Took my crushs virginity and he doesnt want me anymore.

I’ll try to not make this too long, and EXCUSE ME for the awful English I’m tired. At the beginning of February I met up with this guy I liked and we spent two weeks together. I basically took his first kiss, his virginity, his first everything (he’s 25, I am 20). We had a great time and I grew really attached to him. I kept telling him during sex that I loved him but he never took it seriously. He’d still be sweet to me and even got me flowers for Valentine’s Day. He’d call me pretty, tell me he was lucky to have a girl like me hang out with him.
Few weeks later, we saw each other again and it went AWFUL. The first days were fine, but I learned that my mom had brain cancer and I had to go back home (we live pretty far from each other.)
I got extremely depressed and cried a lot. I noticed that it kinda disgusted him because he stopped being sweet to me or telling me nice words. He wouldn’t even try to initiate sex or anything. I told him about it and he said he doesn’t owe me reassurance. Which is true but, I really needed that from him at the moment.

Ape Out Shirt $21.68

DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68

Ape Out Shirt $21.68

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    2/ On the last day before I went back home he went to eat lunch with his girl best friend, leaving me all alone outside. Before he left I asked him if I could get a kiss and he said no. I basically cried all day until seeing him and her again. I kinda went crazy and told his best friend that she should lose weight (she’s fat as frick).
    He got so fricking mad that he fricking ran away from me.
    I took my train, cried during the whole ride and during the next days. He called me crazy to my friends and threatened to block me on everything.
    I was fricking desperate that I begged him through texts to not leave me and he told me that I was just a body and that he will find another girl to frick.
    I’ve been trying to move on but I fumbledddd and texted him that I missed him. He answered that he missed me too and wanted to see me again.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >I kinda went crazy and told his best friend that she should lose weight (she’s fat as frick).
      Lmao, based.

      You sound like a good girl at heart tbh.

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >I told him about it and he said he doesn’t owe me reassurance.
    this must be bait, if it isn't dump this dude wtf

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    3/I was so so so confused.
    I wasn’t even happy that he wasn’t mad anymore. Despite all the things he said I’m still in love with him but I feel so fricking hurt. I don’t know. We keep texting sometimes, but he never texts me first.
    He tells me he still wants me but meh. Hard to believe. I told him that I was hurting from the situation, that I couldn’t stop thinking about him and he just replied that it wasn’t an issue since he thought about me too.
    I feel like he doesn’t get it.
    I am in love with him, I am unironically so so so so into him. We talk so rarely but he’s all I think about. I feel like I can’t move on and I’ve been trying. I don’t know what to do.
    (Also texted him today asking if I was prettier than his bestfriend and he didn’t want to answer.)
    I know he doesn’t care about me anymore, so what’s the point of giving me false hope? Is it because I am the only girl who wanna have sex with him?
    I feel like I just helped him get more confident so he can go with a girl he actually likes and finds attractive.
    I am lost, confused and hurting.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This is common. You build someone up so much that they think they deserve better. He's a piece of shit for being insensitive about your mother. But you're frickin crazy.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        How am I crazy ?

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >sex outside of marriage
    You should have listened. In no circumstance does throwing yourself at a guy actually buy commitment. All it does is cheapen your relationships and enable the worst kinds of men to take advantage of you.
    You opened yourself up to being taken for granted or used for sex.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      oh my god shut up

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >7 / 0 / 1
        he's right and you know, look at you making a mess over a dude who doesn't care about you. This is why you reserve sex (the bonding of souls) after you both commit to marriage

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Why am I the only one being punished for having sex ? Why not him ?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            What do you mean "punished"? Neither of you are going to be physically punished by anyone.

            If he was just after sex, then he is a piece of shit for using you, but you yourself aren't blameless. You got burned because of your own lack of restraint; that's not an excuse for his behavior, but neither is his immorality an excuse for your own. If you mean punished in the sense of being judged, then I'm judging both of you. He's still worse than you are, because he not only was promiscuous but went out of his way to use another. But he's not posting ITT.

            And even if you don't care about the moral notion of not having sex without commitment, what you went through was simply a risk you took. Obviously, a shithead isn't going to protect you from him out of the goodness of his heart. It's up to you to protect yourself from such people. You didn't, and one of them took advantage of it. That's not punishment. That's just life.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Got it. Won’t happen again.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            That's the sad part. Holding off on sex is a far harder sell if you've already had it before.
            Guys who want to wait will expect a woman on the same page--not one who couldn't hold herself to the standard. Guys who don't want to wait, but who might be willing to, will be insulted that you gave easily to other guys what you're making them wait for.

            >This is why you reserve sex (the bonding of souls) after you both commit to marriage
            Christhomosexuals pls go.

            You "people" and your demented ideology are insufferable.

            Yeah, because putting commitment first and avoiding situations where predatory sociopaths take advantage of others is just that demented.
            I can't imagine being this upset by the simple and effective advice of not having sex without commitment unless you're promiscuous yourself.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Yeah, because putting commitment first and avoiding situations where predatory sociopaths take advantage of others is just that demented.
            Commitment doesn't have to = marriage moron.

            Normal people (not Christhomosexuals) are capable of loving someone without needing to go into a church and have a pedophile perform some mystical ancient israelite ceremony in front of them.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Guys who want to wait will expect a woman on the same page--not one who couldn't hold herself to the standard.

            I don’t care about what guys want.
            I care about not being in a situation like this again.
            Also too depressed at this time to think about future men.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I'm not telling you to give up. I'm just saying to prepare yourself for things being harder. Yes, you'll avoid a repeat of what you went through if you insist on waiting, but it'll be harder to find a guy than it would have been if you had waited all along.

            >Yeah, because putting commitment first and avoiding situations where predatory sociopaths take advantage of others is just that demented.
            Commitment doesn't have to = marriage moron.

            Normal people (not Christhomosexuals) are capable of loving someone without needing to go into a church and have a pedophile perform some mystical ancient israelite ceremony in front of them.

            >Commitment doesn't have to = marriage
            Yes, it does. Marriage as an institution is how people have enforceable obligations to each other. That's the commitment I'm talking about--where a guy actually puts something on the line.

            Obviously, for a relationship to work out, people also need to *feel* committed, in the sense of being devoted to one another. But this isn't knowable to anyone else with any certainty, unlike marriage. Case in point: guys like OP describes, who know they can get sex by telling women what they want to hear.

            If you genuinely care for someone and want to stay with them, then what is the cost of making the formal commitment? By doing that, you can easily separate yourself from the cheats and liars and protect the genuine. But to you, it's so important to stroke your ego and flaunt your personal devotion that you'd rather expose women to the shitters. Instead of making it impossible for them to have their way, you want to make it possible for any guy to act that way, and then you can gloat that you're a Good Person who didn't take advantage of the opportunity you yourself created.

            People like you advocate for sex within marriage because you’re incapable of attracting anyone you’re interested in. You cope by saying that your celibacy is intentional, when really you were never able to achieve sex even if you wanted to due to your social ills.

            Nonsense. More women than men wait until marriage. And those who do wait, even controlling for religion (and gender, for that matter) both divorce less and have happier marriages. It works. No amount of baseless coping and seething will change the basic fact that waiting not only prevents situations like OP's, but also positively impacts marriage.

            Your assumption that everyone would frick around if they could is textbook projection from a mentally stunted, promiscuous individual incapable of imagining people with different priorities.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Your assumption that everyone would frick around if they could is textbook projection

            Except everyone does frick around because they could you fricking idiot.
            You can try and quote marriage statistics from pre-80 era, just remember to also quote the divorce requirements for the time as well. There were less divorces because divorce were more difficult to get.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Except everyone does frick around
            No, they don't. A simple search about sex outside of marriage/partner count would tell you this. But you're so lazy and colossally arrogant that you refuse to do something as simple as that before spewing bullshit.
            >statistics don't exist because I don't want them to
            Impressive levels of self-delusion.
            If it has to be spelled out for you, the marital outcomes I reference are for the present day. Post-2010. And the association between waiting and marital stability/happiness has only gotten stronger over time, because the people who still do it despite promiscuous social norms tend to really mean it.

