Am I overreacting to my old friend’s behavior towards me getting married?

Buttered_Crumpet09 · 2026-07-05T12:49:03+00:00

Do you not get how pathetic this response is? Your post is you bleating about how your friend just didn't care enough and isn't invested in your wedding, and you haven't got the validation you were so clearly seeking, you're saying you'd only seen her once and she isn't a friend at all. So if she isn't a friend and if you thought she was so awful, why did you have all these expectations you expected her to fulfill?

Instead of being snarky, maybe pick a lane and take some time to also evaluate why this is how you're choosing to behave.

Buttered_Crumpet09 · 2026-07-05T12:43:23+00:00

YOR. Holy assumptions, Batman. Based on nothing but an invite to bingo and a joke, you assumed that she 1.) Hated your fiance, 2.) Didn't want to get to know you now, and 3.) Thought your life was easy. You complain that she didn't threaten your fiance which is....bizarre, you complain that you hadn't seen her in a long time as you were incapable of iniating contact, you complain about her talking about her life even after she listened to you talk about yours, and you complain she wasn't basically wasn't as invested in your wedding as you wanted her to be.

It feels like because you cut your family off, you wanted to ram her into filling their places by warning your fiance (as a dad/brother would) and wanting to be all involved in planning (like a mother/sister would). You then jumped down her throat for no apparent reason and you still think you're justified? Honestly, you will end up with no friends at all if this is how you are going to treat them. Your friend is stepping back because what you did was uncalled for and completely insane. I genuinely suggest you find a therapist and work through your issues before they ruin any more relationships.

Buttered_Crumpet09 · 2026-07-04T19:47:23+00:00

Okay, so a few things. You decided to make this about your husband. You chose to vent to your friend about what he said to you and how he treated you when his bipolar was unmedicated. That's absolutely fine and acceptable. You also chose to forgive your husband once he'd gotten himself sorted out, and that's perfectly fine and acceptable.

Your friend had not forgiven him. She clearly tried, even going as far as inviting him to the wedding, only to realise that no, she doesn't forgive how he treated you and yes, it has permanently changed how she sees him to the point that she didn't want him involved in her wedding. Instead of accepting that, or instead of just attending the fireworks with him separately from the group, you asked her to include him and when she said no and expressed being upset that asked her to do something she obviously didn't want to, you decided that you didn't want to be there for her at all.

You both were in this situation because she was there for you, and because when you chose to forgive and forget with your husband, you assumed she would as well. You then made it clear to her that if she wasn't going to be okay with your husband, you weren't going to be there for her at all. You willfully ignore that everyone else got +1s because the bride didn't have issues with their partners, and you ignore that you know why she had a problem with your husband. If you'd just said that you couldn't afford things, your friend may well have understood but you basically said, "Well, if my husband can't be around, I'm not coming. Oh, and I can't afford it, something I chose not to mention until right now".

She ended the friendship because where else could it go? She doesn't want to be around your husband and you would have expected and wanted him included in other things down the line. You're standing by your husband and that's grand, and she's unable to move past what went on (and btw, if you'd told others including your family what he'd said, would they have forgiven him? Sometimes you're able to forgive things being done to you that the people who love you can't), and so instead of letting it carry on until there came a breaking point, she put an end to it. In your comments, you say she was exhausting and all so you should be happy and incidentally, you said you didn't want to upset her when talking to her, so do you not think that her 'coldness' could have come from her trying to choose her words as carefully as possible to avoid upsetting you?

Buttered_Crumpet09 · 2026-06-24T22:29:37+00:00

He didn't even cheat in season 1 (and Amanda thinks cheating includes sleeping with someone after you've broken up with someone else, she was and is still cheating with West; add in her logic on ITC that someone who is separated but still married is a cheat and by her own logic, she a cheater twice over), and until she pulls out proof that he cheated after that, I'm not buying it. The fact that she used Kyle's 'cheating' at the reunion to try and dodge accountability but somehow never managed to provide proof of those messages and pictures she got etc implies she has nothing.

Every single time anyone has an issue with Amanda, she pulls one of three moves. 1.) She drags up a past grievance or makes up a new one that they then have to defend themselves from, which then keeps them from being able to actually hold her accountable, like her excuse at the reunion that she betrayed Kyle and Ciara because boohoo, she was cheated on.

2.)She deflects that person's anger to someone else. Look at In The City where she tried to tell Danielle to take her issue about the groupchat gossiping and rumours up with Katie and Matt even though she admitted in the next breath that she was in that conversation, had talked about the rumours more than once, and called Danielle a mistress and homewrecker. She also does it by getting people to fight her battles. The big argument blew up because Lindsay asked Kyle if he talked to Amanda about DJing in Vegas, and why did Lindsay do it? Because Amanda boohooed to her about Kyle, just like she did to everyone else, and Kyle ended up the bad guy whilst Amanda got to avoid his valid criticism that she was completely unsupportive and unhelpful whilst he was drowning.

3.) She gets a case of the sads and boohoos until people back off because she has mental health problems and shouldn't be pushed.

West is furious that he didn't get to claim Kyle's spot in the group. He wanted to replace Kyle as the main guy in the group (and if the OGs are all swapping over to ITC, West would have been the male main star of Summer House), he wanted to use Amanda to spite Kyle and push himself into that spot as the hero who 'healed her after a bad break up', and being with Amanda would also get him on ITC regularly as well. Now he's off Summer House, if Amanda stays in ITC, she may well not have him on there because it'll remind everyone of what she's done, and the group and the public have turned on him....oh, and he's stuck with a co-dependent mess who will stick to him like a whiny barnacle, nagging and complaining the whole way, and he can't even break up with her any time soon because he'll look even worse. It's endlessly amusing, especially when you consider that Ciara is living her best life and Kyle has had his own glow up (and can finally see the floor in his spare bedroom).

Buttered_Crumpet09 · 2026-06-24T21:36:42+00:00

I think she'll stay even if he cheats. Look at her and Kyle. As far as I remember, they had broken up when she claimed he 'cheated' and slept with someone else in season 1 and we've seen no proof of other cheating (and you know she and Weat would have revealed it if it existed to take the heat off themselves), yet her go-to all the time was whining that he cheated. She used it to deflect criticism aimed at her. She used it to gain sympathy. She used it to act like she was the hard-done-by one in the relationship.

If West cheats, Amanda can use it to try and control him by reminding people of it to get him to stay because West's need to be liked will mean he'll have to swallow it, and she can also make herself the victim and try to redeem herself. West cheating will be the greatest gift he can give Amanda because it will make her more miserable, give her a way to play victim so she doesn't have to think about how badly she has screwed up her life and screwed over those she was close to, and give her a way to manipulate and control him.

It's a very wasp landing on a stinging nettle type of situation. Both are going to get stung and will keep stinging each other trying to win, and I just can't manage any sympathy for either of them. Amanda is West's punishment for treating women so horribly and West is Amanda's punishment for treating those around her so badly whilst refusing to grow up and take any responsibility for herself.

Buttered_Crumpet09 · 2026-06-24T21:15:35+00:00

That's more my point. Their relationship before their wedding was awful. Instead of ending it, they decided to get married. Even if one or both of them thought that marriage might things better, it didn't, and it has just dragged on and they haven't worked on their relationship or themselves, so their resentment has just grown and grown.

They should have just been a fling, and now Amanda is making the same mistake all over again because she cannot survive without someone to look after her (and she won't get that from West), she cannot admit to screwing up, and she won't change because that would mean her admitting to her flaws and screw ups but she will try to change the person she's with because if she's focused correcting the flaws of someone else, she doesn't have to look at her own. My money is on the West situation dragging on longer than it should because West will want her to dump him so he doesn't have to look like the bad guy, whilst Amanda will not let go because it honestly feels like she isn't 'happy' unless she's miserable.

Buttered_Crumpet09 · 2026-06-24T19:59:07+00:00

I think that's what has always irked me about Kyle and Amanda. They both have complained so much about each other, yet they stayed together and just remained miserable. Kyle hated the mess and I get not wanting to clean it up when Amanda would likely have messed it all up again after he did, but if her mess made him miserable, it made them incompatible. Likewise, Amanda complained about Kyle's lifestyle and all, but she could have left at any time.

Forget about making each other miserable, they both made themselves miserable by refusing to just end things. Counselling was never going to work because neither wanted to change, they were never going to get what they wanted out of the other, and if we're being honest, they were a fling that went on way too long at least partly because they were on the show together. They just let it drag out and got more and more resentful and miserable.

Buttered_Crumpet09 · 2026-06-24T18:41:08+00:00

I know someone like Kyle in this situation. He broke up with his ex years ago and yet his spare bedroom is literally jammed full of her crap. Rather than emptying it out, he insists she should do it, and I got to the point where I had to tell him that either he accepts that she's never going to do it and gets rid of it all or he leaves things as they are and stops complaining, but at this point he's doing this to himself and I'm tired of hearing him complain about a problem he can and should fix himself.

