how on earth are people ok with this?

[silvermercy]

No one personally attacked you.

 

You got angry at my use of the word "peculiar" to describe your perspective on dating.

 

I backed up the use of that word with its definition.

 

I also asked you to show where anyone else agrees with your distinctions about single vs. multi dating. As far as I know, no one else agrees with your particular viewpoint, which is that you don't associate single dating with any commitment whatsoever to the other person.

YES. You DID attack me and you continue to do so. All the assumptions you made about me so far are false.

[silvermercy]

You're trying to have me banned from the forum because I stated an opinion which you disagree with, and have also asked you to back up your factual claims which you say form the basis of your opinions but which you refuse to do.

 

Trying to have me banned is definitely an attack, the fact that you don't want to admit this means you're just a dishonest person.

No. I'm trying to ban you because you keep personally attacking me through making up false assumptions about me. That is all.

[silvermercy]

How is making a supposedly false assumption about you, which is reasonable based on what you've posted, an "attack"? (By the way where did I assume anything about you that is "false")?

 

If you won't back up what you're saying then the rest of us are free to assume whatever seems reasonable based on the facts you've disclosed.

 

You haven't even bothered to state which assumptions I've supposedly made about you are false. I speculated you're from an Islamic culture but that was a reasonable speculation based on the information you provided until you said you weren't.

 

Then you turned around and said multi-dating wasn't actually prohibited in your home culture, which is contrary to what you tried to say previously even if you didn't actually use the word "prohibited."

 

But how is erroneously concluding you're from an Islamic country based on the cultural clues any kind of an "attack" in the first place? It's not at all.

The bolded is an attack by itself. Thanks for confirming it to the mods even further. (And it's not just about the Islamic county, btw). You turned the thread about ME and attacked my character. If you don't know where you did those attacks, it's not my job at all to correct you. You should have known already.

[silvermercy]

Also you've stated several times you're not reading my posts and not responding to them, yet you keep reading them and keep responding to them.

 

It's not a productive conversation if you're not going to be minimally honest, why are you responding to posts that you're not even reading?

I reported the ones I had read initially, before I started ignoring your posts. But now I'm in the process of reading them more, for more reporting.

[silvermercy]

LOL no it's not an "attack", it's a question, which you refuse to answer. And I see you're still reading and responding to posts which you previously promised to stop reading and responding to.

As I said in my above post, I've just started reading them and already made some more reports.

Yeah, I changed my mind. So what now?

[silvermercy]

See, silvermercy, this is actually where you started out by attacking/insulting me, and you've continued to do so in this thread.

That is NOT an attack. You on the other hand made FALSE assumptions about me. (Hey, you also gave a "peculiar" definition. That is way more insulting than asking someone to see "dating").

[zengirl]

Hmm.. how would they go about getting those 'committed' romantic relationships? From thin air? No. They pursue them casually.. Sometimes they end up becoming 'committed'. Sometimes they don't.

 

And no, they don't 'commit' to all or necessarily even one.

 

They just commit to being open about the pursuit of multiple romantic connections.

 

Which is exactly what you are doing. Sorry if you don't like the label.

 

I don't think multi-dating implies "committing to being open" -- that seems like a weird phrase. Of course, I would say most people don't commit to everyone they date! And with good reason. I don't see anything

 

There's a big difference between multidating and open relationships (FWIW, while open Rs aren't for me, I've nothing against other people having them -- most people who have actual open Rs are super honest about it and follow clearly defined rules) and open relationships aren't necessarily the same as poly relationships. Open relationships implies a committed main relationship and partners outside of it who come and go, whereas that is not the primary focus in the poly community so far as I know, though I suppose some could say an open R is one subset of poly lifestyle.

 

Neither of them relate to DATING because there is no spoken commitment in dating -- some people want the commitment of exclusivity without speaking it and some people don't, but we can all agree (I think) that dating is not a relationship.

 

Just to clue you in on something: I do OLD, and I also meet people IRL. I'm sure I'm not the only one who does this. You may need to reconsider whether multi-dating is really non-existent in other forms of dating.

 

I'd echo this. It's actually quite easier to go "one at a time" with OLD, in my opinion, because I at least have an idea about the guy and was better able to weed them out. When a guy asks me out IRL, I couldn't ask for a few pages summary about him and for him to answer some compatibility questions for me to assess real quick. I met hubby through OLD, which I began not long after I was single and looking again, and a few other men but primarily went out with men I met IRL.

