You Suck, Part 1: Alicia Cox in Chatelaine

I plan on making this a very regular feature on Stuff by Sigmund.  And with shit like this article around, it will be very regular indeed.

Alicia Cox's "The Pros and Cons of Dating an Ex" exemplifies the kind of vapid, insubstantial trash writing that dominates the Lifestyle section of MSN.ca.  (The fact that it came from a Chatelaine article of the same name suggests to me that that magazine can’t be much better.  I can’t say for sure; not being a middle-aged woman, I have never read a copy of Chatelaine.)  It makes blogging look bad.  It drags down internet writing as an honest pursuit.

But that just seems like puerile venting when I write it like that.  Let’s be more surgical, shall we?   

1. If you need to read an article in order to know when it is appropriate to date your ex, you are a fucking moron.  You clearly don’t have an ounce of common sense, you are likely self-destructive and needy, and I want you out of the gene pool before you pollute it with idiot children.  Be in a relationship or don’t be.  Set your boundaries and grow the fuck up.  By writing this article, Cox is enabling thousands – perhaps millions – of insecure, clingy, dependant women in their Sex and the City inspired quests for Mr. Big.
2. This title makes no sense at all.  This is not a pros and cons article.  You would think that a professional writer would remember learning about a “pros and cons” structure in the seventh grade, but clearly Cox missed that day because she presents nothing more than a list of scenarios and generalities.  In fact, she doesn’t even do that.  Items 1 and 2 (“The Wedding Date” and “The Work Party”) are situations, while 3 (“The Random Hook Up”) straddles between a situation and a person, and 4 (“The Lingerer”) isn’t a situation at all.  It’s a person.  What’s worse is that Cox starts the damn thing talking about there being “two types of break-ups: the ones that stick and the ones that slide.” She then ditches that structural concept in favour of… well... whatever-the-fuck it ends up being.
3. Melissa, Kyle, and Erin are useless idiots.  I don’t know who these people are, and I don’t care.  I can tell that at least two of them are loose as blouses and the third, while happy, is a slow learner.  In addition, the info is so vague and useless that it could as easily be made up as derived from interviews.
4. People can comment on this flimsy excuse for writing.  I’m sure that it’s a standard thing on MSN.ca, but the bottom line is that there are few things less brainless than a bad article on relationships.  Other than, of course, unsolicited commentary from even stupider people. 
5. “Information is current as of the original date of publication.”  What the fuck?  What information?  There is nothing in this worth calling information.  It would be hilarious if it wasn’t so fucking sad.

This is shit, pure and simple.  Anyone can make it, there’s no shortage of it lying around, and all of it smells.