Also as an older guy NONE of the girls in HS or college that behaved that way turned out well IRL
So, you still keep in sufficent contact with all of them to make such a statement regarding how ALL of them currently feel?
Or are you making an unfounded and overly-broad generalisation that doesn't hold true in everyone's experience (my own, for example). Gee, I wonder...
The suicide drug abuse statistics for those girls is off the charts and they often get caught up in sex work and find themselves unable to have a normal life.
But "high statistics" are not "100% of people", and "often" is not "always", is it? Some of those people get their lives back on track, and you know it. Again, I've never said she had a good life originally; I've said we have no idea what happened to her after the MC last saw her, and that if she found someone who reciprocated her feelings the way the MC does now, I've no reason to assume she'd be any less happy. Both parts of that statement are indisputably accurate, and yet you continue to argue against it. It's truly bizarre.
We DO know she avoided them and didn't associate with them
And? I never said they associated with each other; I said there's no evidence that SHE ditched HIM (which was your assertion), and that given his self-admitted behaviour, it was actually more likely he'd ditched her. Then you try to act like she, what.. owed him a sympathy fuck, and is somehow a bad person for not giving him the time of day when all he saw her as was an easy lay?
And once again, for the people in the cheap seats, we don't know she fucked the rest of the school; we know that the MC thought she did, but he also thought Alyvia was a slut, and he was wrong, wasn't he? Him believing rumours does not make the rumours true.
Whatever her reasoning she excluded them from her life in the next grade of school.
I never said otherwise; I said not associating with him isn't the same as "she was a bitch", and that they weren't actually owed her including them in her life if their behaviour was the reason for that exclusion in the first place.
I also explained why it was meaningful
Actually, you didn't. Because it's not. I get that you're labouring under the impression that it is, but it isn't. If a person is asking a question about someones behaviour, using a particular definiton of a word ("bitch", in this case), then that's the only definition that's relevant when replying to them. Do you really not get that? Answering the question "is person X gay" with "no, because he isn't happy" isn't a useful answer.
I offered neutral disagreement to you when you were in error, and you responded with some petulant patronizing, probably as a knee-jerk automatic response. I mirrored that patronizing, and pointed it out, with the intention that you might reflect on the behaviour, and perhaps query why that was your instinctual response; you didn't do that, though, and have instead chosen to double-down on the petulance. As I said, it's very telling behaviour. It's also rather amusing that you say "as an older guy" and behave like a child, but I suppose "old" and "mature" don't necessarily go hand-in-hand.
Now, at this point, I'd say our best option is to ignore one another. Let's see if you can do so or not. I'm gonna bet "not", and that you're going to desperately need the last word, based on what I've seen of you so far, but I'm always willing to be pleasantly surprised.