181
Women are being abandoned by their partners on hiking trails. What’s behind ‘alpine divorce’?
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2026
181 points (85.8% liked)
World News
54843 readers
3020 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Maybe “MJ” herself is a shitty person, and roped some equally shitty dude into a shitty time and he decided on the way up “fuck this lady” on a probably very easy day hike and ditched her.
Hmm yes must be the evil women's fault somehow
DUDE! I hike. If you leave together, you FUCKING come back together. YOU want to break up, put on your big boy panties and do it AFTER everyone is home safe.
Also there is no such thing as "an easy day hike." Anything can go wrong in the wilderness and lackadaisical thinking is what gets people killed.
You completely missed his point lol.
I don't see how that's true
There are plenty of safe and easy trails out there. Again. My point is if the dude found another floozy at the top of a mountain and went off with her 1) it was probably a very active trail and 2) both people were probably able to hike it solo and also kinda shitty.
I don't care if they were the worst people on earth walking the easier hiking path on the nicest day of the year. None of that matters! They left on a hike TOGETHER, and needed to return TOGETHER.
Full stop.
Anyone who can't follow that one simple rule has no business out on the trails.
Maybe she was shitty, but we know he was. You never abandon your hiking partner under any circumstances.
Reminds me of people going out and drinking and abandoning their friend who then gets SA. It is import to go out with good people not superficial cunts.
If you don't like them then don't hike with them again. It is that simple unless you are a sociopath.
The fact that he was reported to “hike down with some other woman.” And that she was able to complete the hike herself tells me it was a very easy trail and heavily populated. Just a dumb story of two assholes one of which decided to make her shitty date into an avenue of internet content for the hopeful attempt at gaining some influence. The dude was probably just annoyed and childishly trying to cause an issue with her and was like “I’m gonna walk the half mile down the 0 grade dirt path to the car with Stacy, babe.”
You don't abandon someone period unless you are a sociopath. I get that you would abandon someone and let them die, get raped, assaulted, etc.
Choose your friends/partners very carefully.
We are just built differently I guess.
it's not like the article or the phenomenon of "alpine divorces" rests on this single story, either, there were many stories shared in the article:
or
This last one really confuses me. Like if somebody knocked my camera down some rocks, I would go down and get it unless I thought they were experiencing a medical emergency of some kind.
Is Vertago a serious condition? I thought it meant getting dizzy when you're afraid of heights. I suppose if I were in that position I would want to sit down with my hiking partner and make sure we had a plan like hey I know you're feeling uncomfortable, but it doesn't look like you're in any danger. I need to get that camera back because it is expensive. I'll meet you back here and we can hike down together.
Also, and I'm asking this out of pure ignorance, If someone has vertigo, at what point is it their responsibility to turn back rather than put themselves in an uncomfortable position? Maybe they shouldn't have gone up where the camera got knocked down in the first place. But on the other hand maybe it happens by surprise and there's no predicting it.
vertigo is very dangerous on a trail with heights and steep drops like that, because you can't balance yourself - it's very scary and dangerous in a situation like that.
Hell, even in my house I've had vertigo I was worried would result in my hitting my head or falling, just trying to navigate getting to a bed. Severe vertigo can additionally cause lots of distress, I can understand someone not wanting to be left alone in the middle of an episode.
That said, I understand wanting to go get your camera - I just think it is clear he prioritized the camera over her. The point isn't that the camera is worthless, or it's always wrong to look for the camera - but that you probably shouldn't prioritize the camera over the well-being of another person who probably shouldn't be left alone in that moment, and who has no independent way to get back to the trailhead without you.
A lot of this has to do with the dependence they have on the person, and the person's responsibility to care in that moment.
That all makes sense about what vertigo is, and where the priorities lie. I guess the part that wasn't clear to me in the article was whether they had made a plan for the guy to come back after retrieving the camera or if he had just left her there and gone back on his own. Also what was happening with her leading up to knocking the camera over, and if there weren't any warning signs either of them could have listened to to prevent the situation from deteriorating so far.
Just because if I am putting myself in the shoes of either person, the decisions of both of them don't really make sense to me. If I'm the one having vertigo, I'm going to do what I need to to make it better, wait in a safe place for him to get the camera and come back, and communicate this plan, unless I truly need rapid evac in which case I ask for it.
If I'm the guy, I make sure the person with vertigo is safe, relaxed as much as possible, with other people if possible, with any supplies I can spare, and OK with me leaving. Then I leave my pack, go down the steep terrain to get the camera, come back, and help her evac. Or if we've met any good Samaritans, make some kind of plan to meet them further down if climbing back up isn't realistic.
Maybe I just can't fathom a douchebag being like, "sucks to suck, I'm getting the camera you knocked over in your sudden unexpected vertigo, and leaving you alone, high and dry." Who does that?? Guys in the article I guess.
Vertigo can just be dizziness/disorientation full stop. It can be from heights, it can happen from a brain injury, from being sick, and it can be completely unpredictable.
Thanks for the explanation. It sounds like depending on the underlying cause of the vertigo, it could either be safe for them to wait, sitting down in shade, with other people, for the other person to retrieve the camera, or unsafe if it is from a serious medical condition. I guess the part that's still a mystery to me is how severe vertigo would happen to somebody out of the blue, without other details making it clear if you needed evac or not. If it was really bad and really sudden, and not improving, that would be cause for rapid evac precisely because it is a mystery!
I feel like if I was in that situation, I would want more context to know whether they were improving with rest, shade, food, and water, and it might be safe to leave them and get my camera; or whether it was an emergency and we prioritize them and their evac over the camera.
In either case, if they're scared and don't want me to leave, I don't see how I'm gonna get my camera back, unfortunately.
To be clear, it's wrong to abandon somebody in need. I just wish I knew more details to understand the situation better. It just seems like there must have been signs before this that something wasn't right before both of them are together, dangerously close to a cliff and able to knock a camera down. But maybe not, we weren't there.
I hope this never happens to me.
Oh no! If you leave a woman behind in any location she gets raped a murdered immediatly!
I’m not saying abandon someone on a fucking backpacking trip in the deep country; just saying this story reeks of a rich old-millennial/young-Gen X content creator causing a noise to make some content for their socials and not a genuine “trend” of men abandoning women on fucking glaciers.
I don't leave anyone behind, we are just built differently.
You are full of shit.
Naw, I have gone out and made sure people get back safely more times than you can imagine. We are just different.
Lord of Backback Lord over here. Guessing you were born in the wilderness. moulded by it. No one can hold one candle to your greatness. I apologize.
I can only ever leave everyone behind as I can only see in front of myself. The power you hold is truly special and I grovel before your magnificence and ability to find all lost souls and bring them from the .02 mile marker back to the parking lot.
If you think having a moral compass and protecting and caring for all those around you is mythical then I suppose we can understand your mindset.
Looking at this comment thread, I'm beginning to think the real shitty people of this story are those who think the wilderness isn't dangerous. The only saving grace is that your opinion doesn't seem to be the majority.
The wilderness is dangerous, and the red line for me is leaving without making sure everyone in your party is making it back safely. There can be exceptions to this rule, but none applied in what was presented. There were plenty of stories in the article and in these comments where predominantly masc- folx were being jerks.
They're probably the same dudes who go on hikes without enough water or wearing proper clothing because they "don't want to be pussies." Mfs think nature is conquered and is now as safe as an amusement park.
Yup fuck so many assheads who are in here with such a dismissal of life of another person. It’s fucking gross and disgusting here.
That's exactly what I thought, but it's not pretty so it must not be true.