juldea: (indifferent avatar)
[personal profile] juldea
What's the definition of boyfriend/girlfriend?

I'd like quantity in response to this, even at expense of quality. If you can take the time to drop a comment, even if it's just one word, I'd appreciate it a lot. You don't even have to continue reading if you have a response right now and no time to continue - just drop me what you have and go do what you need to do.

To clarify: Most people, as far as I know, don't associate dating with being in love. Those states are independent from each other; they just happen to overlap in the right circumstances. Therefore, 'love' isn't part of the definition of dating.

If I take out that emotional tie completely, I get two (or more) people who enjoy each other's company, have some similar interests, care about each other's well-being and happiness... and engage in some kind of physical activity that society generally reserves for such relationships (whether it's just kissing or goes on to much more depends on the individual).

But... that's the definition of 'friends with benefits' (using the real-life definition (not the LJ definition) of friend). Friends enjoy each other's company, have some similar interests, and care about each other's well-being and happiness. And benefits are the physical activities that are generally reserved for boy/girlfriend-and-up relationships.

So what's the midpoint? What state stands between a 'friend with benefits' and, uh, a 'loved person'? What am I missing as part of the definition that, in your mind, makes the relationships different?

I imagine (because I've already thought of it, and one other person has already suggested it) that many people are going to say, "Exclusivity." But, well, in the polyamorous society that is Cambridge/Somerville and most of the groups I hang out with now, that's not an acceptible answer. Dating one person doesn't mean you can't date/'benefit from' another, to many people. Therefore it isn't a part of the definition - at least not if the definition is universal. Which I guess leads me to:

Special bonus question: Is this definition universal, or does each individual have to define it for him/herself?

on 25 Mar 2004 11:04 (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] juldea.livejournal.com
Well then, define 'romantically involved.' :P

on 25 Mar 2004 11:14 (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] jester-king.livejournal.com
romantically involved means they see each other socialy, remember anniversaries, bring flowers/candy on Valentines stuff like that, or none of that, like I said it's an agreement between the people

on 25 Mar 2004 11:27 (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] juldea.livejournal.com
But what you're saying means that there is no standard, and anything, provided it is agreed upon between the two people involved, can be considered dating.

So you and I could decide that mutual hate and spitting in each other's face when we see one another is going to be our definition of dating... Why we would, I dunno, but we could. And since that was our agreement, it'd be dating, even though it's blatantly opposite of what the accepted norms are?

on 25 Mar 2004 11:28 (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] jester-king.livejournal.com
pretty much, I'm not real big on normative judgements

on 25 Mar 2004 11:36 (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] juldea.livejournal.com
Okay then. Just wanted to be clear. :)

on 25 Mar 2004 11:42 (UTC)
ext_104661: (Default)
Posted by [identity profile] alexx-kay.livejournal.com
So you and I could decide that mutual hate and spitting in each other's face when we see one another

Well, it would be a classic romantic-comedy dynamic :-)

December 2012

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031     

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated 1 March 2026 03:41
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios