What’s more interesting to me is that every single human society has had the opportunity to allow open relationships and instead settled on some form of hardlined partnership regulation function. To put it another way, every person in every setting in every culture in every era have all come to the conclusion that it is better to have a rigid structural partnership contract of some kind than it is to even attempt to tackle the societal issues open relationships present.
It’s not the first time humans have asked this type of question. Is this really a modern shift, or is this an ongoing historical fad whose waxing and waning phases have been glossed over in favor of more exciting history?
What’s more interesting to me is that every single human society has had the opportunity to allow open relationships and instead settled on some form of hardlined partnership regulation function. To put it another way, every person in every setting in every culture in every era have all come to the conclusion that it is better to have a rigid structural partnership contract of some kind than it is to even attempt to tackle the societal issues open relationships present.
It’s not the first time humans have asked this type of question. Is this really a modern shift, or is this an ongoing historical fad whose waxing and waning phases have been glossed over in favor of more exciting history?
That is just literally not true. There was never any grand consensus. There was religious persecution.
Religions don’t just pop up out of a vacuum. They reflect and reinforce the predominant cultural practices of the time.
Explain the French then.