>>4870 Okay, anon, I have this proposal. It might sound insane but hear me out. Sit down and talk to him about it.

>>4870 you've fucked up. Should have asked for a threesome. Even if he said no, there wouldn't be alarm bells going off in his head

>>4871 Anon wouldn't be asking us about it if she felt that was something she could just do. If she's on the spectrum then the conversation would be even more overwhelming and difficult than it would already be for a neurotypical person. Talking about it is good advice on its face, but it ignores that all the ingredients that would make that talk successful are often missing. >>4872 I've also seen accounts from men for whom the request for a threesome set off alarm bells, so that wouldn't have made much of a difference. >>4870 >>be in relationship, never tell him I'm a cuck, he cheats on me of his own volition I'm very sorry to hear that happened to you, Anon. Awful. Just awful. You were correct to break up with that guy. >Is this a common issue? Actually decent guys refusing on the basis of loyalty? I've seen lots of different reasons a guy might not want to do cuckqueaning, but there isn't enough time to go into all of them here. I've no idea how common it is for men to refuse, but I've seen plenty of men professing online that they'd not want to do it. I've also stumbled across many horror stories where the girl was indeed trying to manipulate or test the man; I can understand why a man would be suspicious. You can also look at the male advice thread over at >>2371 to confirm that the alarm bells are real. All that said, it seems to me that you have two problems, and that this one— >how do I figure out if I've fucked up? >they'd take a woman asking this as her asking for an open relationship so she can "be a whore without feeling bad about it" and I'm kind of scared that's what he thinks I want. >He's been cheated on before and I'm scared I set off alarm bells in his head. —is the more important. First, the answer to your main question: >Did I just fuck up beyond repair? No, probably not. There's no way for us to guess what he thinks about it because we've not much information about him or the relationship, but I think it might reassure you to be able to make sure that he understands what you were actually thinking rather than what he might imagine you were (or what you imagine he imagines you were). Feel free to give us more information if you think it'll help and you're comfortable in doing so. Since you're on the spectrum, maybe it would help to have a rough script? Here's how I'd start off if I was in your position. Feel free to ask for reasoning or detail, and to adapt it to your needs: "<term of endearment>, what I said the other day—about wanting you to cuck me? I'm completely fine with you not wanting to, but I've seen a lot of guys online who got tricked by girls saying that sort of thing and then using it to try and negotiate an open relationship or other access to strange dick, or who were testing them and freaked out if they looked like they'd accept. I wasn't going for any of that; I wasn't trying to trick you and I wasn't testing you. It must have seemed like a really weird thing for me to want, I know, but it was sincere." Depending on how the conversation goes, you might also end up assuring him that cuckqueaning is a real thing, that you're not damaged for wanting it, or otherwise explaining your version of the fetish to him. Do you know enough about cuckqueaning and your own desires that you'd be comfortable with that? Come to think of it, how did you originally raise the matter with him and ask him to cuck you? I know this isn't much, but I hope it at least helped you feel a little better. Lots of people find navigating sex to be very tricky so take some comfort that you aren't alone!

I hope OP is okay.

>>4952 Me too. I regret getting all pushy with advice and scaring OP off but I still hope it works out. I hate it when bad things happen to good queans.

>>4874 That example comes off as backpedaling and that you considered those things as possible outcomes. Doing nothing and letting it be forgotten as a weird horny moment or a test that he passed would be the safer bet in that situation. Of course, you won't get cucked that way, but if he sees it as a moral issue or something that would endanger the relationship that's probably not happening anyway.

>>4977 (very nice) That's true, I suppose. I always err on the side of being too honest in my relationship so perhaps it is I who have the 'tism.

>>4870 >mildly on the spectrum >mildly

>>4874 Random male anon that somehow ended up here. I wouldnt feel comfortable doing it, but i wouldnt shit can my girl immediately (if i had one) for bringing it up. I would just find it weird. i dont want other women, hence why im with her and not them. Going balls deep in some other girl would make me feel like a creep. God help me if she ends up regretting it and weve shitted up our relationship. I'd feel horrible. >Now if she asks to fuck other guys im out on the spot.

OP hasn't said if she actually want to fuck other guys or not, because if she do...Well, I guess the alarm is correct :/ But yea, a lot of guys seems to have a huge amount of suspicion about this due to the past experience and/or other guy's bad experience, its not some made up thing, so tread with care.

