Yup, you got it. See, you can give advice and warning without having to provide one-sided details of the relationship.
Public remonstration should be reserved for people who use positions of power and threats of physical violence, or like Cosby, drugs.
Got it, you think women should stay silent, except for a few circumstances. Thanks for letting us know, though I think most women will disregard your preference that they keep their mouths shut.
Yeah, he’s stupid. And I would tell him so.
No, I don’t think it’s a good thing. In this case, unlike most of the #metro situations, what needed to change was her behavior. How does it help her to have him exposed if she is going to repeat the same behavior with the next asshole?
That was my reaction, but her “as he was sober, I was not to drink alcohol” was part of Dykstra’s list of abusive behavior, and I wondered how others were interpreting it.
I agree about the dictatorial language being a bad sign.
That’s the type of thing that may come out as the investigation progresses–if he was in the habit of speaking in those ‘that’s going to stop’ terms, he will have done so to more than just this one person, over the years.
So just to be clear. HER behavior was the only behavior that was problematic? You have no criticism for the behavior she described on his part?
She states right at the start of her essay what she hopes to achieve with exposing this behavior. Do you have any problem with those goals?
it’s funny, the mods just told a man to keep.his mouth shut about the behaviour of his ex-wives.
But it’s not “a few circumstances”. Women are faced with sexual assault on a regular basis. They should scream bloody murder when it happens and men should listen. I just don’t think dating an asshole is sexual assault.
Well yes, I called him an asshole, I though that implied I hough his behavior was despicable.
As to her goals, they are great. Did she achieve her goals? I don’t think so. She exposed one guy, who is now married (GOD HELP HER), but I don’t see a lot of self-reflection of how she got in that situation or what she’ll do in the future. Or warning signs for other women.
…if you think the problem was “her behavior”, and if you think that what happened here is “unlike most of the #metro situations”, then you really haven’t listened to many of the #metoo stories at all. I suggest you do a bit more listening.
Its not about “helping her.” Its about helping people who are in similar situations who are reading her story.
…how on earth did you come to that conclusion?
Can you do us all a favor?
Can you write your version of what you think Dykstra should have written? It appears you don’t think there was enough “self-reflection” in her post, so I’d like to see from your perspective what adequate “self-reflection” would look like. What is the correct amount of “self-reflection” required in a blog post to pass the Batano test?
That dog won’t hunt. Try again.
.
And is it not a good thing if his employers, his fans, his friends, and anyone else who might enter into a personal or professional relationship with him in the future know what kind of a man he is? Hasn’t she at the very least done us all this favor?
The way this works is… you are lying about the crazy ex girlfriend. Because any sensible man would have recognized the crazy and gotten out before she became a girlfriend. And your reluctance to share her name or details or any corraborating evidence is further proof of the untruthfulness of your statement.
Now, I believe you have a crazy ex girlfriend. I also think that you have probably vented to people to whom she is identifiable about her behavior, because that is what people do. And quite possibly discussed the details. And perhaps warned off a friend or two once she became your ex.
But since I am assuming that neither you nor your ex is a public personality, not pointing it out to the public at large - who won’t give a damn - isn’t a huge sacrifice since no one outside your immediate circle will give a damn.
It would be reasonable to expect a dating partner to abstain from drinking around someone who requested such because they are a recovering alcoholic.
To demand that they do this (as indicated in the article) and demand that not only is drinking around them forbidden but any drinking at all, is not what I would call reasonable at all. It’s controlling and disrespectful of the other person’s autonomy.
I’m pregnant right now. No alcohol for me. My husband shows solidarity by also not drinking, which I’m hugely appreciative of (didn’t even need to ask him to do this).But I told him this act of solidarity should be situation-dependent; it does neither of us any good if he can’t have a beer when he’s out with friends while I’m away somewhere doing my own thing. Why should I care as long as he’s not coming home drunk? A loving partner would at least think twice before asking their partner to make symbolic sacrifices for them.
