Poll

Did Ralph do anything wrong?

Not at all
131 (62.1%)
Delivery failure
56 (26.5%)
Circumstantial
2 (0.9%)
Kind of- maybe
16 (7.6%)
Definitely
6 (2.8%)

Total Members Voted: 199

Author Topic: Etiquette of defining exclusivity- a spinoff  (Read 12313 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Ceallach

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4800
    • This Is It
Re: Etiquette of defining exclusivity- a spinoff
« Reply #120 on: April 27, 2014, 10:07:04 PM »
I was in my twenties during the 1970s, so things might be different now.  And this would be during my dating years - I'm happily married.

Say I meet Jocelyn, Sheila, Babs and Linda within a few days of each other.  In talking to them I find out a few things about each of them.
  • Jocelyn likes movies, but hates playing pool, fishing,  museums, or rock concerts.
  • Sheila likes to play pool but really dislikes fishing, museums, rock concerts or going to the movies.
  • Babs loves museums, but is meh about playing pool, rock concerts, going to the movies, or fishing.
  • Linda like rock concerts but doesn't enjoy doing any of the other things.

Each of them has a personality that is attractive and none of us have had a talk about exclusivity.  At the most I have only seen each of them a few times for a couple hours each time.

I have tickets to a rock concert on one day, tickets to the movies on another, passes to the museum for a third day, a pass to a pool hall on another day and an upcoming trip on a charter fishing boat for a different day.

Yes, I will ask each of them to the event that they like.  If I then meet Sue and she likes to fish, I will ask her out on the charter boat.  If not, I will go alone or with a friend that enjoys fishing.

I wouldn't necessarily think of those as dates to be honest, just spending time with somebody who shares my interests.   Although if it's somebody I don't know well I'd typically include others in the invitation too, e.g. if I met Sue who likes to fish I'd invite her to join me and my friends on a trip.   I wouldn't want to go 1:1 on an outing with somebody I barely knew - too much potential for it to completely ruin my experience of the concert/trip that I'd been looking forward to, if it turned out they weren't good company or had some unpleasant habit.  For actual "dates" with a stranger such as I might have from internet dating, I would do coffee or something where there's less commitment.    Again, I guess it's that whole all or nothing mindset around here!   
"Nobody can do everything, but everybody can do something"


MariaE

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4713
  • So many books, so little time
Re: Etiquette of defining exclusivity- a spinoff
« Reply #121 on: April 28, 2014, 01:44:38 AM »
I can't fathom the concept of going out with a completely random person to see if anything clicks.

I think I may not have been clear enough and caused an incorrect assumption.  None of these people would be completely random; they would all be people I had met in the course of my life.  Say I meet Sheila in a class I am taking - during class break we get to talking, find out we both like to play pool so I invite her to play pool.  The expectation from this is that we will go play pool and hopefully have a great time.  From this, Sheila and I might mutually decide we'd like to go play pool again.  We may play pool once a week, it might from there blossom into a romance or we might stay friends.  Or we might play pool and realize that we are incompatible in every other way and decide not to see each other again.

I think the main thing here for me would be whether the game of pool was considered a date by either/both parties. That is, do you and Sheila view the game of pool as a getting to know a potential romantic partner, or are you just having a nice game of pool with a new friend? The second, I wouldn't really consider to be 'dating' if you met a new friend who shares your love of pool who happens to be female.

Exactly. Just hanging out like that wouldn't automatically be seen as a date here. It might turn into one if things suddenly "clicked"  ;) but it wouldn't be one at the outset.
 
Dane by birth, Kiwi by choice

marcel

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2025
Re: Etiquette of defining exclusivity- a spinoff
« Reply #122 on: April 28, 2014, 03:09:29 AM »
Another classic example of how the US and other English-speaking nations are separated by a common language. :-) In one place, exclusivity is assumed after a first date. In another, it might get you thought of as a creeper.
Since denmark has already been mentioned, this statement is not truly correct :) I can confirm that the Netherlands is similar, and am pretty sure about other north european countries.

Since I tend not to date women from my own country, these things can sometimes get a bit difficult, but I try only to date one woman at a time, except if I know it is ok to date someone else.
Wherever you go..... There you are.

greencat

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2648
Re: Etiquette of defining exclusivity- a spinoff
« Reply #123 on: April 28, 2014, 04:29:18 AM »
I can't fathom the concept of going out with a completely random person to see if anything clicks.

I think I may not have been clear enough and caused an incorrect assumption.  None of these people would be completely random; they would all be people I had met in the course of my life.  Say I meet Sheila in a class I am taking - during class break we get to talking, find out we both like to play pool so I invite her to play pool.  The expectation from this is that we will go play pool and hopefully have a great time.  From this, Sheila and I might mutually decide we'd like to go play pool again.  We may play pool once a week, it might from there blossom into a romance or we might stay friends.  Or we might play pool and realize that we are incompatible in every other way and decide not to see each other again.

I think the main thing here for me would be whether the game of pool was considered a date by either/both parties. That is, do you and Sheila view the game of pool as a getting to know a potential romantic partner, or are you just having a nice game of pool with a new friend? The second, I wouldn't really consider to be 'dating' if you met a new friend who shares your love of pool who happens to be female.

Exactly. Just hanging out like that wouldn't automatically be seen as a date here. It might turn into one if things suddenly "clicked"  ;) but it wouldn't be one at the outset.

For online dating, it is assumed that the first meeting is a date.

For people you've met socially once or twice: more often than not, you have to spell out that you mean a one-on-one outing with a new person (someone that you've not known long) that you mean it not to be a date, rather than the assumption going the other way around.

I have, however, witnessed a great deal of confusion when one party intended some outing with an acquaintance to be a date, and the other person was not so good at interpreting social cues, and thought it was just a friendly outing.  That, and online dating, have taught me that not all Americans date by the same rules either, but the general expectation is a period of casual, non-exclusive dating, followed by agreeing to stop seeing other people.

MariaE

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4713
  • So many books, so little time
Re: Etiquette of defining exclusivity- a spinoff
« Reply #124 on: April 28, 2014, 04:54:43 AM »
I can't fathom the concept of going out with a completely random person to see if anything clicks.

I think I may not have been clear enough and caused an incorrect assumption.  None of these people would be completely random; they would all be people I had met in the course of my life.  Say I meet Sheila in a class I am taking - during class break we get to talking, find out we both like to play pool so I invite her to play pool.  The expectation from this is that we will go play pool and hopefully have a great time.  From this, Sheila and I might mutually decide we'd like to go play pool again.  We may play pool once a week, it might from there blossom into a romance or we might stay friends.  Or we might play pool and realize that we are incompatible in every other way and decide not to see each other again.

I think the main thing here for me would be whether the game of pool was considered a date by either/both parties. That is, do you and Sheila view the game of pool as a getting to know a potential romantic partner, or are you just having a nice game of pool with a new friend? The second, I wouldn't really consider to be 'dating' if you met a new friend who shares your love of pool who happens to be female.

Exactly. Just hanging out like that wouldn't automatically be seen as a date here. It might turn into one if things suddenly "clicked"  ;) but it wouldn't be one at the outset.

For online dating, it is assumed that the first meeting is a date.

Well, yes. I was talking about non-online dating, like mentioned in zyrs post above.
 
Dane by birth, Kiwi by choice

whiterose

  • From the good old US of A!
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4456
Re: Etiquette of defining exclusivity- a spinoff
« Reply #125 on: April 28, 2014, 07:36:25 AM »
I can't fathom the concept of going out with a completely random person to see if anything clicks.

I think I may not have been clear enough and caused an incorrect assumption.  None of these people would be completely random; they would all be people I had met in the course of my life.  Say I meet Sheila in a class I am taking - during class break we get to talking, find out we both like to play pool so I invite her to play pool.  The expectation from this is that we will go play pool and hopefully have a great time.  From this, Sheila and I might mutually decide we'd like to go play pool again.  We may play pool once a week, it might from there blossom into a romance or we might stay friends.  Or we might play pool and realize that we are incompatible in every other way and decide not to see each other again.