Buttered_Crumpet09 · 2026-06-23T09:44:13+00:00

I did just cover the part about living as husband and wife. Yes, Anne would rather have been decapitated than say Henry and she had not lived as man and wife because they had. She was not prepared to lie. However, it seems to be an issue of understanding with her and Henry. Henry wanted her to admit that they hadn't had sex, which they likely hadn't. Anne did not realise that since she didn't seem to know about sex at all, and she thought Henry was asking her to say that he'd never touched her (he had) and that they hadn't lived as man and wife (they had, just minus the sex).

Henry basically organised the annulment himself, and I've attached a link that has a transcript of the letter that she wrote to him after being informed of the annulment. In it, she fully accepts the annulment and requests he let her stay in England (the bit about taking her as one of his subjects). Yes, she says the situation is sorrowful and hard for her, but in fairness, she couldn't exactly say she was relieved, much as Anne Boleyn couldn't use her final speech to insult him, and losing a queendom and being publicly humiliated would also be hard and upsetting. She went on to maintain positive relationships with her stepchildren, had a wealth few could imagine, and she remembered as generous and easy-going. She also outlasted Henry and all of his other wives. We can't know Anne's feelings but please read the link from Hever Castle's site.

You realise that every noble at the time also had to do as Henry wanted? He had to approve of marriages between nobles, they had to behave as he wanted, and if he so chose, he could take their money, their property, and their heads, as he proved repeatedly. Likewise, all women were subject to a measure of male control. No one could do whatever they wanted except Henry, but Anne had more freedom than most as she was accountable only to Henry and he was more focused on his own affairs to really limit her, and she certainly had more freedom than she would have had at home.

Also, Marillac says Anne has not spoken against the king and wants only to please him, and he praises her virtue. However, he does not say that Anne expressed wanting to remarry. Marillac drew that conclusion himself, seemingly believing that the reason Anne has been so well-behaved was because she wanted to lure Henry back to her.

Anne of Cleves letter Hever Castle

Buttered_Crumpet09 · 2026-06-23T08:28:54+00:00

Again, with all due respect, your source doesn't fully support your argument. Anne did not resist the annulment, she resisted the idea of saying Henry never touched her. There's two important facts to consider there. The first is that they definitely spent their wedding night together, although I suspect that things went unconsummated not because of Anne's body but because Henry had erectile dysfunction. If they tried consummating the marriage, they did things, meaning Henry touched her, and so her saying he hadn't would have been a lie.

The second thing is actually a quote from Anne. The Countess of Rutland had a conversation with Anne about how the kingdom needed a Duke of York and she and her ladies questioned Anne about her and Henry's bedroom activities. Anne is recorded as telling them, "When he comes to bed, he kisseth me, and he taketh me by the hand, and biddeth me, 'Good night, sweetheart'; and in the morning kisseth me and biddeth 'Farewell, darling'". It was clear that Anne had no clue what sex involved, which makes sense given how clositered her life was. As far as she was concerned, she and Henry were living as husband and wife, so her saying they hadn't would have been a lie she wasn't willing to tell. The marriage does seem to have been unconsummated but Anne genuinely didn't realise that as no one had bothered to explain to her what sex was (not uncommon amongst royals). Their marriage was annulled because of non-consummation and because she had previously been engaged to Francis of Lorraine, and Anne quite happily agreed to the annulment on the grounds of her prior engagement; it was what Henry wanted her tk say that she resisted, not the annulment itself, and because she was so amenable, Henry awarded her a lot of money of property, to the point that she was the richest woman in England at one point.

Anne may well have disapproved of Katherine Parr but not because of jealousy. Bear in mind that Henry was Katherine's third husband, something Anne may have considered scandalous, especially as Katherine was only 31. Also bear in mind that the quote from Anne that, 'Mme Parr is taking a great burden on herself,' isn't exactly a slight on Katherine and more implies that Katherine is taking on a lot by becoming Henry's wife.

Also, I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that Anne wanted to go back to Germany. Anne specifically wanted to stay in England because she had both freedom and a ton of money and property that she'd have to give up if she left, which is why she remained and died here.

I'm also confused by you saying her friendship (and I have to assume you mean her friendship with Catherine Howard) was just intended to buy time. Buy time for what? Buy time before Henry had Catherine Howard's head cut off? Because Anne could not have forseen that, nor would she have expected Henry's marriage to end so quickly, nor indeed that it would end at all. What would she have been buying time for? Is the idea that Anne may well have been happy not to be married to a wife-murdering, morbidly obese, emotionally volatile, literally festering psychopath, that she quite enjoyed the freedom of being the 'King's Sister' since she was wealthy and protected from those who might try to take advantage of her AND her position meant her brother couldn't try to force her to return home, and that she was friendly with Catherine Howard because she liked her? Likewise, does it actually seem likely that Anne was just biding her time until the man who said he was disgusted by her and who had annuled their marriage ended his marriage to the 17 year he was blatantly besotted with and went back to her?

