The Price of Special Rights: Responsibility, Honesty, and Social Impact

In modern society, a phenomenon is often observed in which some men, relying on allegedly special rights, refuse to take responsibility and restrain their impulses. At first glance, such a lifestyle may seem attractive, but upon closer examination it becomes evident that avoiding responsibility undermines trust and violates fundamental moral principles. The refusal to take on obligations—especially when it concerns the fate of future generations—casts doubt on the reliability and maturity of the individual, which is unacceptable in society.

The second important issue is that civilization demands the ability to control one’s impulses. The modern worldview asserts that a person must understand the limits of personal pleasure; otherwise, the entire system of moral norms begins to collapse. A sense of freedom without reasonable restrictions can lead to a situation where the moral foundations upon which our society is built are in jeopardy. This approach implies not only a loss of responsibility but also the erosion of a key principle, honesty, which inevitably affects the level of trust between people.

Special attention should also be paid to the impact of such behavior on women, for whom relationship stability is of paramount importance. The pursuit of unchecked freedom by some men causes real harm to those seeking sincerity and assurance in the future, as the absence of commitments often leads to inequality and painful consequences. Ultimately, if society begins to justify any action under the banner of a “right to happiness,” the fundamental values of civilized coexistence may come under threat.

Thus, the modern challenge lies in understanding that true maturity and strength of character are found in responsibility, restraint, and honesty. Only by embracing these principles can we maintain stable relationships and ensure a bright, fair future for all.

What arguments can be made against the behavior of men who mistakenly believe that they possess special rights in relationships? It can be argued that such men can be criticized on several grounds.

First, such behavior is evidence of shirking responsibility. For instance, one source states, “A real man should never avoid responsibility for the lives of all conceived children, and especially for the life of his own child. I dare assert that if a man seeks to absolve himself of responsibility for the outcomes of his actions in this area, he cannot be trusted in anything else” (source: link ). This highlights that the refusal to take responsibility for one’s actions undermines trust and the establishment of moral norms.

Second, a civilized society requires the realization that one must restrain one’s instincts and desires. As noted in another source: “A civilized person always believed that one must control one’s instincts and desires. If you never restrain the instinct of self-preservation, you will be seen as a coward. If you fail to restrain your pull toward gain, you will be regarded as greedy. Even sleep must not be surrendered if you are a guard. Yet any cruelty or betrayal is justified when it comes to love and passion. All of this resembles a system of morality in which stealing is forbidden, but stealing apricots is permitted” (source: link ). In other words, if a man believes he can behave without adhering to moral constraints, he undermines the very foundation of the moral norms upon which our society is built.

Moreover, such behavior violates the principles of honesty and trust. One statement reads: “The true state of affairs is further obscured by the fact that Mr. M.’s case is judged from the standpoint of a sort of ‘romantic morality.’ When we steal from a garden, it is not a sin against the laws of ‘fruit morality.’ We sin against honesty. Mr. M. has sinned against trust, gratitude, and basic human decency” (source: link ). This clearly indicates that an indifferent attitude toward duties and commitments in relationships breaches moral standards and erodes trust between people.

Furthermore, this behavior negatively affects women, who are often more monogamous and depend on relationship stability. One source emphasizes: “Firstly, a society in which infidelity is not considered a sin ultimately harms women. Regardless of the songs and jokes invented by men, women are far more monogamous than we are. In an environment dominated by rampant sin, they suffer far more than we do. Moreover, they are in greater need of domestic happiness” (source: link ). Thus, when men justify their carelessness and unfaithfulness, they inflict significant harm on those who seek sincerity and stability.

Finally, if we allow the complete, unbridled satisfaction of every desire, we might end up in a situation where the “right to happiness” is interpreted solely as a license for personal pleasure, ultimately leading to the moral decay of society. One argument states: “If we raise the ‘right to happiness’ to an absolute, sooner or later this principle will pervade all areas. We are moving toward a society where all human desires are considered legitimate. And then, even if technology helps us hold on for a bit longer, our civilization can be deemed dead” (source: link ). This serves as a warning that unrestrained gratification could destroy the very foundations of civilization.

In summary, men who believe they possess special rights in relationships can be reproached for their irresponsibility, their unwillingness to control their impulses, their lack of honesty, and their disregard for the repercussions on those around them—especially on women, whose need for monogamy and stability is severely undermined by such behavior.

Supporting citation(s):
"Look how men have deceived women... But a real man should never avoid responsibility for the lives of all conceived children, and particularly for his own child's life..." (source: link )
"A civilized person always believed that one must restrain one’s instincts and desires... Yet any cruelty and betrayal is justified when it comes to love and passion..." (source: link )
"The true state of affairs is further obscured by the fact that Mr. M.’s case is judged from the standpoint of a sort of ‘romantic morality’... Mr. M. has sinned against trust, gratitude, and basic human decency." (source: link )
"Firstly, a society in which infidelity is not considered a sin ultimately harms women... women are far more monogamous than we are." (source: link )
"If we raise the ‘right to happiness’ to an absolute, sooner or later this principle will pervade all areas... our civilization can be deemed dead." (source: link )