>>4871 ^This. Make it perfectly clear that in you know way intend an open "relationship" or MFM sex EVER (unless the other male is a very passable trap and you only get to watch or something if that's among your things). >>5208 Look, I'm all for religion's regulatory social role but this kind of attitude is that has perverted the near entirety of your clergy into homosexuals crypto-marxist revisionists and turned most of your flock to either deleterious unreligiosity or Islam. If you are not Eastern Orthodox you do not even approach the position to be smug about your biblicality.

>>4870 he thinks it is a trap

>>5231 I'm sorry OP, these are waters that are hard for anyone to navigate and my heart goes out to you.

>>5210 99% of "bi" chicks are probably cuckqueans who want the man to indulge in FFM.

>>4870 >>5232 It's okay OP... It's okay. I can more or less promise you. The world is full of data and scary and confusing volumes of it, but trust in God and hear what I've got. When a man does things for you, nice things like give you a gift or a date out of the blue or he proves his protective instinct over you, sometimes, they are called "Acts of Service". The only thing that really separates an act of service from simping behavior is that the simping acts are more overtly transactional. You perceive simping as a man merely trying to justify his presence to you, whereas an act of service should not be proving a man's dependence on your physical or emotional support so much, but just to show he likes to have you. What an Act of Service is supposed to do is create a sense of "Positive Dread Game". There's both a negative dread game (for both sexes mind you) and a positive dread game. The positive dread game is meant to clue you in to the fact that you have a high value man on your hands i.e. "holy shit he's a dreamboat, he could really do better than me if he wanted". It's a positive thing to create in a woman if you can do it that way, but how you react to those Acts of Service is very important. If you respond with your own in kind; you clean up for him, care for him, give him gifts and think of him and his needs while he's away - that's proof of your love and your anchorage in terms of your loyalties. The TL;DR is that the best way to express your loyalty is to act as an enamoured one usually does for a man they like. I get that you won't always be full of sweetness, life throws shitty days at you, these things are inevitable but if you respond to his protecting and providing for you by being a very supportive girl, then that's a better answer from you than verbal promises that are sometimes forced compulsively from some partners. Whereas if you respond to an Act of Service in an entitled way i.e. "I was due this as a minimum, by default" then you pitch your relationship/potentially a marriage as a transactional one and demonstrate your propensity to be disloyal to a man. Transactional marriages exist in the millions by the way, people put up with them, but it doesn't have to be always so. Sorry if you're depending on me for this advice I am a novice apprentice at this stuff with my own behavioral problems, but the world is a lot less scary once you draw out properly the vague feelings going on in your mind to make them a little more solid. Good luck, and give to God any and all your outpourings.

>>6002 >Sorry if you're depending on me for this advice Don't worry; zero chance that anyone would.

>>6029 Yet I'm the only one here telling you not only what to do, but explaining some mechanisms for why it's that way. That's not praise for me - that's damning for you, all of you lot - specifically, schooling makes no attempt to teach behavioral studies. I'm a cursory not-very-studious-at-all apprentice. If it falls to me to tell people these things then that's pretty condemning of society.

>>6050 But having misread the question, your posts are wretched masturbation. You shouldn’t be here; fuck off.

>>6050 Don't take this the wrong way Anon but what you wrote in >>6002 seems to have nothing to do with OP's actual problem. In what way does an acts of service model allow OP to figure out if she has damaged her relationship? I do not believe OP was not asking for advice on how to make him feel like she is loyal, but rather she was scared and asking how to gauge how much, if any, lasting negative impact was caused by her action. This was well covered by >>4874, and since it has been months since her original question and OP appears to not have returned to reply in thread it's probably a good guess that she is no longer here. Your advice may have come from a good place, but it comes across like you're talking past her. You are foisting wisdom upon a woman who did not ask for it and who will likely never read it; your aims come across as at best reaffirming your own sense of superiority and at worst as an attempt at putting others down, with the hostile rhetoric in your most recent post not helping interpretations of your aid. Even if she did actually ask the question you decided to answer your advice is very one dimensional. Yes, acts of service are one way of expressing affection in a relationship, but there are men and women who do not respond well to them precisely because this "dread game" you describe makes them feel manipulated and pushes them away. She says her BF is a sweetheart, but where in that does it say he performs acts of service? Maybe he's a sweetheart because he tells her he loves her a lot, or because he touches her arm and kisses her when he walks by her, or because she catches him staring at her with a goofy grin when she wasn't paying attention to him and and then he looks away embarrassed once caught. I generally agree that if he is the kind of man who shows his love through acts of service, then responding positively to those can make him feel very appreciated and loved, but its far from the only thing you have to do to make a relationship, romantic or otherwise, not feel transactional. We are all autistic queans here, relationships are hard for most people and they aren't made easier by the kind of women we are and the types of men we select. Boilerplate generalities often have little bearing on our relationships as we operate so many standard deviations from the mean. You may receive a more positive response to your posts if you take more time to reflect upon what someone really wants. After my own reflection, I've come to the tentative conclusion that you want to help so much that you may have skipped over some details at hand here, but you're teetering on the edge of being perceived as a person who believes they are the only font of truth and wisdom in the thread. I say these these things to hopefully help you understand how other people may see things differently from you, and that this is not a threat to you nor does it undermine your own experience. One's experience is not everyone's experience, one's truth is not everyone's truth. All wisdom and truth ultimately come from God, we are but dust, and all glory and honor are his. Go in peace.

