One an F-buddy always an F-buddy

[LiveWell]

Misrepresentation by the GF? OP seems like he's been misrepresenting himself just as much as far as his feelings and respect for his GF, if he would have been just as happy having her as an f-buddy.

 

That's because he had not previously been aware that she had this FWB relationship, she had misrepresented who and what she was.

 

I don't see where OP misrepresented anything. His feelings have changed based on new information that she'd concealed from him. That's not "misrepresentation."

[porter218]

Not to threadjack, but Livewell, you make a TON of presumptions, based on a very limited amount of information and are projecting a HUGE amount of vitriol to this dudes girlfriend...I have to ask...does this hit close to home? Were you in a similar situation?

 

I was wondering the same thing.

 

Red flag. We don't really know why her marriage failed, do we.

WTH..???

Thats ridiculous. I am sure the OP at least has some of that info after 1 year of dating her. So divorced women are red flags? Silly.

 

And for the OP...If you don't value a relationship then why on earth are you in one? If you would rather have a FWB then let this woman go so you can find that. You are wasting her valuable time if you don't care for her...not to mention her childs time too.

[brainygirl]

So you don't think someone's past relationship history is the "business" of a serious relationship partner?

 

You're entitled to your opinion as to what you feel the need to know about your relationship partners, but you're not entitled to dictate what other people might want to know about their partners.

 

OBVIOUSLY a person's past relationship history is totally relevant to their current partner in a serious relationship.

 

More importantly, it's pretty obvious that there's been some level of deceit/misrepresentation by OP's gf concerning her past.

 

Uhm, no it isn't. Past is the past. It didn't work, move on. You are not entitled to know and dissect the past of the person you are dating. I would never accept a man who felt he needed to know every detail of my past relationships. And i don't need to know every detail of the person I am dating's relationships.

 

It sounds to me like she dated him for a year, got comfortable with him, and trusted him with what could be a very painful memory from her past, and he's using it as ammunition to attempt to downgrade the relationship. Nice guy, real winner.

[Stockalone]

Wha...?

 

...

 

Sounds like she was taking care of business, to me.

 

I don't care what her reasons were.

 

 

If you don't like her method, that's cool, obviously you don't have to date her... but to lose respect for her as a human being seems kinda harsh.

 

People's actions can alter my level of respect for them.

 

If I can't respect a person's choices, I certainly don't think of them as relationship material. Besides, it's not like I am trying to deny her basic human rights when I say I lose respect.

[atlnay]

I don't care what her reasons were.

 

 

 

 

People's actions can alter my level of respect for them.

 

If I can't respect a person's choices, I certainly don't think of them as relationship material. Besides, it's not like I am trying to deny her basic human rights when I say I lose respect.

 

I'm just curious on how big a drop in respect you have for someone that was in an NSA.

 

So, in your eyes, what level of respect is she equal to now? A drug dealer? Or a bit higher? A cheater? A thief?

[Woggle]

I actually have to defend her here. It sounds like she went through a painful divorce and for whatever reason decided to have a FWB relationship afterwards. It doesn't mean she is any less commited to you. I had a sex buddy between marriages but when I found a real prize I dropped her so it doesn't mean a person is any less commited.

 

Also the fact that you view a relationship with her as responsibility shows that maybe you should not be with her.

[kdark]

That's because he had not previously been aware that she had this FWB relationship, she had misrepresented who and what she was.

 

I don't see where OP misrepresented anything. His feelings have changed based on new information that she'd concealed from him. That's not "misrepresentation."

 

A guy saying he is getting a raw deal because he is in a relationship with his girlfriend instead of just being f*ck buddies is not misrepresentation. You are right.

 

But only an ********* of immense proportions who has no respect for his partner other than for the vagina between her legs would ever say something like that.

[LiveWell]

I read all of OPs posts. No where did he state that she concealed anything.

 

 

He just found out about this prior relationship of hers after a year's time. It came as a total shock to him. Are you saying she'd disclosed her prior relationship to OP from the beginning? Where do you get that from? That directly contradicts the whole reason that OP posted this thread.

 

 

 

That's a logical presumption, but maybe they didn't? Maybe he didn't ask the right questions, if any.

 

Excuse me for being logical then. You are free not to be .

 

 

 

 

Maybe she discussed certain aspects of prior relationships in general. Maybe it never really came up.

