My gf (21) of 5 months told me she had an abortion last year, because she didn't want to use any kind of birth control.

My gf (21) of 5 months told me she had an abortion last year, because she didn't want to use any kind of birth control. She didn't tell me before because she was waiting for the 'right time' and it apprently affected her, but she also didn't tell me because she was afraid she'd lose me if she did. Now I feel conflicted, I don't want to be with someone who would hide this kind of things from me and I honestly did not think she'd be that irresponsible with her body, but I still care for her. What would you do in this situation?

Man-made Horrors Shirt $21.68

UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68

Man-made Horrors Shirt $21.68

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >What would you do in this situation?
    If I found out she'd killed my child? 100% ghost immediately. Wouldn't say another word to her, wouldn't piss on her if she was on fire.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Sorry I should've mentionned it was with her ex, we didn't know each other at the time

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        In that case I'd still leave her but I'd do it politely as possible because I have read enough that I consider microchimaerism/telegony to be compelling theories. I also could not in good conscience stick around with a woman willing to get an abortion for the sake of the timing being wrong, rape? Maybe, birth defect? Sure. But timing being off? Nah.

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I wouldn't mingle with people that kill their own children

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I wouldn't have anything to do with abortion absolutists.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Who asked? homosexual

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I don't think she did anything wrong, this wasn't irresponsible, if she was a single mother you wouldn't even have dated her in the first place

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      She wouldn't have been a single mother or gotten an abortion if she wasn't having sex outside of marriage.
      Doing everything you can to avoid visible consequences to your actions doesn't make you 'responsible'. It makes you vain and selfish.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Jesus, why is sex outside of marriage so bad? Didn't know we were in the 18th century

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          It's not about sex outside of marriage, anon. It's about whimsical abortions and the destruction of life inside the womb due to irresponsibility. A choice to have sex was made. A choice to not have protection was made. Both choices were recklessly and mindlessly thrown to the wind. So frick her for demanding a third do-over with an abortion. She deserves no sympathy or understanding.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You don't know if she chose to not have protection, many men puncture condoms
            Also a cluster of cells is not a human life yet

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >You don't know if she chose to not have protection

            Read the thread then. Look at the first post at the very start, the one with the image attached. We call that 'OP'. You see the funny little line there that reads:
            >she didn't want to use any kind of birth control
            ?

            That's called 'reading comprehension'.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Also a cluster of cells is not a human life yet
            Ah shit you're right. I forgot, those cells could be anything right? It's probably not human. It could grow into an oak tree for all we know, maybe a cephalopod of some kind. No way of the zygote of containing any human DNA at all. Just a little bunch of ambiguous cells that aren't life.

            Oh well, can't wait for NASA-rinos to confirm life on mars when they find tiny specks of bacteria! It'll be heckin awesome to find life in the form of cell clusters, praise sagan!

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The anon you're talking to is making a bit of a verbal mistake. A clump of cells is a human life but it is not yet what we would consider a person. The same way a sproutling is technically plant life but it is not yet a tree. When people say "human life" what they're usually referring to is personhood. A petri dish with living lung cells is technically alive and human but we wouldn't call it a person.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >A clump of cells is a human life
            Yes, thank you. And to abort it is to destroy that human life, by your own admission that is what it is called.

            >When people say "human life" what they're usually referring to is personhood.
            And this is a dumb metric to measure human life. Personhoods change, they are not static, personalities are always in flux. Trauma changes it, time changes it. And moreover, there are many many disorders that can cause a lack of felt personhood. Take any personality disorder for example. None of them have a clear self-image or identity, they instead just emulate and perform at being a 'person'. So does that mean we can euthanize them with no moral hangups? Oh what about those in comas who have no clear chance of waking up? Or the brain damaged who no longer can express their sacred 'personhood'? Can we lob them into the meat grinder?

            >A petri dish with living lung cells is technically alive and human but we wouldn't call it a person.
            Indeed. That's for the simple fact that lung cells cannot turn into humans. They remain lung cells.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Yes, thank you. And to abort it is to destroy that human life, by your own admission that is what it is called.
            Sure. I admit that but the issue is that as a society we don't really value "human life". What we value is personhood.

            >And this is a dumb metric to measure human life.
            I disagree. I think, intuitively, its what everyone refers to when talking about a person.

