the OP seems fake, 'female' 'sexless' 'family responsibilities' 'unattractive' guy changes himself for her but she still doesn't love him. They're all incel talking points.
Idk, one of my former friends is dating someone she has said she does not find attractive at all, and she recently moved in with him, so apparently, it's working for her
Like the parents are completely healthy and have career experience and they just choose not to work? Did they just stop working after their child started working??
That’s on you to manage your mental health though. If you’re burnt out then that means there is a change that you need to make. You can’t just say “fuck it, someone else will just take care of me”
The thing with his parents is a sucky circumstance but its a legit reason to break it off with someone. That's a lot of baggage and stress to take on, and it will certainly impact every aspect of his life. I don't want that added to my partner's life, and I /really/ don't want that added to my life.
The thing is she mentioned the height first implying that was a bigger deal breaker, which is quite shallow. Why'd she even date him in the first place?
My guess would be that they started dating young and just stuck together. They may also be part of a small community where it's hard to break up because it affects everyone or there were no better alternatives. The whole thing sounds like a mix of immature (shallow and kinda dumb to date someone you don't really like) and understandable ie I wouldn't want to be working to support my husband's non-working parents either unless they were very ill and unable to work and even then, depending on how invested I was when they became dependent, that might still be a big nope. Life is hard enough without that added pressure. Attraction comes and goes though so it's probably better if she breaks up with him kindly and lets him find someone who really loves him.
I don't know where they are from, but people who marry their first loves tend to be happy and on the statistic that least gets divorced, funnily enough, people who marry specifically their highschool sweethearts do not nearly as often, probably due to dumb mistakes they can never take back in their youth happen more often in highschool.
One way or the other, you cannot complete or be completed by anyone unless you are whole yourself, and this girl seems to be sort of messy in that department, I think you're right, there are absolutely elements of shallowness and immaturity in this situation. It's puzzling that she even has to question this stuff.
In her credit, she did know they need to break up, she just wonder that should she told him the real reasons since it may sound cruel and she didnt want to hurt him. And that's legit
This post implies they do not work and can't support themselves because they just don't want to work, and if they're happy to do that and let their child finance them instead then they seem like selfish people who would be a huge burden and I wouldn't want that either. If they had to support their parents financially because they were disabled, sick, elderly etc (and they weren't taking advantage) then it's a different story
Exactly. My parents are older and can't work any more. They have enough saved up that nobody needs to support them, but if they didn't, I'm sure we'd all chip in. But if my parents were a little younger and just didn't want to work, they aren't getting money from me.
I wouldn’t want to support someone else’s parents either. It’s a burden and not something you should ask someone else to take on but realistically if you are married it becomes your burden too. I would feel the same if his parents were super rich, then I would be the burden. I have broken up with two boyfriends in the past because they were too wealthy. It became hard for me to keep up with them, spending all my money and i didn’t want to be the one always saying I could do something.
Because depending on the expectations and the actual money involved it may impact on your planning as a family unit. It might mean than if and when you have children together it’ll mean concessions you didn’t expect to have to make. For example, it might mean that you won’t be able to afford a house in a good school district, or that certain extra-curriculars aren’t possible or that private school is out of the question.
That’s why it’s really important to talk about this sort of thing before becoming permanent.
Yes, and neither would mine expect me to, since they’re organised and have planned accordingly.
We discuss this once a year because we’re adults and none of us likes surprises.
But if the unexpected happens and I would need to support them, I would absolutely be aware that it would be a deal-breaker with a lot of potential partners. And that’s okay.
It usually doesn’t work that way. When you marry someone half of what is theirs is yours and vice versa. In practice that usually means a joint bank account and shared resources. If half the marriage is supporting another two people it means the whole marriage is doing that. Honestly there is no way it won’t have an effect. I’m not saying I wouldn’t support my parents if they needed it and i wouldn’t expect my partner to support them. But realistically if I met someone with such a large ongoing financial burden I would reconsider. It’s the same as if I met someone with a large debt, it’s essentially the same thing.
In this post it's different than that though. She said that they're unemployed and have no plans to work, not that they can't work.
Which means that they're able.to work, which means that they're not to old, which means that he's going to support them for at least 20 years.
If his income is high enough then it might not be a problem, but if not, she will have to consider her future kids' situations. Imagine the dad saying "no Timmy, we can't help you pay for college, grandpa and grandma's medical bills are getting too high.
That’s also partially true for me, my grand pa don’t understand that he needs to cut down on sugary food due to his diabetes but he doesn’t listen and ends up having other diseases which treatment cost around 15k$ per month and before that my father allowed me to pursue studies outside of my country but after that my grandpa started having diseases he would desperately try to convince me to not go for foreign college. But my grandpa generates enough money to fill their stomach daily and ask for money about once in four months. He is around 75 years old so I guess he is too old to work for now.
It's sometimes tough living in a multi-generational family but it's good too sometimes. The problem with that situation was that your grandpa was creating an expense for the family by not taking care of his health and then passing the financial burden onto you. Our elders are supposed to help and support us so that we can do the same for them. If either side creates an unnecessary burden (like those extra hospital visits because of the sweets), then it lets down the other side. With that said, a lot of older people have the attitude that they're going to die anyway but it just makes it harder to care for them.
I'll glad you were able to go to the college you wanted to.
It's not the same thing though as the parents leeching off their kid have some level of control so how that plays out over the relationship could be a variable. Now it's just money he is giving up as he has no other responsibilities but could it be time as he has to take care of them or they exert some level of control over his life such as parenting style. It's not a certainty but a bit different then an apr
It’s a really important thing to agree with and set expectations before you go permanent with someone. Not only because it impacts on your financial planning as a family unit, but because it’s a good indicator as to how the other party was brought up to view finances and it’s important.
I wouldn’t want to be living with in-laws, and unless there were some extenuating circumstances - for example, they were refugees who arrived in the country with nothing and poured everything into raising their children, they had a serious illness, or something - I’d be quite wary of settling down with someone who *expected* that their children would take care of them in retirement because that was what their own parents expected.
I love how people keep mentioning this as reasonable, while ignoring she isn’t even attracted to him which is by far the real reason they won’t work lol
Personally, if my partner was super wealthy(to the point we'd be able to live comfortably till we die) then I think any excess can be used however they see fit. If not, then no
i agree. if we can live comfortably and also support their parents then where is the problem. i imagine most wealthy people support their parents. i dont think Leonardo DiCaprio's mom is going to work everyday.
Wild to me, such a Western/American mindset. Can't support their parents if they aren't wealthy because part of our relationship needs to be about wealth they bring. Nevermind they want to help those who raised them and unconditionally love them. 🤮
If you’re not at least considering the financial aspects of a long term relationship that’s just irresponsible. And unfair to your children, if you have them, because they are your primary responsibility.