 

Her risk. If she wants to hide pr not talk about, certain parts of her past because she's not proud of them, then she takes the risk of being perceived as implicitly deceitful depending upon the entire context of how she has presented herself in her current relationship, should that past baggage ever be revealed.

 

Maybe you haven't been in any relationships long enough to be aware of it but generally speaking the dirty laundry always does come to the surface one way or another.

 

She didn't present herself to OP as someone who would have engaged in a two year long, FWB type relationship. If you don't think that was a deliberate move on her part, then you are entitled to feel that way. Obviously the OP feels that he was deceived. I understand why. Furthermore when it did finally come out her "explanation" wasn't satisfactory to OP. I understand that as well. She had probably been portraying herself to OP as someone with a great deal of self respect, a person of value. Now it turns out that she was basically willing to whore herself out just because some guy asked her to.

 

 

 

I agree in *most* relationships, people talk about their past, but she could've said, "I just ended things with a guy I was seeing for 2 years" and he could've let it go at that point and never brought the topic up again.

 

That's probably what actually happened. She glossed over her past stuff and it really didn't matter because they weren't looking at a serious relationship together. But now a year has passed. So is the OP's gf someone who is simply good enough for sex, or is she someone who is truly "relationship-worthy"?

 

Even SHE didn't believe that she was relationship worthy when she had her 2 year "thing" with the doctor. If SHE didn't believe it, and OP NOW KNOWS she didn't believe it, why should he, knowing what he NOW knows, believe that she is good for anything except sex? THAT'S the question, really.

 

You see if she had told the truth about this rather than glossing over it, or lying about it entirely if that's what happened, they could have tried to work through those issues during the past year, or perhaps simply moved on and saved the time.

 

Two years of FWB is a LONG LONG time. This is a divorced woman with a child, and her idea of a good "relationship choice" is to just be a f*ck-toy for some doctor? Yeah I'd say OP has plenty to be concerned about here.

 

Now the question is, why did he just find that out? What brought that conversation up? And how was his reaction to her when he found out and how was hers to him when she told him.

 

Well this would be interesting to know but now the problem is that by handling things the way she has, OP's gf has really painted herself into something of a corner.

[atlnay]

Yea. You've got issues.

[LiveWell]

Not to threadjack, but Livewell, you make a TON of presumptions, based on a very limited amount of information and are projecting a HUGE amount of vitriol to this dudes girlfriend...I have to ask...does this hit close to home? Were you in a similar situation?

 

But you are threadjacking, and as a matter of fact, rather than actually point to a specific comment I made that you feel is not justifiable or at least a logical inference from what's been posted, you make an ad hominem attack.

 

As a matter of fact I think in your earlier post you "accused" me of making a "logical" inference or presumption.

 

Sorry, but I won't apologize to you for being "logical."

[atlnay]

But you are threadjacking, and as a matter of fact, rather than actually point to a specific comment I made that you feel is not justifiable or at least a logical inference from what's been posted, you make an ad hominem attack.

 

As a matter of fact I think in your earlier post you "accused" me of making a "logical" inference or presumption.

 

Sorry, but I won't apologize to you for being "logical."

 

lol, I knew I was TJ, I didn't mean to. Calm down.

 

I didn't realize logical was a cuss word in your part of town...lol...I like to the think I'm rather logical myself.

 

And I didn't ask you for an apology? lol

 

I can break down why your post is off, but I think you'll miss the point, overreach and turn it into something else.

[LiveWell]

I was wondering the same thing.

 

Again, I'll continue to be logical, and you can continue to wonder about that.

 

 

WTH..???

Thats ridiculous. I am sure the OP at least has some of that info after 1 year of dating her. So divorced women are red flags? Silly.

 

English not your first language? Divorce, not "divorced women," is a red flag. Divorce = a failed relationship.

 

 

 

 

 

And for the OP...If you don't value a relationship then why on earth are you in one? If you would rather have a FWB then let this woman go so you can find that.

 

Obviously the OP did not "want" an FWB relationship!

 

 

You are wasting her valuable time if you don't care for her...not to mention her childs time too.

 

LOL, now it's OP's fault that his gf had a FWB with a doctor and didn't tell him about it?

[carhill]

LOL, nice to see the lawyers have returned

 

Also, I'm quite relieved to receive relevant perspective that my prior affair will be of little to no interest to a future relationship partner. Whew. Big load off my mind. Thanks

 

There's a compelling possibility that the pervy doctor and divorced nurse were playing general hospital while she was M and she continued the arrangement after she D'd in the hopes of turning the head of her young lover.

