LeaningIntoTheMuse Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 What I mean by an internet relationship is someone who: - You converse with via MSN messenger, skype, telephone, and email - Someone who you basically spill everything to, and form a bond/connection with - Someone who loved you, and you loved in return Can these be considered relationships, even though there was no kissing, intimacy, or sex involved? If so, I've had 3 internet relationships. In only one case did it progress past the internet. And by that time, we had already decided that friendship was best. I'm still friends with the person, and I did kiss her, but I didn't have sex with her. What I'm asking is, am I a relationship newbie, or someone who's had 3 short flings via the internet? Because I have learned how a relationship works, via these "internet flings", or whatever you call them. But do you learn more with relationships that aren't started on the internet, and don't progress past it? I have mentioned that I've never been in a relationship before, but I was ruling out those 3 internet relationships. If I include them, I've "dated" three different girls. Link to post Share on other sites
carhill Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 Unless you're a confirmed virgin until marriage, a romantic 'relationship' includes sex, IMO. So, if you desire sex but have been unsuccessful in establishing a sexual relationship with a woman, you haven't yet had a relationship. I 'dated' women until establishing my first 'relationship' at 35. I had no interest in being a virgin until marriage. Upon that basis I offer this assessment. Link to post Share on other sites
Author LeaningIntoTheMuse Posted January 17, 2011 Author Share Posted January 17, 2011 (edited) Unless you're a confirmed virgin until marriage, a romantic 'relationship' includes sex, IMO. So, if you desire sex but have been unsuccessful in establishing a sexual relationship with a woman, you haven't yet had a relationship. I 'dated' women until establishing my first 'relationship' at 35. I had no interest in being a virgin until marriage. Upon that basis I offer this assessment. EDITED: I suppose I do desire sex, but it's not the most important thing in the world. And the way I've gone about things is that I've put sex on the backburner, and been more concerned about establishing an emotional connection first, rather than a physical one. I would disagree about sex being what defines a relationship. Two asexuals can be in love, and never have sex, and it can still be considered a relationship. Edited January 17, 2011 by LeaningIntoTheMuse Link to post Share on other sites
Pyro Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 I wouldn't call it a real relationship until the two people meet in real life and it progresses from there. It doesn't have to include sex, especially if you are the type to wait until marriage for it. A person sitting behind a computer and in real life can be two different people. Link to post Share on other sites
USMCHokie Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 I wouldn't call it a real relationship until the two people meet in real life and it progresses from there. It doesn't have to include sex, especially if you are the type to wait until marriage for it. A person sitting behind a computer and in real life can be two different people. I agree with this. Link to post Share on other sites
carhill Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 I would disagree about sex being what defines a relationship. Two asexuals can be in love, and never have sex, and it can still be considered a relationship. Here's an example. My best friend and I love each other. We kiss each other, hug each other and tell each other we love each other. We have a close and loving *friendship*. He does all those things *and* has *sex* with his wife. They have a *relationship* and a *marriage*. Ask the women whom you believe you have had 'relationships' with if they share your perspective. That's your sign. Link to post Share on other sites
Author LeaningIntoTheMuse Posted January 17, 2011 Author Share Posted January 17, 2011 So I suppose I haven't had a "real relationship." That's cool. That's what I pretty much suspected. Link to post Share on other sites
HeavenOrHell Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 No, you can't be in a r/hip with someone you've never met, I think you can be friends with someone you've never met but have talked to on the phone and online, but a r/ship is something extra, how can you be in love with someone you've not met? How do you know you would feel the same about them if you met in real life? I would call what you describe friendship, not relationship as such. 'Dating' means actually meeting someone face to face. No offence meant, but I think most people would laugh/smile if someone were to say they'd been in r/ships with people they'd never met. What I mean by an internet relationship is someone who: - You converse with via MSN messenger, skype, telephone, and email - Someone who you basically spill everything to, and form a bond/connection with - Someone who loved you, and you loved in return Can these be considered relationships, even though there was no kissing, intimacy, or sex involved? If so, I've had 3 internet relationships. In only one case did it progress past the internet. And by that time, we had already decided that friendship was best. I'm still friends with the person, and I did kiss her, but I didn't have sex with her. What I'm asking is, am I a relationship newbie, or someone who's had 3 short flings via the internet? Because I have learned how a relationship works, via these "internet flings", or whatever you call them. But do you learn more with relationships that aren't started on the internet, and don't progress past it? I have mentioned that I've never been in a relationship before, but I was ruling out those 3 internet relationships. If I include them, I've "dated" three different girls. Link to post Share on other sites
