Quitting the Dating Game (ABCs of Choosing a Good Wife by Stephen Wood)

[chevalier]

I can see that. Highschool-style dating does seem to trickle up.

Yup.

I have never felt this pressure nor given it any of the times I’ve dated.

The pressure is inherent in the system.

I don’t think dating is bound up in kissing; I have never kissed a girl, and not because I’m some sort of romantic failure.

Exceptions don’t disprove a general rule.

(Oh, and I’ve never been on a date so called, which is not because my failcount isn’t huge. I just meet people in places or take them to places. I prefer it this way.)

The problem of exclusive vs. non-exclusive dating is a problem with communication. Exclusivity should never be implied, but always frankly discussed before it is expected of the other.

There’s no reason for exclusivity when it’s just having coffee and talking. On the other hand, there’s no justification for non-exclusivity when it’s kissing, holding hands, reciting bad poetry etc.

Or daters abuse dating as people abuse anything else.

True but the system was made for that.

Of course! I don’t think anyone dating would not at least make some pretence of wholesome activity. Dating is taking someone out on the town or out for a good time, not the thing you do in the backseat of your car.

The way I see it, there’s no reason to play the dating game in those cases, as the activity can simply be referred to as whatever substantive, wholesome activity is taking place.

It is both broken and, in these days, an artificial, insufficient solution. It is so radical that people think that if they only just do that, they cannot go wrong, which is not the case.

Yup. Same goes for dating anyway.

 

[Marie682]

I sort of agree I sort of don’t. I like the idea of “courting the whole family” but then it wont’ really work out unless everyone lives in a nice tidy little village.

I’m tryign to do the “dating” thing at the moment, and my only current rule is never bring them to my home, never go to their’s alone.

For one thing, it could cause my neighbours to think scandelous thoughts seeing me a Catholic bringing a guy into my flat where I live alone, and I wouldn’t want him there anyway.

I reckon I can get to know people outside of our homes.

Of course, to be absolutely frank, the more guys I meet through this dating business, the more I wonder if I am meant for God as a nun.

I think this is a good rule initially (not to be alone with someone you are dating), but really as time goes on and you become more serious about someone, it doesn’t have to be a problem. There is only so much time you can spend at restaurants, movies, etc., but it is possible to be alone in your home with a boyfriend and remain chaste. I live alone, and my neighbors probably see my boyfriend enter my apartment, but if they are really paying attention they will also see him leave the same night. I don’t really know how else I could have gotten to know him as well as I have without spending time alone together, and the fact that we can remain chaste while alone only strengthens our relationship.

 

[Harmony1988]

I haven’t read the book, so I can’t be all too critical, but judging by some comments here it seems like probably needs to be a really fine line drawn. There is nothing wrong with dating, and to suggest you need to quit the dating game is ridiculous.

There are certain cultures in the world where there is no “dating” per se. Men become men at a much younger age, helping their fathers to provide for the family at 15, probably getting married to a girl at a much earlier age who is also well known to the parents. These are cultural things, and it doesn’t really apply to the western culture.

Suggesting chaperoning is ridiculous, just because it was done 200 years ago doesn’t mean it has to be done now, what is it some people are suffering from, nostalgia?

 

[Harmony1988]

There is no set rules for “finding the perfect one” - it is not an objective thing, suggesting one thing is better than the other is to be ignorant of culture, time, and place.

With nearly 7 billion people from 180+ different countries, is one system going to workout for everyone? There are do’s and don’ts, and it mainly depends on where you live. I frankly have no problem with the modern idea of “dating” - it’s what I’m familiar with, and I would find it uncomfortable to go the house of some girl to meet her parents before we started going out. Some people might think that’s the best way for them, so be it.

There’s no need for books, and to think so much about such an easy thing. No one’s right or wrong, do what you’re comfortable with.

 

[chevalier]

There are certain cultures in the world where there is no “dating” per se. Men become men at a much younger age, helping their fathers to provide for the family at 15, probably getting married to a girl at a much earlier age who is also well known to the parents. These are cultural things, and it doesn’t really apply to the western culture.