            >Personhoods change, they are not static, personalities are always in flux. Trauma changes it, time changes it. And moreover, there are many many disorders that can cause a lack of felt personhood. Take any personality disorder for example. None of them have a clear self-image or identity, they instead just emulate and perform at being a 'person'.
            When I say personhood I mean a subject, conscious experience - a first person awareness that you exist and are having an experience. Time, trauma or disorders do not change this. Conscious experiences can be altered with things like drugs, injuries or disabilities but given any reasonably structured brain, the experience still exists.

            >Indeed. That's for the simple fact that lung cells cannot turn into humans. They remain lung cells.
            Sure, but what they turn into wasn't the point of the comparison. The point of the comparison was to illustrate how many things are both human and alive but not considered a person and given moral consideration. You can hook a heart in a jar up to a machine and keep it alive and pumping. It is both living and human but no one would look at that heart and consider it a person. It wouldn't be considered murder to turn the machine off. Therefore, "living" and "human" are not sufficient enough to establish personhood.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >I disagree. I think, intuitively, its what everyone refers to when talking about a person.
            You live at a time where the masses can't seem to agree on what constitutes a male or a female. Don't get your hopes up.

            >A first person awareness that you exist and are having an experience. Time, trauma or disorders do not change this.
            You'd be surprised. Depersonalization and dissociation is far more common than you'd think. Look into it.

            >When I say personhood I mean a subject, conscious experience.
            I ask again - can we throw the comatose into meat grinders then? They're unconscious as all hell and for many of them, no clear time schedule on when they will gain consciousness. So I put it to you - if we were to mass destroy them where they lay, would you have any moral objections?

            >You can hook a heart in a jar up to a machine and keep it alive and pumping. It is both living and human but no one would look at that heart and consider it a person.

            So what would we need to hook up to a machine then? I'm assuming a brain right? If that's all it takes for you to see humanity in anything then boy have I got news for you - it's just brain chemicals. Clusters of cells at work.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >You live at a time where the masses can't seem to agree on what constitutes a male or a female. Don't get your hopes up.
            That's a pretty weird pivot. I argue that we pretty intuitively understand what a person is.

            >You'd be surprised. Depersonalization and dissociation is far more common than you'd think. Look into it.
            That has nothing to do with personhood. A dissociating person is still a person. A person who gets knocked unconscious is still a person. Having an altered subjective experience is not a lack of a subjective experience. A two year old doesn't have the same subjective experience as a ninety year old but the subjective experience still exists.

            >I ask again - can we throw the comatose into meat grinders then?
            >They're unconscious as all hell and for many of them, no clear time schedule on when they will gain consciousness
            We routinely pull the plug on people who are brain dead all of the time. This is why determining brain death and when/if someone will gain consciousness again is the number one determiner of preservation of life - because of the exact argument I'm making - a person is their consciousness, not their auxiliary organ function.

            >So what would we need to hook up to a machine then? I'm assuming a brain right? If that's all it takes for you to see humanity in anything then boy have I got news for you - it's just brain chemicals. Clusters of cells at work.
            A brain, correct. If I take your head off and put it on a robot body, YOU still exist. You are you with robot body. If I take your head off and put a robotic head on your body, YOU no longer exist. It is now a computer program with a human body. You can dismiss this as "just brain chemicals" but your brain is you. Without your brain, you are not you. This is pretty intuitively and universally understood.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            OP here, she said she used the rythm method or whatever as a type of 'birth control'. I told her it obviously wasn't an effective method and that she still was being careless. She genuinely believes it was just bad luck and she wasn't being irresponsible. I don't think I want to be with someone who seems deluded about important matters.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Oh, a woman can't understand that her dumb choices yielded results that she didn't want?

            Damn, what's next? Water = wet?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The rythm method is a failure not because it's scientifically unsound but because it's really hard to track your fertility window. It can become suddenly irregulate under stress, or any kind of other hormonal events, body temperature and such are not going to be suitable evidence of your fertility window. But technically speaking, there are only few days a woman can get pregnant. You can not be pregnant without an egg, and the body only keeps the egg for few days. There's a lot of misconception, that, I, even as a woman, was not aware until my 20's. You should always have protected sex because of UTI's anyways, unless you both have gone through a check, and even, one of you could cheat...