 

Ah, well, nice Saturday fiction, all around, except for the lawyers.

[LiveWell]

lol, I knew I was TJ, I didn't mean to. Calm down.

 

I'm perfectly calm. Stop making ad hominem attacks. If you think I've posted something in particular that you disagree with, then state what it is, and why you disagree with it. But please don't attack me personally nor bring my past relationship history into this discussion, since it really has nothing to do with anything I've said.

 

 

I didn't realize logical was a cuss word in your part of town...lol...I like to the think I'm rather logical myself.

 

It's not a cuss word, it's a compliment. And you used it in one of your earlier posts to characterize my line of reasoning. My point is that you really have nothing to criticize me for, and you know it. So please, stop.

 

And I didn't ask you for an apology? lol

 

Obviously not, and obviously I didn't give you one.

 

 

I can break down why your post is off, but I think you'll miss the point, overreach and turn it into something else.

 

Actually you can't "break down" anything I've posted, or you would have. That's precisely why you're making ad hominem attacks and then when that's pointed out you try to deflect from that. If you don't want to bother actually refuting something I've said on the merits, then don't. But please don't try to justify your inability to do so by further ad hominem attacks.

[atlnay]

Yeah, this train has derailed. I am done here. Live well, Livewell...lol

[LiveWell]

A guy saying he is getting a raw deal because he is in a relationship with his girlfriend instead of just being f*ck buddies is not misrepresentation. You are right.

 

No, the point is that OP obviously feels he may have gotten a "raw deal" (your words, not his) because the entire foundation of his relationship with her, was predicated on her misrepresentation of who and what she really was and is; including her attitudes towards dating, relationship, and sex.

 

He believed he was dating/in a relationship with someone who placed a "high value" on herself, obviously because she wanted him to have that impression and encourage him to have it. He has recently found out that her persona of "high relationship value" may in fact be a total sham, based on the apparent ease with which she acquiesced to what appears to be a totally degrading sex-only relationship with a doctor who obviously believed she had zero relationship value (assuming you take OP's recitation of her story at face value).

 

It therefore makes perfect sense for OP to feel that he has been taken advantage of--from his perspective.

 

 

 

But only an ********* of immense proportions who has no respect for his partner other than for the vagina between her legs would ever say something like that.

 

This is of course a complete double standard you are applying to the disadvantage of the OP. OP didn't actually treat his gf as a worthless sex toy--he is merely contemplating the notion of whether that is a realistic option, knowing what he knows now.

 

It is of course OP's gf who ACTUALLY BEHAVED like a worthless sex toy--yet you don't seem to believe that it should be held against her, that SHE had no respect for herself, IN ACTUALITY.

[LiveWell]

Yeah, this train has derailed. I am done here. Live well, Livewell...lol

 

Next time you might want to actually contribute to the thread rather than gratuitously attacking other posters.

[porter218]

 

Obviously the OP did not "want" an FWB relationship!

 

My bad... I somehow thought this was chucklwaters thread. I apologize.

[LiveWell]

LOL, nice to see the lawyers have returned

 

No, lawyers bill for their time. If by "lawyers" you mean "people who try to discuss things in a logical manner," then I will accept the dig.

 

 

Also, I'm quite relieved to receive relevant perspective that my prior affair will be of little to no interest to a future relationship partner. Whew. Big load off my mind. Thanks

 

Yes and I'm sure if brainygirl gets divorced she will agree that her ex also has no obligation to divulge the reasons for the failure of their relationship to any future partner of his. "What's in the past is in the past." Compulsive masturbation, drug abuse, and whatever else he did that led to the breakup--"no worries mate." No relevance AT ALL to any future relationship he may have.

 

There's a compelling possibility that the pervy doctor and divorced nurse were playing general hospital while she was M and she continued the arrangement after she D'd in the hopes of turning the head of her young lover.

 

LOL you just called OP's gf a cheater and a liar. Your guess is certainly as good as anyone's. What's pretty clear is that OP's gf is not at all what he was led to believe.

 

Ah, well, nice Saturday fiction, all around, except for the lawyers.

 

If you say that one more time I WILL send you a bill.

[kdark]

No, the point is that OP obviously feels he may have gotten a "raw deal" (your words, not his) because the entire foundation of his relationship with her, was predicated on her misrepresentation of who and what she really was and is; including her attitudes towards dating, relationship, and sex.

 

He believed he was dating/in a relationship with someone who placed a "high value" on herself, obviously because she wanted him to have that impression and encourage him to have it. He has recently found out that her persona of "high relationship value" may in fact be a total sham, based on the apparent ease with which she acquiesced to what appears to be a totally degrading sex-only relationship with a doctor who obviously believed she had zero relationship value (assuming you take OP's recitation of her story at face value).

 

It therefore makes perfect sense for OP to feel that he has been taken advantage of--from his perspective.

 

 

 

 

 

This is of course a complete double standard you are applying to the disadvantage of the OP. OP didn't actually treat his gf as a worthless sex toy--he is merely contemplating the notion of whether that is a realistic option, knowing what he knows now.

 

It is of course OP's gf who ACTUALLY BEHAVED like a worthless sex toy--yet you don't seem to believe that it should be held against her, that SHE had no respect for herself, IN ACTUALITY.

 

You aremaking a lot of assumptions about people who enjoy casual sex. "High relationship value?" What the heck are you talking about? Do you honestly believe that someone is damaged goods just because they had a two year FWB relationship with a young doctor? There is nothing degrading about that.

 

Just because a woman enjoys casual sex doesn't mean she places a "low value" on herself. This notion you have that women should only dole out sex during relationships is archaic.

[LiveWell]

My bad... I somehow thought this was chucklwaters thread. I apologize.

 

It is chuclwater's thread. It might help if you stop gratuitously attacking him and anyone else who is trying to see things from his point of view.

[EasyHeart]

I can certainly understand why the OP is upset, and I think I would feel the same way. Adults who start dating, IME, always talk about past relationships, and I don't think anyone should have to ask the exact right question ("Have you ever had a 2 year long FWB relationship with a doctor who said he doesn't date single moms?") in order to find out information like this, which is certainly relevant.

 

Some of you may think "the past is in the past", but you don't have any right to force your values on other people. Most rational adults realize that past behavior (certainly things that happened in the recent past) are indicators of future behavior. I would be very hesitant to become emotionally involved with someone who has such a cavalier attitude towards sex. I consider the decision to become physically intimate to be a serious decision, and I want a partner who thinks the same way. That doesn't mean I want her to go to jail or wear a scarlet FWB on her chest, but it's certainly something I want to know, because someone who is casual about sex is less likely to remain faithful. If someone has the attitude of "it's just sex, it doesn't matter", then she may have same attitude towards affairs (especially if she is still working with the guy).

[Stockalone]

I'm just curious on how big a drop in respect you have for someone that was in an NSA.

 

NSA = no strings attached?

 

 

So, in your eyes, what level of respect is she equal to now? A drug dealer? Or a bit higher? A cheater? A thief?

 

As long as the FWB is the only problem, then my level of respect for her is higher than all of the options you mentioned above.

 

I still wouldn't want to date her, though.

[GooseChaser]

I can certainly understand why the OP is upset, and I think I would feel the same way. Adults who start dating, IME, always talk about past relationships, and I don't think anyone should have to ask the exact right question ("Have you ever had a 2 year long FWB relationship with a doctor who said he doesn't date single moms?") in order to find out information like this, which is certainly relevant.

 

Some of you may think "the past is in the past", but you don't have any right to force your values on other people. Most rational adults realize that past behavior (certainly things that happened in the recent past) are indicators of future behavior. I would be very hesitant to become emotionally involved with someone who has such a cavalier attitude towards sex. I consider the decision to become physically intimate to be a serious decision, and I want a partner who thinks the same way. That doesn't mean I want her to go to jail or wear a scarlet FWB on her chest, but it's certainly something I want to know, because someone who is casual about sex is less likely to remain faithful. If someone has the attitude of "it's just sex, it doesn't matter", then she may have same attitude towards affairs (especially if she is still working with the guy).

One long-term FWB isn't the worst thing out there as far as casual sex goes. Being with just one person for that is safer than having multiple short-term partners. Who says that she didn't take the decision to start the FWB with the doctor seriously?

[kdark]

 

 

 

 

As long as the FWB is the only problem, then my level of respect for her is higher than all of the options you mentioned above.

 

I still wouldn't want to date her, though.

 

I can respect this. But only if you hold yourself to the same standard.