Recently I read a blog post from another
blogger that one of my Facebook friends had shared, and it was about dating
terms and how they’d changed since the writer had gotten married, he called it
a “hazy, undefined dating-but-not-dating scene”. I’m not sure how long he’d
been married but he made it seem like it had been at least a little while. He
assumed these terms are used due to fear of commitment, and with continuing and
increasing reliance social media and technology, of course dating terms have
changed. So I am going to venture a try at clarifying some of the terms he
mentioned.
The two new terms he used were “hungout/ hanging out” and
“talking/texting”, but he also went into the older term of “courting”. So I
will explain what he couldn’t
Let’s start with “talking/texting”, now I know these things
are not unique to this situation and therein lies the source of confusion. You
talk and text with people that you’re not romantically linked to, or wish to
be. You also can do this before you find yourself romantically linked to them.
So how do you
differentiate texting with a friend and texting with romantic interest?
Well it’s simple, two words, “Romantic Intent”, now what
this means is that your intentions are to potentially lead that conversation
either verbal or electronic in a romantic direction. Now this isn’t to be
confused with flirting, because even though flirting is a part of this not all
of flirting has the Romantic Intent that this form of “talking/texting” does.
Some people are naturally flirty, some people oblivious to their own flirting,
and Romantic Intent is a conscious thing, that’s because romance it’s self is a
conscious thing elsewise it is a subconscious, animal, basic instinct.
Now on to “hung/hanging out” and once again these are words
that do not necessarily have a romantic connotation to quote the original
blogger whom I am responding to “Hanging out is how we describe what we do with
our buddies”, and even in my further explanation it is not necessarily
“romantic” but it is also not in the common definition of the words. This is
because “hung/hanging out” could potentially mean one of two things; One being
pre-dating(romantic) and two being a physical thing (could be romantic, but not
always). I will talk about them in that order. Pre-dating is as it seems to,
literally before dating, and “talking/texting” is a big part of this.
Conversational chemistry is only one part of what is necessary for the romantic
relationship known as dating. Now this might need a little more clarification;
once again there is “Romantic Intent” but there is a greater proximity aspect
to this but not a physicality to it. I know that this still sounds like dating
except with no physical aspect but this comprises of non-dating activities. So
I’m talking about things like quick coffees, grocery shopping, exercising,
short walks, even a movie under the right circumstances but there’s no holding
hands, kissing, or cuddling(things that buddies do), but maybe a hug once and
again depending on circumstance. Now these are not requirements, because at
this point what is between the two people involved are still in an essentially
undefined state. Then there’s the other definition where “hanging out” is a euphemism
for having sex, and this one doesn’t necessarily have to have any trace of
romantic intent, this could include friends with benefits, “fun” buddies,
random hookups, pretty much any opportunity where sex is being had could be
described as hanging out. I am pretty sure that was the assumption that was
made in his blog post. And he made it seem like that was the only option where
it could very well be an option but not the only one. This related to him
complaining about hooking up, he didn’t bash it directly but he did call it
“teenage” and used the phrase “vague, timid, code words of high school
freshmen”, also describing it as “embarrassing. Almost as if you weren’t in any
sort of a committed relationship you’re doing it wrong. And with that I believe
that there’s an implied aspect of quote unquote slut shaming there.
There were other things in this post that I had issues with
beyond his lack of knowledge on evolving language that I had issues with. For
one he appeared to put the onus of blame on only men for this. Especially since
it is not always men who are unclear with their intentions or desire for
casuality in relationship. And in relationship to that he compared a casuality
or lack of definition in relationships to an inherit immaturity in men, and it
being a result of fear.
Post Script: I am realizing how much I think about love and
relationships, or at least how much it appears that I do. When in reality most
of these posts are just me figuring or at least trying to figure things out.
This post should have been up sooner, considering when I had read the original
post, it was all in my head and I had just needed the time to get it all out.
No comments:
Post a Comment