Well I hope that you amend your views before bringing a tiny new human into existence. I’m not saying that laws should be outright disregarded. I had limited time to make my response, so I didn’t go into much detail about RA’s approaches to co-parenting. I don’t intend to do so now.
Choosing to get law enforcement involved doesn’t break these rules. If a relationship is inequitable and people are in danger, and getting the police involved seems like the only option from one or more perspectives in the relationship, then that’s what should happen.
Another major factor within RA is the choice/ability to continue or discontinue relationships. And this element (like any other element of skillful RA) requires an ongoing commitment to communication. Checking in about the state of relationships. Choosing to deescalate a relationship for any number of reasons is a fully valid choice, whether due to time constraints, lack of commitment, over commitment, feeling unsafe, feeling codependent, literally anything; though, with the hope that people either won’t oversell an issue or understate it. Literally you’re “not feeling it” can be a valid reason to step back, but also that might be easier to work through than, say, “the way you handle conflict reminds me of ways my parent(s) used to invalidate my experiences of emotional distress before I was able to fully articulate my difficulty, and I can’t continue to relate with you so closely until we have boundaries and agreements in place regarding how you handle conflict.”
I’m guessing you don’t live in the US based on your last statement, and I would hazard a guess that things are indeed pretty different elsewhere, at least in regard to socio-political climate. That doesn’t necessarily invalidate RA as a system, but it likely (and probably greatly) changes the way one or more people may be supported or seen by the society they move through. The US is very patriarchal, but generally women are in less danger here than, for example, Yemen or Saudi Arabia.
I have two kids and a bonus kid. Let me inform you that at no point has “not feeling it” been a valid reason to end that relationship. They are in fact not feeling the food at several occasions, and then changing their mind once they try it. I don’t see the doctrine you are talking about bring any insight still, but it also isn’t wrong. Love is free. You can choose. It is a very basic message. Kids cannot choose though. And prisoners, etc. I really do not understand fully how social and external factors can ever impact these rules when they do, daily for many people around the world? We want free love, for sure, but just saying it’s law and abstracting away any external impact is not really helpful? Or I am missing a lot
It rather seems to me that you’re only responding to the generalized ideas I’m trying to present as they relate to your own specific experience, and using that as a way to discount or invalidate the concept entirely. I don’t see the point in going to bat so hard for this. I’m not telling you how to raise the humans you’ve chosen to be responsible for, I’m just saying that’s another kind of relationship. Relationship anarchy is very specifically not “free love”, which clearly wasn’t so free anyways. Love is free, sure, but these days so many people’s time is money; taking the time to choose what relationships you participate in, and what that participation looks like, can’t possibly be a bad idea, and that’s the idea with RA.
Well I hope that you amend your views before bringing a tiny new human into existence. I’m not saying that laws should be outright disregarded. I had limited time to make my response, so I didn’t go into much detail about RA’s approaches to co-parenting. I don’t intend to do so now.
Choosing to get law enforcement involved doesn’t break these rules. If a relationship is inequitable and people are in danger, and getting the police involved seems like the only option from one or more perspectives in the relationship, then that’s what should happen.
Another major factor within RA is the choice/ability to continue or discontinue relationships. And this element (like any other element of skillful RA) requires an ongoing commitment to communication. Checking in about the state of relationships. Choosing to deescalate a relationship for any number of reasons is a fully valid choice, whether due to time constraints, lack of commitment, over commitment, feeling unsafe, feeling codependent, literally anything; though, with the hope that people either won’t oversell an issue or understate it. Literally you’re “not feeling it” can be a valid reason to step back, but also that might be easier to work through than, say, “the way you handle conflict reminds me of ways my parent(s) used to invalidate my experiences of emotional distress before I was able to fully articulate my difficulty, and I can’t continue to relate with you so closely until we have boundaries and agreements in place regarding how you handle conflict.”
I’m guessing you don’t live in the US based on your last statement, and I would hazard a guess that things are indeed pretty different elsewhere, at least in regard to socio-political climate. That doesn’t necessarily invalidate RA as a system, but it likely (and probably greatly) changes the way one or more people may be supported or seen by the society they move through. The US is very patriarchal, but generally women are in less danger here than, for example, Yemen or Saudi Arabia.
I have two kids and a bonus kid. Let me inform you that at no point has “not feeling it” been a valid reason to end that relationship. They are in fact not feeling the food at several occasions, and then changing their mind once they try it. I don’t see the doctrine you are talking about bring any insight still, but it also isn’t wrong. Love is free. You can choose. It is a very basic message. Kids cannot choose though. And prisoners, etc. I really do not understand fully how social and external factors can ever impact these rules when they do, daily for many people around the world? We want free love, for sure, but just saying it’s law and abstracting away any external impact is not really helpful? Or I am missing a lot
It rather seems to me that you’re only responding to the generalized ideas I’m trying to present as they relate to your own specific experience, and using that as a way to discount or invalidate the concept entirely. I don’t see the point in going to bat so hard for this. I’m not telling you how to raise the humans you’ve chosen to be responsible for, I’m just saying that’s another kind of relationship. Relationship anarchy is very specifically not “free love”, which clearly wasn’t so free anyways. Love is free, sure, but these days so many people’s time is money; taking the time to choose what relationships you participate in, and what that participation looks like, can’t possibly be a bad idea, and that’s the idea with RA.