The answer to your question is a resounding no but you both need to be on the same page. Is there any real risk of you developing deeper feelings that will hurt you in the future if/when you’re cast aside? Are you ready to be cast aside on terms that are not your own if his parents decided it’s time for him to get serious? Would you be comfortable with going from his priority to a distraction in one fell swoop when things get real? Would you simply end the relationship at that point?

If you feel respected by him and his family and you’re cool with it not going any further / potentially ending abruptly then sounds like you’re okay with the circumstances.

You’re in a relationship with a guaranteed expiry date. Traditionally relationships were a means to an end (marriage), now they can be much more sophisticated. Are you truly satisfied with terms of your relationship and most likely outcomes?

If there were a person who treats you great, fucks you good and gets you but also could be a long term partner, would you rather be in that situation? Do you think you’re wasting time by not looking for that person? Is not the oppurtunity cost of this relationship too high if that’s the case? Is there a part of you that feels your investment in this relationship is a sunk cost that makes it difficult to look for alternatives?

It really comes down to whether you want a long term relationship or not. If that’s not a priority to you then you’re fine. If it is, then you may be passing on something even better and you need to decide if it’s time to go look for that.

There is a South Indian film that takes on this idea.

Two nearly century year grandparents have fallen into a routine of elderly living, taking care of each other with some help from the kids.

One day the grandfather finds a love letter from another man addressed to his wife from over 50 years ago. He is livid and wants a divorce despite their near 75 year relationship.

The family largely tries to dissuade him but he is determined to pursue divorce. His wife largely remains silent throughout all of this.

Ultimately a daughter who the grandfather has estranged for going on her own path returns and the context of the grandmother’s affair is revealed.

The grandfather was a flawed character with an inflexible patriarchal view on family dynamics (a fairly global norm in the 1950s and 60s). He has shown growth into a more egalitarian mindset since then.

However, when they prematurely lose their eldest son to a drowning accident, he struggles to cope. He turns to alcohol and while being lost in the bottle his wife (the grandmother, who is also mourning) has to find a way to keep the family together, raise the kids, manage the household entirely on her own.

It was during this period that the affair occurs. A man in the community offers the grandma emotional support while the grandfather is trying to drink his grief away, detached entirely from his family in any meaningful way.

When the grandfather comes to know that it occurred during a period of life that he has come to regret, he forgives her, as she forgives him for his detachment while grieving the loss of their son. Having reconciled they die peacefully together in their sleep.

I completely agree with you that obsessive monogamy is toxic. I think if someone is cheating “casually” in a mutually agreed upon monogamous relationship then that is a red line and disrespectful. However, real life can get pretty complicated and no one should be entering a relationship expecting to exert absolute control over their partners body / intimacy. That is incredibly toxic

This entire thread just makes me mourn the quality of history education in this part of the world.

Which nation, through a proxy war with the USSR, armed and empowered the progenitor of the Taliban?

Nearly everyone here desperately needs a crash course in how this part of the world creates circumstances for conflict and instability elsewhere. If you look closely enough you’ll see, from the colonial era to now, it was done with (often times malicious) intention.

The amazing thing about American foreign policy is that it thinks it can fix the problems it creates and it essentially never can.

people consider it bad because they fear it will be forced upon them by racist/ableist powers

Yes, because this was normal thinking 150 years ago when eugenics was gaining prominence:

At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world.

Charles Darwin The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex

Every state application of eugenics since then has been applied to achieve some form of demographic reconstitution.

Nazism took the Western obsession with eugenics to its lowest point.

So yes, all eugenics is bad. Your example of the mother and father does not amount to eugenics as their motivation is not to “improve the human gene pool” and is instead much more personal.

If you’re moving for economic reasons, because you’re country was decimated by colonialism / neocolonialism, and the country you’re moving to prides itself on individual liberty then you have no obligation to completely abandon your native culture.

Even today ‘expats’ rarely integrate into the local culture. Don’t give up a part of your identity just because you want to fit in.

By all means, when in Rome do as the Romans do. But that doesn’t have to mean losing yourself in the process

The challenge is that historically in America discrimination was applied in a race based fashion and this is not fully captured by socioeconomic status. So the rectifier has to at least in some way acknowledge race. That being said, it doesn’t have to be in perpetuity.

I hear where you’re coming from as an Indian American myself. It can feel weird that some minority groups are disadvanraged / have a handicap applied relative to the majority demographic but I will say yours and our demographic tend to do pretty well despite that.

