It's wrong to "ghost" people

[Grumbacher_Red]

And while I am at it I’ll give an example of being on the receiving end of being ghosted, and yes it still hurts to this very day.

It came from a very dear friend, not a romantic interest. This was a best girlfriend I had known for damn near 30 years, and needless to say we went through everything together, marriages, births of children, problems with family, divorces, brushes with mental illness, I could go on and on. We finished each others’ sentences, were closer to each other than sisters, and knew each other better than anybody.

But that became the problem. We know each others’ faults all too well, and I know all her skeletons in every closet, and she knows mine. So, when she married her 3rd husband, a doctor of a very high social status, she became a member of the Ladies Who Lunch Club, and there was suddenly just no room in her life for me. She ghosted me so hard she became the spirit in the sky.

And I don’t know what hurts worse about the whole affair. That I am not good enough for her new friends? Or that she doesn’t trust me enough to know better that I know perfectly well how NOT to embarrass her in front of them by busting out with some mortifying story from her past. I would never do that to her, I love her too much. But I also know she likes to invent her own reality in many cases, so I think she has probably done just that with these new friends. Knowing her, she has likely very carefully cultivated a backstory for herself, and having me around is too risky and would blow holes in it. I am not claiming to be an Angel, but I do know how to hide my redneck roots and act ladylike when the situation calls for it.

Still hurts, though. And even with all her faults I miss her.

[Grumbacher_Red]

@MaxTheVool

Not to belabor a point, but if you already point blank told him that you are not romantically interested, then stopping communicating after that isn’t “ghosting” at all. Unless I’m misunderstanding the terminology?

Well good. Then I don’t feel so bad about it.

[Pantastic]

@MaxTheVool

There’s a key difference, however. Miss Manners isn’t suggesting ghosting. She’s not saying “stop answering phone calls at all”. She’s saying “tell white-ish lies until they get the hint”.

@Chronos

If you’ve gone on a date with a prospective partner, or if you’ve interviewed a potential employee, then etiquette demands some sort of cut-off. If you don’t feel like you can give them an explanation, then don’t. Just send a text that says “I’m sorry, I’m not interested.”. That’s all that’s needed, just those five words.

Miss Manners does, however, explicitly disagree with the specific assertion I quoted her in response to above, and the other assertions that if you don’t feel like dating someone you are obligated to send a text saying “I’m sorry, I’m not interested”. The claim that ‘etiquette demands’ a clear decline of interest is clearly completely false, and I’ve actually cited an authority unlike the people claiming to speak for ‘etiquette’ in general.

It also shows that etiquette often runs opposite to the golden rule - dude wanted a definite ‘no’, Miss Manners said ‘etiquette says you don’t get to ask for one’. So all of the ‘but the golden rule says’ stuff is crap if you believe in etiquette, because it’s clearly not the guiding principle for etiquette.

As a married, middled-aged man, I can’t claim to have any idea what it’s like to be a woman in the dating world these days. But I have to say I’m skeptical

I date women and have female friends who date. Getting rape and murder threats in response to rejection on dating apps or in texts is so common I don’t know anyone female who has been dating recently who has not had at least one. Getting unsolicited sex fantasies, demands for another chance, demands for an explanation, and so on is so common that being at all skeptical of it is absurd. Dealing with that crap is tiring and time consuming.

And I think you’re vastly downplaying the golden rule aspect of things. I agree that calling it “etiquette” is at best arguable, but perhaps the most fundamental rule of human ethics is to treat others in a way that you would like to be treated.

And I think it’s disgustingly hypocritical for you to have she sheer gall to talk about the ‘golden rule’ and caring about others emotional pain right after a paragraph where you COMPLETELY DISMISS the pain that people experience because you’re ‘skeptical’. If you were doing something that avoided emotionally painful experiences for you, would you really want someone to simply dismiss that it even happens because they’re a skeptic? If not, then why doesn’t the golden rule apply to you here? And if you can’t apply rule you’re trying to invoke to your own interactions, why should anyone take you seriously when you insist that they follow it?

And yes, getting dumped sucks. But then it sucks and you know and it’s over, as opposed to days or weeks of slowly increasing confusion, at the end of which, there’s still the same pain. How much of a sociopath would someone have to be to NOT want to spare someone that pain?

How much of a dangerously obsessed freak would someone have to be to endure days or weeks of slowly increasing confusion backed by pain if someone doesn’t want to see them after one goddamn date? How much of a sociopath are you that you expect someone to do anything to encourage a clearly deranged and dangerous individual with that level of obsession, and how much sociopathy do you have to completely dismiss their stories?Remember, the people I’ve been taking issue with are specifically talking about a single date (Chronos’s case) or even a single meeting in person that might not even be a date (the older case).

That’s the problem here; if neither person is very attached, then ‘ghosting’ is just normal ebb and flow of interest. If one person is overly attached, then either the other person doesn’t realize it, or does realize it and is attempting to minimize the damage to themself.

[Grumbacher_Red]

@wonky

I have hundreds of people I used to talk with but no longer talk to. In some of those cases the other person was the last one to speak, and in some I was the last one to speak. I cannot think of a single instance where one of those people said “I no longer want to talk with you,” and I cannot think of a single instance where I did something horrifying, and yet I am not bewildered and bereft.

So when people in this thread claim that it’s obvious that ghosting someone is incredibly painful and leads to confusion and heartbreak, I can’t help but wonder if we’re all using the same definitions. Are people just calling it “ghosting” when they really feel hurt and otherwise it’s just the normal ebb and flow of human interaction?

Maybe it all has to with the level of closeness and/or the romantic potential of the relationship?

I also have had plenty of casual acquaintances that have come and gone without fanfare and I don’t consider that ghosting.

[Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus]

@constanze

That doesn’t Change the statistic likelihood for a normal woman to Encounter a male creep is very very high, but for a normal man to Encounter a female creep is rather low.

How is this even possible, statistically speaking? IOW, wouldn’t it imply that most males, or at least a big minority–e.g. thirty or forty percent, are creeps.

[MaxTheVool]

@Pantastic

MAnd I think it’s disgustingly hypocritical for you to have she sheer gall to talk about the ‘golden rule’ and caring about others emotional pain right after a paragraph where you COMPLETELY DISMISS the pain that people experience because you’re ‘skeptical’. If you were doing something that avoided emotionally painful experiences for you, would you really want someone to simply dismiss that it even happens because they’re a skeptic? If not, then why doesn’t the golden rule apply to you here? And if you can’t apply rule you’re trying to invoke to your own interactions, why should anyone take you seriously when you insist that they follow it?

Well, I’ll take a step back here and try to ensure that we understand our respective positions.
(1) I think that, in a vacuum, suddenly stopping responding to all requests for communication, with no explanation or comment, is extremely rude, bordering on cruel. That does NOT include a situation where person A says to person B “I’m sorry, I’m not interested”, and person B doesn’t get the hint. It doesn’t even include sequences of “I’m busy that day” white lies trailing off into nothingness. I’m talking about “We texted 17 times on Tuesday, my last message to her was at 8:17, right in the middle of a conversation, and then I literally never heard from her again”.
(2) The level of obligation one has to an acquaintance increases with the length and closeness of the relationship. “We texted a few times last week, and then I never heard from her again” is very different from “we texted and emailed every day for 3 months, and were starting to talk about her flying across the country to meet me, and then one Tuesday she stopped answering my emails and I never found out what happened to her”.
(3) First dates are generally understood to be a time when people are evaluating each other, so “we texted a few times leading up to our first date, then went out, and then she stopped answering my texts” is a particularly non-offensive example, and one that the ghostee should be able to quickly figure out… but nonetheless, “sorry, I’m not interested” is still only 7 seconds harder, and vastly clearer.
Do you agree with any/all of that?

It seems to me that where we disagree is how difficult/dangerous/demeaning it is to actually send the “sorry, I’m not interested” response. Discussions of that have fallen into two general categories:

(1) If I tell her/him that I’m not interested, then he/she will keep begging and whining and pleading and it will take forever and be worse for both of us. I have to say, I have very little sympathy for that in this day and age. What platform are you communicating on where you can’t just block them? But block them AFTER clearly and unambiguously stating your lack of interest. (And of course there’s no reason to think they won’t whine/beg/plead if you just stop responding…)

(2) And clearly the most important issue, usually (although not exclusively) expressed from a female perspective… “if I outright reject him, he might become dangerous”. Now, as I said, I can’t personally sympathize or comment on this. But… what I can’t understand, so maybe someone can clarify it for me, is why, if a man is dangerous or unstable, an outright rejection is MORE dangerous, or MORE likely to lead to abuse, than flat noncommunication. Is there something about the male psyche wherein a male who is told “I’m not interested” is going to be more angry/violent/possessive than a man who is just blown off and ignored forever? (I’m asking honestly, here… it doesn’t sound right to me, because while getting dumped sucks, I’ve personally gotten far more angry and frustrated and hurt (although never even in the universe of becoming violent) when women have just vanished nonresponsively rather than outright telling me that I’m not their type.)

[Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus]

@Spice_Weasel

Leaving social media counts as ghosting now? When I shut down my Facebook account, did I unilaterally ghost 350 people?

(Speaking hypothetically, and not about Spice Weasel particularly or specifically…)

It’s certainly possible for that to happen, if you have serious online-only friends that you know only through FB or FB Messenger. When you close your account, then they’re left wondering what the hell happened. You said you considered them their great and true friend, but your going offline was more important to you than keeping a channel of communication open to them.

[wonky]

@MaxTheVool

(2) And clearly the most important issue, usually (although not exclusively) expressed from a female perspective… “if I outright reject him, he might become dangerous”. Now, as I said, I can’t personally sympathize or comment on this. But… what I can’t understand, so maybe someone can clarify it for me, is why, if a man is dangerous or unstable, an outright rejection is MORE dangerous, or MORE likely to lead to abuse, than flat noncommunication. Is there something about the male psyche wherein a male who is told “I’m not interested” is going to be more angry/violent/possessive than a man who is just blown off and ignored forever? (I’m asking honestly, here… it doesn’t sound right to me, because while getting dumped sucks, I’ve personally gotten far more angry and frustrated and hurt (although never even in the universe of becoming violent) when women have just vanished nonresponsively rather than outright telling me that I’m not their type.)

I think some of the thinking is that time and distance will blunt some of the reaction. People in this thread have talked about not knowing if it’s over and the slow dawning realization. If you think that slow dawning realization is likely to make someone’s response more muted, then it’s a winning strategy.

We can argue about whether this is right. If someone did it to me based on a casual relationship, they are almost certainly right, since I’m used to people fading out of my life. People are busy. I’m busy. Relationships take effort.

[Pantastic]

@MaxTheVool

Do you agree with any/all of that?

Completely disagree with (1), no one is obligated to reply to you, and insisting that they are “rude” because they choose not to spend their time doing what YOU want them to based on what YOU do is manipulative and disgusting. Sending a text doesn’t obligate someone to reply to you, period. (2) is fine but irrelevant to this line of discussion as we’re not talking about long connection. (3) The “7 seconds harder” stuff is complete nonsense, no one is obligated to spend even one second on you, and your time analysis completely dismisses the emotional labor involved in the formal decision, response, and dealing with potential fallout. Note that Miss Manners doesn’t believe in the “sorry I’m not interested” nonsense, so there’s no room to appeal to ‘etiquette demands’ or common practice or anything along those lines.

To put it simply, your sending messages doesn’t create an obligation for other people to respond, and especially not for them to respond in a highly specific, regimented fashion that you’ve laid out.

(1) If I tell her/him that I’m not interested, then he/she will keep begging and whining and pleading and it will take forever and be worse for both of us. I have to say, I have very little sympathy for that in this day and age. What platform are you communicating on where you can’t just block them? But block them AFTER clearly and unambiguously stating your lack of interest. (And of course there’s no reason to think they won’t whine/beg/plead if you just stop responding…)

The fact that your empathy is broken and you have no sympathy for people who are trying to avoid emotional hurt while at the same time trying to place broad obligations on them on the basis that their lack of action causes you emotional hurt is grossly hypocritical and selfish. Emotional labor is labor, and demanding it from people for your personal benefit is just plain selfish; dismissing the cost of emotional labor that other people (especially women) are supposed to engage in on your behalf is absurdly self-centered. The fact that you insist that women* should cater to your emotional whims while completely dismissing women’s experiences, preferences, and the amount of emotional labor involved in your demands would be bad enough, but the fact that you ask “How much of a sociopath” someone would have to be to not bow to your whims is just breathtaking.

• technically “other people’s” would be more accurate, but in practice this is directed at women responding to men.

(2) And clearly the most important issue, usually (although not exclusively) expressed from a female perspective… “if I outright reject him, he might become dangerous”. Now, as I said, I can’t personally sympathize or comment on this. But…

If you can’t sympathize with people not liking hostile responses that often include rape or death threats, there’s a serious problem with your ability to sympathize with people. And “I can’t comment on this. But…” leading into what amounts to ‘explain to me why other people do this thing that you’ve observed over and over or I will continue to deny that it happens’ is a comment on it. The reaction happens regardless of whether you want to believe the people who have experienced it or not, demanding an explanation doesn’t change that.

[Dangerosa]

@MaxTheVool

As a married, middled-aged man, I can’t claim to have any idea what it’s like to be a woman in the dating world these days. But I have to say I’m skeptical that it’s often the case that there is someone who is potentially violent/dangerous whose violence/dangerousness is lessened by instantly and mysteriously cutting off all contact (and blocking on all social media) vs a polite but firm rejection (and blocking on all social media). Whereas I can certainly imagine that laziness makes that the easy choice for someone to take, with self-preservation acting as a convenient justification.

Ghosting doesn’t give them the excuse for confrontation. And early in a relationship, the kind of women who worry about this and ghost for this reason are the type who don’t tend to give out things like addresses. They’ve met you online (where you can be blocked), traded cell phone numbers with you (where you can be blocked) and then when they get the creeps from you and decide to ghost you, you don’t really have a means to contact them.

Women have spent YEARS getting advice on how not to get raped. And a lot of us follow that advice - that includes things like meeting a guy at the restaurant for the first date instead of having him pick you up, telling people you have roommates, even when you live alone.

Now, if you are going to ghost someone you’ve been seeing for several weeks, he might show up at your door because after several weeks, he probably knows where you live. And the proper way to ghost someone like that (at least 25 years ago) who you are concerned with become violent or stalky, is to sleep on a girlfriends couch or move in with your parents for a week or two. Or have a male friend sleep on your couch for a week or two.

Twenty-some years ago, when I was single, I had a guy follow me home from the mall. I had a guy get my phone number off my check and call me for weeks. I’ve been called a tease and a cunt and had a guy leave me on the side of the road at 1am in the middle of nowhere because I wouldn’t give him a blow job (that was closer to thirty years ago, by twenty years ago I wouldn’t have been in the car with the guy in the middle of nowhere - I got smarter). You may be skeptical, and I’m not sure how dating works with the internet, but I’m not skeptical at all that avoiding confrontation is the best way to handle a guy you don’t trust not to act out, since I doubt human nature has changed and I’ve been on the bad end of the acting out more than once.

[MaxTheVool]

@Pantastic

Completely disagree with (1), no one is obligated to reply to you, and insisting that they are “rude” because they choose not to spend their time doing what YOU want them to based on what YOU do is manipulative and disgusting.

I just feel like you’re having a totally different conversation than I am. I made it very clear that I was merely trying to evaluate sudden-cessation-of-communication in a vacuum.

For instance, I think it’s quite rude to be out to dinner at a restaurant, excuse yourself to use the bathroom, slip out the back door, and never come back. That is, in and of itself, an extremely impolite thing to do. It’s not a thing one should do casually and frequently. But it’s certainly justified at times. Things that are, in and of themselves rude, are certain the reasonable, ethical, justified course of action, at times.

(2) is fine but irrelevant to this line of discussion as we’re not talking about long connection.

Well, you might not be, but I am, which I think explains a lot of the disagreement. If nothing else, I think it’s obvious beyond even needing to discuss that if two people’s entire interaction consists purely of 3 or 4 terse texts over a few days, there’s no real relationship there. Whereas two people who have been exchanging multi-page emails several times per day for months, talking about real personal and important topics, do have a meaningful relationship. And the latter type of case is certainly what I have in mind while reading this thread. And some of the examples given have seemed to fit into that category.

(3) The “7 seconds harder” stuff is complete nonsense, no one is obligated to spend even one second on you,

You keep using the word “obligated”. There are plenty of things that decent humans do that they are not obligated to, such as, say, giving up seats on a crowded train to someone who is obviously elderly or pregnant. I think that’s a polite thing to do. I think that not doing so, in a vacuum, is rude. That doesn’t mean anyone is obligated to, and it certainly doesn’t mean that there aren’t circumstances in which it’s entirely reasonable/appropriate NOT to do so, due to the specific circumstances.

If you can’t sympathize with people not liking hostile responses that often include rape or death threats, there’s a serious problem with your ability to sympathize with people.

Again, we are failing to communicate. It’s certainly possible that I chose my words poorly. The point I was trying to make is that, as a happily married man, I can’t really understand what it’s like to be out in the dating world, which is why I’m interested to hear people’s experiences. In fact, I found Dangerosa’s remarks to be very illuminating.