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Didn't know we were in the 18th century
          In the 18th century abortions were legal under common law and commonly performed. Abortion was only illegal once "The Quickening" had occurred, which was when the mother or father could feel the baby moving.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          At least she was honest with you, so there is that. Try to be considerate in your decision in return, not angry and punishing for something she could have kept bottled up indefinitely.

          >I honestly did not think she'd be that irresponsible with her body
          If you're having sex with her (regardless of whether you're using birth control, which isn't foolproof), you shouldn't be that surprised.

          > What would you do in this situation?
          Well, considering her justification, that "she also didn't tell me because she was afraid she'd lose me if she did", you should explain that, if you were the kind of guy to have a problem with it, she "lost" you the moment she did what you found objectionable. Her hiding the truth wasn't keeping you; it was just prolonging an unsustainable lie. I can understand not wanting to give a wrong impression by letting out some information at a bad time. A woman who says "hi, I'm Amy, I got an abortion" on a first date is going to come off as a deranged bawd. But hiding information that is, in itself, a dealbreaker to your partner? That's a waste of everyone's time.

          If you want to be helpful, you could give her advice to gauge a guy's opinion on abortion generally, before she reveals anything. If he opposes abortion, she can quietly end things without getting judged. If he supports it, then she can feel more supported in revealing her past.

          You do realize that it was a social norm into the 70s in large swathes of the West (anywhere outside a major city), right? And that OP's situation (and your own acknowledgement that people don't want to date single mothers) is exactly where the norm has clear benefits?
          Regardless, the kind of person to think that covering up one's wrongdoing with another wrong is "responsible" won't have a remotely worthwhile take on what constitutes wrongdoing to begin with, so your opinion can be safely discarded.

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >I don't want to be with someone who would hide this kind of things from me
    Fair

    >I honestly did not think she'd be that irresponsible with her body
    Not as fair. You were the one dumping loads in her without discussing birth control first. You're just as irresponsible as she is. The only difference is the consequence for her being irresponsible is higher.

    >but I still care for her. What would you do in this situation?
    We aren't you. We have no frame of reference for how you feel about her, the quality of relationship you have, or what boundaries you desire in a relationship. There's absolutely no reasonable advice we can give you other than to do a lot of thinking, make a decision for yourself, and work through that decision with her. We don't know anything about you, her or your relationship. Decide for yourself, anon. Its the only freedom any of us really have.

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Unless you asked her and she lied about, not telling you is fine. I'd stay with her

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      So lying by omission isn't considered lying anymore? Would you be comfortable with your partner never telling you anything important unless you specifically guessed and asked them about it?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I dont expect her to tell me what happened in her past if it has no impact on me. Would you break up with your gf if she told you she used to eat cereals in college?

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Tell her not to lie about or hide shit like that in future, then proceed forward.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      How is that a lie? Not disclosing informations about your past isnt lying. If someone had an accident and did not tell you about it is not a lie. If someone was abused and did not tell you it is not a lie. People do not owe you informations that are not vital to the relationships.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        This

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Same anon here, honestly i'd be more worried about the fact that she was ignorant enough that she had unprotected sex, papillomavirus is a real thing and OP should get an UTI check.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah bud, that is a lie. Quit fooling yourself, you're enamored by the pussy. Why are you defending deceitful behavior, much less accepting it?

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          How is that deceitful behavior? Do you know anyone introduce itself by saying they had an abortion or a vasectomy? That's only a lie because you perceive abortion as being a deal breaker, which i'm suspecting that if he did, he would have told her about it. For many people it is not a deal breaker so there was no deceit.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Oh child, you have much to learn.

            So she waited multiple months to tell you something that she knew would change how op viewed the relationship. Op admits to and acknowledges the deciet.

            Something tells me you do not have much experience with women

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            or it's just something that hurt her emotionnaly so it's not easy to say. Personally idgaf if my gf got an abortion or not. I probably fricked a bunch of girls that had some

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It's not. She already decided to talk about it months in advance. Don't fall for the "well it was hard to talk about" act. They've already talked it over for hours with their girlies and their orbiters. It's not hard, nor was it hard for them to do. Are you really trying to argue that you want to be the last person to know about something relevant to your own relationship?

            >Personally idgaf if my gf got an abortion or not.
            That is cope.

            And now we are back to the lack of communicative ability. Here's a little pearl of wisdom for you: women lack the ability to self regulate their emotional state. Inevitably, whatever bs they create for themselves will come to you as a literal temper tantrum, or as an emotional breakdown. You'll be expected to regulate their emotions for them, because they cannot be bothered to take accountability for their own problems.

            In short, you're very inexperienced with women, as you're willingly a doormat, if you accept deceitful behavior.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You still havent explained how i'm supposed to care about if she got an abortion or not? Why is it cope? I have a lot of experience with girls, I don't know why you're spewing random bs that has nothing to do with the subject

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Lol you'd be OK if she killed your child? Oh OK.

            You clearly do not have much experience with women if you cannot see that concealing information about one's past is deceitful. It's not conducive to a productive and beneficial relationship.

            Past behavior is the litmus test for future demeanor when it comes to women. If she's done it once, she will inevitably do it again. Women do not change

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            If she doesnt tell you she used to eat apples when she was young you'd leave her? An abortion or eating an apple is the same to me. It has no effect on my life. I actually told one of my ex to get an abortion when she thought she waa pregnant lol

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            "Apples are the same as abortions to me"
            Lol now I know for a fact that you have practically zero experience with women

            AHAHAHAHAA MY SIDES

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Lol now I know for a fact that you have practically zero experience with women
            well you're wrong moron

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Also you're talking to two different persons that you keep calling inexperienced with women as if it's any proof of your actual knowledge on the matter

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You spew non sense, it's well known abortion has negative effects on the psyche and that it is, in fact, for most women, a traumatic event. There are plenty of studies on that matter.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Hmmm so killing a child is le bad for a woman's mental health. Water is wet, too?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Getting rid of a foetus is bad for your mental health because it's like having a miscarriage, it'll leave your body in a hormonal shambles. No one here is having a discussion about whether or not it's good or bad. Your point exactly?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            "Women lack the ability to self regulate"
            Most violent crimes are commited by men, most crimes of passions are commited by men, most hate comments online are posted by men. You live in an an echo chamber and you don't even realize it.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You've never had a woman get hysterical over nothing towards you before, have ya? Of the hundreds of women I've dated, I've experienced this far more than I care to admit.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            "The hundreds i have dated" why even taking the bait at this point... You think men do not get hysterical? How many people on NSFFW got beat up by a drunk father?

            She willfully did not bring it up for the aforementioned. Did you not read the post?

            She was waiting for the right time because it's a touchy subject to which she did not know the outcome off, that's not lying by omission, and OP still did not clarify if he had told her he was against abortions.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Direct quote from op's post, that you clearly did not read
            >Now I feel conflicted, I don't want to be with someone who would hide this kind of things from me

            Frickin moron lol

            And yes, I've dated hundreds (more like 120) women in my time... thats a ballpark estimate.

            How does someone getting beaten by their parent relate to women being hysterical over nothing? You cannot even deny that it happens, and I know it for a fact to be true. At first, when I started dating, I thought "maybe I'm being obtuse" and no, it's largely because a lot of women cannot self regulate their emotional states. Especially when I'm just being logical about things.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Yeah again, he did not specify if he is against abortions. I'm sure drunk fathers (which are so recurent they're a cultural archetype) totally have excuses for being abusive. My point being is that men are not better at emotional regulation and that you have a biased, unscientific, petty outlook on life.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You've got to be a woman. No man can be as moronic as you despite him clearly stating that he doesn't know if he wants to be with someone like that.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            He said he felt "lied to" he did not say he was against abortions, that feeling could be tied to the fact that he feels like he was owed this information, the discussion here is about whether or not she intentionally lied about it to further her own agenda (making her a bad person). It's pretty clear that you have no actual argument outside of prejudiced thinking rooted in myths rather than empirical evidences. You argue like a monkey, with ad personams and arguments such as "i've dated 120 women" which indicates you're uncapable of sustaining long term relationships, nullifying any kind of advices you're trying to give about this matter.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Oh I've had relationships that lasted years as well. In my experience: most women are recreational use only. Just as op has found out.

            However, you've argued like an emotional female, trying everything in your power to muddy waters. I've dealt with types like you in the past. It's never not funny to me lol

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Over 120 women (which is a considerable amount, if you're not actually lying) none of them actually lasted, proving my point, since most people actually achieve longer relationships without being a degenerate and going through the equivalent of an amphitheather

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The femoid misses key details, indicating a lack of comprehensive abilities.

