[ Rules / FAQ ] [ meta / b / media / img / feels / hb / x ]

/feels/ - Advice & Venting

Talk about relationships of all kinds, ask for advice, or just vent

*Text* => Text

**Text** => Text

***Text*** => Text

[spoiler]Text[/spoiler] => Text

Direct Link
Options NSFW image
Sage (thread won't be bumped)

Check the Catalog before making a new thread.
Do not respond to maleposters. See Rule 7.
Please read the rules! Last update: 04/27/2021


boyfriend of 3 years cheated on me Anonymous 103469

he told me himself the same day and said he was really sorry, asked for forgiveness and said he didn't want to lose me and everything seemed honest and i loved him so i decided we'd make it work with a reconciliation you know.
i was fine the first few days, i didn't feel angry or anything and i didn't cry… but i think it's what they call the shock stage. it's been 2 weeks and i feel like crap now. i cry every day. i can't do anything. why do boys always cheat on me? when will i be enough, god

Anonymous 103476


People these days just don't understand the value of a relationship or how sacred marriage and sex are. He did it once, so you know he's capable of doing it again.
Cut your losses and find someone who values you as much as you value them.

Anonymous 103478

Daily reminder that moids who have sex before marriage don't believe in sexual monogamy and are likelier to cheat on you.

Anonymous 103491

It’s hard, but you should leave him. It’s never going to be just the one time.

What? You can date people in succession. That’s literally how most people practice monogamy. It’s actually a really simple rule.

Anonymous 103493


i didn't want to break up with him… i really love him so much and i feel i wouldn't be happy with anyone else, he's the type of man I'd like to build a future with for the first time in my life. even if it makes me a cuck

i forgot to mention it but he didn't cheat on me by kissing or having sex with another person, but with a girl from one of those online chatrooms where they talked about sex and stuff. he told me about it same day.

Anonymous 103494


in the meantime, i feel really bad mentally (plus depression and meds), even though he's trying really hard to win my trust back… by giving me access to his cellphone, PC, his current location and talking to me while he's away from home. idk if i can do it

Anonymous 103495

Once a cheater. Always a cheater.
You'll be second guessing him from now on whenever he's out without you and it'll make you miserable, then you'll resent him for it.

Anonymous 103498

>but with a girl from one of those online chatrooms where they talked about sex and stuff. he told me about it same day.
That’s not cheating, even if the “girl” on the other side of the chat room was a biological woman. He literally could have been talking to an ai chatbot, so it’s likely not cheating.

Anonymous 103500

people will say 'just chatting' is completely harmless, but it's the moid testing the waters to see how much of a pushover you are. They all have a madonna/whore complex so theyll either group you into 'wifey material but boring' or 'whore but sexy'. He's checking to see if he can fuck whores on the side while having you as a bangmaid to raise his children and keep his house clean. That is the ultimate dream for moids. I know it hurts, but you cannot let him think youre a pushover that will tolerate being cheated on and used. If you think the chatting is tolerable, he will just escalate until it gets to full on cheating.

Anonymous 103502

>in succession
Monogamy doesn't mean one at a time, but one in a lifetime

Anonymous 103539

So if my bf is my first bf but I’m not his first gf, I’m in a monogamous relationship and he’s not?

Anonymous 103541

If a husband has a mistress behind his wife, who is monogamous and who is not? Certainly the husband is not monogamous while the wife is.

Anonymous 103542

you're terminally online nona, get help

Anonymous 103543

>Monogamy doesn't mean one at a time
It definitely does unless you're adhering to religious rules under which you can't divorce. But the modern monogamy is definitely one at a time.

Anonymous 103546

>Monogamy doesn't mean one at a time, but one in a lifetime
huh where did you get this from?

Anonymous 103549

>modern "monogamy"
not monogamy
It is the true and original definition, but modern times have hijacked the word.

Anonymous 103550

human beings arent 100% naturally monogamous. "true" monogamy is a lie

Anonymous 103553

>human beings arent 100% naturally monogamous
Humans don't naturally know how to drive a car, yet there are still automobiles all around. Why should nature determine everything?
>"true" monogamy is a lie
I was using the adjective "true" to modify the word "definition". I never said anything about "true monogamy", only "true definition".

Anonymous 103555

oh please stop being an insufferable autist about this, you know very well what anon meant when she used "monogamy" whether you agree with her definition or not, that's not relevant.

Anonymous 103558

my boyfriend lied about vaping nicotine for the past 2 years (and my ex before that lied about being an alcoholic for 6 years). I went through the phase you're going through now. We eventually broke up because I couldn't swallow the anger. I forced him to dump me and went all scorched earth and chewed out his family because at the time I knew I'd get stuck in an on and off relationship otherwise. I still vacillate about it now and miss him.

Anonymous 103561

It is relevant, because the true definition of the word is the topic at hand.

Anonymous 103574

It's not, you just derailed anon's thread.

