> Would you agree that current society is not as conducive to long-term relationships?
There can be great value in long term relationships, but equally, there is great value in people's freedom to associate (or not), including the freedom to move in and out of personal relationships.
Those ideals could be framed as appositional, but they are synergistic.
Emphasizing only long term commitments, and stigmatizing break ups, has a long history of trapping countless people in abusive, unhappy, practically harmful relationships. And covering up that harm. Anti-breakup effectively becomes anti-transparency and pro-abuse.
Promoting the freedom to break up (not promoting break ups), helps people get out of bad relationships, and gives them another chance to find one.
So win-win.
So yes, I would say that a more free society is tautologically less conducive to long term relationships than one where they are highly prescribed.
But more conducive to people taking the health of their existing relationships seriously, and for finding a healthy relationship, however long that takes. And more conducive to people who are simply happier without a relationship (after suffering a bad one, or not), to do so without stigma.
> Anti-breakup effectively becomes anti-transparency and pro-abuse.
If there is no communal support or watchfulness, then I guess those things are more likely, yes. Communities should help prevent abusive people from isolating their partners. I guess you would argue that the reality will always fall short of that and that communities can never be good enough.
> So win-win.
I'm not so sure it's necessarily a win for the kids.
I guess the main problem that you're not addressing is the possible lack of sustainability. Women do have a time limit if they want children, and of course there is personal freedom and all that, but if a culture that pushes personal freedom doesn't reproduce enough to replace itself then it may eventually be outbred by cultures that are less interested in personal freedom (e.g. their women might be forced to have more kids).
> Would you agree that current society is not as conducive to long-term relationships?
There can be great value in long term relationships, but equally, there is great value in people's freedom to associate (or not), including the freedom to move in and out of personal relationships.
Those ideals could be framed as appositional, but they are synergistic.
Emphasizing only long term commitments, and stigmatizing break ups, has a long history of trapping countless people in abusive, unhappy, practically harmful relationships. And covering up that harm. Anti-breakup effectively becomes anti-transparency and pro-abuse.
Promoting the freedom to break up (not promoting break ups), helps people get out of bad relationships, and gives them another chance to find one.
So win-win.
So yes, I would say that a more free society is tautologically less conducive to long term relationships than one where they are highly prescribed.
But more conducive to people taking the health of their existing relationships seriously, and for finding a healthy relationship, however long that takes. And more conducive to people who are simply happier without a relationship (after suffering a bad one, or not), to do so without stigma.