The article doesn’t say that, and in fact says the opposite: “There is nothing wrong with being in touch with exes, but you should always run it by a current partner. This situation is fine if you aren’t secretly angling for a reconciliation or bored and in need of attention.”
-
-
Replying to @elseifian @HPluckrose
Nothing in the article suggests that there’s anything wrong with friendships or private conversations with exes. Furthermore, it makes clear that the real issue is motivations, and that actions are at worst warnings about what the motivations might be.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @elseifian
I can't read and comprehend it for you. If you can read it & not see the bits where it says liking other people's posts is suspicious especially in the evening or that ppl making platonic friendships are hiding something if they DM, I can't make you see them.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
You're not "comprehending" it, you're reading bits and pieces out of context and then projecting the stupidest possible interpretation every time a quick, loosely written fluff piece isn’t written as tightly as an academic paper.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @elseifian @HPluckrose
It doesn’t say liking someone’s posts is suspicious, it says that repeatedly going to the feed of a specific person who you find attractive and liking many of their posts is.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @elseifian @HPluckrose
The comment about swapping DMs being “undeniably a secretive means of communication” is, indeed, stupid (and seems to reflect that person’s specific use pattern), and I agree that that section is a mess.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @elseifian @HPluckrose
(Though taken as a whole, especially in context of the other sections, it makes more sense read it as talking about messages where 1) the whole discussion is kept secret from the significant other, and 2) the goal is to transition from a platonic to a romantic relationship.)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @elseifian @HPluckrose
Rather than intentionally reading it in the worst light, try reading it as if the people they’re quoting aren’t complete morons, but are instead describing fairly ordinary social norms about honesty in slightly different language than you’d prefer.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @elseifian @HPluckrose
There are some stupid things in the article, and plenty to criticize (I loath the term “micro-cheating”), but that doesn’t justify reading the whole article looking for the most hostile interpretation.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @elseifian
No, honestly. I genuinely disagree with that whole mentality. You can disagree with me too.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.