"Dating" and (sub)cultures

[Litcrit]

I didn’t want to hijack FeelingGuilty’s thread in which chevalier made an interesting observation:

As a European, I’m very surprised by how much tolerance this whole “non-exclusive” things gets on the American ground… I still can’t get out of the shell shock it gave me… Going to places and talking, having coffee, watching films, eating meals etc. is generally nobody’s business as long as there’s not too much overt flirting.

As a European, I felt the same way. I have come to understand we have different definitions of the word “date”, different mechanisms through which we discern what kind of relationship, if any, we want to pursue with an individual of the opposite sex, and different views about male-female relationships in general.

In my (sub)culture, young men and women frequently socialize in groups, not pairs. A boy and a girl (or a man and a woman) might even become an exclusive couple before they’ve even ever been on a “date” - they’ve had several encounters in their group of acquaintances, they hit it off, they kissed at a party, and only after that they go on their first “date” - just the two of them going out somewhere together with the idea of it being a romantic thing, not just hanging out as friends.

Or you can do something with an acquaintance or friend of the opposite sex if you share an interest - go to a concert, play tennis, have coffee and discuss politics - but it’s not a “date” unless you’re both in agreement that you’re attracted to each other and developing an exclusive romantic relationship. You’ll only refer to an arrangement as a “date” if you both think of yourself as a couple, not if you have a vague attraction that you’re not sure is reciprocated. Otherwise, it’s just hanging out with an acquaintance who might become a friend or has already become one.

“Dating” two people at the same time would be… immoral, insincere, deceptive. Hanging out with different people of the opposite sex without a romantic idea at the back of your mind is a different, unrelated matter.

How does it work in your (sub)culture? How do relationships start - acquaintances, friendships, and romantic relationships? How do you define “dating” and can you do that with several people at once?

 

[chevalier]

Errr… Apologies for the typo. Should be “thing”, “not things”. I sometimes think a word or two ahead and mix a word with the next one.

 

[PatriceA]

I didn’t want to hijack FeelingGuilty’s thread in which chevalier made an interesting observation:

As a European, I felt the same way. I have come to understand we have different definitions of the word “date”, different mechanisms through which we discern what kind of relationship, if any, we want to pursue with an individual of the opposite sex, and different views about male-female relationships in general.

In my (sub)culture, young men and women frequently socialize in groups, not pairs. A boy and a girl (or a man and a woman) might even become an exclusive couple before they’ve even ever been on a “date” - they’ve had several encounters in their group of acquaintances, they hit it off, they kissed at a party, and only after that they go on their first “date” - just the two of them going out somewhere together with the idea of it being a romantic thing, not just hanging out as friends.

Or you can do something with an acquaintance or friend of the opposite sex if you share an interest - go to a concert, play tennis, have coffee and discuss politics - but it’s not a “date” unless you’re both in agreement that you’re attracted to each other and developing an exclusive romantic relationship. You’ll only refer to an arrangement as a “date” if you both think of yourself as a couple, not if you have a vague attraction that you’re not sure is reciprocated. Otherwise, it’s just hanging out with an acquaintance who might become a friend or has already become one.

“Dating” two people at the same time would be… immoral, insincere, deceptive. Hanging out with different people of the opposite sex without a romantic idea at the back of your mind is a different, unrelated matter.

How does it work in your (sub)culture? How do relationships start - acquaintances, friendships, and romantic relationships? How do you define “dating” and can you do that with several people at once?

In my experience, what you’ve described in your sub culture was my experience in high school and college. But the older I got, the more typical the occurance of an official “date” took place when two people were attracted to each other. Probably because hanging out with groups of people become more infrequent as adults become more independent and career oriented.

The sticky point in my experience is when you start talking about “dating” two people at the same time. For me, I was ok with going out with more than one person on “first dates” or the “coffee dates” as I described them. But if there was a second date planned, then I backed off seeing other people.