I think the main thing here for me would be whether the game of pool was considered a date by either/both parties. That is, do you and Sheila view the game of pool as a getting to know a potential romantic partner, or are you just having a nice game of pool with a new friend? The second, I wouldn't really consider to be 'dating' if you met a new friend who shares your love of pool who happens to be female.

Exactly. Just hanging out like that wouldn't automatically be seen as a date here. It might turn into one if things suddenly "clicked"  ;) but it wouldn't be one at the outset.

For online dating, it is assumed that the first meeting is a date.

For people you've met socially once or twice: more often than not, you have to spell out that you mean a one-on-one outing with a new person (someone that you've not known long) that you mean it not to be a date, rather than the assumption going the other way around.

I have, however, witnessed a great deal of confusion when one party intended some outing with an acquaintance to be a date, and the other person was not so good at interpreting social cues, and thought it was just a friendly outing.  That, and online dating, have taught me that not all Americans date by the same rules either, but the general expectation is a period of casual, non-exclusive dating, followed by agreeing to stop seeing other people.

Sadly, often one has to repeat over and over again that you want to be just friends if that is truly your intention. Often, the other one is blind (or refuses to see) your lack of romantic interest.

I do agree that one can assume that with online dating, the first outing is a date. Also safely assume that with IRL romantic ways to meet- brick and mortar dating services, personal ads in newspapers, speed dating, setups, and probably with singles groups (probably- not definitely). However, with online platonic ways to meet it may be trickier- even if you are not meeting up one on one, someone you may meet off an online message board for an interest/fandom may still assume romantic interest. Hence definitely spell it out early.
I have pet mice!

DavidH

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1804
Re: Etiquette of defining exclusivity- a spinoff
« Reply #126 on: April 28, 2014, 11:57:56 AM »
For me, the major learning is that it is critical to discuss expectations, since they seem to vary much more than I'd intended.  For example, if I met someone at a bar playing pool who I was interested in, I might suggest meeting there on another night, or maybe getting coffee sometime.  Those, to me, would be a date, but wouldn't have remotely suggested exclusivity until they had occurred multiple times.  Similarly, having 2 or 3 first dates with people from an on-line site wouldn't seem odd to me at all, since, to put it nicely, not everyone is the same in person as they are on line or on the phone. 

To answer whiterose's question, "Yes, but would you have kissed all of them? Would you snuggle with all of them? Would you gaze into the eyes of all of them?" Maybe, not sure on what snuggle exactly implies, but I assume more than a kiss, less than scrabble, so No, and Maybe.

 

LifeOnPluto

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 6716
    • Blog
Re: Etiquette of defining exclusivity- a spinoff
« Reply #127 on: April 28, 2014, 11:41:16 PM »
I can't fathom the concept of going out with a completely random person to see if anything clicks.

I think I may not have been clear enough and caused an incorrect assumption.  None of these people would be completely random; they would all be people I had met in the course of my life.  Say I meet Sheila in a class I am taking - during class break we get to talking, find out we both like to play pool so I invite her to play pool.  The expectation from this is that we will go play pool and hopefully have a great time.  From this, Sheila and I might mutually decide we'd like to go play pool again.  We may play pool once a week, it might from there blossom into a romance or we might stay friends.  Or we might play pool and realize that we are incompatible in every other way and decide not to see each other again.

I think the main thing here for me would be whether the game of pool was considered a date by either/both parties. That is, do you and Sheila view the game of pool as a getting to know a potential romantic partner, or are you just having a nice game of pool with a new friend? The second, I wouldn't really consider to be 'dating' if you met a new friend who shares your love of pool who happens to be female.

Exactly. Just hanging out like that wouldn't automatically be seen as a date here. It might turn into one if things suddenly "clicked"  ;) but it wouldn't be one at the outset.

For online dating, it is assumed that the first meeting is a date.

For people you've met socially once or twice: more often than not, you have to spell out that you mean a one-on-one outing with a new person (someone that you've not known long) that you mean it not to be a date, rather than the assumption going the other way around.

