I just realized that “ghosting” is what happened to me, back in the dawn of time, pre-digital, when all we had was tin cans on a string (OK, telephones). I had met a guy, seen him maybe 2 or 3 times and been to his place. The last conversation we had on the phone seemed pretty straightforward to me, but afterwards he just stopped answering his phone or returning my calls. It drove me crazy, what had I done wrong? What had I said?
Ironically, I ran into him a few weeks later at a bar, and I failed to have the courage to ask him what the hell happened. We both pretended we were strangers. Oh well.
Yes. It’s not a fair way to deal with People. My instinctual reaction is to give People Feedback so they have a Chance to improve themselves if they want.
But in US culture, women are taught to let men down gently, never say no, because too many men flip out and harrass, stalk or kill women if they feel slighted/ rejected (because they are great guys and deserve a woman!)
So in this context, it’s the only reasonable way for women to behave. If Society at large agrees that speaking out openly is better than being polite, and that women can say no without repercussions, this practice can disappear.
In a professional context - interviewing an employee - not answering at all is shitty behaviour. The excuse many Business use is that notifying a candidate that they weren’t Chosen makes them liable to be sued for discrimination, but it’s still shitty.
If the ad says right at the start that they won’t send back your Folder to save postage, that’s ok. But send a one-page letter or email that you weren’t Chosen, so you can apply elsewhere. (Especially if 20 People apply, and the interview process + Clearing with HR takes weeks, anyway).
As for who determines what etiquette is - there are etiquette books and Websites.
Generally, People should say “No” in theory. But if some Boor doesn’t get it, then ignoring is quite acceptable. Since ghosting skips the “no” = implying/ Assuming that the other Person is a Boor/ Stalker/ dangerous is problematic; but women have a right to protect themselves given statistics.
That’s interesting. I wonder if part of this is re-enforcing bad behaviour because it’s seen as normal - all People in my circle do it, so it can’t be that bad?
Or is that the same People with bad manners move in the same social media circle and bump into others with the same behaviour, while in another circle, People don’t ghost, but it averages out?
They aren’t examples of ghosting, they are the reason people ghost.
(And yeah, I haven’t dated in ages, but I seem to recall a lot of complaints about “he never called - he said he’d call.” Not me, I wasn’t a wait by the phone sort of person)
And yeah, ghosting helps prevent that since what you do is block the number. If its a casual acquaintance, they can’t show up on your doorstep because hopefully, they don’t know where you live. But that just might be me - since I’m one of the #metoo survivors of things like sexual harassment, stalking, and rape.
So anyone who self-publishes a book or spends an hour to slap up a website gets to declare rules? If two websites disagree, how is that abjudicated? If I slap up an etiquette website that says people have to do things exactly how I like, does that mean everyone then must dance to my tune (literally, if I say that’s what’s required)? Does stuff just become etiquette when it’s posted/printed even if none of the people involved agree to it?
Do you begin to see how silly the idea of ‘etiquette says you should…’ is as a justification for ‘I want you to…’?
I’ll also note that your “People should say “No” in theory” above directly contradicts some etiquette advice from people generally regarded as experts on the topic. Miss Manners, for example, has said that a string of “I’m busy” until the other person takes the hint is preferable to a direct “No”. Which is further evidence that declarations of “etiquette says that” are really just “I want but am trying to bolster my position with an appeal to authority”.
And where is the theoretical etiquette published? I’m interested in how the ‘people should say ‘no’’ rule is applied to situations where the person doesn’t even realize there’s a relationship, like the ‘one date’ or ‘met in person one time’ situations.
40 years ago. I was in high school and would take a girl out. I thought the date went well.
Next day, the girl didn’t return my phone calls. She avoided me at school.
<Shrug>
It stung a little but life goes on. Happens to almost everyone.
I always tried to handle it with class. Didn’t press the issue or confront her. She isn’t interested? That’s cool. I’ll take somebody else to the movie.
My biggest concern was not embarrassing myself in a pathetic confrontation. Why didn’t you call me back? What did I do wrong? That’s never been my style. I won’t ever grovel for anyone.
I think because deliberate avoidance now coincides with technical reason. If 40 years ago, Alice didn’t call Bob back, Bob knew she wasn’t interested.
If today Alice has texted/chatted/whatever with Bob for (certain amount of time) and then doesn’t answer any more, she might have a Real Life Problem taking her time away. Her phone/ Computer/ Internet might be broken, cell phone has no power…
So it’s unclear.