Some people, even on CAF, will tell you though having acquintances of the opposite sex is a no no. There have been too many threads on here that people will argue that one can NEVER have a friend of the opposite sex, that there is ALWAYS attraction involved. I disagree with that notion, and I did hang out with friends of the opposite sex without it ever being a “date” or any attraction involved. To me it was just two friends doing something they had in common, no more than that. But some people will always read more into a situation between friends of the opposite gender than there needs to ever be.

 

[Allegra]

I think I’ve always considered any situation where one party invites another party out. I don’t see a problem with dating more that one person unless you have agreed to make someone your boyfriend, in which case you date exclusively. There are many circumstances where someone might want to have a date, even if they aren’t in a relationship. For example, a school or community dance, a wedding, an adult party, a trivia night or similar event, etc.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

I didn’t want to hijack FeelingGuilty’s thread in which chevalier made an interesting observation:

As a European, I felt the same way. I have come to understand we have different definitions of the word “date”, different mechanisms through which we discern what kind of relationship, if any, we want to pursue with an individual of the opposite sex, and different views about male-female relationships in general.

In my (sub)culture, young men and women frequently socialize in groups, not pairs. A boy and a girl (or a man and a woman) might even become an exclusive couple before they’ve even ever been on a “date” - they’ve had several encounters in their group of acquaintances, they hit it off, they kissed at a party, and only after that they go on their first “date” - just the two of them going out somewhere together with the idea of it being a romantic thing, not just hanging out as friends.

Or you can do something with an acquaintance or friend of the opposite sex if you share an interest - go to a concert, play tennis, have coffee and discuss politics - but it’s not a “date” unless you’re both in agreement that you’re attracted to each other and developing an exclusive romantic relationship. You’ll only refer to an arrangement as a “date” if you both think of yourself as a couple, not if you have a vague attraction that you’re not sure is reciprocated. Otherwise, it’s just hanging out with an acquaintance who might become a friend or has already become one.

“Dating” two people at the same time would be… immoral, insincere, deceptive. Hanging out with different people of the opposite sex without a romantic idea at the back of your mind is a different, unrelated matter.

How does it work in your (sub)culture? How do relationships start - acquaintances, friendships, and romantic relationships? How do you define “dating” and can you do that with several people at once?

I’m Italian American, but lived in Italy for a few of my teen years. Boy / girl relationships were similar to how you described it.

“Dating” 2 people romantically (or interested in a romantic way) was not proper at all. There was actually a term for that, “playing with two decks of cards” If a girl or guy found out that someone was “playing with two decks of cards” they would end the relationship.

If you’ve seen the film “Cinema Paradiso” the way Toto’ courts Elena was an example. Another example is the couple that meet at the theatre, even though they don’t have speaking lines, it shows their relationship grow from furtive glances to eventual marriage with children.

Living in the US, my father did not understand “dating” so having a guy come to the house to meet him was something serious.

 

[Marc_Anthony]

Fascinating thread.

I’m a teenager. I met my girlfriend through joining the stage crew in “You’re a Good Man Charlie Brown”. I asked her to prom first, and she accepted. But we still didn’t consider ourselves a “couple”. That wasn’t until we made it “official” a couple of weeks later…it was just a “So are we going out now officially?” “Yeah, I guess we are.” thing. Not counting prom, it wasn’t until the school year ended (we started going out in February, the school year ended in June) that we went on a date.It’ll be five months in a little more than a week, and we’ve still only actually been “out” twice. But this is considered perfectly normal; it’s not like we don’t talk every day, we skype pretty often, and we plan times to meet whenever it’s feasible.

If you have a female friend and you’re a guy or vice/versa it doesn’t matter if you have female or male friends. I don’t really hang out with my female friends (I have a couple, but not a lot) but my girlfriend hangs out with male friends fairly often and I’m not bothered by it at all because I completely trust her and this isn’t really an uncommon thing where I live (I decline to give my location).

And before I got to know my girlfriend I actually went to two dances with two different girls. This is just because we were friends and we didn’t have dates, and it was extremely common to the point where probably 50% or more of the couples going to these dances were probably not actually couples but going as friends. We never considered ourselves dating at any point because we weren’t. Later that same year I invited a mixed group of male and female friends to a minor league baseball game in that area. Only two couple were in that group of about ten or so people;the rest of us were only friends.

The more I think about it the more interesting the “dating dynamic” in our area becomes.

Edit: Oh, and dating two people at the same time is cheating. You deserve to be dumped.

EDIT 2: Unless you mean it’s clear you’re not a couple. Then it’s just “hanging out”.

 

[chevalier]

I think I’ve always considered any situation where one party invites another party out. I don’t see a problem with dating more that one person unless you have agreed to make someone your boyfriend, in which case you date exclusively. There are many circumstances where someone might want to have a date, even if they aren’t in a relationship. For example, a school or community dance, a wedding, an adult party, a trivia night or similar event, etc.

Well, you can take someone else to a ball if you have a relationship, that’s not the same as a romantic event where you’re interested in each other and engage in gestures like kissing.

This is on the assumption that simply going with someone to a ball (community dance etc.) does not lead to holding hands, kissing, other such behaviours (being someone’s companion for such an “official function” does not extend that far, nor are those things a necessary or obvious parts of such companionship). Which, I think, is a reasonable assumption.

 

[Allegra]

Well, you can take someone else to a ball if you have a relationship, that’s not the same as a romantic event where you’re interested in each other and engage in gestures like kissing.

This is on the assumption that simply going with someone to a ball (community dance etc.) does not lead to holding hands, kissing, other such behaviours (being someone’s companion for such an “official function” does not extend that far, nor are those things a necessary or obvious parts of such companionship). Which, I think, is a reasonable assumption.

Like I said, I think I’ve always considered a date as when a guy takes a girl out. I hope those guys that took me out didn’t expect me to engage in physical romantic gestures the first time I ever went out with them! Anyway, when a couple agree to only see each other, we call that “dating exclusively” (a term which indicates that there are other forms of dating inclusively) or “in a relationship”. It would be wrong to go on a date with Fred if you were in a relationship with Ted. But if you weren’t in a relationship with Ted or Fred, then it’s alright to let Fred take you to the movie on Friday and go to the dance with Ted on Saturday.

 

[chevalier]

Like I said, I think I’ve always considered a date as when a guy takes a girl out. I hope those guys that took me out didn’t expect me to engage in physical romantic gestures the first time I ever went out with them! Anyway, when a couple agree to only see each other, we call that “dating exclusively” (a term which indicates that there are other forms of dating inclusively) or “in a relationship”. It would be wrong to go on a date with Fred if you were in a relationship with Ted. But if you weren’t in a relationship with Ted or Fred, then it’s alright to let Fred take you to the movie on Friday and go to the dance with Ted on Saturday.

Well, as far as traditional European mores goes, there would be nothing improper in, for example, accompanying your friend’s wife if he couldn’t go (the have two tickets but can’t go kind of situation) and it’s not like people wouldn’t go to a dance with someone else than their romantic partners (basically to have a dance partner or to avoid going alone). All within limits of propriety and honourable conduct. In fact, this kind of escorting would be an honourable duty.

 

[chevalier]

On a different note, more on topic, I just can’t understand the idea that it may be less than okay to be “steady” or “exclusive” in some situations but kissing on dates is fine (either as a recreational activity engaged whenever feeling like it, or at the end of an evening as the equivalent of a handshake).

Like, if my own hypothetical daughter had a boyfriend at age 14, I’d be worried. If she kissed with him routinely, then even more so. But it wouldn’t be better in any way, shape or form if she met a different guy each day of the week and kissed all of them. It would be much, much worse. In fact, it’d be very serious business. There would be an honour grounding. Same for a son, for that matter.

For the record, since the OP asked about cultures, here you exchange names, exchange numbers, phone, set up a meeting. It doesn’t mean specifically friends or couple, at that point both of you might as well be married or incardinated with a religious order, on the formal side of things at least. At some point a conversation comes where you decide the fate of the relationship, although some people prolong things a lot. Generally, there’s no dating pressure and few women would accept an invitation to go out using the word “date”, they would generally consider it demeaning if the guy were a stranger. It doesn’t matter, attractive, cute, decent character, whatever, it’s still a stranger and an accepting an overt boys-and-girls proposal (let alone one that implies kissing, like dating does), would be in a bad tone. And you’d probably kissed before you had a serious conversation and sometimes there’d be some second-guessing and no relationship obviously, but it’s not like you can go and do the same with any number of people just as long as you don’t explicitly verbally promise not to do it. You can weasel your way out of the situation by claiming you hadn’t made any promises but you don’t gain respect for doing that.

 

[Luvz2travel]

Interesting to read the European take on dating. I grew up in a world where dating more than 1 person at a time was frowned on and still is by most. I don’t see a problem with it morally unless it’s done in secret but if everyone is open about it I don’t see a problem until there is a mutual commitment or agreement to explore a deeper relationship.

 

[chevalier]

Interesting to read the European take on dating. I grew up in a world where dating more than 1 person at a time was frowned on and still is by most. I don’t see a problem with it morally unless it’s done in secret but if everyone is open about it I don’t see a problem until there is a mutual commitment or agreement to explore a deeper relationship.

I see a problem if relationships are being built which one already knows will have to be ended, e.g. building 3 relationships at a time means either 2 or 3 are futile because you can only marry 1 person. This is because of human dignity but also monogamy. Polyamory is something unnatural, while recreationally engaging in romance is not something I could see as highly respectable morally, if at all licit (which it probably is not). The perspective of either openness about it or hiding it just doesn’t cut it because it allows for polyamory as long as everybody involved is consenting.

By relationships I mean real relationships, especially with physical displays like kissing (which are not fun recreational activities to use at liberty, I think), not mere going out to places and talking. So multiple relationships would be like having >1 boyfriends or girlfriends at a time. Very hard to pin down a moral theology source condemning it as wrong (there is likely to be none) but very offensive from the point of view of the monogamous nature or ordering of man. Feel free to try to convince me otherwise.

By contrast, as I said, when it’s meeting and talking and no advances are clearly made, then I believe it’s fine to do it with multiple people until one can decide (including when you have your eyes set on someone but would like to give a look to another person or two before making a more decided move, I guess).

This is another reason why I’m generally against the concept of dating. If you just meet people, then this isn’t awkward. If you insist on “dating”, then there’s a crowd of strangers with rights and expectations or even just one stranger expecting clarity by 3rd date. That being the third time you even talk to each other. Obviously one can’t reliably discern someone as a prospect within such a short time-frame. Cutting down on both the “officialness” of everything and the “consumption” (kissing etc.) allows for more room to get to know people better, actually have conversations. Spend many hours talking before committing (but not enjoying the perks until then, so to say).

 

[AthenaC]

It would be wrong to go on a date with Fred if you were in a relationship with Ted. But if you weren’t in a relationship with Ted or Fred, then it’s alright to let Fred take you to the movie on Friday and go to the dance with Ted on Saturday.

I’ve never done this successfully. Once, when I was younger, I decided to take my mom’s advice and try to date the way it used to be when she was young. Meaning, spend time with multiple people (no strings attached) and worry about exclusivity later. So in one week, I went to the beach with Tom on Wednesday, dinner with Joe on Friday, a movie with Harry on Saturday, and lunch with Will on Sunday. Next thing I know, Joe tells me he loves me and Harry introduces me as his girlfriend.

Yeah … extricating myself from that one was not fun. Never doing that again, nor will I encourage anyone else to do so.

Well, as far as traditional European mores goes, there would be nothing improper in, for example, accompanying your friend’s wife if he couldn’t go (the have two tickets but can’t go kind of situation) and it’s not like people wouldn’t go to a dance with someone else than their romantic partners (basically to have a dance partner or to avoid going alone). All within limits of propriety and honourable conduct. In fact, this kind of escorting would be an honourable duty.

See, at one point I was asked by a male friend to join him in going somewhere with a few other couples because his wife couldn’t make it. I wanted to go, but I ended up turning him down becuase Will (see above), thought it looked bad for a married man and a single woman to socialize. Made me second-guess myself, even though there was zero sexual tension with this friend of mine, and his wife was a friend of mine as well.

I think overall it just shows that American culture is very unbalanced when it comes to gender relations (sex, dating, modesty, breastfeeding in public, etc.)

 

[chevalier]

See, at one point I was asked by a male friend to join him in going somewhere with a few other couples because his wife couldn’t make it. I wanted to go, but I ended up turning him down becuase Will (see above), thought it looked bad for a married man and a single woman to socialize. Made me second-guess myself, even though there was zero sexual tension with this friend of mine, and his wife was a friend of mine as well.

I think overall it just shows that American culture is very unbalanced when it comes to gender relations (sex, dating, modesty, breastfeeding in public, etc.)

From an outsider perspective (hopefully not an exceedingly cursory one) it seems to me that you guys have a lot of contradictory tendencies competing for control in your society. The biggest country in the world on freedom, and the biggest country in the world on police powers. Got yourself rid of an abusive king, your president (along with the executive branch under him) has more power than a king of England had ever had in recent centuries. When it comes to law, both judicial activism and judicial restraint are markedly stronger than in any other place in the law abiding world I can think about. You had both the puritans and the forefront of the sexual revolution. You’ve had both the Monroe doctrine (isolation from the rest of the world) and Vietnam and Korea and dozens of other places where you ended up needing to fight due to your values. You’ve also both spread the custom of being on first name basis with people, and preserved some etiquettal boundaries long forgotten back in Europe. Plenty of contrasts there, perhaps at every step. It’s absolutely no wonder that you could find among yourselves people with diametrically opposed views on this on that aspect of matchmaking behaviours. If this what you mean. For the record, they say that where there are two Poles there are three opinions. Might be the reason I get along with you guys so well.

 

[AthenaC]

From an outsider perspective (hopefully not an exceedingly cursory one) it seems to me that you guys have a lot of contradictory tendencies competing for control in your society.

(snip)

For the record, they say that where there are two Poles there are three opinions. Might be the reason I get along with you guys so well.

I can confirm the comment on the Poles, as I married into a Polish family.

As far as the contradictory tendencies, I agree. Although it’s been awhile since I took an anthropology or a sociology class, allow me to offer some amateur thoughts:

1. People do not move erratically or behave in contradictions where there is balance. I think what you said further supports my statement that Americans are unbalanced with regard to gender relations, but you observed that our society is full of contraditions (in addition to gender relations).
2. Where there is affluence, it is not essential to survival to be terribly sensible or prudent. In other words, one can afford to screw up. Because bad habits / behavior are enabled, poor judgment is more common. This is why the most strategic characteristic of a politician (i.e. one seeking power) in America is to be able to manipulate emotions effectively. If you can do that, you get votes, facts be thrown-to-the-wind. Exhibit A: 2008 election.

 

[chevalier]

I can confirm the comment on the Poles, as I married into a Polish family.

Awch! But you can’t say Poles do not respect the right of others to be wrong when there is a disagreement, can you?

For the record, no disagreement about the latter part of your post. Something of the kind is happening in Poland right now, except the freedom is generally turning into freedom from expectations, freedom from external sources of moral norms, freedom from tradition, freedom to be mediocre and not think for yourself, freedom to go with the flow and keep voting for the ruling party and think you’re being cool when doing so.