Anonymous 103575

How did he happen to even use one of this chatrooms? He must have seeked them

Anonymous 103590

>how sacred marriage and sex are
Is sex sacred? What makes it sacred?

Anonymous 103591

>1610s, "practice of marrying only once in a lifetime," from French monogamie, from Late Latin monogamia, from Greek monogamia "single marriage," from monogamos "marrying only once," from monos "single, alone" + gamos "marriage"

The autist is correct and you should all stop arguing over definitions henceforth.

I was trying to see if anyone had come up with another term for what is conventional nowadays. I tried "sequogamy" for "sequential marriages" but nothing showed, so I tried seriogamy "serial + marriages" and at least one writer has thought of the term. The argument should thus be whether we believe monogamy is the best route, or whether seriogamy is ultimately better. Monogamy, I think, works best under arranged marriages - everyone from such a culture is far far happier with their marriage because 1. they don't think they have any other options (no choice paralysis/fomo), and 2. their parents usually make sure the match will work. There are of course big issues with the deal as well, namely that if your husband dies, or if he's a complete bastard, you have no out. The latter sounds nice in theory, but I don't like that it has ended up with people treating marriage like a business partnership.

Anonymous 103596

>monogamy: the fact or custom of having a sexual relationship or marriage with only one other person at a time:

Modern English doesn't agree with you retard

Anonymous 103597

>someone else should choose who you spend the rest of your life with so you don’t date more than one person ever because that is le bad

Anonymous 103599

>woman: an adult who lives and identifies as female though they may have been said to have a different sex at birth
Modern english says mentally deluded moids are women.

Anonymous 103646

One supposed definition of a word in 1610 does not somehow negate what a word actually unambiguously means in all contemporary uses (and much older).

And it is clearly incomplete anyway. Because remarriage after divorce and widows remarrying has existed long before that and has never been considered equivalent to the practice of having multiple wives. So there were two meanings used with the word, or rather two implications, and the meaning you claim is the real one has in fact not been used in hundreds of years.

Societies where polygamy is a practice (not necessarily more common than monogamy) were the norm worldwide and European writers, across thousands of years, whose societies did not have the practice at all noted it with distaste. In particularly they considered it motivated by lust. They clearly did not see someone remarrying as anything like it, even though they didn't think it was ideal either.

Btw 1610s English is Modern English. What we speak is called Late Modern English or Present-day English. But modern in general use just means contemporary or now or recent. If you want to insist upon meaningless bad faith and ignorant obstructions to communication (the purpose of language), you should be better at it and not say Modern so loosely.

Anonymous 103647

Btw a dictionary or a grammar is entirely arbitrary, and obviously susceptible to language policing, which is why you defer to the real meanings in practice, what people actually say and what they mean. You are the sort to bring up a dictionary definition and an etymology someone came up with as if it determines language absolutely and forever. So you are in very good company with this amendment of 'woman' as they too place authority in it.

Anonymous 103648

>a dictionary or a grammar is entirely arbitrary
Also a proof of this is that multiple mutually contradictory dictionaries and grammars exist at the same time, much less considering all in history. And that they are decided by a few individuals.

Did you know some of the spellings of native English words were Latinised or Greekified by grammarians and dictionary writers who believed they were etymologically from these languages but in fact weren't? We still spell them in these ways.

Anonymous 103649

>mono = one
>gamy = marriage
>monogamy = one marriage
If you had married twice, that's two marriages, not one, and therefore not monogamy.
>you defer to the real meaning in practice, what people actually say and what they mean.
Huh? Why are you accusing me of supporting trannies? You're the one who has a descriptivist view of language. Most people nowadays will say trannies are women. If you believe how contemporary usage determines meaning, you must believe trannies are women too.
>Because remarriage after divorce and widows remarrying has existed long before that and has never been considered equivalent to the practice of having multiple wives.
I never said marrying one after another is the same as marrying several at once. I know it was common for widows and widowers to remarry in historical times. But even then it was called bigamy to do so.
>1610s English is Modern English
So Shakespeare's 'thou's and 'thee's are modern? I believe it would be Early Modern English, not Modern Modern.

Anonymous 103656

>the etymology argument
Homo: same
Phobia: fear
Homophobia: fear of the same so like twins or clones. Nothing to do with gays.

Anonymous 103661

Unironically yes. Hatred of gays should be called antihomosexuality. Homophobia doesn't share much with other words ending with 'phobia' (claustrophobia, arachnophobia), since 'phobias' involve fear, while 'homophobia' is more like a hatred

Anonymous 103670

idk it's supposed to be special ig

Anonymous 103677


he's my first boyfriend and i was his first girlfriend too

Anonymous 103748

Why even lie about vaping? Seems really silly. I’m sorry nona, that you have been with such idiots

[Return] [Catalog]
[ Rules / FAQ ] [ meta / b / media / img / feels / hb / x ]