Let’s say a man decides to change his last name for no other reason than he hates his dad’s last name, and that dad refuses to call his son by his new last name. Then, in my opinion, his son should be 100% allowed to call him any mean name or slur he wants—‘dick,’ ‘shithead,’ the R slur, whatever. You shouldn’t get to disrespect people and expect respect back, so if this person gets called a slut and gets mad, I really can’t feel sympathy for him.
I think that only escalates the conflict minimising the probability of a resolve dramatically…
I think what you two need is long honest talk where both parties give their best listening and trying to understand each others feelings and beliefs.
The best method to achieve this is different for any relationship, for some it together at a dire with some beers, for some it is hiking etc. Basically a place where both feel secure and have their privacy together.
i’m of the opinion that if someone has done their best* [1] to consider the consequences of an approach and chooses to take that approach while accepting the potential outcomes, then that is an acceptable decision making process.
In some cases escalation might be a potential outcome and as long as the person understands that, then them choosing that option is their considered choice.
In the same way that freedom of speech* [2] isn’t freedom from consequences, freedom of choice isn’t freedom from other peoples choosing to act against you.
If you want to make what seems like a poor choice from my point of view, i might advise against it, but ultimately it’s up to you.
However, i’m also free to try and stop you if that’s what i choose. In this case i’m not looking to curtail your choices, but i am pitting my choice against yours.
a good faith best effort, considering the circumstances ↩︎
the general idea not the US specific thing ↩︎