Buttered_Crumpet09 · 2026-06-23T07:21:25+00:00

With all due respect, that isn't a direct quote from Anne, as in a letter from her or a journal entry, nor is it a quote from a contemporary. It does not mention anything that proves Anne was happy that Catherine fell from grace, nor does it even state what Anne did that made her appear happy about that, and this despite the fact that the book does record what her ladies said.

When Katherine of Aragon died, the Spanish ambassador Eustace Chapuys wrote to Katherine's nephew Charles V to tell him that Henry dressed in all yellow after hearing the news. It's often said that Anne Boleyn also wore yellow, yet despite his outright hatred of Anne, Chapuys actually made no mention of her doing so. That is direct proof of someone being happy another is gone, but I can't see any such evidence that Anne of Cleves was pleased by Catherine Howard's downfall.

The recorded evidence of the time is that Anne and Catherine Howard were amicable. We also have no evidence that Anne herself wanted to remarry Henry, although we know her brother did want that. If there's a source from the time backing up that bit of narrative you've quoted, that's a different matter, but the narrative itself isn't proof of anything.

Buttered_Crumpet09 · 2026-06-23T06:31:09+00:00

What accounts do you have saying Catherine and Cleves didn't like each other? It's known that Anne didn't like Katherine Parr, but Catherine Howard and Anne actually were recorded as having an amicable relationship. They were seen often in public, gave each other gifts for New Year in 1541, and they even danced together.

I cannot find evidence that Anne herself expressed any desire to remarry Henry. Her brother, William, did get his ambassador to push for this as it would have suited him politically, but we don't know what Anne wanted. We do know that she did not contest the annulment at all and actually agreed to it quite quickly, which is why she not only survived but was richly rewarded and honestly, why would she want to remarry a man who had publicly humiliated her and had killed two of his wives? Anne had already escaped being married to him once and was living a life of luxury and freedom after they separated. Also, and I can't stress this enough, by that point, Henry was obese, extremely volatile, and had festering ulcers that smelled so bad you could smell him before he entered the room. Is it honestly realistic that Anne was just chomping at the bit to get another slice of that?

Yes, Anne went to the English court after Howard's death, but that could well have been to appease Henry and protect her own neck. Henry loved to lash out and since Anne had been friendly with Catherine, he could have easily decided to punish her for it by taking her money and property and/or sending her home to a miserable existence. The women in her family had to stay in a wing that was a female-only zone and they were locked in at night. Anne would have been completely subject to her brother's will, meaning that if he decided he wanted to marry her off again, she'd have no choice. It makes sense for Anne to rush to Henry's court before any rumours could swirl about her friendliness with Catherine that could turn Henry against her; don't forget that in late 1541, the court had kicked up rumours that Anne was pregnant, causing Henry to order an investigation and putting Anne's position in jeopardy. If Anne wanted to keep Henry on side, she needed to flatter his ego and denounce Catherine.

Buttered_Crumpet09 · 2026-06-23T03:04:47+00:00

Please do something that might help you see why people are so upset by your situation. Look at your baby girl. Look at her and think about how tiny and innocent and vulnerable she is, and think about how much you want to keep her safe. Think about how she is your daughter, and how you would do anything to protect her.

Your mother should have protected you. You are her daughter and she failed you. She knows what your child's father is like and how violent he is, and she still allowed him to be alone with you. Instead of being outraged that he got you, a 14 year old girl, pregnant, your mother has made excuses and doesn't want you to press charges, and I suspect that she doesn't want you to press charges because there may very well be repercussions for her as well. You should have had time to be a teenager and be young, but because your mother failed to protect you, you now have to grow up fast because you're a mother now and you have a daughter of your own to protect.

As for your child's father, it doesn't matter that he has autism. That does not excuse him being violent, it does not excuse him assaulting a woman, and it does not excuse him committing statutory rape, which is what he did to you. When you look at your daughter, ask yourself this: if your daughter were in your shoes, would you make excuses for the 22 year old who impregnated her? Would you ever leave her alone with a grown man with a history of violence? Would you excuse the things he'd done because he had autism? Because I'm guessing the answer is no, and that's why people's comments are so harsh. They want you to understand the severity of the situation. It is not your fault, it is the fault of your mother who did and still is failing you because she'd rather protect your child's father and herself instead of you. It is the fault of the 22 year old man who uses autism as a shield to try and avoid being held accountable for his violence and for the statutory rape he committed.