>>6052 >In what way does an acts of service model allow OP to figure out if she has damaged her relationship? I might be getting a bit ahead of myself, but the OP (paraphrased here) asks; "What if he thinks I'm a whore?" You can answer that, not with full certainty, but to a fair or reasonable degree of what is likely or not likely... If you probe the answer to this question; "How (well) have you been responding to his 'Acts of Service'?" The examples you give later in your post cover basic physical support and emotional support. They're good indicators, particularly from a man. But if you focus on this as a woman, then if in the follow up question of "what to do" if you're scared of being perceived as a whore it's not necessarily good advice to go and love-bomb your man with the things offered by basic support. That's why I'm not just saying to jump on his dick or to rub on his arm and cuddle him and tell him you love him. Because if you pour it on outside of reciprocity then he may think that something's up. It's true that OP's boyfriend may simply not do any Acts of Service in the same sense that you can date a man who is perpetually broke, but given his role is viewed as a protector and provider it would be an atypical/less likely scenario than one where the man does do those things. >Your advice may have come from a good place, but it comes across like you're talking past her... List of sins I'm no doubt guilty of... My view of the self is that I have moral duty. To provide whatever I have to help others. What you're trying to measure me for is moral authority. You're right in accusing me of not caring either way about that. If you just want authority, go ahead and seek a professional. The problem I get, again mainly with women, but also boomer men/some gen X men, is that they simultaneously complain to me that they've tried a healthcare setting that has not worked for them at all, but don't want to take my advice even when they have failed, because I'm not sat at a desk with a diploma stood next to it. My job, inescapable and provided by God, is to say here is this problem, and here is this solution. It's not my job to fight all society to get through. I hate it because things like this have affected me personally, so I do want to learn to handle appeals to moral authority better, but I don't want to spend four times as long trying to get advice through when four young men would be glad that someone, anyone has bothered with them today. Besides spend four times as long being indirect and interacting with the OP more (which is long gone because I can't read) what exactly are you telling me I ought to do to direct effort better? Because I may be gone, but I'll intrude your happy autisimo home at some point again with the same cutting delivery I've got innately unless I can find some way to change it.

>>6053 I should mention by the way that cutting delivery is an asset as much as it is a detriment and I don't want to end up losing sight of it.

>>6053 >>6054 >the same cutting delivery I've got innately

>>6055 Take the advice. Take it. Don't pay with your body or your time for it. Just take the advice. Research it. Learn for yourself if infact it is well advised. Take it - run to the hills with it - and have contented relationships with it... m'lady. This attitude of arguing with a man started with the boomers and ended up with men passport-maxxing, because you forgot what the Bible said you're to do worse than the shame men undergo from having caught the yellow fever. Stop doing it. One more time the refrain of my life, Take the advice.

>>6057 >ended up with men passport-maxxing, because you forgot what the Bible said

>>6058 Everything I said on acts of service and dread game, you will retain it, and you will no doubt use it to trick this sort of beta for his buckaroos when instead you should be a trad wife for a high value man and make him happy with your understanding of behavior. They won't care that you have autism, of course they can love you, it is fine. Go do it. Go make your fantasy hugbox a reality. But when you do you take that advice with you now, there's a good girl.

>>6059 >take that advice with you now, there's a good girl.