            Why would I settle for less than my own standards? I'm one of those guys that gets approached by women. Dating apps work well for me. In other words, I'm in the top percentage of men that are desired.
            >I have my pick of the litter, and choose who gets access to my life

            Eh, must be why my exes keep trying to come back in my life. I typically don't end things on bad terms with people, as they'll likely serve some usefulness to me at some point in my life (think networking)

            When I realized this, I decided to capitalize on this, in order to give myself a further unfair advantage against women (learning exactly how their minds work)

            You're upset that I know how most of you operate, and your anger is blatant. I'm over here enjoying my morning protein shake, and you're seething.

            Back to the point, which you aren't capable of understanding.

            Let's put the last picture and this one together... what does that make? Can you handle this one, or should I mansplain it to you?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I'm not going to engage with you after this post, you clearly lack the intellect to engage with the question of what lying by omission entails. You had no actual come back outside of trying to figure out if i fricked many people or if i'm a female or not. Not only that but you type like a silly redditor, maybe you want to change that.

            All i can say OP is, don't take advice from men that encourage you to antagonize women or brag about fricking 120 of them. Maybe you want to talk it out further, but if it's an issue of principles and morals when it comes to abortion, you want to date someone who's on the same line as you on those principles. Skelettons in closets will arise in relationships, always, it's a matter if the person had bad intentions and if you're willing to compromise with them.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Lol @ the butthurt from your post

            People like you have to settle for scraps. I don't. That is the difference between you and I, I'm just better than you, and op is right to second guess a relationship with someone that chose to hide a massive detail about their past.

            You, on the other hand, would be forced to settle for a broken toy. I can't imagine a fate such as that.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            [...]
            Inother words, he saw the deciet, like I pointed out earlier in this thread. Jesus, you women are fricking dumb.

            She intentionally lied, and kept that information to herself. For months. She is not a good person, nor is she deserving of trust.

            You're really trying to argue "oh it's fine, she'll tell you what happened... just 5-6 months down the line. Don't worry though"

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            OP here, whether I'm for or against abortions isn't the matter at hand here, I'm having an issue with the fact that she was very irresponsible with her own body and showed a lack of prior consideration for the consequences of her own actions, as

            "Op admits to and aknowledge the deceits" is not a proof at all that he specified he's uncomfortable with abortion, that's how he feels and as far as i'm concerned i don't trust biased retailing of an event. He did not even specify to us if it was a deal breaker or if he told her it was a deal breaker. If anything you need to learn to read between the lines. Also 5 months is literaly the beginning of a long term relationship. Your attempt at reading me to belittle me just shows you don't care about the actual moral issue at play, you're just trying to show off on an anonymous imageboard kek. Point is, i'd be more worried about the fact that she was ignorant enough to behave that way. As i mentionned there are "invisible" UTIs that can frick up your life (infertility, cancer etc). I wouldnt want to date someone stupid like that unless she came from a defavorised background that limited her access to education. Both of them should get checked.

            mentionned. The fact that she willingly chose to hide that information because she "wasn't ready to talk about it" is only adding salt to the wound.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            If it's an issue with her being stupid i can't really help you out. It's not even technically hiding if you never mentionned the subject. As i said she technically doesnt even owe you the information, she felt like she did which is why she ended up telling you but that doesnt mean she actually owed you that information since you did not ask for it. It's like getting mad at someone body count when you didnt even ask to begin with what was her body count. You can dislike her character, but it's not lying.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            And yes, men are. Men are required to regulate themselves, AND the emotional state of their women. This is why you, as a woman, look for that patient and safe feeling from your man. You're looking for your emotional safe space lol. This is based in all of recorded human history.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            "Op admits to and aknowledge the deceits" is not a proof at all that he specified he's uncomfortable with abortion, that's how he feels and as far as i'm concerned i don't trust biased retailing of an event. He did not even specify to us if it was a deal breaker or if he told her it was a deal breaker. If anything you need to learn to read between the lines. Also 5 months is literaly the beginning of a long term relationship. Your attempt at reading me to belittle me just shows you don't care about the actual moral issue at play, you're just trying to show off on an anonymous imageboard kek. Point is, i'd be more worried about the fact that she was ignorant enough to behave that way. As i mentionned there are "invisible" UTIs that can frick up your life (infertility, cancer etc). I wouldnt want to date someone stupid like that unless she came from a defavorised background that limited her access to education. Both of them should get checked.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Lol so op discovers deceitful behavior right at the beginning of a relationship. In other words, he's lucked out. She couldn't keep up her act for very long.