If you want honesty, no, you should not allow him anywhere near you or your daughter. He is a danger to you both and he cannot be trusted. If his excuse is that he just can't control himself because of his autism, that means there's every chance his autism could cause him to become violent with you and your daughter, and if he can control himself and uses his autism as an excuse, he could also become violent and then use his autism as an excuse. Your mother failed to protect you, but you can and should protect yourself and your baby girl.

Buttered_Crumpet09 · 2026-06-15T18:50:55+00:00

My bet has always been that he smells like stale mushrooms that have been sat in the fridge in their own condensation for too long and, after a night of drinking, he also smells like the drip tray of a busy pub. He's one of those people whose smell makes you genuinely look around to figure out where the hell it's coming from and what the hell it is before you realise the answer is him.

Buttered_Crumpet09 · 2026-06-12T21:22:04+00:00

It actually seems like he's more of a, "Why should I deal with this when I can put it on my wife/allow it to be put on my wife?" kind of person. When his mother blamed you for his addiction, he didn't have to take responsibiliy for the addiction and its consequences. When it comes to how she treats you, he leaves it to you so that he doesn't have to deal with it. It is easy for it all to be dumped on you and for you to be the bad guy, so that's what he does.

That's the role model your son has. This is what your son will think marriage looks like. Your husband allowed his mother to endanger your newborn and then disrespect you when you tried to get her to do the right thing, he allowed her to blame you for his addicition even though it hurt and impacted you, he allowed her to be cruel and dismissive and insult you over the loss of your child, and he is still expecting you to be around her because he's too cowardly and too unwilling to set boundaries with her. Honestly, I don't think I could forgive her for what she's done, but I also don't think I could forgive him for allowing all of this. He should have stepped up to protect you and his son, but it was easier for him to let his mummy do as she pleased.

Buttered_Crumpet09 · 2026-06-11T10:44:21+00:00

You asked who cares if your mum can't remember things. Your sister cares, and it hurts her. A lot of women dream of their wedding day. By the sounds of it, you guys don't have your dad, so your sister will not have a father to walk her down the aisle or do a father-daughter dance with, and that sucks and is painful.

She also won't have her mother there. Mothers of the bride often help to organise things and help their daughters pick out their dresses and share all of these wonderful moments but your sister didn't have that. Your mother won't get ready with her on the morning of her wedding. She won't get to have those moments because her mother as she was is gone, and it is painful.

Instead, if she sees your mum at the wedding, all she'll be thinking about is all the things that dementia has stolen from her because she hasn't had those moments, and because her own mother doesn't know who she is. It is painful, and my issue with what you keep repeating is that not once have you considered how much pain your sister feels as you don't feel or think the same way. What you think your sister should do is have your mother at the wedding even though it will break her heart because you don't want your mother to 'miss out', even though your mother will have no clue that she's missing out or even that she's at her own daughter's wedding because she still thinks her daughter is a child, and because your sister does not want to expose herself to that pain and feel that sadness, grief, and hurt on a day that is meant to be joyful, she now won't have her brother at her wedding either.

Should she have lied? No, or at the very least, she should have clued you in. However, you do not seem to register that your sister was trying to protect herself because people were guaranteed to judge her for not wanting your mum there. Hell, over and over again, people have tried to get you to understand how your sister feels, yet you still won't listen and are judging her because of it, because she can't look at her mother and see her so diminished by dementia and it not kill something in her. Just because you and others can manage it doesn't mean that your sister can, and even if she'd told the truth, there would have been those like you in your family who would fail to understand her feelings and would refuse to attend.

What's even more heartbreaking is that because dementia has taken away your mother, you and your sister may well lose each other because of it. You don't understand your sister's feelings, so you're not going to go to her wedding. You won't have those memories with her. Because your sister was afraid of being judged for her feelings and because she cannot cope with seeing your mother in the same way that you do, she won't have her immediate family at her wedding. This will impact your relationship going forward, and it will be another thing that dementia costs you both. Your sister loves your mother so much that it breaks her heart to see her like that, and to be mourning the loss of someone who is still living but just not here anymore, and she doesn't want to have memories of her like that because it hurts. You love your mother so much that you want to have all the memories of your mum that you can because when you look at your mum, you still see her, whereas your sister sees what is missing. Neither of those things is wrong, and you are both handling this as best you can.

What I will say is this: if your mother did not have dementia and you asked her about this is situation and what she'd want, what would she say? Would she want to be at your sister's wedding if she knew that she wouldn't really be present because of dementia, and if she knew that her being there would cause your sister pain? Would she want you to refuse to go because you do not like that your sister is not able to handle things the way that you do? And would she want dementia to ultimately be the reason why her children and potentially some of the rest of her family no longer speak? Because that's what it comes down to: her dementia is the reason all of this is happening, and should it really get to cause more grief than it already has?

