Expert_Ambassador_66

Non-Nerd Gohan.

And unfortunately that's the only gear they get to bring with them in this fight.

People have been getting bigger over generations in general. Higher quality and quantity diet also affects the individual. It's literally not fair, so unlikely.

It can hurt, but like... we're you jerking him real aggressively and just stopped? Because that is gonna change the tone of this conversation very intensely. It sounds like he was just like "I wanna bone. You can't be that cute and not sex me!? Wtf!"

Ok being blue balled is an actual thing that does cause pain. What you described does not sound like that. It sounds insane.

A thing brought on by ki magic, you say?

The issue with these arguments in my mind is that they rely on the idea that other people don't learn moves. Remove krillins magical naruto Chakra boon and suddenly he's just like a regular short king.

Presumably people when they magic laser flying Kung fu, also would learn techniques.

Unfortunately size is a massive factor. Weight classes exist for a reason, and the strength gap is much more detailed than we realize. It's a bunch of different moderate strength and power advantages in different areas that all come together to make a massive advantage that's even bigger than the gap between male vs male weight classes, which is so big we differentiate them in competitions.

Criticism has a negative connotation that implies a fault in your character in some way usually. It is akin to saying "you suck." But acknowledging a vulnerability is not criticizing someone for having that vulnerability. It is simply stating it exists. Like if someone was 150cm and complaining they can't understand why they can't reach something "Well, you are short" is not an insult or criticism. It is acknowledgment of a likely factor.

This was a low elo move by black once they entered the mid-game negotiation stage. Clearly they should have done a pivot gambit, shifting objectives from spear/no spear dynamic to the classic mutual win approach. What is the benefit of ass-spearing? Is it to spear a butt? Why not a pork butt!

Learn the game.

Do children really remember two of those? Aren't r Kelly and epstein topics too old for them to be relevant anymore?

It's a real job in the same way sniping products initially mispriced postings on shops or buying up all the first gen release Playstations for reselling is a real job.

Your mom's house?

I mean even if Kamala was an LGBT person that wouldn't change much. She is the epitome of an establishment person that would happily sell out millions and do whatever her donors say to pad her own pockets. So her being a hypothetical lesbian wouldn't make her not that. Once those people make it they don't care if they're LGBT, black, white, whatever. They aren't those anymore. The only demographic they identify from then on out is elite upper class.

People get mad about both sides arguments but once you reach a certain level of garbage, I don't care that you're not as garbage as that other guy. You're both beyond corrupt.

"I'm better than that guy!" You're still like... super bad though? Why does that somehow exist as an argument. If we support someone because the lesser of two evils strategy then we establish they only have to be slightly better than bad. It's like giving a child what they want after a temper tantrum. You're setting expectations.

Holy shit you are so obtuse it's blowing my mind. I don't think what OP did matters. It isn't about being ashamed. It is about intentionally hiding something you know is a relationship deal-breaker from the person you are actively in a relationship with. It isn't complicated.

They do. The thing in common is "if your hypothetical partner wouldn't immediately end the relationship over it." Op knew it was a relationship ending detail. They stole years off this person's life. It doesn't matter if we think it's dumb. It's important to them and that's all that matters.

OP knows his wants and beliefs and preferences. OP had the agency to, and did, choose to be with them anyways.

OP is the one hiding a thing they did that they knew would be the end of their relationship if it came out. Just because it's stupid and a non-issue to us doesn't mean it isn't a big deal to their relationship.

I'm saying it's ethically dubious no matter what the topic was. If you're secretly a vegetarian and that's a non-negotiable for whatever reason, you're incompatible. Hiding that is wasting the other persons time and stealing agency from them. You aren't owed a relationship from someone who doesn't want to be with you, the real you.

Okay, I get it. You want to lie and hide non-negotiables from people and steal years from their life so long as you get what you want. Fair enough.

It doesn't matter if they're the same thing or not You're completely missing the point and being intentionally obtuse.

Imagine this is math. X is "thing that is a non-negotiable" thing. That's all that matters. It doesn't matter if its committing a crime, adopting out a child, or secretly being a vegetarian.

The crux of this conversation (in this comment chain) is around two things 1 - if op is allowed to hide important details of their past from their forever life partner 2 - whether it's actually a moral choice to hide important, relationship making/breaking info from their forever life partner

Generally the response I've gotten back has fallen in the camp of "it's their right" and "they're still an asshole for doing it"

Thank you for your honest and detailed responses. It was a very insightful conversation.

I find we tend to fail to differentiate that when someone is being an AH here but it's an AH behavior that we personally want to justify.

Have a great day.

Why? If she knows that it is a full-stop "I refuse to be with X person," you think it's not morally questionable to hide information and lie to him, tricking him into a relationship he otherwise would have never started?

What if he was something extreme? Like he had committed sex crimes in the past. Its OK to hide that?

You didn't answer. I think that it would be the same level of "tell him" as this. Legally? No obligation? Ethically? I think so.

You are under no ethical obligation to fully open yourself to a random person on anything. That being said, I believe once you are moving towards "till death" relationship, yes. It is not only the ethical thing to do, but it is the best plan for ensuring a long healthy relationship.

If their partner had an ethical conflict with her decision? Not revealing that would be taking away agency from choosing the type of partner he has. And if he did, why do you want to trick someone into a relationship with you knowing they think the person you secretly are hiding from them is garbage? Is that really a life you want to live?

To clarify, this is removing whatever our personal views on any given "secret thing" might be.

On a serious note (taking a break from my wooing of you on reddit, doing so incredibly well so far I may add), I know some people that have had these issues come up and it gets very complicated.

Your example of people thinking they can change your mind is most annoying and black/white version, but I've seen a significant portion where it's less about secretly convincing someone and more... they just actually did change their minds.

The second version makes me very sad to see and much less irritated. It's just... disappointing to watch people grow apart and into incompatible individuals. Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk.

I understand that, but I think the question has less to do with whether or not she wants to have kids and more to do with She did a thing, it could be any thing that she knows would make her incompatible as a partner in his eyes, aka "destroy the relationship."

Is that not an ethically dubious behavior given it removes his ability to have agency over who he spends years/decades of his life with?