Because people don’t form friendships with people just because they’re lonely? I mean that’s not how friendship works. You become friends with someone that you like, have shared interests with etc, friendships just from because there’s some mutual liking, lucky circumstances and some effort from both people.

You can’t just become friends with anyone and usually people don’t have enough time and resources to form some weird pity friendships when most adults barely have the time to nurture their true friendships.

If someone who’s already your friend is lonely, someone in your family etc, of course most people would try to help if they knew.

Es geht doch aber vor allem um das was dich interessiert. Die Berufsaussichten sind doch so schon gut genug und bereitet dich wohl genügend auf den Beruf zu, von daher würde ich einen weiteren Studiengang eher als persönliche Bildung sehen.

Generell würde wahrscheinlich sowas wie Medizintechnik oder Physik dann dazu passen. Philosophie passt zu allem irgendwie, ist auf Grund des Themas Ethik sicherlich relevant und tendenziell gut nebenbei zu machen. Oder allgemein was Geisteswissenschaftliches oder Gesellschaftswissenschaftliches als Ergänzung zum naturwissenschaftlichen Teil den du ja eh schon hast. Wie gesagt, würde mir mehr Gedanken darüber machen, was die persönlich interessiert und begeistert.

No offense, but that’s not solo traveling. That’s going on a vacation solo. If you move every 2-3 days, see something new almost every single day, like a new city, nature, a historical site, then you don’t get bored. But yeah, spending all evenings alone in an all-inclusive resort with families around doesn’t sound too good.

Weird take to define success only by divorce rates. Is a miserable marriage without divorce more successful than a marriage that has been happy for large parts and just didn’t work out anymore at some point? I would strongly disagree.

First of all I would try to get rid of this ‘letting your partner do something’ mindset. That’s honestly weird and in my eyes problematic. You don’t get to tell him what he’s allowed to do, how long he’s allowed to stay out etc. You can communicate that something makes you uncomfortable and you can decide how to respond to what he chooses to do.

The way this girl acts is definitely a little suspicious/weird. But it seems your bf is doing nothing wrong. He’s telling you about everything and is being very open. So I wouldn’t worry about that. In the end you have to chose if you trust him or not, but you can’t control how others act towards him and he can’t either. I’m really sympathetic to his situation and can understand that he doesn’t want to miss his chance at making friends. I feel like if he would stop going out with them completely for you it would likely lead to resentment towards you.

I automatically like all pictures of people I actually know in real life, especially people that are actually friends or acquaintances. I feel that’s just what you do somehow? And when I occasionally post something I guess my friends do the same.

I never overthought what it meant that someone liked some of those photos. For most people it really doesn’t mean much.

Reacting to a story or even replying I guess it’s different, but I don’t see a problem with just liking a photo.

There are some countries for which I get this. But saying that about all foreign countries? That’s a bit paranoid and ignorant. Do you really think that the government of a western or Northern European country for example would just put you into prison for no reason?

Do you really think this whole situation is okay and that you could possibly in the wrong? I don’t even know what to say honestly. I have no idea why you put up with this, this is crazy. Why are you even in a relationship with him? And why are you already married? In what way does he make your life any better or easier?

I’m not sure if any talking or explaining will make any difference at this point as he sounds absolutely selfish and like he doesn’t care about any of your needs.

It is a criterion used in biology not a random one. Parasites are defined among other factors by this. It is about the direct physical connection to another human’s body that makes this certain environment defining.

The difference is that one cannot survive in any other environment but that of the mother’s womb. For the baby or handicapped person that needs people to take care of them to survive, it doesn’t matter who does it as long as someone does it. It doesn’t matter where in the world it happens. As long as someone feeds them somewhere they survive. For the fetus they depend on one single person and one single location. They are physically connected to the mother. And this connection is vital. They live inside of the mother. I mean that seems to be a pretty easy distinction for me.

Some people do like the occasional validation of someone else finding you sexy. And as long as the partner is okay with that and it’s doesn’t get too much, what’s wrong with that? Sometimes it’s just nice for the confidence to know, that you look attractive or sexy. And who are you to decide that no one needs that to feel confident? And who can you differentiate if someone’s dresses a certain way to look attractive or to look sexy?

Also if you feel sexy that can benefit your partner as well, when you feel sexy you’re more likely to act in a sexual way and confidence regarding your body can help be more open sexually etc. If you don’t feel sexy, don’t like your body, you’re more likely to be in your head during sex and overthink stuff.

Something that seems hard to understand for some people is that what matters is what the two people in the relationship think and that there’s no universal rule.

I mean obviously that is not even remotely the same. That’s just the fact that we can’t control other people’s actions. If that were true, people’s bodily autonomy would be violated multiple times on most days. They don’t touch your body in anyway. After the initial kinda automatic reaction you have some choice in how you react, how you regulate your emotions etc. Someone violating your bodily autonomy would be them forcefully injecting you with certain hormones or substances that induce something. Or if they were to actually physically hurt you, because again, that is a direct act on your body.

