A planned reunion between two old friends descended into acrimony after one man launched a stinging critique of the other's life and career choices, branding him insufficiently 'manly' for his role as a part-time working father.
The Reunion That Went Sour
The reader, writing to The Independent's agony aunt Victoria 'Vix' Richards, explained he had been eagerly anticipating catching up with his old university friend, Neil*. Initially, the meeting was positive, with the pair discussing their children, partners, and hobbies like cycling and CrossFit. Their shared history, having met in a university film club, provided ample common ground.
The atmosphere shifted dramatically when Neil began to mock his friend's career path. The writer is a part-time teacher, while his wife is a lawyer and the main household earner. The couple made a conscious decision that one parent would be available after school for their three children, and as the lower earner, he reduced his hours.
"I'm totally fine with it. In fact, I love it," he wrote, detailing the joy of school pick-ups and taking his children to clubs. However, Neil framed this arrangement as a source of embarrassment, implying the reader was not being "man" enough by being an almost stay-at-home dad.
Navigating the Aftermath and Friendship
Stunned by the comments, the reader did not challenge Neil at the time, leading to an awkward end to the evening. The incident, however, left him furious and questioning the friendship. The letter was published on Thursday 15 January 2026, seeking advice on how to respond.
In her response, Vix urged the writer to evaluate what the friendship truly offers him. She is a firm believer in not persisting with toxic relationships that drain energy rather than radiate positivity. "Most of us have very little free time... so I want you to be sure this person is someone who actively brings joy and meaning to your life, rather than negativity," she advised.
Understanding the Motives and Moving Forward
Vix suggested several possible motives for Neil's outburst. It could have been a one-off, born from stress or a bad mood. Alternatively, it might reflect Neil's own insecurities or envy of a setup that allows for more family time. "Often, the things that trigger us reflect insecurities we hold about ourselves," she noted.
She presented the reader with a choice: directly call out the behaviour and likely receive an apology, or give the friendship another chance while remaining vigilant. She cautioned with the adage, "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me," advising a serious reconsideration if the jibes continue.
The agony aunt also posed a reflective question: whether the criticism stung so deeply because it touched on a personal nerve worth exploring. Ultimately, she empowered the reader to prioritise his own wellbeing, whether that means confrontation or distancing himself from a negative influence.
