this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2026

57 points (91.3% liked)

CoupleMemes

958 readers

379 users here now

Community dedicated to memes that often hit a little too close to home. Respect the instance rules and remember that sharing these memes with your SO might 50/50 put you in the doghouse.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Picasso@sh.itjust.works

lena@gregtech.eu

Never (files.catbox.moe)

submitted 3 weeks ago by Picasso@sh.itjust.works to c/Couplememes@sh.itjust.works

19 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 19 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] username_1@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Pfah, you know nothing about cheating. IDDQD and IDKFA are beautiful, you snobby snork.

[–] zero_spelled_with_an_ecks@programming.dev 4 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

That's a single player game. Don't cheat in multiplayer games. Don't be the reason somebody likes kernel level anti cheat.

[–] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 3 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

And even in multiplayer it's not cheating if everyone is aware of what is going on and agrees to it

[–] jtrek@startrek.website 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Reinventing ethical non monogamy

[–] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 2 points 3 weeks ago

Good way to split rent too

[–] zero_spelled_with_an_ecks@programming.dev 1 points 3 weeks ago

Yep, can be a ton of fun.

[–] username_1@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

the reason somebody likes kernel level anti cheat.

The only known reason for that is "imbecilism". No sane person with IQ > 60 is ok with kernel level spy systems.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Shit doesn't even keep up the appearance of being more effective. Every game with rootkit anticheats seems to have more cheaters than the games that don't!

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 0 points 3 weeks ago

That's not my experience at all but on the other hand the only one I played was League. I came across maybe three obvious cheaters in five years of play?

Actually pretty good numbers considering how accepted cheating is in certain regions.

"Certain regions" being Russia, Italy, China, Japan, and Israel.

Hmmm. Wonder what the cultural pattern is there.

[–] canniest_tod@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Hmm, I wish I'd dated the one who wrote this. I haven't believed in love for like 15 yrs.

[+] JCSpark@lemmy.ca -9 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

If only they had a conversation... Maybe cheating is an unspoken exploration for one or both people into other perfectly valid relationship styles?

[–] OldSageRick@lemmy.zip 13 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

See that would be an open relationship, which by its definition allows for extramarital relationships with consent of both partners. Cheating is when one of the partners has not given informed consent to it

[–] zout@fedia.io 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Cheating is for when you know your partner isn't going to consent, and also you'd hate to see your partner with someone else.

[–] OldSageRick@lemmy.zip 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

True, but if you know your partner isn't going to consent then you are just an asshole, or they are.

If you are poli or for any reason want to have multiple relationships at the same time and your partner will not consent then the relationship is clearly not working for at least one person and there for should be ended

[–] JCSpark@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 weeks ago

I 100% agree with this. The same applies in reverse. Should a partner of mine decide they don't want to practice polyamory, it would be an asshole move to deny them that choice, removing their consent. That's besides ignoring their bodily autonomy, independence, and all those pesky other things that are often ignored.

[–] JCSpark@lemmy.ca 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

You're correct in both of those definitions. Let's clarify consent though. Informed, enthusiastic, ongoing, and revokable. Does one consent to expected relationship styles, or is it merely a societal expectation? Are we informed of all options while growing up? Are all traditional relationships enthusiastic with the option to revoke consent?

My point is, I feel that cheating is an outlet when one feels there is no other option. This may be due to never having been presented an option, thus resorting to compulsory monogamy.

I appreciate dissenting opinions as well, and look forward to productive discussion.

[–] OldSageRick@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I agree with you that cheating can be an outlet if a person feels that there is no other option, that doesn't diminish the asshole aspect tho(there are some edge cases).

It may be my brain working in mysterious ways, but every relationship I had began its official stage with me sitting down with the other person and going over every little thing I could think off to establish boundaries, expectations, and so on. Including the type of relationship, assumed consent, level of privacy, and so on and so forth. Granted it backfired a few times, but when it didn't the relationships lasted far longer than the average I have seen with my friend and other contacts.

But that is to say that I believe that even without the lengthy discussion beforehand, a dialogue must happen between the two(or more) people in a relationship. If they don't have a discussion about everything beforehand I would say that the default is consent to the most popular option of the culture they both have (or of the areas culture if different).

As for consent and lack of knowledge, while I think that consent should be Informed, and revocable at any time (I am unsure what you mean by ongoing, so no opinion on that), however I don't think consent must be enthusiastic. For example I hate when my bed has crumbs in it, but I say "fine whatever" to my wife eating cookies in bed, because while I hate having crumbs the I explained it to her so she cleans them off and if not I always can do that myself => I would much more prefer this not being the case (so I am not enthusiastic about it) but it is something I can live with. I also think that consent should be explicit, i.e. anything except a clear or pre-established consent (Like "yes", "okay", nodding, etc.) is a No.

As for lack of knowledge, although I can see the problem of it, I still think that a dialog should happen. For example person A never knew about open or poly relationships, but is poly. Having an urge to have intimate relationship with an other person could it self cause A to talk to their partner, or at least talk to them afterwards.

[–] JCSpark@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Great thoughts! Management of expectations should be the default, and the beginning of any relationship (platonic, ENM, monogamous, professional, familial, etc) should be discussed. I think it's an excellent idea to understand what each party is seeking, and what capacity is available on either side. I agree that this is key to relationships that provide the most fulfillment to all involved, and that's exactly what I've experienced as well.

As for ongoing consent, it's the idea that consent must be continuous. Once it is no longer provided, it is not ongoing, thus the activity/arrangement/etc must end. This is where renegotiation can occur with conversation and (re)management of expectations.

A perfect example would be giving a ride to a friend. They consent to enter your vehicle, and provide ongoing consent while in the passenger seat. They can, at any time, ask for you to stop the car so they can get out. This is revocation of consent, and the end of the ongoing piece.

Side note about consent. I've been referring to ENM as CNM lately, as Ethics are subjective, but Consent is not.

[–] OldSageRick@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 weeks ago

Thank you for the explanation, I learned something new (or rather a new way to put it)!

From reading what you are saying, and what you said before (I had a peak at your profile) it seems our opinions are quite the similar. If you want to share something, or just talk more, please be my guest, besides that it seems we both (or at least I) seem to understand each other.