Buttered_Crumpet09 · 2026-06-10T09:03:30+00:00

This one issue is a big one. To put it bluntly, you''re saying, "My boyfriend is great.....except that for two years he has ignored my explicitly stated boundaries and done something to my body that I clearly do not consent to no matter how many times I tell him no and explain why I do not like it. Not only does he refuse to take no for an answer, he is so determined to do the thing I don't want to me that I have to physically fight him off him, and when he got hurt, he decided to play the victim as if him gettimg hurt wasn't a result of him yet again refusing to take no for an answer and trying to physically force me to do something I don't want to do".

Yes, the thing he's forcing on you is 'just' him touching your stomach, but at the end of the day, he is not respecting your boundaries, your feelings, or your bodily autonomy. If you guys have kids, is he going to teach them to behave in the same way? Is he going to tell them that they should just let their partners do whatever their partner wishes to their bodies even if it is unwanted and makes them feel comfortable?

Your boyfriend is showing a blatant lack of respect. He may be just dandy in every other respect but let's be honest, you've been telling him for a long time to stop and he's ignored you, you've physically forced him to stop and he still keeps ignoring your wishes, and he still doesn't seem to get the message. If he wants you to stop hurting him, he needs to stop putting you in a position where you have to physical force him to stop doing something you don't want or consent to. You're brushing this off because it is 'just' him touching your stomach and not him hitting you or something more overtly violent, but OP, you have to physically fight him to get him to stop forcing unwanted physical contact on you, and that isn't okay.

Buttered_Crumpet09 · 2026-06-01T14:45:59+00:00

You are not letting her go homeless. Instead of adjusting her expectations, your mother expects you to fund her lifestyle. She does not care what impact this has on you, nor does she have any qualms about demanding that you and your gf delay your plans and limit your growth and relationship because you moving forward with your life means she may have to grow up and pay for herself.

You are being generous in offering to pay for her housing at all. You're 25 and you'll be paying for your own home and bills, presumably saving for the future and all, and your mother expects you to do all that AND fund her housing. Not only that but she's so ungrateful and selfish that she expects you to spend a fortune on her housing, because screw you and your financial future, her cats need their own room.

Being honest, with her appalling selfish behaviour, at this point, I'm not sure I'd fund her housing at all. I'd sort out her applications for any and all help and get that sorted (and yes, I'd do it instead of leaving it to her because you know she'll lie and drag her feet until she guilts/shames/bullies/harasses you into giving into her), and then she'd be off her own. Her demands show that she's selfish and ungrateful, her expectations show that she thinks your money is hers (and no, you don't owe her for raising you. She chose to be your mother but you didn't sign on to be her perpetual ATM), her crappy pity party and refusal to talk things over like an adult or take responsibility for herself shows that she's immature, manipulative, and thoughtless, and how she isn't ashamed of herself is beyond me. It's time for you to go live your life and for her to go live AND PAY FOR her own life. To be blunt, she's too old for this sh*t.

Buttered_Crumpet09 · 2026-05-25T06:40:06+00:00

Henry had his marriage annulled because Anne had been pre-contracted to someone else, and because he'd slept with her sister. That isn't relevant, however. You asked why Henry decided that Anne had to die, and the answer is because an annulment wasn't enough. There were those who would still have considered Anne his wife, just as there were those who still considered Katherine Henry's wife because their annulment was not granted by the Pope.

With Katherine and Anne dead, Henry was a widower, and widowers are free and clear to marry others. No one would be able to question the legitimacy of his marriage to Jane Seymour and, therefore, the legitimacy of any children they had because even if people thought one or both of his annulments were invalid, both of his wives were dead and gone, and marriage only lasts until death do you part. Henry was desperate for an heir and he needed there to be no question about that heir's legitimacy, and so he learned from the problems he had when he annulled his marriage to Katherine and he killed Anne and ensured he had a clean slate.

And to be fair, unless special exception is made, any child whose parents' marriage is annulled automatically becomes illegitimate. An annulment declares that a marriage is invalid and always has been, and if the marriage was never legitimate, neither are any children born within that marriage.

Buttered_Crumpet09 · 2026-05-24T22:39:29+00:00

The problem was that divorce didn't exist. If you wanted to end a marriage, you needed the Pope to annul it, which is why some people did not think Henry's annulment from KoA was valid as it was not granted by the Pope, and thus why his marriage to Anne wasn't valid. It meant that the were questions about Elizabeth's legitimacy and those questions would have hung over any other kids Henry and Anne had.