 

It's easy to find reasons not to date someone online -- which is ANOTHER complaint people have about OLD, ironically to this thread -- if you want to. Of course, you can easily miss out that way, I'm sure, depending on how lucky or good you are at it. I found hubby online, and I knew I wanted to go out with him, so it worked out for me.

 

I'm... disappointed... that some people feel that I should be offering them exclusivity before the first date. I can't say that it's something to be appalled at, given that there are so many other reasons why I might not like them by the end of the evening, but I know that there are people who are incompatible with me and I accept that. Life's too short to get upset over some things.

 

This is pretty much how I feel.

 

Not forcing anything, sweetheart.

 

You seem to be the one forcing your multidater agenda on everyone else.

 

I'm just doing my best to help those who don't like multidating or multidaters to avoid them.

 

I'm sorry if you don't like the idea of being 'avoided' because of your dating style, but too bad.

 

I've yet to see a "multi-dater agenda." And no one has suggested you date anyone who you don't want to date. In fact, several of us have suggested many times that you be honest about what you want from the beginning to help avoid those you'd like to avoid! If you want to try to assess whether someone is multidating in sneaky and fallible ways, while hiding your own desires, that's up to you, but that's closer to lying than just having a date on Wednesday and another on Friday.

 

I haven't read a good portion of this thread. I tend to feel the same way that RedRobin does about multi-dating, if there's sex involved. If there isn't, then that's different, but then I've never just wanted to jump into bed with anyone - I'm not *that* casual.

 

I agree that I was never comfortable having sex without exclusivity. But I was also never comfortable having sex without commitment. This is why I always waited to have sex. That's an easy boundary to keep, IME.

 

That's what I'm saying. You wouldn't know. Because you'd thought it was controlling, when both parties have every right to walk away. How is that controlling?

 

With this logic, there is a chance, either form of dating you choose, that you might miss out on your "dream" person theoretically. (Really, I think if it's your dream person, you probably won't miss out --- at least I didn't and couldn't have because the universe is generally kind.)

 

What if your dream guy didn't want to be exclusive from Date #1 and you missed him because of that?

 

The example of my H and I are great for this. Hubby didn't date anyone else while we were dating at all -- after Date #1, he was totally smitten. Before it, he was actually quite difficult to set up that first date with; as a result, there was NO WAY I would've felt comfortable canceling other dates or turning down dates with potential prospects even though I'll also agree Date #1 was a really, really good date -- better than most dates by far. If hubby had said he had an expectation that I not go on other dates, we would not be together now. But both hubby and I didn't care what the other did and allowed ourselves to get to a place, organically, where we both had a desire to see only each other.

 

No, it's not about wanting somebody to stop dating others for you, it's about wanting somebody to not want to date others at the same time as you.

 

Ultimately it is an extension of how an ideal relationship should work - it's not that you don't **** around on each other because you've agreed not to, or as a 'favour' to your partner, it's because you actually don't want to.

 

Well, I'd actually agree I think it's distasteful to F around, firstly. Dating does not need to require sex, however.

 

Secondly, yes, I think at some point you want someone to stop seeing others BECAUSE they want to date only you. I also think if they do this for everyone from Date #1, it's not particularly special in any way. It's just their style. Granted, they may be just as picky -- perhaps they don't like dating and just go on very few dates or any number of other reasons -- but it's not really akin to the ideal relationship thing because it's not about their partner yet. Because they don't know their partner yet! Of course, you can have both concurrently. Really, I wouldn't cheat on hubby because I value him, as my partner, AND because I've made promises not to do so and I value promises. It's two-fold. So, I'm not suggesting someone who has a style that is exclusive from Date #1 cannot make it about the partner eventually (when they know them).

 

Interestingly, as "undesirable" as I was/am, once I started dating someone, there was never any difficulty lining up dates -- even very early on. I took this to mean that the woman was either a single-dater like myself or if she was a multi-dater, she decided very early on that I was her primary interest.

 

Shouldn't the ease with which you can line up Friday and/or Saturday night dates give you a clue about someone's multi-dating activity without needing a formal conversation about it in the very early stages?

 

Frankly, I think time dedicated to you, in general, is a better indicator of the relationship than exclusivity in the early stages.

 

I'm not sure you can really assume it from that (if you're dead-set on avoiding anyone who's also gone on another date at the same time as you), but it's a good barometer, sure. Frankly, I've known men -- and there are men on here even -- who weren't really going out with multiple girls but still wouldn't set up several dates in a week.

 

One of the reasons I stopped seeing other men fairly early in with hubby was he set up extremely regular dates (several times per week). I think interest in a person is a motivator, but if the guy only wants to see me once a week, it didn't matter how interested I was in him -- no way I would commit to exclusivity. And I know many men who are super busy and want to see a girl once or twice a week who would gladly be exclusive; they just won't commit the greater portion of their time and effort to a relationship. That never interested me, and I always found that to be the danger of exclusivity from Date #1.