I have, however, witnessed a great deal of confusion when one party intended some outing with an acquaintance to be a date, and the other person was not so good at interpreting social cues, and thought it was just a friendly outing.  That, and online dating, have taught me that not all Americans date by the same rules either, but the general expectation is a period of casual, non-exclusive dating, followed by agreeing to stop seeing other people.

The Australian/UK/Danish approach has definitely caused some confusion as to whether an outing is a date or not!

Case in point: a friend of mine got a promotion at work. A male colleague offered to take her out for dinner to "celebrate her promotion". My friend accepted, thinking he was just being very kind and generous. Halfway through the meal, he made it clear that he intended it to be a date! She was quite surprised.

(Luckily, it wasn't too awkward, as she was in fact open to the idea of dating him. They kissed on their second date, and in true Aussie fashion, started calling themselves "boyfriend" and "girlfriend" from that point onwards!)

whiterose

  • From the good old US of A!
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4456
Re: Etiquette of defining exclusivity- a spinoff
« Reply #128 on: April 30, 2014, 07:12:46 AM »
Perhaps Jenna was confused as to why after 4 dates, Ralph wanted to keep dating other women instead of going steady because none of the other men she had dated after graduating college and entering the real world seemed to do so. Before meeting Ralph, Jenna had gone on a few dates with Terry, whom she was set up with via a mutual friend. The next person Jenna dated after Ralph was a fellow named Kyle, whom she met on a sci-fi message board. And after that came Philip, whom Jenna met through the largest online dating site. None of them were seeing other women at the time- nor wanted to. All of them were fine- if not downright enthusiastic- with defining the relationship after 3 dates.

In all those cases, the first meeting was the first date (although one could argue that with Kyle, there was friendship first- arguably). Hence Jenna was very surprised that since Ralph was the only one of the four whom she could have experienced chemistry before their first formal date, that he did not want to go steady with her after 4 successful dates involving kissing.

I guess it is a cultural norm. But all 3 other fellows also lived in the US of A, were born and raised there, did not belong to specific groups practicing norms divergent from the main culture, and had families living in the USA for several generations now. Hence Jenna's shock.
I have pet mice!

Owly

  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 43
Re: Etiquette of defining exclusivity- a spinoff
« Reply #129 on: April 30, 2014, 08:59:02 AM »
Hm, well some people just prefer to move more slowly than others. I admit that I'm one of them. If I were Ralph it would have nothing to do with how much I liked Jenna - chemistry isn't the most important thing in a relationship, and we could still end up not actually working very well as a couple. After only a handful of outings with her I wouldn't have enough experience with her to tell, and I'd rather wait to commit until I am reasonably confident she is right for me.

I also live in the US, and I've also met people who wanted to move more quickly than I did - I think a lot of it boils down to personal comfort levels, which are not going to be the same for everyone. My advice to Jenna, not that she asked for it, is to use this as a learning experience. She now knows that not everyone wants to progress at the same pace, and can adjust and/or express her expectations to potential boyfriends with that in mind.

Onyx_TKD

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1404
Re: Etiquette of defining exclusivity- a spinoff
« Reply #130 on: April 30, 2014, 12:51:18 PM »
Perhaps Jenna was confused as to why after 4 dates, Ralph wanted to keep dating other women instead of going steady because none of the other men she had dated after graduating college and entering the real world seemed to do so. Before meeting Ralph, Jenna had gone on a few dates with Terry, whom she was set up with via a mutual friend. The next person Jenna dated after Ralph was a fellow named Kyle, whom she met on a sci-fi message board. And after that came Philip, whom Jenna met through the largest online dating site. None of them were seeing other women at the time- nor wanted to. All of them were fine- if not downright enthusiastic- with defining the relationship after 3 dates.

In all those cases, the first meeting was the first date (although one could argue that with Kyle, there was friendship first- arguably). Hence Jenna was very surprised that since Ralph was the only one of the four whom she could have experienced chemistry before their first formal date, that he did not want to go steady with her after 4 successful dates involving kissing.

I guess it is a cultural norm. But all 3 other fellows also lived in the US of A, were born and raised there, did not belong to specific groups practicing norms divergent from the main culture, and had families living in the USA for several generations now. Hence Jenna's shock.