            >Yes, it does. Marriage as an institution is how people have enforceable obligations to each other. That's the commitment I'm talking about--where a guy actually puts something on the line.
            Marriage in 2024 means jack shit when divorce is so easy.

            You have to be a Christgay to think like this, because the only way you could consider marriage as "putting something on the line" is if you think your god is going to punish you if you step out of line.

            What's important is emotional commitment, which can often lead to marriage, but that comes later.

            Even in its weakened state, marriage still comes with protections that you simply don't have otherwise.

            >What's important is emotional commitment
            As I said, this is necessary but not sufficient. People can and often do mislead others about this. The strength of marriage, as an institution, is that there's no guesswork. It is an objective, verifiable fact that someone is married and thus has marital obligations.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Incels spewing christgay shit again. homosexual.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >buzzword after buzzword
            You lost the debate, simple as

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >n-no, muh buzzword
            I accept your concession.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Even in its weakened state, marriage still comes with protections that you simply don't have otherwise
            yeah like the woman getting half of your shit and taking the kids lmfao

            >strength of marriage, as an institution, is that there's no guesswork
            bahahahahahah

            >verifiable fact that someone is married and thus has marital obligations
            judge ain't gonna agree with this one kek

            you can now sneak leave lmao

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Yes, it does. Marriage as an institution is how people have enforceable obligations to each other. That's the commitment I'm talking about--where a guy actually puts something on the line.
            Marriage in 2024 means jack shit when divorce is so easy.

            You have to be a Christgay to think like this, because the only way you could consider marriage as "putting something on the line" is if you think your god is going to punish you if you step out of line.

            What's important is emotional commitment, which can often lead to marriage, but that comes later.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >both divorce less and have happier marriages
            translation: "religious zealots and control freaks are happy when they find their little submissive doormat that they can step on and control, more news at 11"
            woah lmao

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >What do you mean "punished"? Neither of you are going to be physically punished by anyone.

            you don't call burning for all eternity in the lake of fire with the devil and his angels punishment?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You punished yourself by sleeping with a man who didn’t love you. Anon is telling you the truth and you’re telling him to shut up. Come to terms with it or don’t, but you aren’t going to find any sympathy here.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          do homos bond souls via anal sex

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Most (male) homosexuals are too promiscuous to develop true connections with their partners

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >This is why you reserve sex (the bonding of souls) after you both commit to marriage
          Christhomosexuals pls go.

          You "people" and your demented ideology are insufferable.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Not an argument. You know that situations like OP's literally only happen because of loose sexual mores. If a guy who only wants sex has to commit first, he obviously won't bother investing the energy and putting his own resources on the line. But in a society where women are expected to have sex without any commitment? Those men alone have a field day.

        What you're really saying isn't that you disagree with what I say, but that you think people being used like OP is a price you're willing to pay to get easy sex yourself.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      People like you advocate for sex within marriage because you’re incapable of attracting anyone you’re interested in. You cope by saying that your celibacy is intentional, when really you were never able to achieve sex even if you wanted to due to your social ills.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        You’re projecting. I don’t have a hard time finding women, I still tell girls they shouldn’t frick men to earn their love. It only works AFTER you’ve made him fall in love with you.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          This tells me that you don’t talk to women because that shit ain’t normal Black person.
          Did you imagine that conversation in your head?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >sex only after getting married
      Lol
      Lmao
      Then homies like you cry on r/deadbedrooms about your mediocre (secretly ran through, but you'll be in denial) b***h not being attracted to you after shitting out a kid kek

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Fun fact: those who wait also have higher sexual satisfaction.
        You lot aren’t just degenerates. You’re willfully moronic. The last refuge you all take against sexual restraint is your sacred cow of sexual pleasure. That’s an ironclad reason to oppose waiting, for someone whose ultimate priority is getting themselves off, if it would require you to trade off sex against something else. But hilariously, *even the thing you want* is benefitted by waiting. You, personally, are hopeless. You’d never be willing, let alone able, to control yourself and delay gratification. But the people who can do that are demonstrably better off for it by almost any measure.