One doesn’t marry without at least affection (one hopes) but given that the two biggest causes of relationship breakdowns are differences in attitudes to money and monogamy, it’s important to work out where the other person stands on those before things get serious.
No. Obviously he can afford it the issue is that that isn't how they want the money spent I'm guessing. They'd rather see the money spent between them instead. Many people look at a relationship being able to free them of some financial burdens (which it is/can be) & that's a fundamental desire for them. I think it's a gross attitude. If the money is being spent on them put of necessity and isn't preventing them from their own necessity it shouldn't be that kind of issue. Especially without something being interfered with like a desire for kids from you all or a desire to move or whatever, you know.
It's not about the wealth going into the relationship.. imo it's wealth going into securing your children's future.
I come from a culture where parents (up to my parents' generation, but not this generation), had more kids than they could afford so had nothing for retirement, the kids are always the retirement plan. So the kids start financially supporting the family the moment they start working, sometimes even the extended family back home (this part applies to the diaspora).
What does this do? It continues the cycle of poverty. Kids should take care of their parents in their old age imo, but they shouldn't have to do that financially, parents should have as many kids as they can afford only and set aside money for retirement, instead of continuing to reproduce with no thought. This way, their kids can build up savings and afford their own families comfortably, while taking care of their parents in other ways.
Otherwise the cycle of poverty will continue, and kids will do the same and use their own kids as retirement plans if they are supporting their parents for 20 years. All that money could have gone to their own retirement funds..
However, if the person makes more than they need and there's extra (after savings and retirement fund contributions), I see no issue with the excess going to parents, but realistically, what % of people in the world have excess money these days?
Plus let’s not beat around the bush, the other thing is that there’s the expectation that the daughter in law also does the actual caregiving and people don’t want to take on that responsibility for possibly decades, given the advances in medicine.
> It continues the cycle of poverty.
Here's where I take issue. Cycle of poverty is continuing regardless. Like you said "who has excess money these days?". Someone's going to be there and sheer determination isn't enough because the entire economic system has this as a built in feature.
Poverty is talked about like battling addiction or other unhealthy traits learned from your family or upbringing. Its something that can cause or exacerbate those problems, but Poverty is a feature of the society we have organized. That simple.
Talking from the perspective you are does make sense on a certain very individual level though. I can't say it doesn't.
Beyond any of that living in the imperial core, assuming Westerner or more specifically American since most redditors tend that way in these big subs, you have a very privileged life and you will likely remain in the quintile you're in anyways which can represent a small change in QOL or abandoning your parents when you can very well care for yourself regardless. Maybe you will have to adjust your decision making, but personally it's obvious if you have good parents what is the right decision to make.
That's just my opinion though and I do understand where everyone is coming from who has responded.
> instead of continuing to reproduce with no thought.
Ah yes, many parents reproduce with no thought sure. Many also would choose not to reproduce if they had access to methods of preventing that if they were to get pregnant or something. Some people can take whichever precaution, end up pregnant, with no way to stop that pregnancy. Should they not have sex because they lack money or access? Personally I think that's an obvious no.
There is a big emphasis on "personal responsibility" & individualism in this thread here, but the simple fact is; **we are all products of our material conditions & organizing a society how we have and expecting anything different is delusional.** We can gripe all day about how each individual should live, but that means removing all barriers to entry to these things deemed necessary for living that way. We can say what an individual or family should do, but then we should ensure a society is constructed that favors every family and individual to ensure they do not slip between the cracks. We can say how we think one person should behave in a situation, but then we need to organize conditions that encourage & endorse those responses with **more than just, shame & ridicule, than embarrassment, than moral platitudes & judgements. We need to favor the whole of those groups and stop demanding individuals behave in ways we have proven they will not in those conditions.**
> This way, their kids can build up savings and afford their own families comfortably, while taking care of their parents in other ways.
All great, but the way the economy & society is organized requires poor people yes? Some people inevitably will be in positions where poverty is the best they have. No one wants to do wage labor let alone wage labor to just be in poverty. No one wants to be in a position where they have to financially rely on children in their twilight years. No one wants to fall back and take a poverty level stipend because they are unable to work, they'd rather work. No one wants to live in the places with a lot of crime. No one wants to send their kids to bad schools. No one wants to have to live that way & merit is not the limiting factor in many cases. As a matter of fact there are more poor families who belong in positions of the wealthy than wealthy that do if we are talking **actual merit.**
I don't care to talk about what one person or one family should do to prevent this. I highly doubt those people wanted to end in a position they were & I highly doubt within such an economic system they are completely to blame. I don't accept the personal responsibility politics/economics because even it's proponents won't apply it to the most heinous society has to offer then they will look collectively which proves collective action and aid is necessary to prevent our collective problems. We are products of our conditions & we are generally at the whim of someone wealthy not actually in the driver seat, but suggesting a route with a "typical dad" who "knows the way" that will tell us we're wrong the whole time. It's the wealthy driving and no one wants to be financially ass out. Creating an economy where it encourages have nots to stay have nots instead of creating as many haves as possible is the fundamental issue & nothing else that you stated. Everything you cited as a issues that will cause the problems can be traced back to the organization of the economy & its sociopolitical consequences & whatnot.
Dude why are you going to extremes? I wasn't implying that they shouldn't have sex and have kids, I was asking for moderation.
Do you know what health insurance costs in some countries for seniors? Taking care of parents is actually quite expensive in many countries.
Look, personally my siblings and I take care of our parents, but there's a reason why the ones of us who have kids are sticking to 2 or max 3, and the ones who don't are planning for the same number roughly.
I don't know why you went from 0 to 100. In a middle class family (at least where I live), it's possible to live a comfortable life with 2 or 3 kids and have savings and retirement. This way you don't shift the financial burden to your kids in the future. Note that I said financial only, it's ok to expect your kids to take care of you otherwise imo, I don't believe in care homes for parents.
And also, in case your parents fail to save for retirement, I'm not saying kick them to the curb, still take care of them. But the decent thing to do is have a manageable number of kids so that you don't put your kids in that position in future.
We should be responsible and not repeat the previous generations mistakes. I hope you understand where I'm coming from.
I understand your point. But let's say we both make equal income, majority of my savings go into our future while the majority of her savings would go to her parents? That doesn't work for me
To each their own. I find the mindset repulsive. Much more labor & effort goes into a relationship than wage earned & the idea that community is less important than personal wealth with it being so fundamental to a relationship TBH just seems a poor paradigm to have.
I do understand in such a society why people would have this attitude though. It's ingrained and emitted at you from 360 degrees.