I think Dykstra’s point is not that the alcohol thing alone was abusive, but that it fit a larger pattern of controlling behavior that younger her was too quick to dismiss as no big deal. Perhaps another person reading this will take note if a dating partner demands something similar, maybe even offer some resistance. Maybe they will even get out.
I disagree with this pretty strongly. Recovering addicts need to be able to set whatever boundaries they feel are necessary to protect their sobriety, and those boundaries are going to be variable depending on the addict and the nature of their addiction. I think it’s 100% reasonable for an addict to say, “I can’t risk my sobriety by dating someone who uses alcohol, even if it’s not around me.” Hell, I think it’s 100% reasonable for anyone to say that using alcohol - or any other drug - is a deal breaker. I don’t think there’s anything wrong, in principle, with establishing early in a relationship that one of the ground rules for the relationship is not using any sort of drug, and letting the other person decide if the potential in the relationship is worth going sober or not.
That being said, just because it’s possible to have a requirement like this that’s not controlling or abusive, doesn’t mean it can’t also be done in a way that **is **controlling or abusive. But it still bothers me that this was included in the story - there’s enough other damning material in there that it’s not necessary, and I think including it here muddies some very valid concerns about addicts being able to set boundaries necessary to their own recovery.
I think it comes down to who has the locus of responsibility-
Does he feel that the woman is wrong for not complying (the expectation is she must agree or she is a bad girlfriend) or is it that the addict accepts that issue is his and chooses to move on (she is not wrong for not agreeing, t’s just a poor match between them and it won’t work out).
He might be disappointed and hurt, but understands the issue is his as compared to her being wrong for not listening. The ask and the end point might be the same, but it goes to how he respects a woman’s right to have autonomy.
On the other hand, addicts - whether in recovery or not - tend to have really shitty behavior patterns with regards to other people. They are often manipulative and controlling - its part of feeding and hiding and maintaining the addiction. So while their sobriety is important, its important to self-distinguish behavior done to maintain sobriety, and behavior being done as part of the habits of manipulating and controlling others. Its really important for an addict to also free themselves of an addicts behavior patterns regarding others.
Did you even read the article? The dang thing closes by saying the flags she used to overlook because she was wearing rose colored glasses were actually red flags. It’s unfortunate that this piece she even goes so far as to call a confession doesn’t strike you as sufficiently self-flagellating, but there is no indication she hasn’t learned from his experience.
I guess it depends on how this relayed, and also the context. Is the person presenting this as a request that acknowledges this might be asking a lot of someone? Is this boundary-setting communicated in a nonnegotiable, my way or the highway kind of way, *after * a committed relationship is established? Or is this something disclosed well before hand?
An alcoholic can have whatever boundaries they want to have, but if they pursue a relationship with someone whom they know drinks, yeah, I’m going to see it as controlling if they insist (not just ask) that their partner stays sober too. We could just as easily be talking about any hang up, really. If you have a food addiction and therefore have to stick to a certain diet, as a supportive spouse it almost goes without saying that I would abstain from eating junk food around you. But if the mere idea of me eating sugary snacks at the office completely sight unseen by you violates * your* boundaries, then this tells me that your boundaries overlap with my personal space a whole lot. Maybe this doesn’t make you abusive, but it would absolutely be a warning sign that I’m dealing with a personality type that is more controlling than not. If I wasn’t particular assertive with my own boundaries, it would be in my best interest to look at you carefully.
Perhaps if she said he’d approached the issue as a request and not an edict, then I would agree with you. But the very manner in which he apparently communicated this expectation to her is relevant to her story.
It seems to me it’s the recovering addict’s responsibility to make clear before there is any relationship or emotional involvement that he can’t be involved with someone who has wine with dinner or whatever the limits are.
It seems clear that he sprung it on her after there was already some kind of commitment, whether it was after she moved in with him isn’t exactly clear.
And the words used — “that’s going to end,” or whatever — is more than a little manipulative. He’s seems to be conditioning her to surrender all her independent decision making to him.