Collect and collect...then select

[Ma.Eugenia]

… he has a great group of friends that all believe in chastity, so they tend to all hang out together for group things like parties.

I am glad that there are still young people who stand up for chastity in dating.

You’re right. It is a glimmer of hope.

 

[DaveBj]

Dating multiple girls at one time???

Wow, where does that come from?

I had enough trouble getting just one girl to go out with me.

DaveBj

 

[Black_Jaque]

How do you define “date”?

Suppose that the entire date was just simply going out for coffee and chatting. No physical contact except perhaps a handshake (kiss-on-the-hand).

It would seem rediculously possessive for a woman to think that just because a guy had coffee with her, he was now “hers”.

However, the moment you begin displaying affection the situation changes.

This highlights the Church’s wisdom in withholding affection until you are betrothed.

 

[Ma.Eugenia]

Dating multiple girls at one time???

Wow, where does that come from?

I guess, there are some people wo think its alright to do that as long as they are not caught. In my opinion, its a bit narcissistic.

 

[Ma.Eugenia]

How do you define “date”?

Hello Black Jaque!

I think the difference between **friendly dates **and serious dates is the intent.

***Friendly dates ***is when the idea of going out is just for fun–like going out on date with friends. There is no seriousness in it.

To me **serious dating **is when there is already the **intent to court **a particular girl or (in case of a girl allowing a boy to court her) whether it is said verbally or made to appear that way to one or both party…or to outsiders.

The goal here is trying to find out if, in the end, marriage is possible between the two of them. To me, exclusivity should be part of this stage already because how can one seriously look at the possibility of marriage to one person when he/she is looking at other possibilities?

I don’t think a guy or girl should seriously date more than one person at a time.

Suppose that the entire date was just simply going out for coffee and chatting. No physical contact except perhaps a handshake (kiss-on-the-hand).

It would seem rediculously possessive for a woman to think that just because a guy had coffee with her, he was now “hers”.

I agree that there are those who assume exclusivity when there is really none. Example you go out on one or two or three dates, you are already thinking what gown/tuxedo you will wear…or how many babies you will have. I think that is really jumping way too far ahead.

Black Jaque;1849897]However, the moment you begin displaying affection the situation changes.

This highlights the Church’s wisdom in withholding affection until you are betrothed.

I agree with you here 100%.

Showing affection already changes the intent of a relationship.

I think the problem is some people tend to show signs of affection that leads one or both of them to believe that it is already in a more serious stage.

Affection, I suppose, means kissing, hugging etc…

I think showing “affection” is already an implied courtship.

I agree with our Church regarding the witholding of affection until betrothal. However, many couples nowadays do not wait for an engagement ring to show affection.

The fine line that divides what is casual dating and serious dating tends to be muddled.

It can lead to serious heartbreak if one of the parties believe that exclusivity already exists just because “affection” is already part of the relationship…and the other party thinks it just a game.

 

[JimG]

When my mother was a young woman (in the 1930’s), it was common for both men and women to date a number of people at one time. She described it in a lighthearted and carefree way - people having fun with each other. At some point, they would develop strong feelings for one person and begin to date exclusively (going steady), then get engaged and married. But most of their dating lives was spent in casual dating.

This situation described by Betsy was actually pretty much the norm even in the 1950’s and 1960’s. A girl might go on dates with different boys on various weekends. No serious attachment was intended. “Going steady” (in the teenage years) was rare and serious, and rather frowned upon by parents and teachers, as being too intense and too dangerous for high school students.

 

[Ma.Eugenia]

This situation described by Betsy was actually pretty much the norm even in the 1950’s and 1960’s. A girl might go on dates with different boys on various weekends. No serious attachment was intended. “Going steady” (in the teenage years) was rare and serious, and rather frowned upon by parents and teachers, as being too intense and too dangerous for high school students.

I watch movies from those eras from TCM channel here.

I think dating during that time was much better than it is now.

Today, there is pressure to be intimate too fast and very early in the relationship and a lot of people have accepted the notion that such can exist outside marriage. Its sad that this way of thinking is becoming the norm.

For some people see being “affectionate” (and all that the word connotes) does not indicate courship yet, so, to them, they are still free to be “affectionate” to as many people as they want.

I define “affection” as showing a special feelings and preference to one particular person. I really don’t think **true affection ** can be done to more than one person at a time, without deceit playing a part of it.