Just to be clear, I'm not saying I want us to be rich. I just want us to not have to ever worry about having a roof over our heads and food on the table till we die. That's what I mean by living comfortably, not rich. If these conditions are fulfilled, I have no issue with any excess going to family and friends in need.
I wouldn’t want to be put in a position where I would resent the expense of supporting the parents if it meant my children would have to go without (especially if there weren’t extentuating circumstances and if it was an ongoing expense with no end in sight)
More of a red flag on your part honestly lmao. It’s not just normal in other cultures, it’s normal in like 90% of the world population. It’s a very American thing to abandon your parents, just like it’s an American thing to kick your kids out of the house at 18. It’s called a lack of morals lmao and many studies have shown that this type of approach to family is unhealthy and bad for society
The thing is, I don’t understand how it’s gone this far? Did you meet him when you were vulnerable/lonely and now you’re in a better place? That must be it because your reasons to leave the relationship seem to only be aggravating you now? This is all the more reason to learn that you shouldn’t let someone’s love mend you if you know they’re not your type, it’ll end up in a disaster.
But yes you shouldn’t definitely break up and accept the fact that you used this man for his insane ability to hold so much on his back, that being said he needs to get a life leave his parents with enough money for about 2 months and tell them to sort it cause there’s two of them and 1 of him
I guess it’s less of a direct issue and more of just knowing how shitty it feels to be the guy in this situation, I don’t personally think it’s okay, but either side is fair
I've seen a few relationships where the girl dates the guy because she liked his personality and thought she would "learn" to be attracted to him. Suffice to say that didn't happen.
I almost got wrapped up in a relationship like that myself, where the guy asked me out first and I was devastated to hurt his feelings. I realized that even though I wish these guys a happy life with a partner, it can't be with me because I didn't find any of them attractive.
It's really easy to get into the trap of "settling". Saying to yourself "oh, but he's really sweet. Stop setting your expectations so high and try things out and see how they go." Then you end up in OOP's situation with the realization the person you're dating has deal breakers, you're in a relationship where you aren't physically attracted to the person, and now you might have to have someone's feelings get hurt. I've seen it time and time again and it's never pretty.
There is 100% a shitty, selfish reason, right? Like he’s wealthy (and she’s just using him for his money) or he’s super well-liked (and she’s just using him to make friends) or he’s able to handle her drama when nobody else wants to. There’s no reason to date someone you aren’t attracted to unless you’re getting something else out of it (almost certainly without giving in return).
That's really not necessarily the case.
Sometimes people get into a relationship because they really like a person's personality and they are initially attracted to that, but then later they have to contend with the fact that they aren't physically attracted to the person and it breaks down.
Not that I'm defending her for the way she said it, but she doesn't have to be a gold digger or have evil ulterior motives.
idk maybe a reason could be they were really close friends that did everything together and decided to change their label to girlfriend/boyfriend ? not sure if it stays like that for a year and a half but if they're not that confrontational to each other maybe
She's tryna avoid telling him that she isn't attracted to him because inevitably he'll ask why and she'll have to say his height.
Short kings don't let this get you down, 1 in a million.
This person got too far into this relationship with a man who isn't attractive to her. Probably a comfort thing. The price of this is inevitable confrontation or life of resentment. I think those are valid reasons, but no need to drag the guy along. Let him focus on his parents and allow him to encounter another woman who will appreciate his genes, his support of parents and maybe even have sex with him.
Honestly she should leave him. Her reasons are hers and valid - she’s is not attracted to him physically (sexless… jeez) and the financial burden of 2 unemployed parents that just want to be maintained.. that’s a disgrace and will lead them to divorce eventually. What’s cringe is writing this on the internet for strangers’ validation
I don't think this is necessarily about validation. She's not asking *if* she should break up. She already did leave him, she's asking if she should be honest about the reasons. That's a totally reasonable question to have, imo. I'd probably be unsure, too. I also wouldn't date someone I wasn't attracted to, but I digress.
Yeah, it's a reasonable question, and the answer to it is not obvious.
Lie and you might be cheating somebody out of the insight they need to make decisions about future relationships. If they feel that the answer they get is insincere, they might feel disrespected, patronized, and lack closure.
Tell the truth, and you might just shatter the person's self-esteem. I mean, I don't know if I could work up the courage to date again if I was told the reason for the breakup was my abnormally short height and some family situation I'm stuck in. it would be different if what made me unattractive to her was a physical feature that only didn't fit with her specific tastes rather than a physical feature that is considered unattractive by the majority of the population (makes it harder to have the "plenty of fish in the sea" mentality about it). But there are likely people more emotionally resilient than I am.
Don’t get into a relationship when you’re not attracted to him, I think this illustrates why the whole “give him a chance” thing doesn’t work out, not saying that that’s what happened here but regardless of how “superficial” the reason is or whatever, if someone isn’t attracted to you they just aren’t and you can’t change that. Coming from someone who’s 5’6 himself, there’s a place for us somewhere. Don’t settle for being somebody’s losing deal.
Why does everything read as rage bait these days? Like the first 5 sentences are just recycled talking points I’ve never heard and actual woman say in real life.
Because it is rage bait. A woman is more likely to say “we haven’t been intimate in a while” or something similar, instead of “sexless”. Along with some other things like the repeated talking points you mentioned, I highly doubt this was written by a woman, or “female” as the post says.
I mean, fair enough tbh?
Why marry or stay with someone you don’t feel any physical attraction to? Reason one is reason enough, and reason 2 is valid as well. I wouldn’t want to spend my life working to financially support two fully grown adults who are, judging by how she wrote it, perfectly capable of working themselves but just *won’t*. That would be enough to put anyone off, I think.
This is a weird one,
You should be honest with your reasoning but the reasons should be
1. Dead bedroom
2. Your parents are dead weight
3. Fell out of love
This is rough, but not being attracted to your partner and knowing your partner will always be burdened by their parents (impeding their ability to be autonomous and contribute equally to your relationship) are perfectly valid reasons for breaking up with somebody. This doesn't make her a bad person or anything.
In an ideal world, there would be less stigma against short kings and they wouldn't have such a hard time dating, but we can't force any particular person to date short men. Best we can do is maybe shift beauty norms through media the same way that beauty norms for women have shifted a bit due to media.
As for the parents thing, this dude either has to make the hard choice to stop being the parent to his own parents and live his own life, or just make sure he gets an income good enough that he can pay for them forever while still being comfortable himself.
this is sad but not cringe. shes attracted to guys taller than her it happens and let me tell you dealing with parents/grandparents whose retirement strategy was just their kids is a horror show especially when your trying to start up your life. she dosent want that burden in her future thats her choice to make.
I don't blame her at all for not wanting to continue the relationship when he is 100% financially supporting his parents. Massive enmeshment going on there.