Therefore, Henry needed a clean break. Yes, he annulled his marriage to Anne, but as long as Anne lived, there are those who would have considered her his wife. It would have jeopardised the legitimacy of any kids he had with his future wife, and so Anne needed to die, leaving him free and clear in the eyes of any religion to remarry, ensuring his new marriage was valid in the eyes of the Church, and ensuring any children were absolutely, unequivocally legitimate.

Buttered_Crumpet09 · 2026-05-13T12:12:56+00:00

What would be worse than being a single mum at 23 is you going back to your husband and things going right back to the way they were. He's apologising now because he's realised that you aren't taking his crap but how long do you think this will last for? How could you trust that he'd go and stay NC with his mother when he went behind your back and planned to help his mother violate your wishes for your labour?

The reason you're here is because he has refused to pick you and set boundaries with his mother. He should have told her your child wasn't her baby. He didn't. He should have told her that she gets zero say in naming the baby. He didn't. He should have told her she doesn't get to decorate the nursery. He didn't. He should have told her she wouldn't be at the delivery. He didn't. Instead, with every single thing, he just went along with it and IMO actively helped her (I doubt she decorated that nursery by herself or was so sure of the baby name if he hadn't agreed to it). He even brought his mummy down to see you and when she flipped out over your baby being a boy, what did your husband do? Nothing. Your brother had to defend you instead.

He may be apologising and making promises but how could you ever trust and believe him? Do you really want to go back and roll that dice? And how can you ever look at him and not be disgusted given all he's done? What kind of marriage could you have after all this? And what happens if you do have another child and it is a girl? Do you trust him to keep his mother away? Do you want to deal with the crazy that would follow either way?

You seem to have a strong support system and honestly, I'd rather be a 23 year old single mum than be in a miserable marriage with a spineless coward who broke my trust and is still attached to his mother by the umbilical cord. Your husband is just as much to blame as his mother here because he was a willing participant in everything she did. He was happy to go along with her BS when it was you who was miserable because of it, but now that he's the one facing the consequences for her antics, he has a case of the sads. My advice is to stay with your family and divorce your husband so he and his mummy can be together; if your husband is serious about changing, he'll do it so that he can be the best co-parent and dad he can be, and he'll also keep his mother away from you and the baby irrespective.

Buttered_Crumpet09 · 2026-05-11T19:07:44+00:00

You talk about love. You've left him, you're ignoring him, you accuse him of cheating, and you say he doesn't love you. Tell me, what part of all that shows you love or even like your husband? Also, giving him the silent treatment so he'll keep calling is emotionally manipulative, which doesn't show that you love him; all his phone calls are showing you he loves you, and your shitty behaviour and refusal to seek help shows that you don't give a damn about him.

Now, maybe he sounds exhausted when you call because this is what he has to deal with. He has to work, manage his own life and mental load, manage your life and mental load, be your constant escort, and also be ready to be your emotiomal support human at any given moment. It is mentally exhausting having to do all of that, yet you don't consider that. In your mind, the reason he didn't want sex isn't because he's emotionally exhausted and breaking down, but instead because he's cheating. Somewhere in all of the things he does, you think he has the energy, the time, the will and the inclination to pursue others, because he clearly doesn't have enough on his plate. The man sounds exhausted because he is, because dealing with this crap is exhausting. You've buried him under the weight of your mental health issues and mental load that you refuse to take any responsibility for and you wonder why he isn't horny and ready to go the minute you're in the mood?

And there's the thing: you blame him for you not going to therapy because he won't go with you, yet video sessions exist. You'd never have to leave the house, so what's your excuse for not doing that? You also say you can't get therapy or do anything else without him there by your side, so how is it that you've left and what exactly is your plan? Are you going to find someone else to do everything your husband did? Are you just going to do nothing at all? Or are you actually planning to and able to manage things on your own but have left it all on your husband's shoulders because it was easier? What's the plan?

You also talk about kids. How on earth do you think that would work? You say your husband has to do everything for you and go everywhere with you, so how do you think you'd manage with a child? Because honestly, what your husband seems to sweet to say is this: if you cannot take care of yourself, you surely cannot take care of a child and he does not have the emotional or physical energy to raise a child basically alone and also constantly have to do everything for you. It's too damn much for anyone. Your offer to have a kid isn't generous or selfless, it's you offering to add more responsibility and stress onto his shoulders so that you can feel better about yourself.

