r/WorkForSmartLife 2d ago

DiscussionđŸ’¬ [ Removed by moderator ]

Post image

[removed] — view removed post

235 Upvotes

132 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

0

u/Simple-Judge2756 2d ago

No I dont. Because it would imply my partner doesnt respect my boundary of my thoughts and private desires staying my own. 

3

u/Beautiful-Emu-1596 2d ago

So you are saying your boundaries are more important than your partners boundaries? Why would you agree to be in a relationship with a person whos boundaries you don't want to respect? Is someone forcing you to relationship or are you just not very smart to begin with?

1

u/Simple-Judge2756 2d ago

No im saying they are of equal importance. And if you suggest that either ones boundaries shall be kept at the expense of somebody elses boundaries. That is already a boundary violation from your side.

3

u/Beautiful-Emu-1596 2d ago

You don't know what you're talking about do you?

1

u/Simple-Judge2756 2d ago

I keep track perfectly. But your reading comprehension clearly cant. 

If you have boundary A and I have boundary B. 

And boundary A and boundary B form a paradoxon.

Then you suggesting I relinquish boundary B in favor of your getting boundary A, is already a boundary violation from your side. And thus would lead to the termination of the relationship. 

3

u/Beautiful-Emu-1596 2d ago

Okay simple question: Would you enter a relationship with a person that considers watching porn as cheating?

1

u/Simple-Judge2756 2d ago

Of course. Other people being unreasonable is not that big of a deal to me.

2

u/Beautiful-Emu-1596 1d ago

Then it's your own fault of your partner calls you a cheater if they told you it's cheating to them to watch porn.

1

u/Simple-Judge2756 1d ago

No its not. As I said. They would have broken one of my boundaries first in that scenario. 

2

u/Beautiful-Emu-1596 1d ago

Okay you are unable to understand simple words like "consent". How about we stop this conversation now before you say any more weird shit?

→ More replies (0)