        >both divorce less and have happier marriages
        translation: "religious zealots and control freaks are happy when they find their little submissive doormat that they can step on and control, more news at 11"
        woah lmao

        Translation:
        >baseless cope over facts I don’t like

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Fun fact: those who wait also have higher sexual satisfaction.
          I think people who are genuinely in love with each other have higher sexual satisfaction. That may, at times, correlate with people who waited for marriage. But equally so there's infinite cases of sexually deficient couples who obeyed the strict laws of their religion and thus never really enjoyed their sex, even after marriage.

          I think you're too hung up on the legal process of marriage being so important. You can wait to have sex with someone you truly love, and you will probably enjoy it more that way, but you don't need to marry them first. It's not as if your only choices are "strictly no sex until you put a ring on her" or "frick every b***h on the first night".

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >But equally so there's infinite cases of sexually deficient couples who obeyed the strict laws of their religion and thus never really enjoyed their sex, even after marriage.
            No, it's not equal. Is waiting a panacea? No. But it is objectively better for marriage than the alternatives.
            Some people would win Russian roulette with 5 chambers loaded, and some would lose with only one.

            Individual cases vary, yes. But the distributions don't. If waiting until marriage is, say, 20% more likely to be "better" by some metric (which is undershooting it in the case of divorce rates, let alone the odds of a couple being each other's first and only), that might not look like a knockout for a particular individual, but apply it across a society, and even small shifts make huge impacts.
            One person who plays Russian roulette is playing a game of chance. A million people playing it will give extremely consistent results. Adding just one round shifts the odds for one person by 17%. It would also kill around 170,000 if everyone did that. Only a psychopath could call that a trifle.

            The problem with your wishy-washy attitude is that it is completely valueless in both senses of the word. It doesn't actually offer any useful guide to behavior (your attitude is exactly what leads to a free-for-all and promiscuity in practice), while it also is wholly divorced from reality at best or just scornful of the values behind waiting at worst.

            >I think you're too hung up on the legal process of marriage being so important.
            The entire point of moral standards is their clarity. Look no further than OP for what happens when you take away that clarity and give shitty people the grey area they need to thrive in.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Fun fact: those who wait also have higher sexual satisfaction.
            I think people who are genuinely in love with each other have higher sexual satisfaction. That may, at times, correlate with people who waited for marriage. But equally so there's infinite cases of sexually deficient couples who obeyed the strict laws of their religion and thus never really enjoyed their sex, even after marriage.

            I think you're too hung up on the legal process of marriage being so important. You can wait to have sex with someone you truly love, and you will probably enjoy it more that way, but you don't need to marry them first. It's not as if your only choices are "strictly no sex until you put a ring on her" or "frick every b***h on the first night".

            > It's not as if your only choices are "strictly no sex until you put a ring on her" or "frick every b***h on the first night".
            Actually, they might as well be. The salient difference here is about which should come first: sex, or commitment (and also whether lifelong monogamy is a worthy ideal). All promiscuity depends on the basic assumption that the former is more important. Obviously, not everyone takes that to mean completely unrestrained hedonism. But anyone who prioritizes sex has already laid the moral and ideological groundwork for that to happen.

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What makes you love him as much as you do?
    Do you have solidified values that makes him romantically attractive?
    Did your love for him only exponentially become a big deal only after having sex with him?