Actually, you don’t really need to look far to the east. Dating, clearly so defined and without variance, exists probably only in some parts of the US and maybe of the UK due to sharing the language and having an easier cultural exchange. Anywhere else, it’s probably less clearly defined, and to my knowledge people don’t explicitly go on dates. In my part of Europe we certainly don’t put so much definition on the meetings, if you at all use the dictionary equivalent of the word “date”, it’s purely descriptive and almost always in jest. You’re basically seeing someone at this or that date, time and place, or going somewhere with someone. The noun for that is “meeting”. This even though we’re thoroughly familiar with the dating concept and we’ve had a short stint with it, in fact it ended some 20 years ago and for the better.

I’m pretty sure within the US, you can also find communities where people just meet people and are seeing people and going to places with people, and the world isn’t going crazy becauce of that, there’s no “dating” craze.

 

[HumbledCatholic]

chevalier,

I think, in this instance, exceptions do disprove the rule.

If there can be exceptions, it’s not a rule; consequently, anyone engaged in this activity is free to decide for him or herself whether or not to take things too far.

Consequently, going after the system or, as you seem to be doing, the name, is to miss the point and cause of the unchastity. Dating can be redeemed, both as a word and as an activity. It needn’t be scrapped, and it is more helpful, for the sake of the weaker bretheren, not to dismiss it in such universal terms. That breeds scrupulosity or causes people to shift responsibility for actions from themselves to a system.

Either way, it’s bad.

-HC

 

[Cat_Herder]

Consequently, going after the system or, as you seem to be doing, the name, is to miss the point and cause of the unchastity. Dating can be redeemed, both as a word and as an activity. It needn’t be scrapped, and it is more helpful, for the sake of the weaker bretheren, not to dismiss it in such universal terms. That breeds scrupulosity or causes people to shift responsibility for actions from themselves to a system.

The problem with dating is that it is easily abused by either gender. A woman who enjoys dating as a fantasy outlet and has no desire to commit can just lie and lead on the man. A man can just as easily string the woman along and then dump her for someone else. Or the woman can manipulate the man’s feelings and then cut him off or vice versa.

Wood describes this as a cycle of breaking up and regardless of what he thinks about chaperoning, his indictment of dating is absolutely dead-on.

I for one want commitment, and I’m not finding it in the dating universe. You say that the system shouldn’t be blamed for the faults of the participants. I say that so many of the participants have abused the system that there is no longer any expectation of commitment on the cultural level; dating is just “for fun” and those of us who are looking for something more than “fun” need to look elsewhere.

 

[Alexander_Smith]

That’s true, but there are other ways to do that than on a first date saying, “those people in the restaurant glaring at us our my mother and father. Oh yeah, I’m 28 years old.”

Time to spread your wings and fly, little birdie. Leave the nest.

I like meeting families, and most of them usually like me back (how could you not? I’m a lovable guy ) but on a the first few dates, let me get to know you-not your friends, family, dog, Facebook friends, etc.

Why do you date at all? Are you trying to find a spouse, or are you just jumping from one short-term female companion to another?

 

[HumbledCatholic]

The problem with [marriage] is that it is easily abused by either gender. A woman who enjoys [marriage]** as a fantasy outlet and has no desire to commit can just lie and lead on the man. A man can just as easily string the woman along and then [divorce] her for someone else. Or the woman can manipulate the man’s feelings and then cut him off or vice versa.

Wood describes this as a cycle of [serial marriages] and regardless of what he thinks about [pre-nuptial agreements] , his indictment of [marriage] is absolutely dead-on.

I for one want commitment, and I’m not finding it in the [marriage] universe. You say that the system shouldn’t be blamed for the faults of the participants. I say that so many of the participants have abused the system that there is no longer any expectation of commitment on the cultural level; **[marriage] **is just “for fun” and those of us who are looking for something more than “fun” need to look elsewhere.