Bodily autonomy is about choice concerning your body, being pregnant against your will is something happening in and with your body is violating that. When someone hurts you or threatens you and you feel a certain way you still have full choice over your body. Yes there are some instinctual reactions adrenaline etc but that has nothing to do with bodily autonomy. Otherwise you would say that your own nervous system/brain is violations your bodily autonomy which just doesn’t make sense.

Yes it seems we disagree.

But just to clarify: I’m not saying anyone is absolves of responsibility. Yes, we have to face the consequences and reality if it happens. And we are certainly responsible to make a decision and react, with all possible responsibilities that come with said decision. I’m just saying that doing something with a small but possible risk doesn’t bring an obligation to make the decision about how one would react if said risk became true beforehand or that one shouldn’t be able to change their minds in that case.

Sure, go ahead. I’m curious.

I think there’s a difference (even if a small and hard to distinguish one) between knowing a risk and accepting it and consenting. Or maybe it’s better put that way: for me knowing that risk and accepting it or consenting or whatever, doesn’t bind you to any reaction to that consequence in my opinion. Because those consequences are usually extreme situations, that put your mind and/or body at extreme stress. And I think that for those situations you can only ever truly know how you feel and how you’ll react once the situations happens. You may say know if you get paraplegic due to a car accident you’ll not wanna live anymore, but how you’ll actually feel in the rare case that happens is an entirely different matter. Similar for unplanned pregnancies.

This is an interesting take. What would follow from that in the case of a pregnancy being a danker to the mother’s life after the 20th week (if the complications only happen after this or are found it then)? How does viability outside of the womb play into this? One could argue that one could hardly be a person if you’re not viable on your own outside of someone else’s body. What if later one it is found out that a fetus is not viable at all due to some development defects?

I feel another aspect the argument relies on and that seems to often distinguish people on different sides of the argument is the one about consent to a possible pregnancy. Personally, I don’t agree that having sex while taking all possible precautions means consenting to a possible pregnancy and thus having to keep it. For me knowing that there is a small chance/risk of some consequences is not equal to consenting to those consequences. If you drive your car on the road, there is a small chance you will be killed or end up severely impacted every time. Does this mean consenting to the possibility of being killed or ending up disabled? Would anyone ever say: ‘Well, it’s unfortunate, but they knew the risk and consented’?

And in regards to the fact of rape I would argue that the situation is hardly comparable to others and the analogy of in other cases it wouldn’t be okay to kill an innocent person just because someone violates you is hardly explicable. Because in all those other possible cases the innocent person is not inside of your body, feeding off you and possibly putting your life at risk plus the fact that you don’t have to care for this other innocent person for the next years. If you think the category innocent is applicable to a fetus, it still gets tricky because still this ‘person’ is an intruder, a pregnancy is aggressive on the body or can be, and especially in the case of rape you probably feel very much violated by this fetus.

Wie wär’s wenn du sie das einfach mal genau so fragst? Du ihr genau das alles sagst, dass du dich um sie sorgst, ihr möglichst viel helfen willst etc. Nur sie kann dir sagen was sie braucht, wenn sie gestresst ist. Menschen sind unterschiedlich und brauchen unterschiedliche Dinge, auch Frauen. Manchmal wenn ich gestresst bin, bin ich am liebsten alleine und da finde ich es persönlich wichtig, dass ich meinem Partner das so auch sagen kann, ohne dass er es persönlich nimmt.

Es klingt aber als würdest du schon sehr viel machen und allein, dass du dich so sorgst und dir Gedanken machst ist super.

You can’t make him feel better. You can’t change your past and that is okay. This is wholly his issue. And the problem is how he judges you and not what you did. You have different views on sex and intimacy. Even though his views seem to go beyond and sound very judgmental and fueled by his religious upbringing. Personally I couldn’t be with someone with those views and values.

You are definitely not gross, there’s nothing wrong with what you did and in my opinion the number is totally normal for people your age (even though I believe that this body count bs doesn’t matter at all and nobody should be shamed due to it). You are not immoral, nothing of what you did was immoral.

Tbh I’m very skeptical that this can be worked out. It seems unlikely to me that he will change his views or get completely over it.

Was heißt denn sie hat mal angedeutet, dass für sie nichts anderes infrage kommt? Wann war das, war das ein ernstes Gespräch oder ein Kommentar nebenbei? Ich denke kennst deine Freundin besser und kannst ihre Einstellung besser einschätzen. Aber euere Erfahrungen klingen für mich schonmal so, als könnte deine Freundin definitiv auch Sex und Gefühle auseinanderhalten. Sonst könntest du das Thema natürlich einfach mal anteasern im Sinne von hab heute einen Artikel darüber gelesen etc. Ist ja mittlerweile ein Thema, das hier und da auch mal in den Medien angesprochen wird.

