pregnant others, you never know, maybe it's the reason why the bitch refuse the poor boy twice

You really need to stop calling op a bitch 200. You don't know the whole story like how long they've been dating and how she feels. Maybe she just isn't ready.

She might not want to marry him but she probably still loves him. I don't think she wants to embarrass the shit out of him to every family member. A little harsh, don't you think?

OP can always be the better person and not embarrass him. She can always just tell him what he did was wrong and call it off. It's not like they got married, just engaged.

Idk, in my eyes they are both at fault. More so the boyfriend of course though.

He orchestrated that drunken yes and then tried to manipulate her by putting it on Facebook so she have to embarrass him in order to change the answer back to no. He is way more at fault and she's crazy if she stays with a manipulative, controlling douche like him.

^ shut up. I don't care about your opinion. I know this is an open forum, but you're stupid for saying that. You have no idea the ins and outs of this relationship. Fml'ers always assume way too much. Couldn't it just be a guy whose in love with his girl, and wants to be her husband? He got shot down, yeah he picked a time when she was inebriated, but unless she's black out drunk, she has a functioning brains, and the thought processes were still there.

How his family members feel isn't her problem. OP ****** up, but this doesn't mean she should go through with the whole thing just to please everyone else.

Whether she can or can't handle alcohol, is not the point to this FML.

actually it is. she was taken advantage of because she makes poor decisions when she's drunk. had she not been so drunk, she wouldn't have a ring on her finger when she woke up. I stand by my original comment

That's as insensitive as saying a girl who was raped and taken advantage of because she was drunk is at fault for not being able to handle her booze. What the boyfriend did was wrong, regardless of the amount of liquor involved.

Well 108 there are many people who believe that is true, if the girl is not drunk then it would be much harder for her to be raped. Not saying that is fair to the girl, but there is some validity to the statement..

#108 its called take responsibility for your own actions and stop blaming everyone else for your own stupidity. nobody forced her to drink.

108 - This FML is NOT the equivalent of a girl being so drunk that she can't push a guy off her or doesn't explicitly give consent (still shouldn't be that drunk but at least doesn't warrant rape). This is the equivalent of a girl being so drunk that she says yes but then regrets it when she wakes up. So yeah, it's her fault.

She can't give up drinking yet 13. Her bf has to get her drink one more time to get her to go through with the wedding. Shot glass weddings are all the rage now.

You're a dumbass, marrying him wasn't her own actions in a sense that she had alcohol in her body at the time and I hope you know what happens when you have alcohol in your body. So stfu about how it was the ops fault, because it wasn't, imagine me attacking someone and saying it was their fault because they were drunk, make sense? NO! So stop talking.

You miss the point. She is responsible for what SHE did while drunk. And she can easily correct that just by saying 'I said yes drunk, now I'm sober the answer is (still) no.' But she is not responsible for his manipulation. He took advantage, knowing she had already told him no. Do you really think that a decent boyfriend should behave that way? That a woman should have to safeguard herself against her own boyfriend? He should be looking out for her if she's drunk, not looking for an opportunity to trick her into getting engaged and then setting her up so that it's embarrassing for her to try and fix the situation. Stop blaming the victim for the crime.

163 - actually, if someone says yes to sex while blacked out it is still technically rape. Drunk people cannot consent, it's the equivalent of having sex with a minor. 108's comparison was valid.

163 - Quick Google search says apparently you're right. Google also shows that the majority of people still think otherwise and a billion people seem to be asking 'what's the difference between drunk sex and rape' to try and find some sort of line. It seems a dodgey ground that needs clarification. If it's literally all sex after alcohol then that makes half the world rapists and includes times when we KNOW it was in fact consensual and no-one had a problem with it. Weird. I also find it uncomfortable that it all appears to be in favour of the women though female>male rape happens most when drunk and, though women get drunk quicker, it's not like they get drunk and guys don't.

And if you're gonna down thumb me at least have the balls to come out and say why. I don't bite; I actually find this quite interesting and I'm open to debate.

Seriously you're telling her congrats ? After being tricked in to marriage ... Dude your display pic really isn't helping seem like you aren't a creep

Some people are experts on recognizing sarcasm.

It seems 20 is a master of sarcasm.

You expect too much. Most (70%) people can't recognize sarcasm on the internet. If it isn't speech, and there's no body language/voice cues, so recognizing sarcasm is very hard.

Rule of thumb for me is if it sounds ludicrous or beyond the pale I consider it sarcasm. Then again I was the guy that thought Rush Limbaugh was a comedian.

#20, my picture is just for ***** and giggles.

Obviously drunk her said yes. Hence the ring.

A wonderful reference to another FML.

That's not very nice.

She can't keep the ring. If she calls of the engagement, then legally she has to give the ring back because she isn't fulfilling her end of the contract to marry him. She can only keep it if he has done something like cheat on her after giving her the ring or something on that level.

Legally? Contract to marry?! Geeze. Legally she doesn't have to give it back, it's called proper etiquette to give it back. And a ring is NOT a contract to marry somebody.

That may be true for some states in the U.S, but if you are giving an engagement ring you are pretty much making a leap of faith. Most courts would se it as a gift. So keeping the ring would be an expensive lesson for OP's "fiancé".

Actually accepting an engagement ring is basically signing your name to a verbal contract to marry somebody. If you decide to break that contract you do have to give the ring back. People have gone to court over this.

91 I went to court about it as well. My ex thought he had the upper hand since he was a cop and "knows the law" but court ordered in my favor saying it was a gift. In OP's situation, the courts would would be in her favor as well if it got down to that.

Seriously, how do people argue these things when a simple Google search turns up that everything the other people are saying is true? An engagement IS a binding vocal contract, and depending on the state, the ring has to be returned legally, unless the man has cheated.

104, What people SAY is true isn't necessarily true. By your logic, it is perfectly okay to knock out girl with chloroform and then put ring on her hand in order to marry her (I wonder what court would say about it). As far as I know, in order to accept a contract, person should be at least conscious. In some countries said person should also be sober and in right state of mind. I also suppose that vocal agreement would require witness of some sort. Google is not a legal attoerney/authority, by the way.

123 - No but state laws are a legal authority, and some states require the ring to be returned to the man by law, while others say it's considered a gift. Honestly, you should read up and educate yourself. It's a contract in a sense that if you break your end, you forfeit the ring.

145, First, you'll have to prove that there was a marriage proposal, she actually accepted the ring and that the ring wasn't put onto her hand by somebody else without her consent. It is irrelevant whether it is a gift or not, the question is about marriage. Also, I think that your stance on marriage is weird - it looks like you're treating marriage proposal as a purchase of some sort - something like "I give you ring, you devote yourself to me". Which is probably the reason why some couples decide not to marry even if they love each other - they don't need to give each other useless baubles in order to prove that they can be together..

#100, the only way that I can see the courts letting you keep the engagement ring "fairly" is if your ex gave it to you as part of your gift (birthday or Christmas. Etc...) and then courts would ask what type of gifts you gave him on those occasions in return. Just to see if they matched up close in price/value. Engagement rings are a verbal contract. If the marriage doesn't take place, the ring is normally returned to him.

This debate got interesting while I was away. Each state treats it differently. In OPs particular case we really don't know if she even officially accepted the proposal. only that there are pictures and she woke up with a ring implying she was not in a condition accept the terms of any contract.