An Old New Trend in Dating

So many words to say simply that if the sex stinks, people tend to not come back for more.

A “new” trend in dating. People are hilarious. And as clueless as anybody since dating was first invented.

Advertisements

11 thoughts on “An Old New Trend in Dating”

  1. It’s just a boring way of saying dating apps create this pool of people who you can avoid afterwards with minimal reprecussions, if any.

    Notice how little “ghosting” or “mosting” occurs with people you meet through work or through people you already know in some way.

    I’m not sure how much of an asshole that makes me but I’ve talked to people for a month, and then faded off without ever talking to them again (and had the same to me.) Note that in most cases, I’ve never met them in person because it was long distance (get on a plane.) I always figured others were juggling multiple people so why get super invested? What irritates the crap out of me is people who get super needy after one conversation and people who show up six months later like they never talked to you before.

    Like

    1. “What irritates the crap out of me is people who get super needy after one conversation and people who show up six months later like they never talked to you before.”

      • God, this was my pet peeve when I was a dating person. Like making plans for how “we” will spend Christmas after one date in July. Creepy as hell. Maybe they thought this was an attractive thing, I don’t know. But sheesh. I’d get out of there in two seconds after that.

      In all sincerity, though, when I met N I was ready to discuss how we would name our future children two minutes after I first saw him. So there’s that. When it’s right, it’s right.

      Like

      1. You did not, however, immediately present him with a photoshopped version of a baby that looked like the two of you and declare “This is Narissa, our future child” or share baby names.

        Like

        1. No, we both stupidly pretended that it wasn’t clear that we’ll spend the rest of our lives together. Because we didn’t want to scare each other away. So. . .

          Like

  2. None of this is surprising. Every new generation that comes along believes that it’s the first to experience/invent social interactions that have existed since the start of civilization.

    So they create new words like “ghosting,” “mosting,” “zombie-ing,” and “catfishing” to describe social behaviors that were familiar to their great-great-great grandparents.

    Like

  3. The students are also informing me that there is a new sexual orientation, asexual, but you can be asexual and not aromantic, or you can be demiromantic; people who are asexual have libido but are not attracted to anyone, and on, and on, and it all sounds to me as though really they are talking about being more or less interested in different contexts and DEMANDING LABELS for it all.

    A separate issue is that I am probably reactionary and mean because I think it is probably a sign of a psychological problem not to feel attraction for anyone ever.

    Like

    1. It’s not that new. The way that my blog first became famous 9 years ago is when I expressed a doubt that it makes sense to apply this label to everybody who might have sexual dysfunction. People went nuts over the idea that a label of this sort isn’t accepted as sufficient and in no need of further exploration. It’s like Verhaeghe says, people think that naming the symptom somehow explains everything.

      So yeah, I’m with you in the “reactionary” camp.

      Like

    2. Yes, I’ve read the explanation on tumblr but I can’t understand it. Mostly because I know one woman who claims asexuality but wrote all this M/M fanfic (porny and romantic) in all these different fandoms.

      I think those labels and MGTOW (and to a certain extent red pill) are just a way to have a world view to justify permanent, endless abstinence (mostly to themselves, but also others). Apparently abstinence only education assumes you’re heterosexual and will get married one day so that’s not enough. Religious abstinence (monks, nuns) are out of fashion because nobody is religious anymore and nobody wants to support penitents anyways. Otherwise I don’t get how this label is specifically useful to the people who use it. YMMV.

      Like

      1. The idea that one needs to justify one’s sex life in any way is already bizarre. The world frankly doesn’t care what one does in this department. Yes, people ask questions to make small talk but the idea of anybody actually giving a damn is weird.

        Like

        1. I think it’s also about people discovering themselves. One student who at 21 now has a recognizable sexual orientation (interested in women, but not ready, at least at this time, to settle down with only one) says that in the past they considered themself semi-asexual, bi and demiromantic because of not being interested in men, but feeling they should be, at least somewhat, and therefore feeling sort of asexual and not really romantic. Now that they know and admit it is women they are interested in, they don’t have to put such a fine point on things.

          Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.