Until we live in a world where a resume with the name Tyrone or Mercedes isn’t more likely to be discarded without review, looking at socioeconomic status alone won’t make sense. We have evidence now that the AI hiring tools used by major corporations are just as biased, if not more so, than humans so this a problem that still needs solving.

What I’ve heard is Russia wants access to the black sea since its crucial to their power projection. Russia had its puppet running Ukraine until 2014 so they were ok with Ukraine’s sovereignty but the revolution leading to his overthrow opened the door for installation of a Western puppet and Russia responded to that by annexing Crimea and eventually war. Zelensky has recently said Ukraine will be letting go of its NATO membership aspirations which should help with achieving peace, especially since leadership in both Russia and the West seem accepting of a war of attrition with Ukraine stuck in the middle.

Putin’s strategy:

He’s betting that Russia’s authoritarian system can endure high casualties and economic hardship longer than Western democracies can maintain political support for Ukraine. He is waiting for political fatigue to flip elections in the U.S. and Europe.

A state of perpetual war allows the Kremlin to frame all domestic dissent as treason, effectively cleansing the Russian political landscape of pro-Western or liberal elements.

West’s strategy

By providing aid incrementally rather than all at once, NATO avoids red lines that might trigger a nuclear escalation or a direct Russia-NATO war. The goal is to weaken Russia slowly enough that the Kremlin doesn’t feel backed into a corner where they resort to extreme options.

The war acts as good justification for Western nations to revitalize their neglected defense sectors. This long-term ramp-up in production is seen as necessary to prepare for other future conflicts.

There is a quiet fear in some Western capitals that a total, rapid Russian defeat could lead to the collapse of the Russian state, leaving thousands of nuclear warheads in the hands of unknown warlords. A controlled attrition is seen by some as more predictable.

Male to female ration 4:-1

And he was detained for all of 11 hours. Lot of weird misinformation going around regarding this.

Might be a good time for them to learn about the curry leaf.

Colonial legacy. One has to remember Europeans spent the 1800s and much of the early 1900s dabbling in “were civilized, they’re not” brainrot ie. phrenology, race “science”, eugenics, forced sterilization and most Western education essentially ignores the cultural legacy of white supremacy. Some Western countries (including the US) continued race based apartheid into the mid to late 1900s. It’s why Western countries can never seem to completely shake Nazism. To a degree it’s imbued into their very foundations.

She has refused to acknowledge Japan’s war crimes during WW2 and wrote the preface for a book promoting Hitler’s election strategy.

Anti LGBTQ sentiment is undoubtedly not uncommon around the world. I live in the West and it was not even 15 years ago that insinuating homosexuality was a way men insulted each other and there are many that still do. If anything it’s gradually getting worse here, with more and more countries electing far right governments. We are a long way from acceptance.

But Takaichi is more than your everyday mild bigot.

Digital nomads in Mexico City

https://youtu.be/km4QYxOlJgM

I don’t mean this in a disrespectful way at all but this is a very white perspective. No minority (including myself) would default to that option and even many white people are wising up.

It gets engagement from all sides. Advertisers dream come true.

1. He was detained for “misuse of public office” ie. leaking sensitive information to Epstein, not for child sex abuse.

2. He was released from custody 11 hours after being detained.

3. The British state covered up child sex abuse at the Kincora Boys Home in Ireland. You can read more in “Kincora: Britain’s Shame” by Chris Moore. Andrew’s great uncle Louis Mountbatten (the one that incompetently drew the India-Pakistan border) allegedly raped boys at this school and never faced consequences in his lifetime.

If we’re going off election results it would be nearly two thirds of white men and more than half of white women so YMMV depending on which part of the country you’re in.

For which party and why? I would contend many people enjoy sex most when their partner is someone they respect, provided they’ve developed to a certain level of maturity. Perhaps you have an alternate rationale.

Even within dom/sub and other BDSM variations I would hope both partners respect each other because without that you’ve entered a very toxic and destructive space.

Unsurprising, including the fact that it took a couple white folk becoming victims for the issue to get national recognition. One can only wonder how many others ICE/DHS has killed along the way.

Civil disobedience but historically there has also been a violent anti-state faction to contrast with the non-violent faction, allowing the latter to appear as the reasonable folks that should be heard out and negotiated with.