HeavenOrHell Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 I agree, sex doesn't have to come into it, but I think emotional intimacy does, more so than you share with anyone else. I wouldn't call it a real relationship until the two people meet in real life and it progresses from there. It doesn't have to include sex, especially if you are the type to wait until marriage for it. A person sitting behind a computer and in real life can be two different people. Link to post Share on other sites
Star Gazer Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 I agree with this. :lmao: I think the foundation for a real romantic-relationship can be built via the internet (email, IM, webcam/Skype, etc.). You learn a lot about a person when you're less driven by the physical and forced to communicate and share more than you would if you were always around each other and motivated by hormones. That's how real intimacy is built, IMO. But I don't think it's fair to expect anything from the other person in terms of commitment or seeing the other as "yours" until you actually meet and decide what kind of real relationship you want with the other. Link to post Share on other sites
USMCHokie Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 :lmao: I think the foundation for a real romantic-relationship can be built via the internet (email, IM, webcam/Skype, etc.). You learn a lot about a person when you're less driven by the physical and forced to communicate and share more than you would if you were always around each other and motivated by hormones. That's how real intimacy is built, IMO. But I don't think it's fair to expect anything from the other person in terms of commitment or seeing the other as "yours" until you actually meet and decide what kind of real relationship you want with the other. I agree with you on all counts, as I've clearly learned a few things from recent experience. But I'm glad you got a chuckle out of it. Link to post Share on other sites
carhill Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 OP, for clarity regarding my perspective, I established my first internet 'relationship' back in 1998 and traveled about 6000 miles to effect it *in person*. This included *intimacy* and *sex*. I also had a number of *infatuations* via the internet (and via telephone) in the decade prior. They were *not* relationships. Some occurred while I was a virgin; some not. Sex, as in the physical act of genitals meeting, is not the determinant factor; it is the intent and real life actions of effecting that intent which define the relationship. So, in your scenario, if both you and the lady are confirmed asexuals and establish a real-life physical and emotional bond and commitment which does not include sex as part of that dynamic and you *agree* you are in a relationship, then you are in a relationship. I'll give another example: The 'friend' from my journals, someone I loved for many years and had a long and painful unrequited romantic desire for, never had a 'relationship' with me, even though we were very close emotionally, were physically close and often said 'I love you' to each other. We didn't have a relationship simply because we were not in agreement. To her, I was a 'friend'. My feelings didn't matter. It's as simple as that. The imperative is to *accept it*. Link to post Share on other sites
Star Gazer Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 I'm glad you got a chuckle out of it. I wasn't really laughing so much as annoyed, to be honest with you. I'm pretty amazed at the number of switches being flipped today. Link to post Share on other sites
Author LeaningIntoTheMuse Posted January 17, 2011 Author Share Posted January 17, 2011 Makes a lot of sense, carhill. I suppose I haven't had a relationship yet. However, I don't believe that these internet connections were bad, because they formed the basis of what could have been my first relationship. They just never took off for some reason. As a shy guy who doesn't approach many women, I don't have many chances outside of the internet. Girls find me attractive, yet if they approach me, I run, and if I try to approach them, I come off as 'too anxious' and make her uncomfortable. Then they run. I suppose I need to find a girl who's as introverted as I am. Then we can be introverts in love. Or, I need to get over my shyness through desensitization. I have an anxiety disorder, but am coping with it, and have gotten over most interactions with people (aka: I can make both male and female friends, and talk to strangers and start random conversations.) However, include anything romantic, and I start blushing like a schoolgirl and begin to have an anxiety attack. Link to post Share on other sites
carhill Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 Congratulations OP. You've met an older version of yourself. As I've often shared here, I was a virgin until my mid-30's. Hope the tidbits of my life that I shared have meaning. Good luck One tip I will share was that immersing myself in the diversity of the world (as shown by the example I gave of the LDR I chose to effect) was the single largest factor in mitigating shyness, anxiety and fear. Think of those three factors as your sound barrier and you're Chuck Yeager. The buffeting scares you to death but, on the other side, things are incredibly calm and peaceful. Hope it works out Link to post Share on other sites
Ilovecake Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 I would say if you have not met outside of written correspondence you are pen pals, that's all. I don't see how you can truly get to know someone without their physical presence. The person you are corresponding with is a figment of your imagination. Their characteristics are ones you have given them using your imagination, also you have never been on a date with them therefore you are not dating. I wouldn't even go as far as saying you know the person. Link to post Share on other sites