>>6062 >w-why is my boyfriend going off to thailand

>>6053 >I might be getting a bit ahead of myself I think you may be getting ahead of yourself a little, yes. While you could make an argument that his perception of her as unfaithful underpins her fear, it seems she created the thread with two aims, one being to ask if this is something other women have experienced and two to sus out how to find out if his view of her was damaged. The way in which that view could have been impacted seems less material, given that she provides context in saying that she can't read subtle clues and her BF wont tell her outright. What I read in her post is a woman looking for specific advice on how to tell if she's fucked up and providing context for why she fears that, not asking for advice to change his mind if there was damage caused. To use an analog, Anon asked how to tell if her faucet is leaking and you provided very detailed information on sink maintenance and installation. Helpful information, to be sure, but skipping a few steps forward from the matter at hand. You could argue that its good to perform proper maintenance anyway, even if it wasn't asked for, but it doesn't actually help with the matter at hand and giving advice people didn't ask for is often perceived as rude. OP isn't here to clarify, but I can read the room and I think the other ladies picked up something similar to what I did, or at least they did not pick up your reading so your post being seen as rude and evoking the hostility it did. >I have moral duty To provide whatever I have to help others >My job is to say here is this problem and here is this solution >The problem is that they don't want to take my advice Alternate read here, but might it be possible that people aren't taking your advice not because they view you as unqualified, but rather because you're coming across as preachy? You certainly sound convicted, and its good to have convictions, but it's very rare that you find someone who wants to be preached to outside of church. When presented with information contrary to their beliefs, most people dig in their heels and get their hackles up. If you enter into dialog with someone and you present all your points as the one right way, all your views as the one correct interpretation, you're walking into a dark room filled with rakes. At some point, you will blunder into a point of disagreement with that person and get hit in the face. There are certainly to this, like when a person is highly receptive to what is being said due to trusting the speaker or viewing them as an authority on the matter. In those contexts, fervor and condition on the speaker's part can cause the listener to doubt themselves, and that can open them up to the speaker's way of thinking. Since an appeal to authority means nothing in anonymous online spaces, so attaining a position like that is nearly impossible. A more realistic workaround would be to soften your tone. Delivery is critical when it comes to rhetoric; you can easily alienate your audience even if they would have agreed with your points when presented another way. I'm a blunt person, I appreciate bluntness in my men and my friends, but I know there's a difference between being blunt and being an asshole and I will still soften a blow for the sake of the person I'm talking when appropriate. If you can't moderate your delivery to avoid rubbing people the wrong way, or you aren't willing to put in the effort to do so, then you've set your priorities and there's nothing inherently wrong with that. At the same time, there's also nothing wrong with people choosing to not engage with what you say because they don't like the way you communicate. >four young men would be glad that someone, anyone has bothered with them today. Young men aren't really a fair yardstick here considering their level of social deprivation. Young men are so starved for social attention they would be glad anyone looks at them, let alone talks to them. If you don't want to provide more than the bare minimum, then don't expect gratitude from people who are well fulfilled. A starving man may thank you profusely for the scraps from your table, but a well fed man would likely take offense at being offered offal. >simultaneously complain to me that they've tried a healthcare setting that has not worked for them at all, but don't want to take my advice This is a secondary point not really related to the matter at hand here, but it's also possible the persons in question are complaining not because they are looking for material aid or advice in solving their problem, but rather for the simple act of social support? If all they wanted was a person to earnestly listen to them and tell them their concerns are valid, they probably wont take kindly to proffered advice because they don't want it and don't see themselves as having asked for it. Whether that's a rational response or not could be up for debate, but every woman I know (save one, bless her heart) does this and it's usually pretty obvious when someone is asking for advice instead of social support. Like I said, I think this matters less here because I do believe OP was at least half asking for help. Just food for thought.

>>6064 No need to soften it - it’s less the blind leading the blind and more the blind and deaf demanding the seeing follow them, then pitching a fit when it’s speculated that this might indicate that they’re retarded as well as insensate. It’s obvious (actually obvious, this isn’t rhetorical hyperbole) that what the poster in question wants most of all is an audience, specifically one of women who will admire his great knowledge no matter how warmed-over it actually is, hence his falling back into a blustering sulk when that supply doesn’t come. Forget OP, he can’t even hear himself.

