I hate dating. Ok, I don’t really hate dating. Or maybe my hate for it isn’t as bad as I make it sound.
I just don’t like the way our culture does it. It seems like a lot of people have different definitions of it. I’d like it more if dating were generally defined as “spending time with a guy or girl with whom you click/have chemistry; getting to know him or her without a whole heck of a lot of pressure.”
See, it seems like “being too quick to commit” is a big part of what dating is in this culture. Scenario: guy meets girl. Attraction. They barely know each other, but they’re drawn to one another. Sometimes, they can’t explain it. But they want to act on that (which is natural). Maybe they’ll flirt, and go out a time or two, and – I’m speaking generally and hypothetically here, as this certainly isn’t the case for everyone or for every relationship. – it doesn’t take long for the two to decide (whether explicitly or implied) to see each other exclusively.
But something about that just irks me, honestly. Let’s say this new couple, whose attraction to one another – along with some initial similarities, shared values, etc. – was the reason they became an item, has been exclusive for a couple of months. Typically, they’ll get close, emotionally and/or physically, which almost always creates an attachment – an emotional and biological bond. And the more time they spend together, the more of each other they will start to experience – the good as well as the bad. He might notice some traits of hers that he really can’t stand. She might see some patterns of behavior in him that she doesn’t approve of.
When that happens, because they’ve already committed to be in an exclusive relationship – and usually therefore have become attached to one another – these things that he and she can’t stand about each other are “bumps in the road,” or issues to be worked through, “phases that will pass,” or reasons to admit that “she’ll change someday,” or that “boys will be boys” and they’ll brush them off.
I’m not saying a guy and a girl who are drawn to each other shouldn’t act on it. They should, by all means. They should hang out, get to know each other, go out on the town, talk. But I think guys and girls too often and too carelessly assume that being drawn to one another is reason enough to immediately be more than friends, and to commit to something exclusive. Dating, in our culture, seems like “committing to someone to see if it works” when I feel like conversely, we should really be committing to someone if…it works! Instead, I see so many people “doin’ the deed” far too soon (i.e. pre-ring exchange), which creates the only real bond that makes them want to stay together. But I’m fairly certain (as in, 100% certain) that that kind of intimacy should strengthen the bond that already keeps you together.
A good friend of mine dated this girl at the beginning of high school. They broke up, but became best friends. Strictly friends, but inseparable. After high school, he went on tour with his band and she went on vacation: it was the first time they’d been apart. While they were gone, my friend had an epiphany. This “holy crap, I love her and I can’t live without her” moment. Badabing, badaboom… he proposed. Now they’re married with three kids. Clearly not everyone will have a story like his, but I think stories like his are possible and even more possible if guys and girls approached “dating” differently.
Like, what if the guy and the girl from my aforementioned general and hypothetical scenario had done things differently? What if they spent time together, or “dated casually (i.e. “went out on dates,” but didn’t act like a couple, or what have you)” and held off on getting close physically. If he or she spent enough time with one another, he or she would eventually have noticed the same habits or patterns of behavior they can’t stand. I think it’s a lot easier to know the difference between “something to work through” and “a really good reason not to pursue a more-than-friendship relationship” when a person is free to come to that conclusion without feeling like it’s some kind of faux-pas, and when there isn’t an attachment to be broken.
I really feel like there’s such confusion between love and infatuation, and between reasons to commit and reasons to get to know a person. Even before they’re married, people are “taking” each other, to have and to hold, for better or for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish from this day forward because they find each other attractive (and until one of them comes to their senses). And they’re doing it because they think long-term exclusive relationships let you learn whether a marriage with the person would work. I kind of think that’s bull. We shouldn’t have to commit to a person to see if it will work. We should want to commit to a person because it does work. And I really believe we’d be able to tell that it works if we’d take our time.
If I date, I hope it’s to find a husband. And if I get married, I want to be able to say I knew I wanted to commit to this guy – I knew I wanted to share the rest of my life with him – because we make sense, and because even after being exposed to his dark sides and his annoying habits, there was more than just an emotional attachment that kept me tethered…, etc. I want to be able to say something like that instead of something like, “Well, I wanted to marry this guy because I was emotionally attached to him, and couldn’t bear to be separate from him, because it hurt too much.”
I see so many young people feeling like they have to make a relationship work – people who became exclusive to each other for the wrong reasons, and consequently got too emotionally/physically intimate, fostering the kind of bond that can be really hard to break, leaving them so attached that they’re trapped trying to make it work while blind to the reasons that it won’t.
And apparently, I had to get that off my chest. But, please, discuss. I’d love opinions!
