|
|
|
|
|
by brokenkebaby
1056 days ago
|
|
>How promiscuous either of you were at any time before you met will have no bearing on that whatsoever, if you are committed to each other. The problem is in the fact that commitment doesn't naturally happen from sympathy, or sexual attraction. As fitting two lives is hard, it's a choice which for most people stems from cultural alignments, or hard necessity. If someone's learned behavior is to fly as a butterfly over multiple flowers you can bet with a high probability that culture won't be helpful here. And necessity to stick together for survival is unlikely to exist for modern middle class. |
|
Wait why is that the problem? I don't think anyone believes that being sympathetic or hot is sufficient to sustain a relationship.
> And necessity to stick together for survival is unlikely to exist for a modern middle class.
One of the points (a worryingly small number of) people are making here is that this is good. You don't need to just stay married just for survival - so if you're unloved, unfulfilled, abused or simply unhappy you can part ways without sacrificing your health, livelihood, social status or wellbeing.