            It's clearly a deal breaker for him, as that is the basis of why he's made this post.

            It's an advice board, bud. I have a lot of experience with women, so I'm sharing such. If you think it's "showing off" that's on you for your insecurity. Not my fault that your experience is less than mine... you should not take offense to this.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It's a deal breaker now that he has experienced it, how are you supposed to guess someone's deal breakers? She assumed it might be, but she didnt lie by omission, so she came clean, if anything it's a proof of honesty.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            She willfully did not bring it up for the aforementioned. Did you not read the post?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >How is that a lie?
        It's a lie because the reason for not telling was one of deceit
        If she didn't tell him because she genuinely forgot or didn't expect him to care about it then it wouldn't have been a lie, it's the intent that matters

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I'd dump her. She had 5 months to tell you about "something that was bothering her" but she waited. Likely she wasn't going to tell you at all.

    She would do the same thing if she was sucking and fricking another dude. She likes to keep secrets from you, and lacks communicative ability.

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >What would you do in this situation?
    Honestly, if the answer to the question "Why didn't you tell me about this sooner?" is "Because I knew that, if I did, you would react exactly like this," then that's a sign that you need to do some hard thinking about what it is you're doing that makes the other person feel like they can't talk to you.

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Inother words, he saw the deciet, like I pointed out earlier in this thread. Jesus, you women are fricking dumb.

    She intentionally lied, and kept that information to herself. For months. She is not a good person, nor is she deserving of trust.

    You're really trying to argue "oh it's fine, she'll tell you what happened... just 5-6 months down the line. Don't worry though"

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You're just claiming she lied when it's not clear at all it was a lie to begin with since we don't know if he specified he was against it. Abortions are not considered to be things you must disclose in a relationship, just like you don't have to disclose other types of traumatisms. If you think it must be disclosed you should make it known, that's communication skill, as you've mentionned or another anon mentioned. Anyways, talking about emotional regulation, you seem to be a little frustrated and can't stop yourself from throwing insults... sweet irony.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Pic rel.

        How old are you, girl?

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          What type of truth was she trying to misrepresent, a truth he had in his head and did not express or a truth she presented (that she had no abortion)? If someone did not tell you they had PTSD from war, would that be a lie by omission? You're not understanding what the definition actually says.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Considering I'm also a veteran (no, don't thank me, I think it's weird to do so) post traumatic stress is something I've experienced 99% of fellow vets being very open about. You clearly do not have much experience there either, hence your "what if" scenario there.

            She withheld that information, specifically because she did not know how op would react towards the relationship. Direct quote again:

            >She didn't tell me before because she was waiting for the 'right time' and it apprently affected her, but she also didn't tell me because she was afraid she'd lose me if she did

            Honey, did you not read this post?

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Op, do not settle for less.

    You deserve far more than a chick who you cannot trust to tell you pertinent information to your relationship, in a timely manner.

    She knows it would be a deal breaker... you know it is as well, considering that you see her deceitful nature in this lie of omission. She showed you that she likes to keep you in the dark. Do you really think she's going to never do that again? What else is she not telling you? You have reason to second guess her for a lot of stuff now, solely by her revealing this key character flaw she possesses.

    Some women are recreational use only. Don't tie yourself to one of those

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's with her ex? Why'd you leave out that detail silly. Yeah I wouldn't care. How much you care really hinges on your opinions on abortion dawg

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Only way I'd stay with a chick like this is if it was clear she has changed a lot of her lifestyle and deeply regrets her decisions and the abortion. But I'm suspecting you'd tell us if she was a devout Christian now who doesn't have premarital sex, so yeah I'd leave her and not look back.

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You will have my time, son

    Pay attention, read carefully

    >21
    >already an abortion
    >because she didn't want to use any kind of birth control

    I dont need any more details. She wanted to get creampied. In the heat of the moment she wanted this. She whispered to the guy to come inside of her. And it happend several times. Your woman has low impulse control and addicted to excitement. Why? Daddy issues, she comes from unideal background. You cant fix her, you cant change her, you cant help her. Her character flaws will blow into your face later. Low impulse control women cheat sooner or later. At best she will just cheat. At worst you will get some veneral disease from her coworker

    You dont care for her. You care for your needs being covered. Find a better woman, it will be easy

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *