Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Agony of Eros: Dating

ava.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 270 posts

Re: The Agony of Eros: Dating

#131

Post by raxxorraxor »

xupybd wrote: post #64

I skipped all this being religious. I knew my wife for years. Over a year we started to hit it off and got to know each other as good friends. I asked her out and proposed one week later. Four months later we were married. It's old fashioned but our emotional and physical involvement was proportional to our level of commitment at every stage. It won't be the way most people want to go but it seems to have saved much…

The vast majority of married couples I know never used any dating app or even went dating at all. They mostly came together by chance. I don't think this is unusual and almost none of them are religious at all aside from keeping some traditions (mostly u-boat Christians that surface once a year to Christmas).

There seem to be huge socioeconomic differences here though and some groups tend to dating apps far more than others. An exception of people in public or media personalities who also deviate here the most.

Re: The Agony of Eros: Dating

#132

Post by jawarner »

verisimi wrote: post #11

'Modern Dating' is where corporations intermediate your interactions with the other sex... and its not working out well? Well, what a surprise! People have lost all sense it seems to me - we have been trained to have technology do everything for us. This really means the corporations behind the tech are meant to do everything for us. Good god. The mega-trend - IMO - in all this is a fostered neoteny (extended juvenil…

You make some big claims.

1. Apps or no, dating is still about interfacing with another person. It's hardly true that the dating app is "servicing our desires." It's not. It's just a window into another person.

2. "The more unhappy you are the more you will spend in your date-death spiral." Is this even a thing? I would imagine a very unhappy person would not date a lot. Or they would be settled into an unhappy relationship. Is it really true that dating has historically resulted in more happy relationships? I'd love to see evidence to this point because I know a lot of people whose parents were in unhappy relationships. That model, from my perspective, didn't have the best results.

Re: The Agony of Eros: Dating

#133

Post by hahamrfunnyguy »

enraged_camel wrote: post #33
librish wrote: post #8

I find the discussion of ghosting interesting. If I've gone on a bad date or two I don't specifically tell the other person I don't want to see them again unless they ask me. This allows for a lot more saving face if I run into them in the future (we can both pretend it just fell through the cracks) and is exactly how I want to be treated. While I appreciate the honesty I do find it a little condescending when someon…

>> I do find it a little condescending when someone messages me "just so you know, I don't want to see you again" after a bad date I mean, it could be said in a nicer way. "I don't think we're a good match" or something similar is a lot more polite, for example. Most people take it well, in my experience (maybe because the feeling tends to be mutual).

I certainly appreciate it, and I think it can be done tactfully and respectfully. I think it's courteous to let someone know you aren't interested, just in case they are interested.

Re: The Agony of Eros: Dating

#134

Post by chefkoch »

mikevm wrote: post #126
lolc wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, not all people look at their relationship in that specific "work for sex" way. Read up on "invisible labor" if you want to understand why women in particular could get offended by your perspective. If you're looking for such a relationship, I'm sure you'll find a mate on those terms. But don't claim that this is the only way. And please accept that other people may prefer other setups.

> Eh, not all people look at their relationship in that specific "work for sex" way. I'm not talking just about relationships, I'm talking about the asymmetric access men and women have to sex. This is an undeniable fact of life. If a man wants to get laid tonight, he will have to work hard, and his chances are not that high. That's why ~80% of the prostitutes are women... most women just don't need to pay for sex.

For most man yes, some men get laid easily.

Re: The Agony of Eros: Dating

#135

Post by liminvorous »

mikevm wrote: post #123
dbspin wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a wholly subjective, not to say toxic view of relationships as mutually codependent and cloistrated. It speaks more to your own personal issues than any universal problem with a given relationship style. No one is forced to adopt an open relationship. The idea that 'I don't like it, so you can't have it', is profoundly authoritarian. If it doesn't suit you, don't engage in it. Easy, you can thank our pluralis…

Quoted post unavailable.

Based on your comments here and what I’ve seen of polyamorous people’s online dating profiles I think I am more likely to respect a man in such a relationship style than I am to respect you.

Do you think this comment is helpful? If not do you think your own comments have been helpful? If your answers to those two questions are different do you know why they are different?

Re: The Agony of Eros: Dating

#136

Post by temp234 »

jawarner wrote: post #121
immigrantheart wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see, well I'm not part of the cool kids then.

Do you really think dating used to be easy? I fail to see how "dating apps and social media" is the direct cause of the problems you mention, or that any of those problems are new to society.

No post body was provided.

Re: The Agony of Eros: Dating

#137

Post by helpfulclippy »

mikevm wrote: post #68
antihero wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly is “messed up” about open relationships and making out with strangers?

An open relationship is an abusive relationship, even if on the surface it doesn't look like one. You cannot love a partner without fearing of losing them - there has to be some kind of an investment. If you let your partner be intimate sexually with other people then that is definitely bound to happen. And if that doesn't scare you, then you don't really care about him/her. In most cases this is pretty much cuckoldr…

This presumes the game is entirely a competition to see who gets more sex. Poly and open relationships can have other advantages. For instance, a lot of men are effectively in a second relationship with their work, which often destroys monogamous relationships due to loneliness on the part of the ignored partner. Divorced parents often have a special relationship with their children, with a connection that is fed by lots of alone time with their kids.

Poly relationships also open up effectively a new kind of family dynamic, in which metamours have a deep relationship that may not be sexual but allow a lot of trust and reliance.

Finally, even if it really were about who gets more sex, men become much more attractive relative to women in middle age. The silver fox effect is real... sex is also a lot easier for men with lots of social status, which can also come with age.

Re: The Agony of Eros: Dating

#138

Post by eternalban »

chrisseaton wrote: post #127
blfr wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kinda but not really. First, you can reuse and even steal material heavily. Second, you can rely on props, whatever happens around. Third, you don't need to be that good: you're competing with six other boring dudes she went out with and her uncle, not Tim Dillon. Finally, after a while she will pick up and start talking herself. Then you can bounce off that, tease, make fun. This is the best anyway since anything ab…

> Second, you can rely on props I’ve clearly got no idea how people are dating these days…

A friend of mine met her future husband via a dating site. He apparently brought Scrabble to the first date. (The marriage is successful.)

Re: The Agony of Eros: Dating

#139

Post by adriand »

doix wrote: post #84
smackeyacky wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I found it interesting. Being an older person in a long term relationship with someone I met in high school, the online dating stuff seems much harder for a lot of reasons. Firstly, meet someone when you are young they are more likely to be of a similar socio-economic group and share a lot of values by default. Second (and I realise this is controversial) if you fall in love when you are young and stupid, the pair of…

I am 30(ish) and have managed to avoid the online dating scene. I just met people doing the hobbies I like and traveling. I feel like now it's easier than ever to do that. COVID has made a lot more people travel (anecdotal data ofc) after they felt stuck for a while. And remote work means that you can travel while working. You can go somewhere, meet someone, and then travel around together. If things stop going well,…

This sounds like a huge amount of fun! Kudos to you, it seems a million times more enjoyable and memorable than what most other people are doing.

Do you get lonely though? After you and someone you’ve been hanging out with to your separate ways, how do you feel? And aside from romantic partners, what about friendships? Like what are you doing to maintain, and benefit from, relationships that you’ve had for years?

Re: The Agony of Eros: Dating

#140

Post by nickelcitymario »

jdrc wrote: post #55
jll29 wrote: post #38

This post gets it wrong already in the headline. At least if your happiness (instead of short-term satisfaction) is your objective, it's not about love but about love. Let me explain: the headline mentions "eros" for love, which is one of several (Greek) words for love, but focusing on physical erotics (lust). Nothing wrong with lust per se, but lust considered in isolation can be a selfish thing. Now "agape", anothe…

Eros did not just represent lust but also love. Agape is a context more limited to christianity, which kind of has anti-sexual overtone. But there were many Erotes representing all kinds of desire and attraction > Anteros ("Love Returned"),[1] Hedylogos ("Sweet-talk"), Hermaphroditus ("Hermaphrodite" or "Effeminate"), Himeros ("Impetuous Love" or "Pressing Desire"), Hymenaios ("Bridal-Hymn"), and Pothos ("Desire, Lon…

> [...] christianity, which kind of has anti-sexual overtone.

As a Christian, I wouldn't agree with this statement. Most denominations that I've experienced are very pro-sex. We see sex as a gift from God, intended to bond two (or, depending on the denomination, maybe more) people together. God is Love, we're taught, and sex is understood to be an expression of love.

Now, you might be right if you said Christianity was against certain types of sex. I'm not, and I think the sexual morality police are an overly loud portion of Christians. Most Christians I know are very open and accepting of people's sexuality. But there is certainly an abundance of Christians who feel it's our responsibility to tell people about the right and wrong applications of sex.

But "anti-sex" overall? Any such denomination would go extinct pretty quickly if their followers actually followed that.

Post reply on HN