They always come back...but what do you do when they do? Let's break down what you should do when they¶

A short clip: avoidants "always come back," but you have to tell a breadcrumb from a genuine bid for connection - and you owe a response to neither.

Key points¶

The speaker's recurring claim: avoidants always come back at least once, because they cannot leave the relationship where it ended (lingering attachment, unresolved). A return is not proof of a genuine bid for connection.
Breadcrumbs (mean nothing): liking your story, a "hey" text, running into you in public, asking friends about you indirectly. Do not respond, do not read into them.
A genuine bid: a real reach-out - a phone call or a text like "I've been thinking about everything and I'd like to have a conversation."
Suggested boundaried reply to a genuine bid: "I'm willing to talk, but only if there's something meaningful to discuss."
You do not have to respond even to a genuine bid - if you have healed and moved on, you owe them nothing. A return may reopen the wound briefly; how far it goes is your choice. Stay no contact.

Notably skeptical of the video's central "they always come back" claim. The single most-liked comment: "I went no contact... it's been 38 years, pretty sure he's not coming back."
A highly-liked unfollow rant accuses the channel of doing harm by giving false hope - "they SOMETIMES come back, not always... just be honest" - the sharpest dissent in the thread.
Defenders counter that she does say a return is not healed and that ignoring breadcrumbs is the point.
The breadcrumb-vs-genuine-bid framing resonates; commenters share examples (a supermarket run-in, a "wrong number" call read as a test) and several long discard stories of a warm return that slowly went cold again ("we & us" becoming "me & I").
Recurring practical objections: what if there is no shared social media or city, or if they ghosted and blocked you - does the rule still hold?