>>6064 I was funposting in what's developed into a containment thread for playing games with the other anons, it's caught me a little off guard with the effortpostings. I'm thrilled with this post... >What I read in her post is a woman looking for specific advice on how to tell if she's fucked up and providing context for why she fears that... I give structure to fear. That's all I know I can do to help. Let's say the fear is not the root cause of the problem, you've got a spouse that beats you or a casino keeps taking your money or whatever it is. The fear includes looking into an array of overwhelming information, this nebulous miasma and you're left not knowing in which direction to walk. Sometimes it's your marriage that's on the line, or your finances or something else. But if you can study human behavior, and I mean really study it, then you can make the way in and out visible. Not necessarily every thought or feeling has a name for itself or a reason for being in there, but you can fashion a lens which makes visible for them a doorway. Just having a bit of structure in there will leave this fear of the unknown slain, and if that happens, then the problems themselves tend to get left behind along with this fear. This is why my angle of attack is the way that it is, because old Audrey across the street you can talk to and she can give advice but that therapy is in the talking itself, insofar as talking things out is therapeutic. But what you won't get is here is the problem => here is the solution, the way a medic solving a problem should do these things. It's the difference between therapy where you pay $80 an hour vs $500 an hour. Sometimes even for the higher price there's not any distinction. It is not like a faucet in that respect. You can go in there with a wrench and your own DIY skills but it's not as clear as some plumbers tape or a new gasket... Anything that won't manifest as instinctually obvious, burdens the need to go study. >A more realistic workaround would be to soften your tone. I see what you're saying. I was going to say that 20 other people, presuming they have friends to go to, will be talking to them in that tone with broadly good intentions mind, but you will be #21 if you aren't directly cutting through. But this isn't necessarily true. I think women are more inclined to listen as well as to talk. With a man I'd be very direct. I need seriousness out of them when I'm talking about something important before their attention drifts to something else. I've also tried softness on women before and got nowhere, and then tried hardness and still got nowhere. The stubbornness is something I'm used to having to fight, honestly. You're the first person who's made it obvious to me in reading between the lines why I need to learn feminine delivery with a positive reason for doing that. I was just thinking they've been socially conditioned to only take feminine delivery. It made me mad. I'm a man. I talk like one. I don't want to have to bend to societal conditioning where only a feminine approach will do. Leave me alone. With negative reasons for doing it I hadn't the motivation to go & look very much into it. I'll leave it at that before I fill up more paragraphs but also I want to get the flattery in as well. I think you're good at this. Either you've studied, or you've a role within a family that's brought that out, or both... It's really nice. I don't know about being as direct mind you, most men want submissive and soft-spoken but you're of high value with those skills. Because you provide good likelihood of contentment toward an LTR.

>>6065 You are useful or entertaining to interact with. But your admiration isn't useful to me. Your tits aren't useful to me unless they're <20 miles away and I can fill my hands with them. I don't want to concern troll gas light dog whistle whatever the fuckin modern English is. I just want to refine my ability to help. I'll take it and I'll have better relationships of my own with it. Y'know you're very defensive, for a good girl.

>>6002 The fuck is this nonsense? Ignore this, OP.

>>6077 >nonsense.gif psst hey girl Look up "relationship framing" on YT or some such. Teach it to your man. Be happier with it. Teach it to yourself too, find out why you may like the things that you like. It's not a cruelty to be imparted, it's not because I want my fat ass worshipped, it's not me trying for some elitist better than you euphoric moment. I don't know what I'm saying or doing much more than you do, but I've been taught some things and I want to relay them. If my explanation of it is wrong then just do the "communicate more" advice instead. Nobody follows that advice, either because it takes conscious efforts or because it's full of traps and gotchas that can and do go wrong some of the time, but technically it's not bad advice that she's tried to give you. You are right to try and do the communicating - just that the bulk of it's typically a body language issue. As for everything else, without posting another essay, I love you but I don't know why I love you beyond what God commands. I've studied "Oxytocin and vasopressin in relationships" and any addictions to them. I've also studied "Atlas personality" in regard to attachment mechanisms. But I've still not got a handle on why it feels good to try and help you. I think it's a float for my self-esteem but it's only temporary? Even if you worshipped me at my feet. I just want to know this, and if I study persistently enough then I will come to know this. That's all. There is no trick. I don't want into your panties. I don't want to orbit you - if you don't take the advice that's too bad. I want to help myself and in the process help some others. I think it's only because society has already handed you 9/10ths of the power that you're weary. You *should* worship a man, your own man (isn't me), with Biblical reverence. The Bible tells you this in pursuit of your own happiness - it'd be worthless in pursuit of your enslavement, you were *already* enslaved back then. But since the boomers/WWII it's been lost and forgot. And you're unhappy. The women frequenting this board, presumably in their 20s or less mostly, they're unhappy too. You needn't be. The social experiment was not right or fair, but it can be fixed and it can be preached. In a containment thread that only the autistic will look in, but they will carry it with them elsewhere. If nobody bumps again on this 20pph board, thanks for the interaction, I've enjoyed it.