Exclusivity in Relationships

Come on CK you can't generalise casual/open relationships as sleazy and adulterous. Often people just don't have time for a fully committed relationship while still wanting the comforts of a physical one. Perhaps it isn't "romantic" but that is not the sole criterion of a healthy relationship.
 
I think that occasionally couples just "come together" in a perfectly romantic way, as I have had it happen once, but plenty of other times have involved one-sided fixation even without things like alcohol being involved for me personally. I am not even trying to say any of that is bad, I think that people should have sex with whomever they want whenever they want; sex is inherently dirty and disgusting was a point I wanted to make against some sacrosanct vision of relationships as wholly pure. My entire point is just to try to get people to dismiss this notion of some all encompassing purity that applies as long as one really hopes it does or wants it to.
 
WarriorPrince said:
He asked for people's opinions , not a debate.

Discussion is debate, or rather "good" discussion is.
<snip>

We should just post "our" opinions and leave others alone. Everything doesn't have to be a debate. If thats how someone feels about it, thats just how they feel about it.

Why would I want my thread to be pc++? Because that's what it would be if you had it your way...
Click to expand...

Anyway, now that that's done.

m0nkfish said:
Often people just don't have time for a fully committed relationship while still wanting the comforts of a physical one.
Click to expand...

See to me this just seems a bit selfish, and if this is your intent in a relationship than it ought to be YOUR responsibility to inform your partner that this is the type of relationship that you're looking for, not the other way around.

In my eyes, and exlusive "traditional" dating situation is the default, not the other way around. It's up to the person who's not interested in more than just casual dating to pipe up, lest you send mixed messages that you're really interested in something more, because anything other than just outright saying "i'm not interested in anything more" is going to imply that you are.
 
ck said:
I think that occasionally couples just "come together" in a perfectly romantic way, as I have had it happen once, but plenty of other times have involved one-sided fixation even without things like alcohol being involved for me personally. I am not even trying to say any of that is bad, I think that people should have sex with whomever they want whenever they want; sex is inherently dirty and disgusting was a point I wanted to make against some sacrosanct vision of relationships as wholly pure. My entire point is just to try to get people to dismiss this notion of some all encompassing purity that applies as long as one really hopes it does or wants it to.
Click to expand...
I agree - however I think it's certainly possible to have respect for something without belief in its purity.

lonelyness said:
See to me this just seems a bit selfish, and if this is your intent in a relationship than it ought to be YOUR responsibility to inform your partner that this is the type of relationship that you're looking for, not the other way around.

In my eyes, and exlusive "traditional" dating situation is the default, not the other way around. It's up to the person who's not interested in more than just casual dating to pipe up, lest you send mixed messages that you're really interested in something more, because anything other than just outright saying "i'm not interested in anything more" is going to imply that you are.
Click to expand...
I agree that the traditional form of relationship is the default - I have never actually asked my girlfriend whether we are 'exclusive' because I would expect her to say something to the contrary if we were not. However, you must discern the point in the relationship when this needs to be defined. Casual dating is also the default, for the dating scene at least. I don't think many people would expect to be exclusive after 4 dates - it was a fair few months before my current girlfriend and I became a couple, and I know we were both seeing other people during the initial dating period. It's not a question of this girl having no intention of having a relationship with you - she was most likely just doing the sensible thing and exploring her options.

I also disagree with your last point that someone should have to state as soon as you start dating what they are looking for. There's no need - if you reach the stage where you want to be in a relationship, you ask them, and they may say yes or no. It's not something that people should be forced into when first dating someone. Apart from anything else, it isn't particularly healthy for the relationship. I'll use myself again as an example: Emily wasn't looking for anything serious, and neither was I - if we had both stated this at the beginning, we probably would not be in a relationship. We spent time together and eventually realised that we would like to be a couple, and at this stage only did we discuss the future of our relationship - because before that, during the dating period, there was no need to.
 
Though one member of a casual relationship can believe that they are exclusive, it is not until is it talked about. You know what they say about assumptions... Talking it over, stating what you want the relationship to be, and deciding the next step to take is what should happen when you decide that you want a monogamous relationship. If the other member is not interested in it, then simply stop seeing them. (Though I think dating around > exclusive)
 
m0nkfish said:
Casual dating is also the default, for the dating scene at least. I don't think many people would expect to be exclusive after 4 dates - it was a fair few months before my current girlfriend and I became a couple, and I know we were both seeing other people during the initial dating period. It's not a question of this girl having no intention of having a relationship with you - she was most likely just doing the sensible thing and exploring her options.
Click to expand...

Assuming that she dated these "other options", if she ended up with you, then surely dating those "other options" was a total waste of time since she isn't with them now. From the sounds of it, all the dating scene is about is going out with anything that has different sexual organs to you. I sincerely hope that that is a misinterpretation because that kind of infidelity does not sound like love to me. Suffice to say, I wouldn't be dating more than one person at the same time and I would expect any girl who genuinely wanted me to love them to do the same.
 
OK it is becoming increasingly obvious that you have neved dated. It's not about desperately trying to find love, it's about having some fun with people and making an informed opinion of whether or not to enter into a relationship with someone. It's not "infidelity" in any way, shape or form because infidelity implies some sort of commitment.
 
m0nkfish said:
OK it is becoming increasingly obvious that you have neved dated. It's not about desperately trying to find love, it's about having some fun with people and making an informed opinion of whether or not to enter into a relationship with someone.
Click to expand...

I thought that was just when you go out with them as a friend.
 
m0nkfish said:
OK it is becoming increasingly obvious that you have neved dated. It's not about desperately trying to find love, it's about having some fun with people and making an informed opinion of whether or not to enter into a relationship with someone. It's not "infidelity" in any way, shape or form because infidelity implies some sort of commitment.
Click to expand...

This. Dating, flirtation, and sex can be about casual fun; enjoying other people and experiences rather than OH GOD I NEED SOMEONE TO MARRY.
 
Casual fun = go for as many girls as possible? That's what it sounds like.
Or is it casual fun = get as much sex as possible?

Seriously, does fidelity have no meaning whatsoever in love? Is it just a load of kissy-kissy, bouncy-bouncy, dumpy-dumpy (in which case the most loving people in the world are prostitutes)?
 
Love is love, dating is dating, fucking is fucking. They are not always irrevocably linked.

Case in point: last winter I had a crush on this cool girl I knew and I could tell she shared the feeling. We started hooking up in October* and ended up seeing each other for a couple months. At the end there was no break-up, no sadness, we just stopped hanging out. For those two months we enjoyed each other's company (and more than that, enjoyed the sex). We were never even really dating, let alone in a relationship. It's kinda like that new movie, "He's Just Not That Into You."

*NOTE: Who knows what might have happened between us if I hadn't found out at election time that she was a staunch braindead-Limbaugh-loving Republican.
 
Objection said:
Casual fun = go for as many girls as possible? That's what it sounds like.
Or is it casual fun = get as much sex as possible?

Seriously, does fidelity have no meaning whatsoever in love? Is it just a load of kissy-kissy, bouncy-bouncy, dumpy-dumpy (in which case the most loving people in the world are prostitutes)?
Click to expand...
Casual fun is exactly what it sounds like: enjoying the company of another person without being restricted to enjoying the company of only that person.

I can't help but feel you're trolling with your second comment. How anyone could be so naive after the posts in this thread which make the distinction between dating and love massively clear is beyond me.

Relationships aren't black and white, you don't suddenly jump from being strangers to newlyweds. The transitional stages are just as important as the end result. If you are determined to only date one girl at a time then you're fated to get crushed time and time again, either because the girl decides to go for someone else or your relationship becomes stale when you get past the initial excitement and find out that actually you don't have that much in common and that it would have been better to find this out before you proposed.
 
Objection said:
Casual fun = go for as many girls as possible? That's what it sounds like.
Or is it casual fun = get as much sex as possible?

Seriously, does fidelity have no meaning whatsoever in love? Is it just a load of kissy-kissy, bouncy-bouncy, dumpy-dumpy (in which case the most loving people in the world are prostitutes)?
Click to expand...

"A prostitute is a woman who will love you no matter who you are or what you look like" - quality south park

Casual fun; enjoy the company of who you are spending time with, and who you are sleeping with. Enjoy sex; mess about; have fun. It's got nothing to do with love. It doesn't mean that I don't love, or I can't, just that I've not been in love with everyone I've had sex with. If love, to you - or to your partner - requires fidelity, then that's fair enough; but love doesn't have to (and love doesn't have to have anything to do with sex, either).
 
After reading and re-reading the above two posts, I am becoming more and more convinced that love, dating, relationships, casual fun, the whole lot - it's just not for me.
 
I donno I like relationships to be 100%, I always feel like I'm missing out on something when it's not happening that way, so I tend to go for it a bit differently. but that is just my idea of fun.
 
m0nkfish said:
Yeah I used to dig the whole "love" thing when I was 17 too. Trust in DM!
Click to expand...

Sarcasm, right?

Also, I love how most (if not all) people are saying that dating multiple girls constitutes as "fun" but are not saying that dating only one girl does as well (even if that is the case).
 
No I'm actually serious, I was exactly like you back then, I thought that if a girl showed interest in me that she should be interested in ONLY me. Now I know that's not really practical, putting all your eggs in one basket is pretty unwise at such an early stage.

And hey, dating one girl is fun as long as you're not placing expectations on her because if it doesn't work out (or in LonelyNess's case where she's dating multiple people) that's where the "not fun" bit comes in. If she has agreed to be exclusive too then... you're pretty much in a relationship lol
 
Lol this is similar to something my sister went through yesterday. Apparently the man she is dating is also dating another women. Very similar to LN, but my sister's situation is much worst =/. Let's leave it at that
 
Well, I have to agree with you, LN. I feel that as soon as the dating process occurs, that is, when two people officially agree that they are, in fact, dating. From that time on, the relationship, in my opinion, is exclusive. Exclusive in the dictionary gives us these as the meaning of the word: only available to or used by one person, group, or organization and being the only one. I don’t care how petty or odd these sound, especially the first one, but they definitely define exclusive in a relationship. Sorry, but she is definitely wrong.
 
Flamewheeler said:
Well, I have to agree with you, LN. I feel that as soon as the dating process occurs, that is, when two people officially agree that they are, in fact, dating. From that time on, the relationship, in my opinion, is exclusive. Exclusive in the dictionary gives us these as the meaning of the word: only available to or used by one person, group, or organization and being the only one. I don’t care how petty or odd these sound, especially the first one, but they definitely define exclusive in a relationship. Sorry, but she is definitely wrong.
Click to expand...
You haven't read this thread at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top