• S E X
    L O V E +
    R E L A T I O N S H I P S


    ❤️ Welcome Guest! ❤️


    Posting Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • SLR Moderators: M!$TER-ED

Boyfriend Relapsed...Again.

Someone needs to get a dictionary and read the definition of analogy.

Is that someone you?

Food is not bad.

No shit really? I didn't know that :|

I'm beginning to think you have no idea what a proper analogy is. Your explanations for why your analogy is true is well lacking to say the least.

Here this might help you mister know it all.

The relevance of the known similarities to the similarity inferred in the conclusion.

There are no similarities between opiates and food nor is going without food anything like going without opiates so your analogy fails at first inspection.

The number of characteristics that the things being compared share.

Again the two things you compare completely lack shared characteristics. Again your analogy fails and becomes false.

Of course food is not the same as drugs, the whole point of analogy is to compare two different but also similar things to point out certain properties.

Yes but the two things being compared need to share more similarities than food and opiates. Comparing something that is necessary to the sustaining of life to something that isn't necessary just doesn't make for a good or strong analogy. At best your analogy is weak, and at worst it is false.
 
Last edited:
I think he may be confusing analogy and anallogy -(anallodging, archaic) or the process of shoving your head up your ass to subvert your attention from truths.
 
^That is a fair point. I drew many lines in the sand. But I only crossed two. I said I would never borrow money from my friends to buy dope with. I did but paid it all back in good fashion. I said I would never pawn my stuff for dope money. I did but bought it all back within a months time.

Not all addicts take the road that leads them to steal or whatever is what I am trying to say. But yes it is a tempting road to go down.

What happens one day when you have two choices: pay back the friend or buy dope? Which one would you choose?

Food is not bad.
However going without food can cause a major problem, a desire to do extreme things to obtain food, and even ultimately death.
Despite the problems caused by going without food, which could result in you doing bad things, this does not make eating food bad.

The fact that you are comparing food with drugs really says something about your addiction. I would compare it to coffee, but then again, I'm not going to get sick if I stop drinking coffee or even my kratom for that matter, because I have gone without, it sucked, but whatever...had to.

Antecessor, you really have a twisted sense of reality, and it's a shame, because your children and your GF are going to suffer.
 
Last edited:
Well I only read half of the first page but Queen Bee your boyfriend is a drug addict. You said you drink and party with him and that it doesn't affect your relationship but it does. He cannot take any drugs that INCLUDES alcohol. When he "parties" with you that's great and all. He might not have a huge problem with drinking. But I know with myself when I drink eventually I use some other drugs. Now you say you aren't an drug addict. I will take your word for it. Your boyfriend needs to go to AA if he wants a chance at a happy and sober life. Your boyfriend will be jealous and upset at first that you can drink responsibly and that he can't have fun with you. But the fact of the matter is he can have fun with you. He can do it without the use of any mind altering chemicals too! My drug of choice was opiates. I loved xanax too but not nearly as much. I hope things work out for you guys <3
 
@Lysis

What happens one day when you have two choices: pay back the friend or buy dope? Which one would you choose?

That has already happened to me. And believe it or not I paid my friend back and suffered withdrawal for two days before I got more money to buy dope. But like I said I'm clean now and thankfully I don't have to make decisions like that anymore.

Just to be clear I do understand that there are junkies out there that are pieces of shit and will rob you and treat you and their families like dirt. Its just that I wasn't one of them. If you read any of my previous posts on this thread you will find that I partially agree with you. I just felt like you were generalizing when you say all addicts/junkies will rob and run over anyone to get their fix. If you asked any one of my friend they would say that I wasn't anything like that. Yeah they worried about me but only because I was hurting myself not them and they know that I would never hurt them in any way shape or form.

I do feel that addiction is a sickness. But its not like any other type of sickness. It is the only disease IMO that can be cured by decisions alone. And it is up to the addict to make that decision.

And I agree with you about Antecessor. He does IMO have a somewhat twisted sense of reality. Comparing food to opiates? Ludicrous really.
 
Last edited:
An analogy is not a comparison of similarity, two different words, two different meanings.

Only one similarity is required for analogy.

Similarity between food and opiates for an opiate addict is this:
Bad consequences from NOT having them.

The fact that food causes death as a consequence whereas drugs only cause discomfort, only makes my case, that your arguments that bad consequences from not having something makes that thing bad, totally false.

For if bad consequences from not having something makes something bad, then the worse the consequences, the worse the substance.
This would mean that food is a far worse thing than opiates, which is clearly absurd.
Therefore the claim made about drugs being bad because if the consequences of not having them is also absurd and false.

My analogy was chosen to best highlight this absurdity, not because I feel that food is in anyway alike to drugs, but because they are UNALIKE, except in that one particular way.

This does not prove that drugs are not bad, it disproves your argument that drugs are bad because of the consequences of not taking them, which is why I pointed out something which has even worse consequences, and leads to even greater immorality than opiates, and yet is not bad because of it.

The fact that you need food to live only makes my case stronger, everytime you point out that food is not the same as drugs because you will die without food whereas just feel bad without drugs, I don't understand how you don't get that this IS THE ENTIRE POINT of my analogy.


Anything can have negative consequences in life, it's how you handle it that matters, and how you handle it is determined by your character.

Opiates make me desire them, but not to the point of causing any negative consequences to others. I take drugs responsably, be addicted responsably, by remaining true to my main moral principle of; do no harm.

My family are and will continue to be fine, but thanks for the insinuations against my character Lysis. I get enough of that garbage from mainstream society, stop being so judgmental.

I know your probably basing your assumptions off of things you did to others in your life while using, or drug addicts have done to you, but you don't know me and the things that are true about your character are not true about mine.

People who say drugs are bad because they make you do bad things are just refusing to take responsability for the terrible things they do while on or in pursuit of drugs, instead of admitting that they did bad things because of their own moral failings, they blame drugs, and that's how drugs get a bad name.

Drugs harm only one person, the user, and sometimes the harm they do is outweighed by the benefits.
However any harm that drugs are commonly said to do to others around the user, no its not the drugs doing that, it's the immorality and bad character of the user.


There is a paradox regarding an addict stopping drug use, barring circumstance preventing access to opiates an addict will only give up drugs if they want to stop using. If they don't want to stop using and drugs are available then they will continue using. But, if someone is using, barring certain circumstances, the drugs main effect is to make the addict want to continue using.

Therefore not being a fiend, going without or stopping when needed, are never chosen by anyone, but entirely determined by the persons character interactions. It's too complex to predict, but there is no free will in drugs, nor anywhere else in life by extension, the results are deterministic, based on all the variables, morality and strength of character being one such variable.

This means we are both responsible for our actions, while at the same time not actually choosing our actions, but calculating them, determinism, machina.

As for me I'll remain happily addicted to opiates (suboxone) for the rest of my life or until I don't want them anymore.
But there is no moral failing in me continuing to take them, nor harm to people around me, despite lysis adamant that bad things will happen to my family.

I have much worse problems that my opiate use, like pre existing mental conditions, like my surgical fixation and depression, I manage to avoid letting these harm my family, so too with everything else.

Ps if your going to quote me, please do so with full context to my argument, else it's misleading, and pointless.
 
Last edited:
I just hope that when people are dealing with their SO that they don't force that person to hide their drug usage, relapses if trying to stay sober, or even a re emerging/worsening drug problem.

You could cause them to not seek proffesional help, as that would mean their drug use would become known to you, and you would go off at them, or fulfill certain threats to leave them.
Instead your actions may isolate them, they can't even ask mutually known friends for help, in case those friends dob to you.
They could end up with a far worse and untreated addiction, or even dead of OD in a cheap motel while your at home wondering if the reason he isn't home yet is because he's scoring, and how your going to give him an earful when he gets back.

Either support them in what they want or if what they want is unacceptable then leave them.

If your partner cheats, you either accept their having cheated, and likely hood of them cheating again in the future, or you leave them.
You don't try to change them into non cheaters, usually.
 
I just felt like you were generalizing when you say all addicts/junkies will rob and run over anyone to get their fix

Now now, you're the one exaggerating here. I never said that, because I don't believe that. I think it's a whole 'nuther level from lying to your GF and being a total waste of space in a relationship and robbing/hurting someone. I do think there are limits people will go to, but I do think that generally, a junkie will shit on the people who love them, because they are selfish and feel like "if you love me, you'll put up with it and understand."

At some point, it gets old and it's not worth it anymore. The OP has an option to stay and help, but you know as much as I do that a junkie doesn't get well unless he wants to, so screaming, threatening, crying, begging..it doesn't matter until the junkie wants to get well. That's when it happens, and the OP has to decide if she wants to be a doormat or if she wants to put her foot down for her own well being.

This is the one situation where I agree with an ultimatum. Clean up or get out.

@Antecessor, you have so many failed, wrong statements, I can't even begin to respond. You're living in a fantasy world, and I doubt very much your family is just fine. Not with the way you think.
 
@Antecessor, you have so many failed, wrong statements, I can't even begin to respond. You're living in a fantasy world, and I doubt very much your family is just fine. Not with the way you think.

I don't believe you have read nor understood my comments.

If I am so wrong then choose one statement out of the longer response above and prove that it's wrong. Should be easy if you're so correct?

Ps I am becoming offended (no doubt the reaction that you want) by your constant references to my family and insinuations about them, I have not asked for advice about my family, nor would I ever ask you for advice about them.
My family are very happy and well taken care of, I ask you to respect that and please stop claiming otherwise, as my family is the one thing I don't tolerate nonsense about.
Accuse me of living in a fantasy land all you like but leave out the accusations about my loved ones in any future replys please.
 
Last edited:
OK.

Drugs harm only one person, the user, and sometimes the harm they do is outweighed by the benefits.

huh? Are you kidding me? Selfish point #1. And lets not mention the incredibly ridiculous suggestion for a non-user to IV drugs to "see where the drug user is coming from."


You're the one bringing your family into it by saying we're all wrong and your life is proof because your family is fine. Not us. You wanted to make a point, and the majority of responses don't believe you. If you don't want your family brought into it, then leave them out of your "proof."

I can't read your entire threads, because they are so full of fail and wrong.
 
An analogy is not a comparison of similarity, two different words, two different meanings.

This is true but it doesn't make your analogy any less weak and false. Good analogies would share more than one single similar characteristic other than without A or B you get bad results. By that logic you could compare any wildly different things and come up with some reason why it would be bad to not have those two things. Like comparing food to say a need for oil or something like that.

The fact that food causes death as a consequence whereas drugs only cause discomfort, only makes my case, that your arguments that bad consequences from not having something makes that thing bad, totally false.

Uhh I was not making this argument at all. I was simply pointing put how weak your analogy was. If anything I agree with you on this particular point. Its just your analogy sucks.

Ps if your going to quote me, please do so with full context to my argument, else it's misleading, and pointless.

I was trying to separate the wheat from the chaff. Most of your post was in defense of an illogical idea so I decided not to quote it.
 
Now now, you're the one exaggerating here. I never said that, because I don't believe that. I think it's a whole 'nuther level from lying to your GF and being a total waste of space in a relationship and robbing/hurting someone. I do think there are limits people will go to, but I do think that generally, a junkie will shit on the people who love them, because they are selfish and feel like "if you love me, you'll put up with it and understand."

Sorry I assumed that when you said junkies will always run over anybody to get their next fix you also meant rob and or steal. But I still don't completely agree with you here although I do see your point. Yes the vast majority of junkies are selfish pricks that pull the "if you love me, you'll put up with me" bullshit. And yes I agree this is completely wrong.

But again that is not the typical behavior of all addicts. The majority maybe. But not all.

At some point, it gets old and it's not worth it anymore. The OP has an option to stay and help, but you know as much as I do that a junkie doesn't get well unless he wants to, so screaming, threatening, crying, begging..it doesn't matter until the junkie wants to get well. That's when it happens, and the OP has to decide if she wants to be a doormat or if she wants to put her foot down for her own well being.

This for the most part I agree with. Although I'm not completely a hundred percent on that last sentence. If the OP has had enough and simply doesn't love her BF anymore that is cool can't disagree with that. But from what I gathered from what she posted she still obviously cares about him. Otherwise why would she care if her BF is back on the drugs at all.

I don't know I guess I just got a soft spot for unconditional love. I'm not saying she should be a doormat or anything. I just think if you truly love someone your first option shouldn't be to leave em when they are struggling against something so difficult.
 
If the OP has had enough and simply doesn't love her BF anymore that is cool can't disagree with that.

See, this is where I disagree though. You can totally love someone. Truly love someone, but that someone cares more about the drug or they are just not willing to let go of the drug, and if that is the case, you can't sit around and be a doormat. You have to be happy too. It gets even worse with kids. You can't have your kids around that crap..no way, so for the sake of your kids and your own self-worth, you have to get away as much as you love that person, they don't apparently love you enough to stop the abuse.
 
^That is a valid point and again for the most part I agree with you. But I guess I'm just trying to find the middle ground here.

Antecessor made an understandable point (although he put it in an incredibly stupid way) a large part of the problem with heroin addiction is not being able to score consistently therefore leading addicts to become the stereotypical junkie asshole. I'm not agreeing with him completely I think most of his posts were completely illogical and in some cases rude and inconsiderate. I don't think that anybody should IV a drug to see what it feels like to understand addiction for example and comparing food to opiates is just retarded.

But if you look at examples in countries with heroin assisted treatment programs such as the Netherlands or Switzerland for example where they actually provide heroin to addicts practically free of charge. You see that the addicts under such treatment programs actually function well within society and maintain healthy lifestyles.

Many even start families and lead good honest lives. It has been so successful that other European countries are starting their own heroin treatment programs Germany being the latest one to adopt such a program. So in that sense yeah I think if you are an addict but had reasonable access to the drug to maintain functionality I think there would be no problems with having an SO that is an addict. Because then you would be eliminating the potential conflict between a couple.

But yes being that the OP and her BF are in the States I guess you could say what I just said in the above paragraph is irrelevant. Still I think this deserves some thought.
 
I'm guessing that it's his first relapse (that's my understanding of her post), and I suppose for a long-term relationship, if the guy is willing to recognize the issue and get help, it is ok, but I just don't know how healthy it is to go through the roller coaster of relapse, and I know that relapsing is something like a 95%(?) chance.

I'm pretty tolerant despite my stubborn posts, because I understand you don't bail on someone you love, but once is one thing..twice is pushing it, but some addicts just roller coaster back and forth, and I would imagine that is hell for the SO.
 
I'm guessing that it's his first relapse (that's my understanding of her post), and I suppose for a long-term relationship, if the guy is willing to recognize the issue and get help, it is ok, but I just don't know how healthy it is to go through the roller coaster of relapse, and I know that relapsing is something like a 95%(?) chance.

Yeah I'm not sure about that percentage either. But it does seem to be high. Speaking from personal experience (not just my own but from watching fellow addicts fail) I would say its around 80 to 90% of the time addicts will relapse at least once.

I'm pretty tolerant despite my stubborn posts, because I understand you don't bail on someone you love, but once is one thing..twice is pushing it, but some addicts just roller coaster back and forth, and I would imagine that is hell for the SO.

Yeah after all that argument this is pretty much what I was ultimately trying to say. You don't simply bail on somebody you love for a one time fuck up. Especially a fuck up that is nearly inevitable. I can understand if you've been through hell and honestly believe someone is a lost cause and then give up. But yeah the first time? Give the guy a break.
 
I think you and I are on the same page, freddy, despite our rocky start. I understand your position better. Just from my personal experience, I have not had good luck dating drug users, and that includes a chronic weed smoker who I supported through thick and thin and he would flip the hell out and get mean if he did not have his weed. (Incidentally, BL told me to stay away and break up with him a year ago, and they were right). Then, of course the BF ODing after being 10 years clean. I've been through a lot with drug users, and the common factor with these guys is that they did not recognize it as a problem, and although the OD'd guy loved me a lot, the drug was still more important for both of them. I even dated a user who stole from me in high school. So, I've seen past the drug usage to see the good guy inside, and it's bitten me in the ass, so for my own sanity, I've said "No more."
 
^That is totally understandable and I see what you mean now that you've shared your experiences. And I'm truly sorry you went through that. So yeah I think we are on the same page here.

I agree that most addicts (again I refuse to say all addicts) are selfish especially when they don't recognize that their drug use is a problem not only for them but for the people they care about. Ultimately however IMO that selfishness is caused by self preservation not desire alone. But if an addict can maintain functionality it becomes a non issue IMO. But addicts that can maintain functionality are few and far between and are usually the exception to the rule. For every addict that is capable of not fucking everyone over in their life there are 20 junky assholes willing to do anything to get their next fix.

I have not had good luck dating drug users, and that includes a chronic weed smoker who I supported through thick and thin and he would flip the hell out and get mean if he did not have his weed.

That is pretty weird. I was a big pothead myself back in the day but whenever I couldn't get any or ran out it was just a mild annoyance not something to get pissed off about. But then again weed was never my problem Heroin and other opiates are. I guess everybody has their addictions.

Then, of course the BF ODing after being 10 years clean.

That sucks. Did he end up being ok? Or was it the fatal type of OD? This goes to show that for most addicts no matter how long they have been sober they can still relapse. That is why I think it is truly a sickness. Anything can set a former addict off. But I think it helps a whole bunch if said addict has people who love and care about him/her. But as I have said before addiction is the only disease that can be cured by decision making and willpower alone. Sometimes it helps to have medical support and that is a big helpful hand to people who need to come off it slowly. (I'm talking about Suboxone and the like) But in the end it is entirely up to the user to quit and stay off their drug of choice. They can blame everybody in the world for their addiction but in the end it is their choice.

I just hope one day the world recognizes that heroin is a manageable problem. And that criminalization and persecution of heroin users only causes all these criminal and social problems and does nothing to solve them. I think if you have an addict that truly can't quit you should give them a daily prescription like in Germany and Switzerland.
 
Last edited:
Yeppers, folks, the dirty truth about addiction is it turns the afflicted into a mighty selfish despicable manipulative individual. For those that say the only one they are hurting is themselves when they are using um, what?! If you are lucky enough to have anyone is your life that actually cares about you, they are hurt and saddened by your drug use/abuse. And God help your children. Science has yet to unlock why some people become drug addicts while others are able to use recreationally. So, until the day you got addicted you chose to use. Thus the dearth of sympathy for the devil.

I have never had the pleasure and misfortune of reading such well-spun, self-serving junkie garbage. You can fool some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time. Anyhoo, maybe this portion can be renamed and given its own thread "The Perfect Self-Justification for Junkies as Merely Misunderstood Saints." lol

To the OP: Girlfriend, being as how your boyfriend has the disease of addiction, when I look in the mirror I can see his face even though I have never met him. If you chose to stay, do know that you are in for the ride of your life, a ride that almost always proves to be utterly thankless. NOTHING YOU DO WILL HAVE MUCH CONSEQUENCE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. Prepare to be lied to repeatedly and often. The lies will hurt you but he will think nothing of them - or remember them for that matter. Someone cared enough about him to put him into extended treatment. This means NOTHING if he wants to use. You deserve to have a life, too, and babysitting an addict is not a pleasant second career choice. It is all-encompassing, and the pay is shit. Oh, and the risks that go with it? The problem with being an addict, one of 'em, is that you have to score. And that brings up a whole lotta issues. Like his/your freedom. YOU CAN'T SAVE HIM. YOUR LOVE CANNOT SAVE HIM. I do hope you learn this sooner rather than later. Because limits and boundaries are something addicts do not much care for. Hell, no one does! Give him an ultimatum: me or the drugs. Know why that will not work? Because he will choose the drugs but tell you he chooses you. Yes, he will lie to you. And then you can go through it some more. Until YOU stop it. For those that tell you to not desert him ask them why? To stay for what? Watching him nod with not a care in the world? And then rage and panic and whine like a little bitch when he does not get his way concerning his habit? That sounds like fun to me! And it gets worse. So.much.worse.

I know a dad that put a second mortgage on his house, then lost his house, to help his kid feed his opioid addiction. I asked the kid what he thought about this. He shrugged and said, "So what? It is not MY problem."
 
Last edited:
Top