why is "dating" still the norm?

<p>it seems like such a pointless, dated ritual.</p>

<p>in the 21st century, women are certainly as capable of providing for themselves as men are. so why do people, especially women, still seek emotional dedication from a man so fervently? historically, people HAD to pair up in order to survive. but today, marriages are almost frivolous. with today's resources, it's possible to survive as a complete recluse, therefore it's clearly possible to survive without an (<em>emotionally dependent</em>) partner.</p>

<p>and yet, in this new age, people still follow silly courtship laws like "dating". is it because we've been exposed to too many unrealistic hollywood romance movies from birth onward? is it because of the gender roles that they've drilled into us from day one? meh. it's such bs, and i'm sick of it. </p>

<p>people should take advantage of the resources that allow us freedom to live uncommitted, unfettered lifestyles--especially young people.</p>

<p>i mean, can anyone expain the BENEFITS of a relationship that consists of anything more than a mutual physical outlet, i.e. friends with benefits? honestly i don't see any.</p>

<p>I agree with you 100%. There is nothing wrong to have a few friends (or a friend) and not date. Some people think everyone should get married. In the long run, you will save mroe money and probably have less stress.</p>

<p>ok... you guys go and do that. just don't go on spouting your super-liberal dogma everywhere</p>

<p>^ do you have a reason for disagreeing? or are you just THAT influenced by tradition, regardless of whether or not it's obsolete? :D</p>

<p>People like it. Doesn't need to be any more reason than that, just like some people like friends with benefits.</p>

<p>Dating is just a higher form of friendship, culminating ultimately in marriage. It doesn't have to be ritualistic at all.</p>

<p>
[quote]
people should take advantage of the resources that allow us freedom to live uncommitted, unfettered lifestyles--especially young people.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>While such a lifestyle is indeed suitable for some, others do like having a partner. It's as simple as that.</p>

<p>Promiscuity and FWB. That sounds like a wonderful way to spread STDs. If that's what you want, fine. But why say everyone should live their life that way? </p>

<p>First off, I think relationships can help give kids a more stable childhood (if you have parents that can actually work as a unit). Single parenthood or two separate homes can be extremely stressful.</p>

<p>Second, why are you making it all about survival and gender roles? Yes, women can provide for themselves, do any job they want, etc. That doesn't mean they have to; it means they have the OPTION to do that. Some people enjoy being in relationships, some people enjoy being stay-at-home moms, and some people enjoy being completely independent. If being in a relationship makes someone happy, then why shouldn't they be in one?</p>

<p>Personally, I don't like the idea of sex with random people, mostly because I'm a fairly private person and take a while to warm up to people. I also don't like the idea of living completely alone because I find that lonely and depressing (unfortunately, this may possibly be my future since I'm 19 and never have been on a date). I like the idea of relationships because I think it gives a level of comfort of with a person that you can't have with somebody that is just a friend.</p>

<p>some people would rather have love than independence.....</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>That's because you've never been in love. Are you studying feminist theory by any chance?</p>

<p>What are the benefits of a relationship? Emotional and psychological, basically. While some of the manifestations of certain traditions related to courtship and relationships are outdated, people still go into relationships often - and it's for a reason.</p>

<p>not dating =/= having sex with random people</p>

<p>but anyway, i agree with the point about having freedom to choose whichever lifestyle you want. i'm just surprised that dating is still the norm, since it's so obsolete.</p>

<p>plus, i'm not easily offended, but i'm offended when a women is called a slut for doing FWB and a man is not degraded. meh :/</p>

<p>
[quote]
- and it's for a reason.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>err, okay. that's kind of what i'm asking you to explain--the reason.</p>

<p>If you can't see a benefit to dating it seems to me like you've never had a good relationship or you just broke out of one and now you're bitter. How about the close emotional (as well as physical) intimacy you have with a partner? If you have had a relationship, was the emotional connection between the two of you really on the same level as with any of your friends? </p>

<p>People date because it's fun. There you go. You might as well say "why have friends?"</p>

<p>Based on the OP's argument, why have friends at all then if we're all so self-sufficient? We might as well not date AND not have friends unless we can use them.</p>

<p>Ok, so you can argue that having a few friends is necessary to have fun and to not be lonely, but why date, why not just be friends? </p>

<p>"so why do people, especially women, still seek emotional dedication from a man so fervently?"</p>

<p>"it's possible to survive as a complete recluse, therefore it's clearly possible to survive without an (<em>emotionally dependent</em>) partner."</p>

<p>I don't know what kind of friends you have, but for me I'd say that yeah, I'm "emotionally dependent" to my closest friends. That's why after I don't see them for a while I start to miss them, and when I'm with them it feels good, not just because I'm using them. I'm probably not "dependent" to the extreme that you're thinking of for marriage but it still an emotional thing. </p>

<p>I haven't been married obviously, but the same thing goes for dating. It's the same as having a friend who you're physically attracted to. Nowadays people like the idea of stay true to one person and one person only. Maybe it's because of the media or social influences? Who knows, but honestly who cares? People also like the idea of solidifying the relationship and making it "official." There just happens to be these things called "dating" and "marriage" that make this possible. So people go ahead and do it. </p>

<p>Lol, I'm not really a mean person but since this is an internet forum who really cares. So no offense, it just sounds like you're a little love deprived and are now finding an excuse by taking it out on society. Maybe you should get out and get some love, you'll see then what the point of it is :p</p>

<p>I took "uncommitted, unfettered lifestyles" to mean casual sex. </p>

<p>I'm not sure if you were replying to me, but I don't call women or men nasty names for their choices.</p>

<p>I guess I just find it hard to see marriage as frivolous since my parents have been married around 30 years.</p>

<p>Commitment in a spousal relationship is one of the critical components in the development of a child. If a family unit is nonexistent, it is unlikely a child will be given the level of care that a family unit provides. Since mammalian developmental periods are longer than those of other animals, many mammals have a sort of simple family unit. Humans are characterized by complex culture and one of the longest developmental periods of any organism. For this reason, it makes sense that a strong, long-lasting and stable family unit would be desirable in the upbringing of children. And even if for this reason alone, the development of the next generation is a pretty significant task.
Additionally, it is within a family unit that children learn many of the skills they will need throughout life. Modern research in developmental and cognitive psychology has even been showing us more and more that most of development occurs before age 5 -- to the point where some of our presuppositions concerning developmental appropriateness (i.e., that a child of age 10-12 cannot understand any sort of abstraction) may actually not be entirely correct.
Furthermore, we now know that there are critical ages for learning many basic skills. Unfortunately, if a person is single and has children while in this stage of life, it is unlikely the child will be tended to in the same ways that a couple could tend to their child. While some may claim daycare is sufficient, there are many experts who would point to studies showing the problems with daycare (not the smallest of which is the simple lack of child-parent relationship and much lost time in that relationship).
One of the research areas I am currently working on is with 1st generation college students. My team is in the process of researching and writing a book to help 1st generation college students' families facilitate their transition into college. Many of these students have extreme difficulty upon entering college (despite their natural abilities that shine when they are properly guided), presumably because they lack the guidance and knowledgeable support of a family (especially parents) that understand what their child is facing while in college.</p>

<p>Most people date in order to find love and eventually have kids. Having a child grow up in a household in which there is a new guy every week is extremely unhealthy. If your doing someone new each time, how would you even know who the babies dad is? How would you explain that to your child? It would also be a great way to spread STDs!!</p>

<p>Getting married also allows someone to have a better lifestyle. Wouldn't it be had to take maternity leave when you are the sole provider?</p>

<p>If everyone lived alone, do you have any idea how many houses would need to be built? It would be hard to get a loan for a house and it would help contribute to destroying the environment.</p>

<p>Being single is for some people, but many people still want to get married.</p>

<p>My main questions is: why are some people so desperate to be in a relationship? My mom has a friend that keeps talking about how she needs a man. Technically, nobody needs a man, it just makes things easier.</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>That rather depends on your point of view. If you're an evolutionary psychologist, it results from evolutionary pressures that create a reward mechanism for commitment; if you're a cultural psychologist, it is a result of cultural indoctrination. The former is probably more of a contributing factor - at least for women, for whom having a steady long-term commitment from a male would have been key for much of our species' evolutionary history. The latter probably explains much of the reason for why males experience this so much today.</p>

<p>From a proactive point of view, children of monogamous relationships are statistically correlated with better development vs. children of single parents. This may have just as much (or more) to do with confounding factors like socioeconomic status, but it nonetheless must be considered.</p>

<p>casual sex =/= sex with <em>random</em> people =P</p>

<p>i like your responses. it's interesting.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I guess I just find it hard to see marriage as frivolous since my parents have been married around 30 years.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>the length of time that a couple is married is irrelevant in determining whether or not marriage is frivolous. i'm calling marriage frivolous because <em>it is completely unnecessary to survival in today's society</em>.</p>

<p>apumic - thanks for the informative post. but the "uncommitted, unfettered lifestyle" would include being uncommitted to a child.</p>