 

Honestly, sometimes I wonder if some women are either totally exaggerate their online success or if they seem to have set their requirements that low so that the majority of guys think they have a chance with her. I really doubt that any woman can be so good-looking that she gets that many messages a day.

 

It's possible for the first week or first few weeks or so. After that, assuming they're anywhere near her area, it'd have to taper off some. When I would put up a new dating profile, I'd get pretty flooded, but unless you're not responding to guys and they re-message you (generally because they don't remember you -- I've found guys are more likely to remember you if you say, "No thanks"), I cannot see how 100s of messages a day can be sustained. Not that many new people are joining that quickly.

 

I have done multi-dating and single dating. As a guy, I think multi-dating is a better option for a variety of logistical reasons. For example, I contact girl X online and she gets back to me a week later. We chat a bit and she ends up agreeing to go out with me two weeks from initial contact. Now, in the mean time, I meet girl Y out at a bar. We flirt and she also agrees to a date. Now, I have met two girls around the same time. Which one would I cancel? The one who said yes second? What if online girl answered first, but I did not see the message and said yes to bar girl already? The bottom line becomes that woman are always passively available even if they are not dating more than one person because they are always being contacted/flirted with by men who are interested. Most men only have options after they actively ask a woman out and date her. Thus a man only has options once a woman has said yes. However, if a man offers to take a woman out while she is dating one guy, she can dump him and go out with the new guy. No other action needed. Multi-dating evens the playing field for men in that respect.

 

However, I find I am happier single person dating because I do not compare the women. When multi-dating it is easy to think one woman is better looking, while another is more interesting, and the third is the best on paper. It can leave you unhappy with all your choices, while single dating leaves you with either a happy enough to stay or be single choice only.

 

Interesting thoughts. I actually thought, at first, I might multi-date less if I were a guy and did most of the asking out. I typically would only ask out one guy at a time (unless there were truly 2 that struck my interest equally, which I think happened once so was relatively rare). Granted, a guy might put me off for awhile, as hubby did, and I would continue about my dating life.

 

But being consistently asked out by men who may be good 'contenders' was the main reason I multidated. If I were a guy, I could just wait to ask them out in sequential order that I was most interested in them. As a girl, it's kind of suspicious if I say, "I have Date #1 with another guy next week; let's see how that shakes out first." I have, on many occasions, said, "I've been on several dates with someone -- it's not a relationship, but it's serious enough I don't feel like dating other people, I'm sorry," to men, but in most cases, that made them non-options forever to me. I was always willing to do that if I thought I might really like the person, but how could anyone do that for someone they truly don't know yet?

 

But I found your thoughts an interesting read from the male side. I've certainly been on the side of waiting for someone to kick their act into gear, re: meeting. So, I get that totally. The choice thing was never difficult for me because few men met my rubric for long -- I find it easy to narrow options while judging them individually via a rubric system (some of it was logical, and some of it emotional) because rubrics are just what I do. It allows everyone to get judged on their individual merits, rather than comparison. I just saw how they matched up to the relationship I wanted (not with silly stats for the person, but with a description of what I wanted the relationship to be like) and it was easy to tell when someone fell short.

[silvermercy]

Just like you single date guys, that is, until you change your mind.

 

Correct?

 

Thanks for proving the point.

Another false assumption personal attack for the mods to see. Thanks.

[silvermercy]

Actually I hope the mods read the ENTIRE thread because then they'll see you've been fighting not just with me but with everyone, both male and female, who dares to express a differing opinion to you. Not just fighting with them, but you've been sarcastically insulting them.

REALLY now? Nope. I have not insulted anyone or made false assumptions about them SPECIFICALLY at all. If I made any false assumptions then they were not directed them against THEM specifically. See zengirl's reply above on my quote. She has a different view from me but her reply was respectful to me. And I do the same in return. Something you didn't do in the first place.

Edited March 26, 2012 by silvermercy

[silvermercy]

No, you have not been "respectful" to anyone. Your first response to something I posted was to insult me by calling it "ridiculous." You have spent the entire thread mocking and denigrating every one else's opinions, long before I even started my participation.

OH wow! You are trying to turn this against me now? LOL (using the word "ridiculous" btw, is not a false assumption and hence, a personal attack).

 

Please any mods around here? I'm just tired replying to this poster. This person is trolling me consistently and won't leave me alone. I feel like I have a stalker. Please take care of him, mods? Thanks.

