To not understand this trend for having to have an “exclusivity talk” when dating someone?

[HeartsAndClubs]

I was always under the impression that when you started seeing someone you were seeing each other and that was that.

But more recently there seems to be an understanding that unless you’ve actually agreed to be exclusive, it’s pretty much open season and either one of you can continue to date whoever you want however you want.

How have we got to this point?

Why is it seemingly so difficult for people to date one person at a time? And how is it that people should seemingly be happy to be cut loose at any time in order for the other to be “exclusive” with someone else?

[quote MuckyPlucky]@phoenixrosehere

Why is it when some people aren’t used to something and don’t like it, it has to be an Americanism. It’s not and it is done in other western cultures

Because it DID actually start in America, as a social trend, before it started in the UK? It is a North American social trend, therefore accurate to call it an Americanism. The term ‘Americanism’ isn’t always synonymous with the negative, it is just a fact.[/quote]
Dating did not start in America. That is not fact

@Riverlee

But it was considered cheating. In those days, you only dated one person at a time. If you were a couple, then you were considered off-limits. Obviously, you may meet someone new and decide you like them better, then will ditch the first person and start going out with the second (and there may be an slight overlap). However, very people in 80s dated multiple people at once. It just wasn’t done.

That is not true. Dating is not the same as a relationship

Only fast types took a turn around the garden in the presence of a chaperone. She met him when he was reading aloud from Fordyce's Sermons to Young Women.

@StrongLegs

I agree OP. I don't know how people can manage two relationships at once. It would wreck my head entirely.

Again, for the people that are not raly understanding it. Dating is not the same as a relationship

Again, for the people that are not raly understanding it. Dating is not the same as a relationship

Whatever you call it, it takes time and energy.

@Ionlydomassiveones

Love that if you think that somehow integrity and morality should be involved you’re ‘old fashioned’ or that this is somehow ‘liberating’ and an opportunity for ‘women to be upfront and honest’. Bloody hell, if you want to shag around, shag around but if you’re seeing someone on the regular I would expect exclusivity as a default unless you agree otherwise. How can any fledgling relationship start with any ounce of respect or trust if you’re both fucking around with other people?

YANBU op. The whole thing smacks to me of mostly benefitting men who can have their cake and eat it.

Well, you might expect it 'as a default', some of us expect the opposite as the default and have the conversation.

It's cleaner that way to be honest. Because until you have the bloody conversation you don't know what the other person thinks is the default. There's no rule book. You do what you want. Others do what they want. And if two of you come together you DISCUSS what you both want and that is ALL that is happening.

No idea why this is even worthy of being talked about. All this pearl clutching about all these babies no-one know the fathers of (being shagging around for years, managed to avoid pregnancy and STDs, not that it's anyone's business).

@Ionlydomassiveones

“Because until you have the bloody conversation you don't know what the other person thinks is the default. There's no rule book.”

Well it seems like there is a rule book, and that is that men can sleep around with impunity. I doubt most women would take that opportunity once they’ve met someone they like.

I'm a woman and did. I'm not sure why people think only men like to test options. For me I think I felt more time pressure due to the biological clock ticking away, so was even more certain not to waste time by cutting contact with others before I was certain

You'd be shocked at how lesbian dating can be!

Because it DID actually start in America, as a social trend, before it started in the UK? It is a North American social trend, therefore accurate to call it an Americanism. The term ‘Americanism’ isn’t always synonymous with the negative, it is just a fact.

Cite a source for this fact then. Where in North America did it start? What year or decade? If it is a social trend, surely it had a starting point?

I agree OP. I don't know how people can manage two relationships at once. It would wreck my head entirely.

It’s not two relationships though. Going on a date or a few dates, doesn’t automatically
make it a relationship.

@Ionlydomassiveones

“Because until you have the bloody conversation you don't know what the other person thinks is the default. There's no rule book.”

Well it seems like there is a rule book, and that is that men can sleep around with impunity. I doubt most women would take that opportunity once they’ve met someone they like.

Nope.

There's definitely no rule book.

The only reason it appears men can sleep around and women can't is because of threads like this and the hoiky judgy people posting here.

In actual fact, we can all do what the fuck we want.

@StrongLegs

I agree OP. I don't know how people can manage two relationships at once. It would wreck my head entirely.

Dating doesn't automatically mean a relationship, surely you know this

It's not a conversation about "being exclusive".

It's talking about where you both are in terms of each other. If you've been on a few dates and been sleeping together, you discuss "what you are" and whether you're in a relationship or just having fun.

This is not new at all
When you date it doesnt mean your exclusive !

You are just dating so that means you could date several people at the same time. Or just go on dates with different people etc.

I never had the talk either but im not naive to think my ex partners were all just dating me at the start. Hell i wasnt just exclusively dating them at the start haha

I wouldn't enter into a sexual relationship that wasn't exclusive. That's my boundary. I'm not interested in casual sex.

Because it's a reasonable conversation. 2 strangers getting to know each other, doesn't constitute a relationship. Equally, many people don't equate sex with commitment, although also many people do. Hence a conversation regarding expectations is always a good idea.

When you are meeting people you know next to nothing about, based of a profile and a few messages, it makes sense to get to know them and decide you like them and are compatible before talks about exclusivity happen. Some people like to see several people at a time while they make that decision, that's fine too. And efficient.

In the eighties it seemed as though people got drunk, got off together and then were together for years, sometimes life. I thought at the time it was a bit odd. Maybe I didn’t understand the full picture,
People saying “ Dating doesn't automatically mean a relationship, surely you know” are being a bit unreasonable though. ‘Relationship’ is just a word. Seeing someone repeatedly requires time, effort and communication. If seeing someone includes having sex with them then even more so.

I think it’s probably best and part of the ‘getting to know each other’ process to have that conversation
It’s good to know where you both stand

@Ionlydomassiveones

“Because until you have the bloody conversation you don't know what the other person thinks is the default. There's no rule book.”

Well it seems like there is a rule book, and that is that men can sleep around with impunity. I doubt most women would take that opportunity once they’ve met someone they like.

Yep, this is the judgemental crap about women on this thread that is the underlying tone form some people on this thread. And in society

@Joystir59

I wouldn't enter into a sexual relationship that wasn't exclusive. That's my boundary. I'm not interested in casual sex.

Yes, so you'd have to have the conversation, right?

@HosannainExcelSheets

It's not a new thing at all. My grandmother explained that in her day (late 1930s) you "played the field" and had dates with many young men in over a short period of time. You didn't commit to one person or "go steady" unless you were heading towards marriage. Not that people tended to have sex with multiple partners then, but dating more than one person was completely normal.

I think the idea of commitment to one person right from the start, and before you read know if you want to rule out other possible partners is unusual.

What social class was your grandmother?

People saying “ Dating doesn't automatically mean a relationship, surely you know” are being a bit unreasonable though. ‘Relationship’ is just a word. Seeing someone repeatedly requires time, effort and communication. If seeing someone includes having sex with them then even more so.

Relationship is not just a word. Our lives are filled with different types of relationships that we navigate a throughout our lives. People say they have a working relationship, they’re in a committed relationship, relationship is used by many to detail the type of interactions they have with someone over time.

A friendship is a relationship. If you’re going out with another mum for a coffee for the first time after a baby/toddler class that you’ve just met in and chatted during, are you two automatically friends? No. At school, if you’re nice to some people and have the occasional chat, does that automatically make them your friend? No.

Dating and whether or not they’re in a relationship means different things to different people hence for many a conversation is needed so both parties know how the other feels, sees things, and expects.

Assuming that you’re in a relationship and automatically exclusive without knowing if the other party sees it or agrees is unreasonable, regardless of gender, because that’s assuming that the other party fully knows exactly what you mean and agree to the same terms as you despite never having discussed it. Yes, you can not have this conversation and be absolutely fine however it can definitely lead to upset when both parties are not on the same page when thought otherwise.

I have 3 dc in their 20s and this certainly is not the norm in the circles they move in. In fact people (especially girls) who do this are viewed very negatively.
As you get older and thoughts turn to settling down,the best men really do not want a woman who has shagged half the town.

@phoenixrosehere
Yes. I nearly said some of that myself. I suppose what I object to is the argument that no commitment means no relationship. I don’t think that would stand up in court.