tldr thinking about someone's ventpost about their ex isn't worth your time, don't read it, ignore all of the discourse. unfortunately i did not do that
i am annoyed by the lack of reading comprehension that the disgruntled readership of tara knight's most recent essay/ventpost/article are demonstrating here. both the author & the puppygirl suck! no one wants anyone to Literally Die. i saw the archived version and found her remarks about wearing womanhood as a costume to be transmisogynistic; the puppygirl archetype described is familiar to me but in no way unique or special to a certain agab. the "marxist analysis" is inappropriately applied, cold, and lacking compassion. i personally believe that relationships aren't transactional and shouldn't be framed that way. but i don't like how people are talking about this and it seems that they didn't even read the text that they're complaining about.
i keep seeing the complaint that the woman/author is in the wrong because she did not communicate. if you read the substack, this is not true—she gently brings up doing the dishes, paying rent, wanting to be able to say no to sex—and each conversation is shut down by the puppygirl partner. these aren't one-off either, these are patterns. it's not about her not doing the dishes, it's about her not being able to talk to her partners about anything serious or difficult. if you want to maintain a healthy relationship, then you need to be able to communicate with your partners, and you should ideally foster an environment where they can do so freely (& not feel coerced into having sex). being mentally ill makes this more difficult and i understand that. it also doesn't absolve you of your obligation to be good to others or absolve you of the harm you may have done to them.
the other topic that her piece of writing deals with is the unspoken expectation in your average romantic relationship to perform care beyond one's limits (if you Really love someone). i'm personally not one for any kind of unspoken expectation and prefer these things to be explicitly discussed with me. i am not looking for / don't have the capacity to perform the extent of care that was expected in the article, on par with parenting a child. having that discussion about the amount of care needed or expected by the puppygirl would have caught this conflict much earlier & prevented the build of resentment. i don't think it's bad or wrong to not want to become someone's caretaker (to the detriment of your health, finances, livelihood, etc), even if you've been dating for a while, and especially if you've never discussed that kind of commitment.
in her mind, the woman/author can't just end the relationship without a better reason than being unhappy and she keeps looking for one (thus the "marxist" framing). if you're unhappy in a relationship, then you can leave. you don't need more of an explanation, like summing up the value of your labor versus what you get in exchange. i think one of her reasons for staying is that disabled trans women are at the intersection of two marginalized groups and especially vulnerable, so she would feel guilt about withdrawing her support (and i think the puppygirl plays into this guilt somewhat). but here the puppygirl has others to support her. in a different situation, where those are lacking, the kind thing to do would be ending the relationship while also offering to help her transition and make arrangements for care for a fixed amount of time. depending on specific needs, you can help her apply for low income housing, food stamps, get a social worker (possibly one specializing in disability benefits like SOAR), adult foster care, etc. ending a relationship where you have been a caregiver to your partner is more complicated and requires more thought because you could seriously harm your partner, but there is a compassionate way to go about separating.
i don't think the puppygirl had all of these needs though; it seemed like she needed a cheap pair of gloves to overcome the sensory issues of washing dishes, maybe therapy/medication for helping her deal with her anxiety and emotional dysregulation, help applying to section 8 and food stamps.. she is certainly not owed these, but i think it's the kind thing to do rather than removing all of the supports she has been depending on at once.
this isn't a defense of the text or author but i think it's basically fine to vent your anonymized frustrations about your ex (unwise to do so attached to your name on a fairly public platform, but fine). individuals are responsible for what they expose themselves to online (i thought we've already litigated this plenty of times). no one is forcing people to read an article that will upset them. if you feel compelled to read it but know that you shouldn't, consider blocking the domain and blacklisting related terms.