folieadeux Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 I wouldn't call it a real relationship until the two people meet in real life and it progresses from there. It doesn't have to include sex, especially if you are the type to wait until marriage for it. A person sitting behind a computer and in real life can be two different people. Completely agree. Link to post Share on other sites
Rollercoasterr Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 Mathew and I never even met in person until November 2008, even with our long history together. I fell in love with this man in 2004, we had an internet fling for a few months, and then we decided that we were too young(I was 15, he was 17) to attempt an LDR that big. I never ever fell out of love with him. We got back together in July 2008, and I felt even stronger about him. We met in November and everything clicked perfectly and I fell in love with him more in person yet again. So I do believe that the foundations of a relationship can be built via internet, because like Star Gazer said, you're forced to focus more on other things than the physicality of it. I'm not saying it's this way for everyone. Maybe Mathew and I were one of the lucky ones who realized that we were perfect for each other, or maybe we were insane, who knows. I was engaged to another man after Mathew and I broke up the first time, but I never forgot him, and I never felt anything nearly as strong as my feelings for my husband. Mathew was always my one and only true love. It still amazes me every single day that I feel so passionately about one person, and my heart just swells each morning that I get to wake up beside him, even though he does leave the toilet seat down ALL THE TIME. I do think that people should meet in person as soon as possible, because you never know if you're going to click as well in person as you do on the internet. Prolonging an internet relationship for a year or two and then meeting in person would be devastating if you ended up not feeling anything for them in person. I wish Mathew and I had that choice when we dated the first time, but we were just way too young to attempt it. Link to post Share on other sites
Citizen Erased Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 As Star said, the foundation was laid for us in what I assumed to be a very important way. I was under the impression that we were exclusive to each other before we met, that signals to ke a relationship, guess I was wrong going by my fiance's assertion that it's not real until people meet but anyway... I guess the important thing is if it's real to you, not by what is real to other people. Link to post Share on other sites
Pyro Posted January 18, 2011 Share Posted January 18, 2011 As Star said, the foundation was laid for us in what I assumed to be a very important way. I was under the impression that we were exclusive to each other before we met, that signals to ke a relationship, guess I was wrong going by my fiance's assertion that it's not real until people meet but anyway... I guess the important thing is if it's real to you, not by what is real to other people. Thats not what I meant. Yes the foundation was laid before we met. We had feelings for each other and I had no interest in dating anyone else, but we weren't ready to call each other BF and GF(which makes it official) until after we met that first time. You even told me before that you wanted to wait until we met to become official. Link to post Share on other sites
carhill Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 No person I ever pursued, spoke with or otherwise engaged in my 35 years of virginity agreed with that. Those persons were women. Small sample of the entire human population but pretty significant, considering very few humans refrain from sex that long. This would include women who were raised, schooled and worshiped within the Catholic church, as I was. Sex defined a romantic relationship from a platonic one. The basic tenet of sexual desire, whether requited or unrequited, separated the two. It's as simple as that. Link to post Share on other sites
blugirl Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 Prolonging an internet relationship for a year or two and then meeting in person would be devastating if you ended up not feeling anything for them in person. I wish Mathew and I had that choice when we dated the first time, but we were just way too young to attempt it. Yes of course but it's so easy to say you know, there are people who cannot instanly afford a plane ticket and they have to wait until the financial situation improves Like my situation, we've known each other for over a year but still weren't able to meet. We hope something's gonna change this year, though It's a real pain in the a**, makes me wanna bang my head against the wall >< Link to post Share on other sites
Author LeaningIntoTheMuse Posted January 19, 2011 Author Share Posted January 19, 2011 Yeah, one of my "relationships" was with a girl in England. I am American. I sincerely doubt that would work out, since neither of us had the money to fly to see each other. Link to post Share on other sites
carhill Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 If I met a lady over the internet today from some far away place (pick one), I could go visit her next week. Why bother seeking out or meeting people from far away or assigning any significance to those interactions if one can't act on that? Prepare the means, then search. Horse before cart. TBH, back when I was international dating, this was the single biggest complaint the ladies had, that men would romance them with electrons and letters and flowers and never visit. Total waste of their time. The guys who did visit, like myself, got more attention than we could possible have bargained for. In an equal opportunity world, as a man, I feel the same way. If a woman doesn't have the means to effect the relationship, don't waste my time. A pen pal doesn't warm my bed. Simple as that. Link to post Share on other sites
carhill Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 You're kidding, right? How old are you? I'm 51. You don't think I looked? For 35 years I looked. Please. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts