Comment by aeturnum

3 hours ago

Like true love, I somewhat believe this can exist, but most of the people who talk like this are in a codependent relationship. It's just extremely unlikely that a person you're seeing romantically is also interested in all the other things you've got going on. They should support you in your endeavors in general, but often in the way parents might ("ya winning son"?).

Instead, the best relationship for most people will not be all encompassing. Your partner will love you for you and encourage you, will know what you're up to and keep track, but will also have areas and interests that you aren't into. For me, a lot of my growth has come from the areas where partners are into things I'm not: I don't change to be like them, but through their eyes I learn to see things in new ways (while still liking what I like). It can go too far in the other direction - but for most people having parts of your life your partner is not very involved in is a sign of maturity and strength. A strong relationship is a base from which you can set out into the world on your own terms, free to return to that relationship in the future.

Have you read TFA? I think you're reading 'all-encompassing' too literally and make it seem that the author has his girlfriend substitute friends, colleagues and they're in some 'total life overlap' mode. But if you read it through, he's presenting how they're just sharing emotions openly with one another and letting each other 'in' on what they're up to from time to time.

For example:

"even if they don't have the background or experience that you do, and vice versa, you can both be patient with each other and spend loving time in harmonious movement."

"She showed me her spotify playlist (it was so cool, nothing i'd heard before) and I should her my claude coded landing page. "

Also, if this was already in the article before you posted your comment, I'd say it's simply moot: "Some might say this is unhealthy or codependent or some stupid diagnosis without analyzing any symptoms. Let me explain the symptoms. It starts where most relationships buckle under stress"

  • I suppose I am reacting to lines like these in the article:

    > Now I don't even need to blog. I just talk to Alex and I feel satisfied.

    > In our household, we are now doing Friday demos, just me and Alex. We're each sharing something we shipped the previous week.

    > For example, when we exercise, we each have different goals and needs but we still try to go to the gym with each other if we can and it's not too much hassle.

    These are fine - and like I said it could be real - but often this is how people describe codependency.

    I want to highlight a "mixed" passage part way through where the author restates their thesis:

    > The best relationships truly are all-encompassing, and it's okay to talk about your deepest, darkest inner things

    The first half of this sentence talks about being all-encompassing - i.e. the ways in which the partnership has come to be central in all things it can be central in. That is what feels codependent-y to me. The second half of the sentence describes intimacy and it has nothing to do with shared activities. You do not need to have any sort of "encompassing" relationship to comfortably discuss your deepest darkest feelings - you just need trust and an appropriate interlocutor. It's the conflating of "doing everything together" with "intimacy" that makes me worry.

    But again - the author could be right! I suspect this is real sometimes.