[ SECRET POST #4983 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4983 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________


03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.

























Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 07 secrets from Secret Submission Post #713.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I love them, too, but I'm also not convinced that "codependent" is automatically a bad thing. I mean, a lot of what are considered "great romances" are also codependent as hell, and I feel like you constantly hear stories about couples who got together as teenagers and were married for like 60 years and were never apart and seemed super codependent, and have a bunch of kids and grandkids and everyone commends them for having this great relationship/marriage.

OP

[(Anonymous)]

I agree with this, actually. I think codependent relationships are quite likely to be unhealthy, but I don't think they're inherently toxic. I do think that even in a non-toxic codependent relationship there are bound to be problem areas. But you could say the same about almost any relationship.

I guess the thing about codependent relationships, though, is that even when they're not toxic, there's a vulnerability inherent in them because both parties are placing too many of their eggs in one basket, and that's never ideal.

So like, I wouldn't recommend codependency, even in its healthiest forms. But I also don't think every codependent relationship is the same. Abuse is not a foregone conclusion, nor is extreme dysfunction.

Re: OP

[(Anonymous)]

ayrt

Yeah, I get what you mean. Honestly, I think a lot of it depends on your perspective, and how you define "codependent". I just think it's interesting that what some people define as codependent is seen by a lot of other people as the ideal romantic relationship.

I'm really not sure how I personally would define it, except maybe just a relationship where you're so obsessed with the other person that it negatively affects your or their life, but I've seen people automatically label a relationship "codependent" (and therefore bad) because it doesn't fit what's seen as "normal". Like, if two friends or family members have a relationship that's super close and devoted in a way that would be seen as normal if they were dating/married, but because they're not it's suddenly "codependent" and wrong, even though it doesn't have negatively affect either of them (other than people giving them crap for it). IDK if I'm even making any sense, but I guess my point is that I just think it's subjective to a large degree. (I mean, obviously I'm not going to recommend/encourage a relationship that I view as unhealthy, but that doesn't mean that a relationship I think is completely fine won't be seen as codependent/bad by other people.)

Re: OP

[(Anonymous)]

NAYRT, but I think the negative aspect of codependency that's always present, even in "ideal romantic relationships" that are codependent, is that one or both partners can't function without the other. So not just "I would both die and kill for you," but also "I can't do a bunch of stuff without you because you always did it for me, so I never had to learn," whether that's making doctor's appointments, maintaining friend or family relationships, or even stuff like emotional regulation.

Re: OP

[(Anonymous)]

ayrt

Oh, definitely. I consider those things to fall under the negative impact I mentioned. I've known so many middle aged men who basically cannot survive on their own because their wives do everything for them, and whether it's codependent is kind of irrelevant to me because I think of it as just...failing at the basics of being an adult. But like, a situation like that where, say, his wife dies, and he's a mess because he just took for granted that she'd always be there and do all those things for him, and he'd never have to learn, a lot of people would look at the situation and say "awww, poor guy, he's lost without her, it's so sad". And I'm not by any means trying to defend that "oh, it's so romantic" mindset because to be completely honest, I think it's kind of pathetic, I'm just saying a lot of people think that way.

I guess my objection is that there's not any cut and dry consensus on what constitutes "codependent" and a lot of the time it seems to be based on not understanding something. As a random example, there's a family friend who lives with her mom. They're both entirely capable of being self-sufficient adults and living alone (and did for several years) but the daughter lost her job and got one making much less money, and the mom admitted that she was a bit lonely in the house by herself since her husband had died a few years before, so it made sense for the daughter to move in with her mom. There are several people I know who've called them "codependent" for seemingly no reason other than that an adult living with a parent is seen as "weird" here, even though they're both more than capable of taking care of themselves and I personally wouldn't consider them "codependent" any more than random roommates. (They get along well, and seem to enjoy living together, but very clearly have their own lives.)