Edited March 26, 2012 by silvermercy

[sid3]

 

Please any mods around here? I'm just tired replying to this poster. This person is trolling me consistently and won't leave me alone. I feel like I have a stalker. Please take care of him, mods? Thanks.

 

You're both Trolling. Obviously you aren't too tired of replying. Hopefully you'll both get bannned.

[silvermercy]

You're both Trolling. Obviously you aren't too tired of replying. Hopefully you'll both get bannned.

I will NOT stand getting personally insulted for nor reason. MKK!? Thanks. Well excuse me, I didn't think DEFENDING myself from derogatory comments and insults was trolling!! Especially something I didn't start. So WHO ARE YOU to tell me how to defend myself? If you don't like it don't reply to me again or simply read this thread!! Save yourself from wasting time. Thanks again.

Edited March 26, 2012 by silvermercy

[silvermercy]

No wonder you can't get a boyfriend. You just have a very nasty attitude.

Are YOU paired? I'm dating someone actually as I've already mentioned and it's getting serious. Thanks for the millionth personal attack. I have lost count now. I WILL get nasty when someone falsely attacks my character. I was not talking to you in that post. LEAVE ME ALONE STALKER !!!

Edited March 26, 2012 by silvermercy

[PlumPrincess]

Fair enough. I hadn't realised English wasn't your first language.

 

 

 

Well, indeed! We agree on this!

Don't you think that when someone says, "I started dating xyz," it sounds more official than saying, "I went out on a couple of dates with xyz"?

[PlumPrincess]

Honestly, I just can't fathom how worked up some people get about other people's prefered dating style. Or maybe I'm getting old and mellow.

[dasein]

"Sound and Fury" thread of the month, maybe the year.

 

Dating standards are cultural, so will only speak within my culture.

 

In the U.S., freedom to date, look at, have sex with, wash the car of WHOMEVER one wants until a mutually agreed exclusive relationship is reached is the cultural norm in every area of the country I am aware of, certainly is in my area. This means that the term "multidater" is a negatively charged nullity that is only used to create slant and bias when used in the U.S. It is a "sour grapes" term that decodes into "I don't like the cultural standard and expect the entire cultural standard to conform to -my- preferences." Thus absurd.

 

The term "dater" or "dating" is entirely adequate. If you are "exclusive," you are not a "dater" or "dating." If you are a "dater," or "dating." you are not "exclusive." Clear and logical, so let's put the term "multidater" out of the discussion entirely. It is meaningless, negatively charged, and muddles the discussion.

 

Not everyone dates within the cultural norm for various reasons that run the gamut from personal preference to religion and all points in between. That's fine and dandy, and it is their right to do so.

 

If you are in the U.S., and your views align with the cultural norm, fine and dandy, you wouldn't ever be making a thread like this or complaining about "multidating." To do so would be hypocritical.

 

If you are in the U.S., and your views are not aligned with the cultural norm, fine and dandy as well. HOWEVER, it's on YOU to handle your own variance in preferences in expressing them very clearly to those who may or may not be in the majority you may date. If they agree with you, and are also in the minority view, fine and dandy, complain all you want if they then proceed to see others, cruise dating sites whatever.

 

If OTOH, they do not agree, and their views are in fact aligned with the cultural norm, it's a decision that you must make as to continuing to date them. There is simply no wiggle room here at all. Either you express your minority view and it is agreed with or not. 1. If you don't express your view BEFORE dating someone, all bets are off, and complaints are illegitimate. 2. If you do express your minority view beforehand and they agree, all is well provided they comply with their stated position. 3. If you do express your minority view, and they don't agree, then if you continue dating them, your complaints are illegitimate as to their seeing, dating, sexing anyone else.

 

What it boils down to is accept the majority cultural standard or not, the responsibility for expressing a minority view is on the person who holds it. And the choice to continue dating someone who is in the majority is also on them. It's a simple matter of accepting accountability for one's preferences and behaving accordingly.

 

If you don't like the cultural norm in the U.S., either date elsewhere or lobby the "culture board" to change the norm. Until they do change the norm, the above is really the only way of looking at it, as loathe as certain people are to accept accountability for variance in their views and given realties of social life, and as prone as they are to rationalize using terms like "multidater" to create some false reality more favorable to their -individual- preference.

[RedRobin]

Like I said before...

 

It's not up to me to tell anyone what to do with their lives.

 

But I do have very little patience for 'multidaters'. Obviously.

 

I don't give ultimatums and tell people they must do this or that... Like Andy K said, it has to be their choice and freely offered... ideally from very early. If not, then our values don't match.