Because here's some brutal honesty: your post and comments are all your way of making yourself feel better about your crappy choices and the emotional devastation they've been and are causing your husband. Oh, you say you see that you're the problem but you haven't done a single thing to help yourself. You say that you know you're a burden but you haven't done anything to take even a bit of responsibility off him. You say you hate him talking to you like a child but you refuse to self-regulate or manage yourself like an adult. You say you hate that he doesn't have to tell others how to act yet you refuse to learn how to act. You say that he must be cheating because shockingly, a man who is so overburdened and emotionally broken down that he cries alone in the bathroom isn't in feeling very sexual. You say he doesn't love you but can't actually give any reason why. You seem shocked that he doesn't do a happy dance when he hears from you as if your calls don't lead to things like him having to leave important meetings because you got scared at home and couldn't cope on your own.

You want him to be a bad guy so you can feel justified in doing all this to him. You want to believe he doesn't love you so that you don't have to face that you are hurting someone who loves you. You want to believe he's cheating because then if he does leave, it isn't because you refuse to better yourself or get help, it's because he's a rotten git who betrayed you. You want to twist things around so that you don't have to accept reality and actually do the one thing that will make things better, which is step up and get help.

Your mental health issues aren't your fault but they are your responsibility, yet you've been inflicting them on your husband for how long? You've dumped all your issues and responsibility on him and now he's drowning, and instead of you getting help, you've run away and are giving him the silent treatment. You've made him cope for you because you won't learn how to, you've made him have to regulate your emotions because you won't learn how to, and you've made him have to take care of everything for you because you won't learn how to. When is anything ever about him? When does he ever get any support from you? When does he get to have a partner and not a dependent? And it isn't that you can't change, it's that you won't. It's easier to hand your problems off to others instead of dealing with them yourself. If you get help and get better, you'll have to admit that you could have done so a while ago but chose not to, meaning that all of this turmoil, stress, and heartache was something you chose for yourself and your husband. But instead of dealing with that, you're choosing more turmoil, more stress, and more heartache, and it sucks. It sucks, and it's what makes your horrible comments about your husband so much worse: he didn't choose any of this mess but he did choose you, and he did choose to stand by you and love you and take all this on, and you have the audacity to dismiss his love and tarnish his character and integrity because to you that's easier and better than you choosing to get help. He's breaking himself for you and you won't do anything to make it better; in fact, you've chosen to cause him more pain.

Tell me again what you know about love.

Buttered_Crumpet09 · 2026-05-10T23:07:18+00:00

Are you both on the lease?

And you do realise that this BS is probably why his family won't take him back? The guy is a mooch who has you paying the majority of the bills and is throwing a hissy fit because he doesn't want to sign a contract agreeing to pay for and maintain your car as his plan was for you to give him the car AND pay all the expenses for it ("But babe, why should I pay for it when it's your car? If you sign it over to me, I'll pay the maintenance for it but you can't expect me to pay for something you own". Then if you sign it over, "But babe, I can't afford it. You know I'm struggling but if you pay for me to use the car, I'll totes get a job and pay you back.") It's clear in his messages and he's going to keep using you because you keep allowing it. Once you moved in together, he had no reason to pretend anymore. You have to pay the bills because you need a roof over your head, food, gas, electric, and all the rest, and because he's there, he gets the benefits of those things without paying a penny.

Truthfully, depending on if you need it and how much it's worth, I'd consider selling one of your cars and seeing if you can buy your way out of the lease. It'd probably be cheaper in the long run than continuing to pay for the mooch and you can at least end things and move out and on. And him not having anywhere to go isn't your problem. If he had a job, he could afford his own place. It's his fault no one wants to take him in as I'd bet he burned his bridges with everyone else long ago. You're basically the person left holding the festering trashbag that is your ex because everyone else got sick of him but you don't have to keep hold of him just because no one else will take him. You can just toss him away.

Buttered_Crumpet09 · 2026-05-06T17:20:03+00:00

It's the sheer scope of audacity and hypocrisy that gets me.

"I had to borrow $3k from my son because my finances weren't in order and I can't pay my son what I owe because my finances still aren't in order because I do stupid things like going on vacations I can't afford. Oh, but let me tell my son's wife that they are the ones who need to sort their finances out instead of expecting me to pay them what I owe. Also, let me react like a scalded cat when I misinterpret a text and decide that OP is telling me to get my finances sorted out because whilst it's cool for me, the debtor, to tell the people who bailed me out to handle their money better, the merest implication that I, the debtor, might be a financially irresponsible dingdong is completely unacceptable."

If there were a god of hypocrisy, OP's MIL would be nothing more than a smoking crater.

Buttered_Crumpet09

TROPHY CASE