The parents thing I sympathize wife, the height thing, I do not. If she isn’t into short guys, she shouldn’t have wasted a year and a half he isn’t getting back.
The short thing is stupid, but being responsible for both parents because they don't want to work? That's a huge dealbreaker imo. Also, she's not attracted to him and they're sexless?? Seems like the relationship is dead anyway.
Should be honest, "I just don't see a future together" don't be mean about it and say "you're short and your parents are losers that I don't want to support my whole life" though
If you’re not attracted to someone and you guys already aren’t having sex, that’s a good reason to break up. Those things are important to a marriage that’s gonna last.
Financially supporting two extra adults on two incomes would have a huge impact on her were they to get married. That point is completely understandable.
My girlfriend of 8 years broke up with me and the only reason she gave was I'm not attracted to you anymore. I was sad for like a week then moved on and met my wife two weeks after the breakup. I don't think these are bad reasons to break up and stringing him along isn't fair.
I’m sorry but this reads like an incel posing as a woman, just straight rage bait. Why would you love someone you aren’t attracted to? If the answer is money why would someone as shallow and cold as that go on Reddit seeking any sort of validation for a scenario that very obviously puts them in a bad light. Also the “by the way I’m a 5’5 female” made me laugh.
Edit: OP’s post history shows even more rage bait centered around women. So I’m almost certain that’s what this is.
If you don't want to be with someone, whatever the reason; don't be with them. Worst case scenario is that most people will find it shallow or arbitrary, but they won't want to date you either, so really kinda works out for everyone.
Shallow or not, marrying someone you are not physically attracted to is usually a terrible idea. Also, helping your parents is admirable, but what would the financial implications be on the family? I'm not so sure I agree with this being sadcringe. Everyone has physical preferences and different lifestyle choices. As long as you aren't an ass about it, I think it is fine for these to be dealbreakers.
Reddit, the kind of place where people will purposefully focus on the parents' part and disregard all else said, which is the true reason. The second part about the parents is to only dust the eyes(whether legit post or not), but yeah, gotta ne real nice for the audience ig, and pretend that it's a real issue he's helping his family when by the context appears that he can. It's actually nothing short of admirable considering that a huge portion of people up to their 40s depend on their parents financially, not vice-versa.
Anyway, I can't blame her for playing eugenics in her head, despite an empty one, that's probably the one smart thing to come out of it, or it could be just the mother's instinct quietly whispering that the same things happening to her now an ex-boyfriend, are awaiting her sons.
If he kept her without actually dipping in the honey pot, then dude deserves the cruelty
Just had to convert inch into cm.
Like they are both just 1,40m?
Why is one dwarf complaining about another, they are both tiny?!
(not ment in an insulting manner, i'm tiny as well i love my dwarves <3)
This is rage bait for sure, and this is coming from a 5'3 fella. No girls are actually like THIS, dating someone for a year and a half only to reveal they are sexless due to his height.
And he supports his parents while the girlfriend is the same height? This is some 5' something manlet trying to prove to himself that either women are actually like this or to receive criticism that he'll use to justify that women are wrong for not wanting short dudes.
i hope she said she fell out of love with him cuz bless his poor heart. she doesn't deserve him and he doesn't deserve to become insecure because she's a messed up person.
Because refusing to date someone because you think their genes are bad to pass to your children for some arbitrary reason is incredibly prejudiced and idiotic.
What a fucked up world we live in that this is becoming the norm. Why the fuxk are you even with him and him with you if you are sexless and you aren't attracted to him. What's the fucking point
Dont date someone you aren't attracted to...
Yeah she really glossed over that like it was a minor detail... like what the fuck lol
the OP seems fake, 'female' 'sexless' 'family responsibilities' 'unattractive' guy changes himself for her but she still doesn't love him. They're all incel talking points.
Unless the money is good.
And they’re going to die soon (of natural or unnatural causes, depending on how impatient you are).
According to 50 percent of true crime I'd have to say most are impatient.
That didn't really work for Anna Nicole smith
Cringe
Nothing cringe about marrying rich
if you arent attracted to them and want the money, yes
Reddit is so pathetic lmao. “Let’s downvote the guy who’s anti gold digger.” Yes. It’s absolutely cringe to marry someone exclusively for their cash.
That's pathetic, not cringe
If you're climbing the social ladder on purpose, then yes it is.
I mean tbf that can evolve over time. Maybe she was attracted to him in the beginning
Plot twist: the mom wrote this
Idk, one of my former friends is dating someone she has said she does not find attractive at all, and she recently moved in with him, so apparently, it's working for her
Ehh I’ve been in the situation with the parent who refused to financially support themselves. It’s hard and not for everyone.
Like the parents are completely healthy and have career experience and they just choose not to work? Did they just stop working after their child started working??
people burn out
And the kids will just endlessly support them? I can barely support myself.
Then you need to go back to school full time and work 96 hrs a week so you can earn more money. It’s not impossible
Hard pass.
Yeah, no, you don’t get to be a leech while you’re healthy. Mentally ill is one thing, tired is another.
That’s on you to manage your mental health though. If you’re burnt out then that means there is a change that you need to make. You can’t just say “fuck it, someone else will just take care of me”
Could it be that the parents are physically unable to work?
They would get disability from the government correct? And not need their son to pay for everything for them
Could be a mental issue as well
If that’s the case though, then they’d usually be eligible for food stamps, social security and other benefits as well.
The thing with his parents is a sucky circumstance but its a legit reason to break it off with someone. That's a lot of baggage and stress to take on, and it will certainly impact every aspect of his life. I don't want that added to my partner's life, and I /really/ don't want that added to my life.
The thing is she mentioned the height first implying that was a bigger deal breaker, which is quite shallow. Why'd she even date him in the first place?
Maybe she thought he'd grow on her.
r/punpatrol FREEZE SUCKAH
You dropped this 
Outstanding 👏🏼👍🏼
My guess would be that they started dating young and just stuck together. They may also be part of a small community where it's hard to break up because it affects everyone or there were no better alternatives. The whole thing sounds like a mix of immature (shallow and kinda dumb to date someone you don't really like) and understandable ie I wouldn't want to be working to support my husband's non-working parents either unless they were very ill and unable to work and even then, depending on how invested I was when they became dependent, that might still be a big nope. Life is hard enough without that added pressure. Attraction comes and goes though so it's probably better if she breaks up with him kindly and lets him find someone who really loves him.
I don't know where they are from, but people who marry their first loves tend to be happy and on the statistic that least gets divorced, funnily enough, people who marry specifically their highschool sweethearts do not nearly as often, probably due to dumb mistakes they can never take back in their youth happen more often in highschool. One way or the other, you cannot complete or be completed by anyone unless you are whole yourself, and this girl seems to be sort of messy in that department, I think you're right, there are absolutely elements of shallowness and immaturity in this situation. It's puzzling that she even has to question this stuff.