    I noticed, when we fall in love our brain tricks us into believing what we’re feeling is unique, but actually everyone can feel that way towards someone.
    This shouldn't invalidate your emotions either, but it is important to remember that.
    Your emotions can seriously frick you up, and it is important you stay on top of them.
    Sex typically makes these emotions far more intense, making us feel that the connection through sex means more than it really does. Outside of that, do they have other qualities that are worth a romantic pursuit?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I like his palpable shyness, his sweaty hands, his clumsy movements, his stuttering when his heart races, but never as much as mine when he looks me in the eyes. His shy green eyes, his delicately upturned nose, his soft lips that I now know I will never feel again on my cheek. He is gentle in his actions, he was tender with me. He is very masculine too, and his sweat smells good. We slept together because I was extremely attracted to him at the moment, I didn't think much of it.
      I felt at ease with him, and I want to bring him peace in return. And I did bring him peace! He told me himself. That I made his days a little better. That he was happy to see me after work. He has changed his mind since then, but it made me extremely happy to see him less depressed

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It sounds like a case of puppy love, loving the little quirks of a person without much of the substance that can define a good relationship.
        Don’t worry though, everyone has gone through this shit before. I had my moment like this when I was about between 20 and 21 and it fricking sucked. I loved that girl so much for much of the reasons you mention, the shyness, the gentle nature of them, and how I sprung up their personality to be more open and loud rather than reserved they usually were.

        However, it’s important to establish the values you have with someone to determine a long term relationship.
        Would you say they’re emotionally intelligent? From what you’ve said, they seem to lack it through their constant misunderstandings of you and your intentions, though this does not mean they’re a bad person. Just someone who is underequipped to be in a relationship with someone like you who desires to be understood.
        Are there any personal values you two meet on that made you confident in a romantic relationship?

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I mean, it’s not my first time being in love and I don’t date to get married or something. I just wanna spend a good amount of time with someone, have fun, be happy and in love even if don’t end up getting married.
          And yeah he’s obviously not emotionally intelligent but it’s not so bad.

          We’ll never be in a serious relationship, we’re too different. But why would that stop any of us to just ENJOY TIME together.
          (Ideally I’d marry him tbh but I know it won’t happen)

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Yeah I completely understand. I don’t date for marriage either, though through times with dating, I realized I can get some confident estimate of how suitable the relationship is through meeting some sort of values together. Those relationships typically are more satisfactory due to that deep personal connection you have with someone, meanwhile the past relationship highlights is constantly being in conflict-resolve mode which was stressful.
            I’m currently in a relationship that I believe will end pretty soon due to the lack of passion from their end. Though we still think of each other as incredible people who we appreciate a lot at least. But it’s never going to move forward towards marriage or anything, but the value of that relationship was through mutual connection we felt for each other. It’s the best relationship I’ve had to be honest.

            It’s good to have fun and spend time together with someone you adore. But that constant stress of trying to win over someone who is unwinnable may cause you to believe they’re of higher value than they really are. But that’s okay, it’s important to go through the experience.

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    If you liked like that this wouldn't have happened. You're ugly and unstable.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Incelgay incelgayging

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah incel as in incelibate. Your name calling is not an argument, not a refutation, and not even applicable. You're ugly and unstable and you know it.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >If you liked like that this wouldn't have happened.
      wat

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I assume your pussy is just too big. Some women have very wide veganal canals, just like how some guys have long thin pencil dicks. Until we can generate bio-identical genitals with specific features in labs this is just going to be a barrier for otherwise perfectly compatible couples worldwide for the foreseeable future.

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Tldr but safe to assume pump and dump. Better luck next time!

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    LOL GET OWNED prostitute THIS COULDVE BEEN PREDICTED
    Based guy for not settling down with a bawd with more BODIES than him.

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Women are so fricking moronic
    >ABLOO ABLOO WAAAHHHH
    Shut the frick up and suck my wiener b***h

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Refuse to believe you are a real woman.
    Post vegana with timestamp. no one can identity you with pics of your vegana so it's safe.

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why are so many people seething in here about facts? Roasties or sex addicted men?

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