I think Jenna could be reading a little too much into her previous dates' behavior. The fact that they didn't date anyone else while dating her doesn't necessarily mean they felt any obligation to stay exclusive. It's entirely possible that they shared her views of exclusivity. However, it's equally possible that they just didn't happen to have any other potential romantic partners on the scene at that particular time. Just because the culture allows people to date multiple people simultaneously doesn't imply that everyone will choose to at all times. It's an option, not an obligation.

For example, if I started dating someone right now, it's highly unlikely that I'd date anyone else at the same time. But that's not because I feel any obligation to date someone exclusively in the early stages of dating. Instead, it's because (A) I don't date much in general, so the odds of me having two potential dates come onto the scene at the same time is low, and (B) I don't have a lot of spare time at the moment, so carving out the time to date not just one but two people would be prohibitively difficult.
« Last Edit: April 30, 2014, 02:54:44 PM by Onyx_TKD »

angilamae

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 454
Re: Etiquette of defining exclusivity- a spinoff
« Reply #131 on: April 30, 2014, 02:06:38 PM »
This may have been answered before but if you are european exclusive (for lack of a better term) and only dating one person from the outset, do you have to break up with them as well?  Like have a break up talk?  In America (for me at least) if I go on a date with Joe-Bob and either of us could also be dating someone else because we haven't had "the talk", I can just not go out on further dates with Joe-Bob if I am not feeling it with him.

I can resist everything except temptation-Oscar Wilde

MariaE

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4713
  • So many books, so little time
Re: Etiquette of defining exclusivity- a spinoff
« Reply #132 on: April 30, 2014, 03:08:11 PM »
This may have been answered before but if you are european exclusive (for lack of a better term) and only dating one person from the outset, do you have to break up with them as well?  Like have a break up talk?  In America (for me at least) if I go on a date with Joe-Bob and either of us could also be dating someone else because we haven't had "the talk", I can just not go out on further dates with Joe-Bob if I am not feeling it with him.

No, the break up talk is only necessary if you've moved on to the girlfriend/boyfriend stage. During the dating stage you can just stop accepting invitations.
 
Dane by birth, Kiwi by choice

jedikaiti

  • Swiss Army Nerd
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2855
  • A pie in the hand is worth two in the mail.
Re: Etiquette of defining exclusivity- a spinoff
« Reply #133 on: April 30, 2014, 03:20:14 PM »
This may have been answered before but if you are european exclusive (for lack of a better term) and only dating one person from the outset, do you have to break up with them as well?  Like have a break up talk?  In America (for me at least) if I go on a date with Joe-Bob and either of us could also be dating someone else because we haven't had "the talk", I can just not go out on further dates with Joe-Bob if I am not feeling it with him.

No, the break up talk is only necessary if you've moved on to the girlfriend/boyfriend stage. During the dating stage you can just stop accepting invitations.

But if you're dating & exclusive, doesn't that mean you're in the gf/bf stage?
What part of v_e = \sqrt{\frac{2GM}{r}} don't you understand? It's only rocket science!

"The problem with re-examining your brilliant ideas is that more often than not, you discover they are the intellectual equivalent of saying, 'Hold my beer and watch this!'" - Cindy Couture

TurtleDove

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 6284
Re: Etiquette of defining exclusivity- a spinoff
« Reply #134 on: April 30, 2014, 03:22:08 PM »
This may have been answered before but if you are european exclusive (for lack of a better term) and only dating one person from the outset, do you have to break up with them as well?  Like have a break up talk?  In America (for me at least) if I go on a date with Joe-Bob and either of us could also be dating someone else because we haven't had "the talk", I can just not go out on further dates with Joe-Bob if I am not feeling it with him.

No, the break up talk is only necessary if you've moved on to the girlfriend/boyfriend stage. During the dating stage you can just stop accepting invitations.

But if you're dating & exclusive, doesn't that mean you're in the gf/bf stage?

Yeah, this is my question also!  This is exactly why I guess I prefer the "let's have an exclusivity talk" way of approaching things so there is far less confusion!