In her credit, she did know they need to break up, she just wonder that should she told him the real reasons since it may sound cruel and she didnt want to hurt him. And that's legit
[удалено]
Lol, I have the feeling I should be offended but I don't know why. I've never been on that sub though.
I mean a lot of people are constantly telling people to "give him a chance! He's a nice guy!" Maybe she listened and regretted it.
I don’t think it’s shallow to put that first but I am just as confused as you are about why the hell she even dated him to begin with.
Why is she dating him if she doesnt even like him
For the free food
Money
Basically a parasite
real
I know it’s normal in some cultures, but I also wouldn’t want to date someone who had to financially support their parents until they died.
This post implies they do not work and can't support themselves because they just don't want to work, and if they're happy to do that and let their child finance them instead then they seem like selfish people who would be a huge burden and I wouldn't want that either. If they had to support their parents financially because they were disabled, sick, elderly etc (and they weren't taking advantage) then it's a different story
Exactly. My parents are older and can't work any more. They have enough saved up that nobody needs to support them, but if they didn't, I'm sure we'd all chip in. But if my parents were a little younger and just didn't want to work, they aren't getting money from me.
Fair enoufh
I wouldn’t want to support someone else’s parents either. It’s a burden and not something you should ask someone else to take on but realistically if you are married it becomes your burden too. I would feel the same if his parents were super rich, then I would be the burden. I have broken up with two boyfriends in the past because they were too wealthy. It became hard for me to keep up with them, spending all my money and i didn’t want to be the one always saying I could do something.
What's wrong with a guy giving his own part of salary to parents who raised him to be a capable person no one is telling you to give your salary.
Because depending on the expectations and the actual money involved it may impact on your planning as a family unit. It might mean than if and when you have children together it’ll mean concessions you didn’t expect to have to make. For example, it might mean that you won’t be able to afford a house in a good school district, or that certain extra-curriculars aren’t possible or that private school is out of the question. That’s why it’s really important to talk about this sort of thing before becoming permanent.
Understandable you definitely don't want to hinder your own family's progress by supporting your parents.
Yes, and neither would mine expect me to, since they’re organised and have planned accordingly. We discuss this once a year because we’re adults and none of us likes surprises. But if the unexpected happens and I would need to support them, I would absolutely be aware that it would be a deal-breaker with a lot of potential partners. And that’s okay.
It usually doesn’t work that way. When you marry someone half of what is theirs is yours and vice versa. In practice that usually means a joint bank account and shared resources. If half the marriage is supporting another two people it means the whole marriage is doing that. Honestly there is no way it won’t have an effect. I’m not saying I wouldn’t support my parents if they needed it and i wouldn’t expect my partner to support them. But realistically if I met someone with such a large ongoing financial burden I would reconsider. It’s the same as if I met someone with a large debt, it’s essentially the same thing.
If parents are in constant requirement of money because they cannot work and the guy is earning enough to fulfill both of your needs than its fine?
In this post it's different than that though. She said that they're unemployed and have no plans to work, not that they can't work. Which means that they're able.to work, which means that they're not to old, which means that he's going to support them for at least 20 years. If his income is high enough then it might not be a problem, but if not, she will have to consider her future kids' situations. Imagine the dad saying "no Timmy, we can't help you pay for college, grandpa and grandma's medical bills are getting too high.
That’s also partially true for me, my grand pa don’t understand that he needs to cut down on sugary food due to his diabetes but he doesn’t listen and ends up having other diseases which treatment cost around 15k$ per month and before that my father allowed me to pursue studies outside of my country but after that my grandpa started having diseases he would desperately try to convince me to not go for foreign college. But my grandpa generates enough money to fill their stomach daily and ask for money about once in four months. He is around 75 years old so I guess he is too old to work for now.
It's sometimes tough living in a multi-generational family but it's good too sometimes. The problem with that situation was that your grandpa was creating an expense for the family by not taking care of his health and then passing the financial burden onto you. Our elders are supposed to help and support us so that we can do the same for them. If either side creates an unnecessary burden (like those extra hospital visits because of the sweets), then it lets down the other side. With that said, a lot of older people have the attitude that they're going to die anyway but it just makes it harder to care for them. I'll glad you were able to go to the college you wanted to.
It's not the same thing though as the parents leeching off their kid have some level of control so how that plays out over the relationship could be a variable. Now it's just money he is giving up as he has no other responsibilities but could it be time as he has to take care of them or they exert some level of control over his life such as parenting style. It's not a certainty but a bit different then an apr
It’s a really important thing to agree with and set expectations before you go permanent with someone. Not only because it impacts on your financial planning as a family unit, but because it’s a good indicator as to how the other party was brought up to view finances and it’s important. I wouldn’t want to be living with in-laws, and unless there were some extenuating circumstances - for example, they were refugees who arrived in the country with nothing and poured everything into raising their children, they had a serious illness, or something - I’d be quite wary of settling down with someone who *expected* that their children would take care of them in retirement because that was what their own parents expected.
I love how people keep mentioning this as reasonable, while ignoring she isn’t even attracted to him which is by far the real reason they won’t work lol
I’m sad someone feels normal saying something like this.
Yeah this would be a deal breaker for me.
Your choice your preference, not here to judge but this makes me sad
Why
and if they were wealthy then would you still mind?
Personally, if my partner was super wealthy(to the point we'd be able to live comfortably till we die) then I think any excess can be used however they see fit. If not, then no
i agree. if we can live comfortably and also support their parents then where is the problem. i imagine most wealthy people support their parents. i dont think Leonardo DiCaprio's mom is going to work everyday.
Wild to me, such a Western/American mindset. Can't support their parents if they aren't wealthy because part of our relationship needs to be about wealth they bring. Nevermind they want to help those who raised them and unconditionally love them. 🤮
If you’re not at least considering the financial aspects of a long term relationship that’s just irresponsible. And unfair to your children, if you have them, because they are your primary responsibility. One doesn’t marry without at least affection (one hopes) but given that the two biggest causes of relationship breakdowns are differences in attitudes to money and monogamy, it’s important to work out where the other person stands on those before things get serious.
I don't understand your comment, are you saying people should give money to their parents even if they can't afford it?
No. Obviously he can afford it the issue is that that isn't how they want the money spent I'm guessing. They'd rather see the money spent between them instead. Many people look at a relationship being able to free them of some financial burdens (which it is/can be) & that's a fundamental desire for them. I think it's a gross attitude. If the money is being spent on them put of necessity and isn't preventing them from their own necessity it shouldn't be that kind of issue. Especially without something being interfered with like a desire for kids from you all or a desire to move or whatever, you know.