It’s less about groveling, and more that a Man asking a woman “why didn’t you …?”, especially in US culture of ownership, is putting pressure on the woman to justify herself. It quickly veers into Stalking/ not letting go. Most men who start asking “Why are you dropping me?” Aren’t interested in getting Feedback for self-improvement, or wanting to communicate like adults about possible mis-understandings; rather, they feel insulted as not being good enough, and won’t accept explanations “I’m not a bad guy, you should give me another Chance”. That can become scary or manipulating for the woman.
That’s not even true. How would a business think that not responding at all is more defensible than formally rejecting a candidate?
The actual reason is that businesses either don’t have time or can’t be bothered to notify a candidate. Keep in mind that your interviewer often just provides feedback to Recruiting, but has no responsibility for following up.
Another reason is that they still might hire you. I’ve been on interviews where I’ve been hired six months after the process started. Usually what happens is that they are waiting for some project to land so they have something billable for you to work on. Some firms (like mine), constantly interview candidates and only hire one if a project happens to land.
Then sometimes you simply can’t respond back to all 200 candidates that applied for a position online.
Etiquette demands that when you can make someone else’s life much easier and less stressful by doing something that costs you almost no effort at all, that you do that. Not ghosting people is just one example of that. Literally all the effort it takes to not ghost someone is a text that says “Sorry, not interested”-- It doesn’t get much easier than that.
I like how the concerns people have shared are now defined as “almost no effort at all.”
If your life is made much easier and less stressful from a “Sorry, not interested,” you are too invested too soon. Because if you are only invested in someone where the timing and interactions make sense, then a “Sorry, not interested” is a profound rejection.
Well etiquette also says it’s wrong to be obnoxious in public, smack your lips when eating, not offer your seat on the train to someone who’s infirm or just obviously needs it more than you, etc…and in agreeing with those norms I’m sure I have a stronger case than my merely wanting people to abide by them.
One shouldn’t think that ghosting is done only by women to shake off the creepy, clingy, or entitled. Men do it too gor a variety of reasons; it’s definitely equal opportunity here.
First off, you still have utterly failed to justify your use of ‘Etiquette demands’ in place of ‘Chronos wants you to’. You seem to think that you’re allowed to declare that your personal preferences are ‘etiquette’ and that everyone must follow them, but as this thread shows that’s simply not the case.
And why doesn’t the “when you can make someone else’s life much easier and less stressful by doing something that costs you almost no effort at all, that you do that,” rule apply to YOU? You could make everyone’s life much easier by sending them a text before any potential meeting explaining that you require that they send you a formal ‘not interested’ text if they decide they don’t want to see you again. I notice that, again and again, the ‘obligation’ crowd is perfectly willing to dictate others’ behavior, but isn’t willing to put in what they claim is a minimal effort themselves.
As people have pointed out, it doesn’t take ‘almost no effort at all’ in many ways. The fact that you don’t care about the effort that other people put into an action (largely because they’re other people) is just selfishness, it doesn’t mean that they aren’t actually putting in effort. A direct ‘not interested’ takes a lot of mental effort for some people, especially those who’ve had years of socialization that they should never give a hard no. The ‘not interested’ often prompts stalkery or aggressive responses, which also take a lot of mental effort to deal with. Further, it requires someone to come to a clear ‘not interested’ decision, which they may not have come to - a lot of ‘ghosting’ comes down to ‘oh, a text with PERSON, not interested right now, maybe later’ and things drifting off, with no ‘not ever interested’ decision actually happening. Going through every random chat and brief personal interaction and specifically examining how you feel about the person, then coming to a formal ‘yes/no’ decision is exhausting if you meet a lot of people, and wholly unnatural for some people
And again, the idea that meeting someone once in real life or sharing a few online chats obligates someone to ANYTHING is simply absurd. People can drift into and out of chat, or casually meet up without suddenly being obligated to a formal breakup procedure. The fact that you don’t want to accept it doesn’t constitute an actual obligation, and the fact that you want to put an obligation on people doesn’t mean that ‘etiquette’ does so.
Yet that’s what Managers reply in interviews when asked.
not answering: the candidate can’t be sure.
Formal rejection: “You rejected me only because …”
It’s easy to raise a suit, even if it’s unlikely to be successful, so Business want to avoid it.
So they are badly organized. It’s not that HR has to mail out 100 letters in one hour - the first weeding out before the interviews takes days-weeks; the interviews take days; and so on. If 20 People are interviewed each day, I expect a competent HR Company to have a form letter ready and fill in only names + adress in the space of 1 week.
Why not? You have their email-adress, do a search+ select to filter out the one Person Chosen and do a mass-mailing to the rest “Sorry, place is filled”. If the Company can’t do a mass-mailing, how can they do Business? (A mom+pop place with 5 employees will likely not do an online search and get 200 candidates).
