Comments

1
Block his number
2
Digital devices make it so easy to be codependently pathetic...
3
20 times a day. This guy is not your ex.
4
Yep, the ex sounds just as pathetic as she seems.
5
Really girl, what is your problem.
Let this weirdo go. Cut him off and out. What is his game? Whatever it is, you are not doing yourself any favours by continuing this way.
Say Bye Bye and go have your life. Alone to start with, get a bit of strength back, then look for a decent man to be with.
6
Do schools not teach kids what homophones are these days? Such as: cord and chord (surely the Stranger editors could have fixed JAT's typo), rein and reign? People talking about "free reign" and "vocal chords" just make me want to strangle somebody!
7
@6 I hear you about the vocal chords. But "free reign" isn't necessarily a failure to recognize homophones, it could or simply be a misunderstanding of the origins of the idiom. It kind of makes sense to interpret the expression to mean "allowed to rule freely."
8
@4: Well yeah, but while an attempt to humanize, it also shows that sometimes the boyfriend blows smoke up his girlfriend's ass about how the ex girlfriend "needs him" and not about his own codependent behaviors. For every "damaged damsel in distress", there's a white knight who wallows in the suffering and is drawn to women who are less than whole.
9
At least free reign, while wrong, makes some amount of retcon sense (and is apparently more popular than the initial idiom.)
10
@8 - probably the case here. Once the ex starts acting like she's healthy, he will lose interest.
11
So will she!
12
Free reign - it's an eggcorn! From which grow mighty oaks.

Now'scuse me, while I kiss this guy.

- Secret Asian Man.
13
Blows smoke up his girlfriend's ass, undead? Do men do these things?
Classic way of saying it. No room for confusion with the motivation there.
Keep the women hopping.
14
@13: "Blows smoke up his girlfriend's ass, undead? Do men do these things?"

Hahaha, I have no clue whence the idiom originated, but it is certainly a mental image when decontextualized. Are bellows involved?
15
It's a good one. Get to hear a lot of the strategies males use on this thread. Trade secrets, you could say.
16
This is a perfect example of the nice vs. kind divide. It's nice to text someone hourly if they are stuck at home on NYE. But it's kind to give your ex distance when you've dumped her, or at least to respect her space when she starts getting over you and pulling away for real.

LW, why not just be single for a bit? Cut ALL the cords, learn what life is like in a quiet apartment without a constantly beeping phone, concentrate on friendships, hobbies, travel, volunteering. Get to know yourself again.
17
oh, it's much simpler than all this: no one wants to acknowledge that "happiness" is not possible by cultivating, breaking, hanging onto or cutting cords of relationships. It just doesn't live there. It lives in one's relationship to one's self. Period. Everything else is an expression of codependence.
18
undead @14: "an insufflation of tobacco smoke into the rectum by enema, was a medical treatment employed by European physicians for a range of ailments."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco_sm…

I don't know if that antiquated practice has any connection to the contemporary phrase, but I could see such useless quackery as the origin of the saying.

And while we're on the subject of mangled idioms and weird things people say, can we stop saying the proof is in the pudding which makes no sense. The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Please.
19
@18: Nah, I think it's just the usual laying down of smoke to distract and obfuscate the situation in front of you. "Blowing smoke" is a less vulgar version that contains the same meaning as used.

Of course, it could be a strange hybrid of the two.
20
@8, 9, 10: Yup.
21
What a ludicrous idea. What could that possible achieve?
Life hating people who take other's lives, want that. Everyone to stop living, celebrating, loving- just like in their world.
22
Oops. Wrong thread. It is early!
23
LavaGirl just made my day.
24
I think another important thing to consider is that the "ex texts" tend to try and fill a hole that their current relationship isn't filling. Not necessarily all of the time, it doesn't mean her current relationship relationship is even that awful. When her boyfriend is away or being curt or even if she's just projecting insecurities and nothing is actually wrong, she may just be using him to reassure herself that she's still worthwhile in those lulls because "Nice Guy" is still talking to her. Like a confidence/worth supplement. Like she has to convince herself that she is attractive and worthwhile to other people, not just her boyfriend.
25
Sorry ex. But just because the ex is you doesn't mean she's not pathetic.
26
@24: I think we've all experienced insecurities at some point and understand the whys, but that still doesn't make the codependent behavior healthy.
27
@18, Amen. Could we also quit saying, "To each their own"? Each is singular and their is the plural possessive, which makes it ridiculous. How about the way it really goes: "To each, his or her own."
28
divachels @27, there is a good argument to be made for the usage of their as a gender-neutral, singular pronoun. However, I'd still go for one in that instance, over his or her.

In any case, to each, one's own.
29
Just bear in mind that if you do try to pull away properly, and he doesn't like it, he will find a way to reel you back in, pronto. There will be some kind of crisis which only you can help him with. It sounds like he's doing that already and it will happen to a greater extent the harder you try to get away.

Personally I've found that when I'm getting involved with someone and they don't feel the same, they will cling on just for the ego boost. It's cruel but that's what people are like sometimes.

So it needs to be final but possibly time-limited, so you get your breathing space but he isn't tempted to pull any of those kinds of stunts.
30
@25 Exactly what I was thinking

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.