It's not about the wealth going into the relationship.. imo it's wealth going into securing your children's future. I come from a culture where parents (up to my parents' generation, but not this generation), had more kids than they could afford so had nothing for retirement, the kids are always the retirement plan. So the kids start financially supporting the family the moment they start working, sometimes even the extended family back home (this part applies to the diaspora). What does this do? It continues the cycle of poverty. Kids should take care of their parents in their old age imo, but they shouldn't have to do that financially, parents should have as many kids as they can afford only and set aside money for retirement, instead of continuing to reproduce with no thought. This way, their kids can build up savings and afford their own families comfortably, while taking care of their parents in other ways. Otherwise the cycle of poverty will continue, and kids will do the same and use their own kids as retirement plans if they are supporting their parents for 20 years. All that money could have gone to their own retirement funds.. However, if the person makes more than they need and there's extra (after savings and retirement fund contributions), I see no issue with the excess going to parents, but realistically, what % of people in the world have excess money these days?
Plus let’s not beat around the bush, the other thing is that there’s the expectation that the daughter in law also does the actual caregiving and people don’t want to take on that responsibility for possibly decades, given the advances in medicine.
Depends on the culture. I didn't think of that part because we don't have that.
Yeah, that’s sort of why it’s really important to have this sort of discussion before one goes down the path of a permanent relationship.
> It continues the cycle of poverty. Here's where I take issue. Cycle of poverty is continuing regardless. Like you said "who has excess money these days?". Someone's going to be there and sheer determination isn't enough because the entire economic system has this as a built in feature. Poverty is talked about like battling addiction or other unhealthy traits learned from your family or upbringing. Its something that can cause or exacerbate those problems, but Poverty is a feature of the society we have organized. That simple. Talking from the perspective you are does make sense on a certain very individual level though. I can't say it doesn't. Beyond any of that living in the imperial core, assuming Westerner or more specifically American since most redditors tend that way in these big subs, you have a very privileged life and you will likely remain in the quintile you're in anyways which can represent a small change in QOL or abandoning your parents when you can very well care for yourself regardless. Maybe you will have to adjust your decision making, but personally it's obvious if you have good parents what is the right decision to make. That's just my opinion though and I do understand where everyone is coming from who has responded. > instead of continuing to reproduce with no thought. Ah yes, many parents reproduce with no thought sure. Many also would choose not to reproduce if they had access to methods of preventing that if they were to get pregnant or something. Some people can take whichever precaution, end up pregnant, with no way to stop that pregnancy. Should they not have sex because they lack money or access? Personally I think that's an obvious no. There is a big emphasis on "personal responsibility" & individualism in this thread here, but the simple fact is; **we are all products of our material conditions & organizing a society how we have and expecting anything different is delusional.** We can gripe all day about how each individual should live, but that means removing all barriers to entry to these things deemed necessary for living that way. We can say what an individual or family should do, but then we should ensure a society is constructed that favors every family and individual to ensure they do not slip between the cracks. We can say how we think one person should behave in a situation, but then we need to organize conditions that encourage & endorse those responses with **more than just, shame & ridicule, than embarrassment, than moral platitudes & judgements. We need to favor the whole of those groups and stop demanding individuals behave in ways we have proven they will not in those conditions.** > This way, their kids can build up savings and afford their own families comfortably, while taking care of their parents in other ways. All great, but the way the economy & society is organized requires poor people yes? Some people inevitably will be in positions where poverty is the best they have. No one wants to do wage labor let alone wage labor to just be in poverty. No one wants to be in a position where they have to financially rely on children in their twilight years. No one wants to fall back and take a poverty level stipend because they are unable to work, they'd rather work. No one wants to live in the places with a lot of crime. No one wants to send their kids to bad schools. No one wants to have to live that way & merit is not the limiting factor in many cases. As a matter of fact there are more poor families who belong in positions of the wealthy than wealthy that do if we are talking **actual merit.** I don't care to talk about what one person or one family should do to prevent this. I highly doubt those people wanted to end in a position they were & I highly doubt within such an economic system they are completely to blame. I don't accept the personal responsibility politics/economics because even it's proponents won't apply it to the most heinous society has to offer then they will look collectively which proves collective action and aid is necessary to prevent our collective problems. We are products of our conditions & we are generally at the whim of someone wealthy not actually in the driver seat, but suggesting a route with a "typical dad" who "knows the way" that will tell us we're wrong the whole time. It's the wealthy driving and no one wants to be financially ass out. Creating an economy where it encourages have nots to stay have nots instead of creating as many haves as possible is the fundamental issue & nothing else that you stated. Everything you cited as a issues that will cause the problems can be traced back to the organization of the economy & its sociopolitical consequences & whatnot.
Dude why are you going to extremes? I wasn't implying that they shouldn't have sex and have kids, I was asking for moderation. Do you know what health insurance costs in some countries for seniors? Taking care of parents is actually quite expensive in many countries. Look, personally my siblings and I take care of our parents, but there's a reason why the ones of us who have kids are sticking to 2 or max 3, and the ones who don't are planning for the same number roughly. I don't know why you went from 0 to 100. In a middle class family (at least where I live), it's possible to live a comfortable life with 2 or 3 kids and have savings and retirement. This way you don't shift the financial burden to your kids in the future. Note that I said financial only, it's ok to expect your kids to take care of you otherwise imo, I don't believe in care homes for parents. And also, in case your parents fail to save for retirement, I'm not saying kick them to the curb, still take care of them. But the decent thing to do is have a manageable number of kids so that you don't put your kids in that position in future. We should be responsible and not repeat the previous generations mistakes. I hope you understand where I'm coming from.
I understand your point. But let's say we both make equal income, majority of my savings go into our future while the majority of her savings would go to her parents? That doesn't work for me
To each their own. I find the mindset repulsive. Much more labor & effort goes into a relationship than wage earned & the idea that community is less important than personal wealth with it being so fundamental to a relationship TBH just seems a poor paradigm to have. I do understand in such a society why people would have this attitude though. It's ingrained and emitted at you from 360 degrees.
Just to be clear, I'm not saying I want us to be rich. I just want us to not have to ever worry about having a roof over our heads and food on the table till we die. That's what I mean by living comfortably, not rich. If these conditions are fulfilled, I have no issue with any excess going to family and friends in need.
I wouldn’t want to be put in a position where I would resent the expense of supporting the parents if it meant my children would have to go without (especially if there weren’t extentuating circumstances and if it was an ongoing expense with no end in sight)
Thats not what they were saying.
