Wednesday, October 8, 2014

Dating Terms. A blog response.

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: