it's fine to be critical of that and mindful of how it impacts consent, but we also don't have that here.

What we have here is assumptions and that's probably not the best basis for making conclusions about OP's ex's character.


True, there are a lot of unknowns in this thread.



Nades
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Jan 2017
Age: 1934
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,013
Location: wales

05 Jun 2024, 1:08 pm

blitzkrieg wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
blitzkrieg wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
You could argue that the consent is less than fully informed, but that's not a litmus test that automatically invalidates consent.


Legally I imagine you would be right. Morally, I think if a person intentionally deceives someone and deprives a person of the ability to give informed consent, then a lack of consent would be present, even if that would not be legally recognised as a lack of consent.

I mean, it makes sense, logically, even it it isn't recognised legally.


I agree that if someone's demonstrating a pattern of dishonest or manipulative behaviour it's fine to be critical of that and mindful of how it impacts consent, but we also don't have that here.

What we have here is assumptions and that's probably not the best basis for making conclusions about OP's ex's character.


True, there are a lot of unknowns in this thread.


There are, but I'm reading between the lines and going of my own experiences.



funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 29,054
Location: Right over your left shoulder

05 Jun 2024, 1:11 pm

Nades wrote:
Can you actually tell me how preventing two people from having sex and potentially "eliminating" chances of sexual activity is respecting consent? This is a very intriguing concept.


It still seems like you're treating everything that doesn't actively enable one to follow through on consenting to sex as inherently problematic and interfering with one's ability to consent.

It seems like if a roommate being loud interfered with a couple's ability to hook-up in the other room you'd be painting the loud roommate as on par with a rapist for "not respecting their consent" when at most all the roommate did was make the couple feel awkward.

Forgive me for identifying your logic as deeply flawed.


_________________
When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become king, the palace becomes a circus.
"Many of us like to ask ourselves, What would I do if I was alive during slavery? Or the Jim Crow South? Or apartheid? What would I do if my country was committing genocide?' The answer is, you're doing it. Right now." —Former U.S. Airman (Air Force) Aaron Bushnell


TwilightPrincess
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 27,857
Location: Hell

05 Jun 2024, 1:11 pm

Nades wrote:
blitzkrieg wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
blitzkrieg wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
You could argue that the consent is less than fully informed, but that's not a litmus test that automatically invalidates consent.


Legally I imagine you would be right. Morally, I think if a person intentionally deceives someone and deprives a person of the ability to give informed consent, then a lack of consent would be present, even if that would not be legally recognised as a lack of consent.

I mean, it makes sense, logically, even it it isn't recognised legally.


I agree that if someone's demonstrating a pattern of dishonest or manipulative behaviour it's fine to be critical of that and mindful of how it impacts consent, but we also don't have that here.

What we have here is assumptions and that's probably not the best basis for making conclusions about OP's ex's character.


True, there are a lot of unknowns in this thread.


There are, but I'm reading between the lines and got g of my own experiences.

Every situation and every woman is different. You can’t judge women just because of your experience or that of a few people you met online.

It seems like you are watering down what the word “consent” means which is deeply problematic for a few reasons. Sure, being in a sexless relationship is frustrating, but experiencing real nonconsent is something else entirely.



funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 29,054
Location: Right over your left shoulder

05 Jun 2024, 1:12 pm

Nades wrote:
There are, but I'm reading between the lines and going of my own experiences.


Yes, you are writing fan fiction based on projecting your own bad experiences and questionable attitudes.


_________________
When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become king, the palace becomes a circus.
"Many of us like to ask ourselves, What would I do if I was alive during slavery? Or the Jim Crow South? Or apartheid? What would I do if my country was committing genocide?' The answer is, you're doing it. Right now." —Former U.S. Airman (Air Force) Aaron Bushnell


IsabellaLinton
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Nov 2017
Gender: Female
Posts: 72,422
Location: Chez Quis

05 Jun 2024, 1:13 pm

Nades wrote:
I'm my eyes, that's not respecting his sexuality and prevented him from finding more suitable people.



Same thing happened to me.
They were gay but didn't tell me.
Legally and morally, it boils down to "sucks to be me".

Perhaps my marriage could have been annulled because he married under false pretences.
The rest of it gets filed under "live and learn".

We can't control other people or how they act.
We can only control ourselves and how we react.

That includes not blaming entire demographics or using baseless speculation.


_________________
I never give you my number, I only give you my situation.
Beatles


Nades
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Jan 2017
Age: 1934
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,013
Location: wales

05 Jun 2024, 1:18 pm

funeralxempire wrote:
Nades wrote:
Can you actually tell me how preventing two people from having sex and potentially "eliminating" chances of sexual activity is respecting consent? This is a very intriguing concept.


It still seems like you're treating everything that doesn't actively enable one to follow through on consenting to sex as inherently problematic and interfering with one's ability to consent.

It seems like if a roommate being loud interfered with a couple's ability to hook-up in the other room you'd be painting the loud roommate as on par with a rapist for "not respecting their consent" when at most all the roommate did was make the couple feel awkward.

Forgive me for identifying your logic as deeply flawed.


If done so knowingly, then yes. I think she knew what she intending all along and intended to do it long term based on his original comments. He said why he didn't leave the relationship, because he didn't want to be lonely and start courting again which I also think she prayed upon.

Treating it like it was an accident on her behalf seems naive given the facts of what he's said.

Am I being harsh to her? Yes, do I care, no. This is just what I think likely happened and there isn't anything stopping me from making judgments of her intentions.



funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 29,054
Location: Right over your left shoulder

05 Jun 2024, 1:22 pm

Nades wrote:
Am I being harsh to her? Yes, do I care, no. This is just what I think likely happened and there isn't anything stopping me from making judgments of her intentions.


So you'll understand why people make harsh judgments of you based upon the attitudes you've expressed and the prejudices you've demonstrated?

Unlike her we can actually evaluate your behaviour first hand, in particular to how you define "respecting consent" in a much more broad manner than could ever be deemed reasonable.


_________________
When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become king, the palace becomes a circus.
"Many of us like to ask ourselves, What would I do if I was alive during slavery? Or the Jim Crow South? Or apartheid? What would I do if my country was committing genocide?' The answer is, you're doing it. Right now." —Former U.S. Airman (Air Force) Aaron Bushnell


Last edited by funeralxempire on 05 Jun 2024, 1:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.