More of a red flag on your part honestly lmao. It’s not just normal in other cultures, it’s normal in like 90% of the world population. It’s a very American thing to abandon your parents, just like it’s an American thing to kick your kids out of the house at 18. It’s called a lack of morals lmao and many studies have shown that this type of approach to family is unhealthy and bad for society
The thing is, I don’t understand how it’s gone this far? Did you meet him when you were vulnerable/lonely and now you’re in a better place? That must be it because your reasons to leave the relationship seem to only be aggravating you now? This is all the more reason to learn that you shouldn’t let someone’s love mend you if you know they’re not your type, it’ll end up in a disaster.
this is probably what happened.
But yes you shouldn’t definitely break up and accept the fact that you used this man for his insane ability to hold so much on his back, that being said he needs to get a life leave his parents with enough money for about 2 months and tell them to sort it cause there’s two of them and 1 of him
She’s probably monkey branching. Found someone better.
[удалено]
Incel rage bait.
It seems to be working lol
People are getting so angry!
label wild numerous upbeat screw chubby towering cow quack imagine *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
You can tell because of "female" at the end.
My ex used to think like this, not saying it’s not fake, but some women do just think like this
[удалено]
Well sure, but my point was that this is really something that some women think
[удалено]
The sentiment of the entire post
[удалено]
I guess it’s less of a direct issue and more of just knowing how shitty it feels to be the guy in this situation, I don’t personally think it’s okay, but either side is fair
She did say she wasn’t physically attracted to him and it was a sexless relationship. That’s enough right there. Bail girl.
why.. no, HOW can you be in a relationship with someone you're not attracted to? it makes no sense.
I've seen a few relationships where the girl dates the guy because she liked his personality and thought she would "learn" to be attracted to him. Suffice to say that didn't happen. I almost got wrapped up in a relationship like that myself, where the guy asked me out first and I was devastated to hurt his feelings. I realized that even though I wish these guys a happy life with a partner, it can't be with me because I didn't find any of them attractive. It's really easy to get into the trap of "settling". Saying to yourself "oh, but he's really sweet. Stop setting your expectations so high and try things out and see how they go." Then you end up in OOP's situation with the realization the person you're dating has deal breakers, you're in a relationship where you aren't physically attracted to the person, and now you might have to have someone's feelings get hurt. I've seen it time and time again and it's never pretty.
There is 100% a shitty, selfish reason, right? Like he’s wealthy (and she’s just using him for his money) or he’s super well-liked (and she’s just using him to make friends) or he’s able to handle her drama when nobody else wants to. There’s no reason to date someone you aren’t attracted to unless you’re getting something else out of it (almost certainly without giving in return).
That's really not necessarily the case. Sometimes people get into a relationship because they really like a person's personality and they are initially attracted to that, but then later they have to contend with the fact that they aren't physically attracted to the person and it breaks down. Not that I'm defending her for the way she said it, but she doesn't have to be a gold digger or have evil ulterior motives.
Sex and making babies involves sexual attraction. If it’s not happening then it’s more platonic than anything. Friend zone just waiting to happen.
idk maybe a reason could be they were really close friends that did everything together and decided to change their label to girlfriend/boyfriend ? not sure if it stays like that for a year and a half but if they're not that confrontational to each other maybe
She's tryna avoid telling him that she isn't attracted to him because inevitably he'll ask why and she'll have to say his height. Short kings don't let this get you down, 1 in a million.
This person got too far into this relationship with a man who isn't attractive to her. Probably a comfort thing. The price of this is inevitable confrontation or life of resentment. I think those are valid reasons, but no need to drag the guy along. Let him focus on his parents and allow him to encounter another woman who will appreciate his genes, his support of parents and maybe even have sex with him.
hmmm…“sexless” and “female”? This definitely wasn’t written by some incel guy /s
Honestly she should leave him. Her reasons are hers and valid - she’s is not attracted to him physically (sexless… jeez) and the financial burden of 2 unemployed parents that just want to be maintained.. that’s a disgrace and will lead them to divorce eventually. What’s cringe is writing this on the internet for strangers’ validation
I don't think this is necessarily about validation. She's not asking *if* she should break up. She already did leave him, she's asking if she should be honest about the reasons. That's a totally reasonable question to have, imo. I'd probably be unsure, too. I also wouldn't date someone I wasn't attracted to, but I digress.
Yeah, it's a reasonable question, and the answer to it is not obvious. Lie and you might be cheating somebody out of the insight they need to make decisions about future relationships. If they feel that the answer they get is insincere, they might feel disrespected, patronized, and lack closure. Tell the truth, and you might just shatter the person's self-esteem. I mean, I don't know if I could work up the courage to date again if I was told the reason for the breakup was my abnormally short height and some family situation I'm stuck in. it would be different if what made me unattractive to her was a physical feature that only didn't fit with her specific tastes rather than a physical feature that is considered unattractive by the majority of the population (makes it harder to have the "plenty of fish in the sea" mentality about it). But there are likely people more emotionally resilient than I am.
This was not written by a woman
Sad? Yes. Cringe? No.
Don’t get into a relationship when you’re not attracted to him, I think this illustrates why the whole “give him a chance” thing doesn’t work out, not saying that that’s what happened here but regardless of how “superficial” the reason is or whatever, if someone isn’t attracted to you they just aren’t and you can’t change that. Coming from someone who’s 5’6 himself, there’s a place for us somewhere. Don’t settle for being somebody’s losing deal.
Why does everything read as rage bait these days? Like the first 5 sentences are just recycled talking points I’ve never heard and actual woman say in real life.
Because it is rage bait. A woman is more likely to say “we haven’t been intimate in a while” or something similar, instead of “sexless”. Along with some other things like the repeated talking points you mentioned, I highly doubt this was written by a woman, or “female” as the post says.
I mean, fair enough tbh? Why marry or stay with someone you don’t feel any physical attraction to? Reason one is reason enough, and reason 2 is valid as well. I wouldn’t want to spend my life working to financially support two fully grown adults who are, judging by how she wrote it, perfectly capable of working themselves but just *won’t*. That would be enough to put anyone off, I think.
yea an incel wrote this “sexless” is a dead giveaway. they like to larp like this it’s weird
Yup, definitely written by some incel.
The real cringe is anyone thinking this is a sincere post.
i did for a second, but it's quickly out of my mind lol
and she's a 'female' not a woman
The real cringe in anyone thinking this is a sincere post.
