Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You have a pretty homogenous view of "society." There are many subgroups, and varying expectations and cultural behaviors, within society at large. "Social norms" are best understood when they are applied to a specific population for which they happen to hold true.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,936 posts, read 36,962,945 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just A Guy
It sounds to me like she is getting to know guys before actually starting to date in a romantic sense and that you are dating immediately before getting to know someone (as in just meeting them and asking them out or doing OLD).
I don't think there is a default, although I would think that people who are doing short term relationships are more open to non-exclusivity and people looking primarily for long term want exclusivity from close to the beginning (and especially if sex is involved).
She was indeed doing OLD if I recall correctly.
The issue isn't wanting exclusivity from early on, or not, that's done on a case by case basis... the last person I went exclusive with and I agree very early on to do so, after only a handful of dates... the issue is whether two parties need to agree to be exclusive for there to be an agreement on exclusivity. I don't believe in telepathy, nor do I agree that I can think and want something, not communicate it, and it binds the other person to what I want.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,936 posts, read 36,962,945 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by TabulaRasa
You have a pretty homogenous view of "society." There are many subgroups, and varying expectations and cultural behaviors, within society at large. "Social norms" are best understood when they are applied to a specific population for which they happen to hold true.
Not really. I've lived in many different states and dealt with widely varying demographics across this country.
However, I've never met a demographic that is either telepathic, nor one that can remain silent and wish something mentally and be able to hold another person to a one sided agreement \that is kept only within ones head and never ever communicated.
Have you? If that demographic of society does exist, you're correct, I have not knowingly interacted with it.
And whether you like it or not, we live in a society, a society has social norms for conduct... we can try to pretend they dont exists, but if one wants to divorce or extract ourselves from those norms (which is our right) one has to make that clear or risk serious issues with the people we interact with.
You may not like society, but you too understand it and do work and live within it. We all do.
You speak of this "society" like you're an expert.
That, somehow, the norms you live by dictate what "society" expects. Seems awfully convenient.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,936 posts, read 36,962,945 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by TabulaRasa
Yes, I'm completely and so obviously talking about telepathy.
Not, you know, different populations within society having differing social expectations due to various cultural influences.
So there are people that hold other people to interpersonal agreements that both people haven't acknowledged existing, discussed, and agreed upon?
OK. If you say so. You're right, I've not interacted with such a group. I'm ok with that, I don't think I'd like socializing with people that don't see other people as individuals that deserve respect and can be controlled by a thought or wish.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,936 posts, read 36,962,945 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by mishigas73
Hate to break it to you, but that experience does not make you the "voice of society".
I never said it does. But since you agree with me nearly 100% as your words, explanations for why you do what you do, and actions indicate, I have no idea what you are harping on any longer. I think you just must want to be pissed off at something, and for some reason you're taking it out on me even while agreeing with me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mishigas73
You speak of this "society" like you're an expert.
That, somehow, the norms you live by dictate what "society" expects. Seems awfully convenient.
No, you have it reverse, I express the reality of what society expects. You live by the same norms as you've repeatedly stated today.
She was indeed doing OLD if I recall correctly.
The issue isn't wanting exclusivity from early on, or not, that's done on a case by case basis... the last person I went exclusive with and I agree very early on to do so, after only a handful of dates... the issue is whether two parties need to agree to be exclusive for there to be an agreement on exclusivity. I don't believe in telepathy, nor do I agree that I can think and want something, not communicate it, and it binds the other person to what I want.
I think there is another issue there and this conversation is a good example of it. Since people will have differing ideas on this, it is best to bring it out into the open as soon as possible.
I think the OP is being disingenuous. I think he knows there is a possibility that one or both girls are going to be hurt to learn he might be having sex with the other one, even though they have not had the exclusive conversation.
I think he is just taking the easy way out and wants to be able to have sex with both girls without being upfront about things.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.