Alpine Divorce: A Hike That Ends a Relationship(nytimes.com)
nytimes.com
Alpine Divorce: A Hike That Ends a Relationship
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/12/style/alpine-divorce-relationships-hike.html
15 comments
And the logical extension would be don't go hiking with anyone who might split the party or strand you, I suppose.
Well, as much as one might.
Many of the very good lessons of goofing around climbing with randos has been refined skills at evaluating partners, which I had not previously considered to be a skill that could be developed in its own right and which has served me quite well as I have worked at it in my larger life.
Many of the very good lessons of goofing around climbing with randos has been refined skills at evaluating partners, which I had not previously considered to be a skill that could be developed in its own right and which has served me quite well as I have worked at it in my larger life.
The "Alpine Divorce" demonstrates the way in which too many of us have been conditioned to be selfish, inconsiderate, and uncaring of our partners and avoidant of providing any of their needs that don't match our own.
It's not just about simple miscommunications nor a mismatch in interests and physical abilities. Instead, leaving your partner behind on a hike demonstrates a major lack of concern of anyone outside oneself.
Leading some to think it's perfectly reasonable to prioritize finishing their little walk over staying with and caring for their partner in a time of need.
Every "alpine hike" might not be mortally dangerous, but that's not the only justification for needing care.
I suspect many relationships that ended after such hikes likely included previous moments of similarly demonstrated lack of care that were easier to ignore.
Loving someone is effortful and requires the selfless giving of oneself in time, energy and attention. Abandoning someone and leaving them alone on their own - even in familiar terrain, but especially when it's not - is the exact opposite of loving.
I'm glad everyone involved were able to see that their personal needs weren't being met and find ways to ask to have them met going forward.
It's not just about simple miscommunications nor a mismatch in interests and physical abilities. Instead, leaving your partner behind on a hike demonstrates a major lack of concern of anyone outside oneself.
Leading some to think it's perfectly reasonable to prioritize finishing their little walk over staying with and caring for their partner in a time of need.
Every "alpine hike" might not be mortally dangerous, but that's not the only justification for needing care.
I suspect many relationships that ended after such hikes likely included previous moments of similarly demonstrated lack of care that were easier to ignore.
Loving someone is effortful and requires the selfless giving of oneself in time, energy and attention. Abandoning someone and leaving them alone on their own - even in familiar terrain, but especially when it's not - is the exact opposite of loving.
I'm glad everyone involved were able to see that their personal needs weren't being met and find ways to ask to have them met going forward.
Oddly I went hiking with my then girlfriend and discovered that I'm not great at altitude. I believe I told her that she should go on to the top and I'd just sit down and take a break. Maybe a nap. To her credit she saw that for awful idea that was and instead slowed down and encouraged me onward.
I'm not saying that's why I proposed but it definitely didn't hurt. It was just one more instance that reality threw in my face that the two of us worked well together.
I'm not saying that's why I proposed but it definitely didn't hurt. It was just one more instance that reality threw in my face that the two of us worked well together.
Not about Alpine linux, which I would imagine to end a relationship better than some mountains
Both may result in musl soreness.
Thank you for forcing me to clean my keyboard.
</s>
:->
:->
I suspect the "alpine divorce" phenomenon is the same desire to test influence dangerously attempted in a higher stakes environment. "No, let's go to this restaurant" becomes "Let's take this path" or "Let's take a break" and refusal to entertain tests of influence to alter the plan are recast as attempted murder.
https://twitter.com/JamesLNuzzo/status/2037859859585179746
https://twitter.com/JamesLNuzzo/status/2037859859585179746
A certain flavour of “shit testing”
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=shit%20test&...
It’s easy to criticise Sara, but Sara had a man with her who should have acted like a man.
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=shit%20test&...
It’s easy to criticise Sara, but Sara had a man with her who should have acted like a man.
[deleted]
Honestly this feels like a psyop. Like it's just meant to discourage people from wanting to do outdoors stuff together or going out into nature in general.
I've seen a lot of sensationalist articles lately about getting abandoned on hikes. A tiktok got shared to me about it, just some woman ranting in a touristy outdoors area about how she got ditched. Whose to say that even really happened? Almost certainly just pure engagement bait that's being spun into a "trend".
I've seen a lot of sensationalist articles lately about getting abandoned on hikes. A tiktok got shared to me about it, just some woman ranting in a touristy outdoors area about how she got ditched. Whose to say that even really happened? Almost certainly just pure engagement bait that's being spun into a "trend".
Subjects trending on TikTok are now the basis for an NYT piece. No further comment.
Alpine hiking is a strenuous (by today's standards) and hazardous activity that requires some preparation, is done in relative isolation, demands collaboration from partners, and must be seen-through once started.
It's also sometimes confused by the initiated but perky partners with merely taking a long walk.
These features add-up to a test that may break any relationship.
When the discomfort of the exertion is regarded alongside the common tendencies of co-dependency which attend couples, such as dominance and submission, domestic friction, control issues, boundary issues, resentments, and neuroses are mixed with physical stress disorientation, fatigue, exposure and/or confusion/fear/anger, the challenge might become mortal for the relationship.
The risk is attenuated by couple's typical tendencies towards group-think: over-familiarity and dismissiveness, co-joined planning and reactions, emotionalism, unresolved bones of contention and/or sequestered stresses/alienations that distort a merely risky situation into a life-threatening one.
In more basic terms, undertaking an unguided travel challenge with a mate will lead to trenchant discovery of one's interpersonal limits, and this may include a relationship apocalypse. Such activities are a good test between amorous partners who are considered marriage: if you get along well during an ordeal, you may have what it takes to make a life together. If you don't get along through an ordeal, that's good to know early so you don't overcommit.
It's also sometimes confused by the initiated but perky partners with merely taking a long walk.
These features add-up to a test that may break any relationship.
When the discomfort of the exertion is regarded alongside the common tendencies of co-dependency which attend couples, such as dominance and submission, domestic friction, control issues, boundary issues, resentments, and neuroses are mixed with physical stress disorientation, fatigue, exposure and/or confusion/fear/anger, the challenge might become mortal for the relationship.
The risk is attenuated by couple's typical tendencies towards group-think: over-familiarity and dismissiveness, co-joined planning and reactions, emotionalism, unresolved bones of contention and/or sequestered stresses/alienations that distort a merely risky situation into a life-threatening one.
In more basic terms, undertaking an unguided travel challenge with a mate will lead to trenchant discovery of one's interpersonal limits, and this may include a relationship apocalypse. Such activities are a good test between amorous partners who are considered marriage: if you get along well during an ordeal, you may have what it takes to make a life together. If you don't get along through an ordeal, that's good to know early so you don't overcommit.
Please stop using LLMs to post for you. This could have been two sentences long. Every sentences is saying the same thing.
Two very basic facts emerge:
- about a 25% of the accidents they list would not have been accidents if a helmet had been worn
- a significant number of incidents are caused by folks splitting up for some reason
The large point that I've take into later life: there's nothing special about me that exempts me from statistics.
So when I can I wear a helmet while climbing and never split the party in the mountains.