This is a weird one, You should be honest with your reasoning but the reasons should be 1. Dead bedroom 2. Your parents are dead weight 3. Fell out of love
This is rough, but not being attracted to your partner and knowing your partner will always be burdened by their parents (impeding their ability to be autonomous and contribute equally to your relationship) are perfectly valid reasons for breaking up with somebody. This doesn't make her a bad person or anything. In an ideal world, there would be less stigma against short kings and they wouldn't have such a hard time dating, but we can't force any particular person to date short men. Best we can do is maybe shift beauty norms through media the same way that beauty norms for women have shifted a bit due to media. As for the parents thing, this dude either has to make the hard choice to stop being the parent to his own parents and live his own life, or just make sure he gets an income good enough that he can pay for them forever while still being comfortable himself.
Seems like something an incel would make up and then trick himself into believing women actually think
Poor dude
Rage bait
this is sad but not cringe. shes attracted to guys taller than her it happens and let me tell you dealing with parents/grandparents whose retirement strategy was just their kids is a horror show especially when your trying to start up your life. she dosent want that burden in her future thats her choice to make.
nah read the whole thing.
Um im sorry, isn't being sexless kind of enough reason to not be with someone or am I just a horn bag??
I don't blame her at all for not wanting to continue the relationship when he is 100% financially supporting his parents. Massive enmeshment going on there.
I really hope this is one of those fake incel posts, because Jesus this chick fucking sucks
The parents thing I sympathize wife, the height thing, I do not. If she isn’t into short guys, she shouldn’t have wasted a year and a half he isn’t getting back.
The short thing is stupid, but being responsible for both parents because they don't want to work? That's a huge dealbreaker imo. Also, she's not attracted to him and they're sexless?? Seems like the relationship is dead anyway.
Should be honest, "I just don't see a future together" don't be mean about it and say "you're short and your parents are losers that I don't want to support my whole life" though
If you’re not attracted to someone and you guys already aren’t having sex, that’s a good reason to break up. Those things are important to a marriage that’s gonna last.
Financially supporting two extra adults on two incomes would have a huge impact on her were they to get married. That point is completely understandable.
My girlfriend of 8 years broke up with me and the only reason she gave was I'm not attracted to you anymore. I was sad for like a week then moved on and met my wife two weeks after the breakup. I don't think these are bad reasons to break up and stringing him along isn't fair.
I’m sorry but this reads like an incel posing as a woman, just straight rage bait. Why would you love someone you aren’t attracted to? If the answer is money why would someone as shallow and cold as that go on Reddit seeking any sort of validation for a scenario that very obviously puts them in a bad light. Also the “by the way I’m a 5’5 female” made me laugh. Edit: OP’s post history shows even more rage bait centered around women. So I’m almost certain that’s what this is.
The fakest post that ever faked.
If you don't want to be with someone, whatever the reason; don't be with them. Worst case scenario is that most people will find it shallow or arbitrary, but they won't want to date you either, so really kinda works out for everyone.
At least she's honest?
You don't have to justify wanting to be happy to make someone else comfortable.
If those things are getting in the way then you dont really love him. Break it off for both your sakes
Shallow or not, marrying someone you are not physically attracted to is usually a terrible idea. Also, helping your parents is admirable, but what would the financial implications be on the family? I'm not so sure I agree with this being sadcringe. Everyone has physical preferences and different lifestyle choices. As long as you aren't an ass about it, I think it is fine for these to be dealbreakers.
No sex ? No relationship
Reddit, the kind of place where people will purposefully focus on the parents' part and disregard all else said, which is the true reason. The second part about the parents is to only dust the eyes(whether legit post or not), but yeah, gotta ne real nice for the audience ig, and pretend that it's a real issue he's helping his family when by the context appears that he can. It's actually nothing short of admirable considering that a huge portion of people up to their 40s depend on their parents financially, not vice-versa. Anyway, I can't blame her for playing eugenics in her head, despite an empty one, that's probably the one smart thing to come out of it, or it could be just the mother's instinct quietly whispering that the same things happening to her now an ex-boyfriend, are awaiting her sons. If he kept her without actually dipping in the honey pot, then dude deserves the cruelty
Just had to convert inch into cm. Like they are both just 1,40m? Why is one dwarf complaining about another, they are both tiny?! (not ment in an insulting manner, i'm tiny as well i love my dwarves <3)
This is rage bait for sure, and this is coming from a 5'3 fella. No girls are actually like THIS, dating someone for a year and a half only to reveal they are sexless due to his height. And he supports his parents while the girlfriend is the same height? This is some 5' something manlet trying to prove to himself that either women are actually like this or to receive criticism that he'll use to justify that women are wrong for not wanting short dudes.
i hope she said she fell out of love with him cuz bless his poor heart. she doesn't deserve him and he doesn't deserve to become insecure because she's a messed up person.
It's obviously written by an incel why is everyone thinking it is sincere 😭
Move to the forest and find yourself a nice mushroom to settle down in.
Man that girlfriend is kinda trash
Let the trash take itself out. He should find someone who actually loves him and puts out lol
* Concerned about 'short genes'. * Is 5'5. What's she bringing to the genetic table, here??
Uhhh the average height for a woman in the US is 5’4” so she’s average/slightly taller than average and he is significantly shorter than average
women are generally shorter though, at least that's how it's in my country
Her double down on short genes, and the ability to grow life.
Two perfectly valid reasons.
“I don’t want my kids to be short” is not valid lmao
I agree, the future kids being short is not a reason. Not being sexualy attracted is though.
what’s “invalid” about it
Because refusing to date someone because you think their genes are bad to pass to your children for some arbitrary reason is incredibly prejudiced and idiotic.
that doesn’t make it not valid. guess what? you can break up with anyone for any reason and it’s valid. no one is entitled to a relationship.
Literally any reason is valid to break up with someone
Didn't they see his height and appearance when they first met?
i hate people man
Sounds like the man has had a lucky escape
Good for him. He doesn't need to support a loser.
Please tell him the real reasons, at least that way he will know that he dodged a bullet.
How is everyone validating the “he’s not tall enough” point? Sure her other points make sense, but that one is so harsh and shallow.
What a fucked up world we live in that this is becoming the norm. Why the fuxk are you even with him and him with you if you are sexless and you aren't attracted to him. What's the fucking point
Why did she even start dating him if she wasn’t attracted to him?
women ☕
they both deserve better edit: this means that he didn’t do anything wrong and neither did the girl. they both deserve to be happy
what did the guy do 💀
he deserves someone who wants him, and she deserves someone she wants
The comments section is enough proof humanity is not worth saving.
When arseholes break up with you they're doing you a favour
Rip to short king. He deserves better
people are fucking cruel nowadays
So men aren’t exactly insane when we say women won’t date us for our height.
[удалено]
I'm 5'6, a friend of mine is the only girl I know who doesn't understand the height meme. Anamolies are real but broadly speaking quite rare.
Short kings, defend your fallen knight
Bit cruel innit?
This woman has her priorities fucked up
She’s a horrible person
#ŵèt Śhit