Aber ja, wenn es einmal wirklich ausgesprochen ist, kann man es nicht mehr zurück nehmen und für manche Leute ist das äußern des Interesses schon ein Dealbreaker. Das Risiko besteht definitiv, dass selbst wenn du es ansprichst, die Beziehung daran zerbricht.

You keep saying it’s about the potential of life and you don’t want to argue about the status of embryos etc but then you go on to constantly use terms like person and someone else. Even though you say it’s not about arguing about the definition, in the end it is a very defining point, maybe the most important one.

And this potential of life point of view seems very weird to me. In life there are so many potentialities but everything depends on complex factors and coincidences and know one can actually know what would have come real. With this view of potential you could also argue that the potential person would have become a serial killer so it was good to not have realized that potential. Or would have led a very unhappy life full of suffering. So for me this is not a convincing argument.

Plus your definition of the consequences is a pretty big understatement in my opinion. I mean having a baby is not just making your life a little more difficult, it’s life changing. It has the potential of becoming life threatening to you or to have to deal with medical consequences long term, and it’s a responsibility for at least the next 18 years if not life long.

It is a decision that cannot be reversed, so yes I would argue people should get a second chance at deciding. Forgetting to take the pill one day or forgetting to check the interference of some medication is not a decision. That is ridiculous. It is a mistake.

Have you ever done actual research and listened to podcast, read book about it etc? Those are examples of people sharing their positives experiences and some of them have in non-monogamous relationships for decades, have done scientific research, are couples therapist that have worked with multiple non-monogamous couples. Maybe that counts for a bit more than your limited anecdotal experience.

Yes, if a monogamous relationship is opened after years due to one person wanting it and the other just following along due to fear of losing them, then it will probably fail.

But that’s only one specific case. I think the fundamental different world view that seems hard to understand for a lot of monogamous people is the expectation that a partner can ever and should fulfill all needs. And that if this isn’t the case it’s just not the right person. I think it is very rare if not impossible for one person to be that perfect and compatible in every regard and acknowledging that doesn’t take away from the love for your partner or appreciation of your relationship. For friends this is completely accepted, why not for romantic relationships?

The next problem is viewing commitment only in terms of exclusivity. The assumption that if you’re not exclusive you’re not as committed is simply false for some people. And if you can’t see that for yourself, that’s fine, but at least accept the possibility that some people define it differently. If I have a partner that’s the most important person in my life, we stay together for decades, share experiences and make big decisions together, maybe even live together etc, how is that not commitment just because I occasionally have sex or a fling with someone else?

There are asexual relationships, they can also be committed without having sex as the defining factor. People value different things and see sex differently. I think emotional connection, the depth of connectedness on a mental level is way more impressive than the physical side of things.

Also it is definitely possible (for at least some people) to love multiple people at once and loving another person doesn’t diminish the love for one person. For friends, family member, children this is totally accepted and I mean what is deeper than the love for a child? If I can have this much and deep love for multiple children, why should romantic love be necessarily limited?

Taking into account your comment about him having cheated on you multiple times (as if everything else is not bad enough already): Why the hell do you want to stay with him? In which universe is this a good relationship?

Ironically you got one thing right: feminism will come before any man, because independence, autonomy and free choice will come before any man and modern women don’t want to put up with men that try to restrict those. And in my books that’s a good thing.

Als jemand, der selber in einer festen längeren Beziehung ist, in der wir beiden Reisen lieben und es auch normal für uns ist, alleine Sachen zu machen, sehe ich vor allem die Doppelstandards als Problem. Das würde ich definitiv ansprechen. Ich finde es gut von dir, dass du ihm nicht die Reise versauen willst und impulsiv handelst. Gleichzeitig denke ich aber auch, dass ihr beide, wenn ihr so weiter machen wollt an eurer Eifersucht arbeiten müsst. Wenn ihr beide weiter alleine reisen wollt, müsst ihr Wege finden jeweils alleine mit der Eifersucht umzugehen, aber auch zusammen nach und vor der Reise darüber zu reden können, um gemeinsame Regeln zu finden, Wege euch gegenseitig zu helfen etc.

Ich muss auch sagen, sein Verhalten klingt nicht besonders toll. Erstmal so übertrieben bei dir reagieren, wobei du in meinen Augen nichts falsches gemacht hast, ehrlich warst und nichts verheimlicht hast. Aber in einer fremden Stadt im Park übernachten? Übernachtunsmöglichkeiten auf diese Weise zu suchen? Klingt unabhängig davon ob Single oder nicht etwas leichtsinnig und dumm. Außerdem dir Stress zu machen weil du mit einem Mann einen Kaffee getrunken hat, dann aber bei einer Frau übernachten und es dir nichtmal zu erzählen? Absolute Doppelmoral und die meisten Menschen in Beziehung würden wohl erwarten, dass man sowas wenigstens offen kommuniziert.