>>7624311So you're positing the causal inference that addiction is already common and so is normal.
This has nothing to do with relationships but rather the terms to socialization within a particular sub-set of the group. Maybe it's just around your friends that this kind of crap is normal and not necessarily within the city/state/country you live in. Your argument hinges on a personal responsibility that isn't being recognized, or a futility that is being flouted, due to a societal norm that states, discretely, that if you obey from the get go, you won't be cast out but that if you disobey and then find yourself struggling, you need to just be completely servile and subordinate if you want to make more friends. The problem with this is that just as this clause stands for redemption, people aren't allowed to make new friends because they represent the notion of disobedience. There's also the fact that some people can support what was deemably an addiction and live normal lives because their social circle isn't quite so stringent on conduciveness as a result but rather money or some other term.
Women that are not also deemably "addicts" will not mess with addicts because those addicts represent something that some other societal norm has a ruling against. It's exclusivity, not by nature, by through schema and the channeling of logical derivatives where upon the terms do not relate and simply act as a point of induction through a system that abounds nothing it can't directly control or advocate through itself, whether those things are actually healthy or conducive.