 

If the multidaters don't like that I'm evaluating them and drawing conclusions about our compatibility and relationship goals based on the extent of their multidating when they meet me, then too bad.

 

I assess their behavior and their actions just like anyone else does when they are 'dating'. If they are still seeing other people beyond a point I'm comfortable with, I send them on their way. No loss, right? They've got however many others as a backup... is what you keep telling me.

 

Great... get to it!! Have a blast.

 

For others who prefer to avoid 'multidaters' at whatever stage of getting to know someone, I've listed some of the key behaviors. Male or female. What people do with that information is up to them.

[dasein]

For others who prefer to avoid 'multidaters' at whatever stage of getting to know someone, I've listed some of the key behaviors. Male or female. What people do with that information is up to them.

 

I read your list, it's completely unfair and inaccurate. Translates as "either you conform with -my- view as opposed to the majority cultural norm, and be ready for an instant relationship, or you are a rude, polyamorous liar."

 

"Multidater" is not a real word, at least not in the U.S. One is either "dating" or they are "involved in an exclusive relationship." The terms are mutually exclusive, outside of certain specific usage like "my BF and I have been dating 2 years now," and there is no room for any further minority preference based negative slant term in there.

[RedRobin]

I'm not sure where the term multidater came from... but it seems to describe fairly accurately the people who casually date multiple people simultaneously. I made the link to polamory for those who are open and honest about it.

 

I actually thought I was doing the 'multidaters' a service by assuming that a good portion ARE open about it. My experience is that most of the time, no, they aren't. Hence the list.

 

Anyway, nothing to worry about. It seems the multidaters don't have any problems with their way of dating... and the single daters don't have any problems with theirs...

 

The only trick is figuring out how we can both avoid each other, it seems.

[dasein]

I'm still trying to figure out which of the world's cultures supposedly frowns on dating more than one person simultaneously. It's not only not true in the U.S., it's not generally true in any other world culture where inter-gender contact is even permitted beyond arranged/ritualistic courtships.

 

I have not dated in England or Australia, but have heard that there is a presumption of some level of dating exclusivity there from the first date. No idea whether what I heard was accurate. Can also envision very traditional, fundamentalist cultures being similar.

 

through the magic of the internet somehow they become "memes" and infect certain segments of pop culture.

 

Yeah, the terms "creeper" and "practice girl" are similar IMO. But it isn't just the net and has been going on as long as the marketing industry determines that we must compartmentalize everything and everyone ala "baby boomer," "yuppie," etc. The internet merely makes the process faster.

 

These women are entitled to only date one guy at a time if they choose to but not to have any expectations that the guy will only date one girl at a time.

 

I had one actually -tell- me this. She was hot, so I stuck around until I got bored of banging her. My mistake, there were other better, down to earth, less vapid options at the time which I missed forever.

[silvermercy]

You should check your Caps Lock key, it appears to be stuck.

aNOTHER PERSONAL ATTACK AGAINST ME. iS THIS WHAT YOU LOWERED yourself into now? cAPS KEY INSULTS?

Edited March 26, 2012 by silvermercy

[silvermercy]

Your Caps Lock key still seems to be stuck.

 

Try removing your tongue from your keyboard.

 

If that doesn't work, try extracting your armpit hair from your keyboard.

TROLL ALERT! Are there any mods around here?

[FitChick]

TROLL ALERT! Are there any mods around here?

 

Obviously not or there wouldn't be so many new trolls and troll threads. Use the ignore feature.

[fishtaco]

Honestly, I just can't fathom how worked up some people get about other people's prefered dating style. Or maybe I'm getting old and mellow.

 

Exactly. Some people multidate, some don't. So do your own thing. If you don't like what the other person is doing, then don't date them.

 

Insulting other people for their dating style is... well, it speaks volumes about the person making those statements.

[Andy_K]

I have not dated in England or Australia, but have heard that there is a presumption of some level of dating exclusivity there from the first date. No idea whether what I heard was accurate. Can also envision very traditional, fundamentalist cultures being similar.

 

Here in the UK it is mostly still assumed that you don't date several people at a time, or that doing so makes you a bit of a player and not to be trusted, although the rise of internet dating is slowly changing that, particularly in the more urban areas. It almost seems like the offline daters just single date, whereas the online ones are largely switching to multidating. There are a large chunk for who it's normal now.

 

Thing is, over here it's pretty common to have sex very early on in the dating process too, which means either you stop multi dating pretty damn quick or you're sleeping with more than one person at a time - which is obviously not a good idea and frowned upon most places.