It’s all about the individuals involved. There is no panacaea or paradigm which will make everyone moral and the world a utopia except for grace. No hundred thousand bad examples will ever change the way my girlfriend and I behave.

 

[LittleSoldier]

It’s all about the individuals involved. There is no panacaea or paradigm which will make everyone moral and the world a utopia except for grace. No hundred thousand bad examples will ever change the way my girlfriend and I behave.

???

So why bother to get married?

 

[Nec5]

One overused and completely foolish analogy is the one comparing birds(i.e. time to leave the nest) to humans. Wouldn’t some other creatures, like a wolf pack or gorilla cabal, be more useful?

Unless it’s the cuckoo bird (that lays an egg in someone else’s nest for them to raise and then runs off). Yeah, maybe the cuckoo analogy fits today’s culture.

 

[LittleSoldier]

One overused and completely foolish analogy is the one comparing birds(i.e. time to leave the nest) to humans. Wouldn’t some other creatures, like a wolf pack or gorilla cabal, be more useful?

Unless it’s the cuckoo bird (that lays an egg in someone else’s nest for them to raise and then runs off). Yeah, maybe the cuckoo analogy fits today’s culture.

Don’t judge.

Sorry, I really couldn’t help myself.

 

[HumbledCatholic]

The institution of marriage itself is open to the same critism–that it is frequently abused–that has been levelled against dating. Yet that has not led anyone here to reject that institution. In that case, we are perfectly happy to place the blame not on a flawed institution, but on individuals acting unjustly.

Why does the same not apply to dating?

So why bother to get married?

I’m so sorry that you have such a hard time understanding my posts. I try to make them as clear, concise, and logical as possible.

That said, I do not see how this question follows from anything I said.

 

[Nec5]

Don’t judge.

Sorry, I really couldn’t help myself.

Few can.

 

[LittleSoldier]

The institution of marriage itself is open to the same critism–that it is frequently abused–that has been levelled against dating. Yet that has not led anyone here to reject that institution. In that case, we are perfectly happy to place the blame not on a flawed institution, but on individuals acting unjustly.

Why does the same not apply to dating?

Because matrimony, which is a Sacrament is not at all the same thing as dating, which is not a Sacrament.

 

[HumbledCatholic]

Because matrimony, which is a Sacrament is not at all the same thing as dating, which is not a Sacrament.

OK, let’s restrict our discussion to civil matrimony between nonbelievers. I’d imagine it would take rather the same course.

There is a 50% divorce rate. Yet no one is seriously proposing radically different alternatives to non-sacramental marriage.

 

[LittleSoldier]

The institution of marriage itself is open to the same critism–that it is frequently abused–that has been levelled against dating. Yet that has not led anyone here to reject that institution. In that case, we are perfectly happy to place the blame not on a flawed institution, but on individuals acting unjustly.

Why does the same not apply to dating?

I’m so sorry that you have such a hard time understanding my posts. I try to make them as clear, concise, and logical as possible.

That said, I do not see how this question follows from anything I said.

I’m sorry; I missed your edit. I am having a hard time understanding your posts, but that’s probably my own fault and if you want I’ll PM you and tell you why.

 

[Cat_Herder]

Because matrimony, which is a Sacrament is not at all the same thing as dating, which is not a Sacrament.

That Sacrament has as valid matter one man and one woman. You are one, but the problem is how do you find the other…? Hence the great debate.

 

[LittleSoldier]

OK, let’s restrict our discussion to civil matrimony between nonbelievers. I’d imagine it would take rather the same course.

I believe it’s up to the OP. I don’t want to go off-topic.

 

[HumbledCatholic]

LittleSoldier,

If you’d like to PM me, that’s fine, but I wouldn’t worry about it!

Just don’t be so alarmed…I probably haven’t said anything as shocking as it seems you sometimes think I’ve said.

My point with restricting the discussion away from Sacramental marriage was to do away with the distinction between Sacraments and secular institutions, and to compare views on the secular institutions of marriage and dating, and where we perceive the fault as lying in the abuses of each.