I certainly empathize with someone who has had unpleasant experiences, but I don’t want to pretend that I really know what it’s like to walk a mile in their shoes…

[Dangerosa]

@MaxTheVool

I certainly empathize with someone who has had unpleasant experiences, but I don’t want to pretend that I really know what it’s like to walk a mile in their shoes…

But you should do us the favor of believing us when we tell you what its like to walk a mile in our shoes - rather than be skeptical. To have to explain this, to have to pull out being eighteen years old and walking a mile or more in the middle of the night to a stranger’s farmhouse to knock on a door and ask to call my parents in the middle of the night to pick me up - that isn’t a pleasant thing to remember. Empathize enough to just trust there is a reason, and its a good one.

By the way, they still have the EXCUSE for confrontation with ghosting - what they lack is the handed to them on a silver platter OPPORTUNITY for confrontation. I’m done with giving men the opportunity laid out on a silver platter for them to abuse me (and women as well - I no longer enable those opportunities for anyone, regardless of gender, as much as I can avoid it). And I’ve raised my daughter to be aware when she is pulling out that platter for serving up herself.

[MaxTheVool]

@Dangerosa

But you should do us the favor of believing us when we tell you what its like to walk a mile in our shoes - rather than be skeptical.

For the most part, I do believe you… I’m certainly far more sympathetic to ghosting than I was when I entered this thread, at least in the context of shortish interactions in the dating scene. That said, I’m still not quite sure what your position is. There’s a big difference between saying that ghosting is 100% moral and reasonable thing to do with no downside whatsoever; vs saying that it’s a necessary evil, but still frequently the right choice given the world we live in; vs saying that it’s something that women should be aware of in their arsenal of ways to deal with the world without being their only tool.

[constanze]

@Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus

How is this even possible, statistically speaking? IOW, wouldn’t it imply that most males, or at least a big minority–e.g. thirty or forty percent, are creeps.

The cultural expectations. Hollywood and other media teach American (White) men from very Young Age that the reward for being a hero is to get the beautiful woman. How much the woman is interested in the Hero before, whether they are compatible, etc. is mostly ignored.
So many men internalize that Society Kind of “owes” them a woman if they are “nice guys” (see all the complaints on the Internet about “why do women like bad guys, not me, when I’m such a nice guy?” Often because the self-proclaimed nice guy isn’t actually nice at all). There’s also the strong social pressure on men to be a “stud”, not a virgin, so they have to find a woman, or at least Girl-friend, quickly (male loner who lives in his parent’s Basement is an Insult).
There’s also the strong expectation that a man who is either good-looking or rich will automatically get women; and that women who are beautiful are desirable, but getting an average-looking woman is settling for second-best = being a looser.

Now obviously not every man believes 100% of this narrative. But enough of that Segment who are unable to self-reflect on their faults (It’s the fault of the woman for liking bad guys/ rich guys/ handsome guys, not because I’m a whiner/ control Freak/ …), unable to question the unsaid cultural assumptions, who get invested in and obsessed with finding a woman. (See also the personal examples in this thread).

The more desperate These specific problematic guys get, the more likely women who are either dating, or just living in the world, will meet them, because once the desperate creeps reach 30, they will start accosting women at work, at the store, … everywhere.

[Dangerosa]

@MaxTheVool

For the most part, I do believe you… I’m certainly far more sympathetic to ghosting than I was when I entered this thread, at least in the context of shortish interactions in the dating scene. That said, I’m still not quite sure what your position is. There’s a big difference between saying that ghosting is 100% moral and reasonable thing to do with no downside whatsoever; vs saying that it’s a necessary evil, but still frequently the right choice given the world we live in; vs saying that it’s something that women should be aware of in their arsenal of ways to deal with the world without being their only tool.

What I’m saying is that if your ghosted, it doesn’t make any difference what my reasons are for doing so - its none of your goddamn business. You are not entitled to an explanation for why you were ghosted any more than you are entitled to an explanation of why she doesn’t want to see you any longer.

And by extension then, its always ok, because the rationale for doing it isn’t anyone’s business. Maybe she’s lazy and mean and enjoys yanking the chain of guys who she met on tinder. Maybe his last girlfriend turned into a psycho bunny killing bitch. The end result is the same, and since no one is owed an explanation, it is universally ok.

[wonky]

@Dangerosa

What I’m saying is that if your ghosted, it doesn’t make any difference what my reasons are for doing so - its none of your goddamn business. You are not entitled to an explanation for why you were ghosted any more than you are entitled to an explanation of why she doesn’t want to see you any longer.

And by extension then, its always ok, because the rationale for doing it isn’t anyone’s business. Maybe she’s lazy and mean and enjoys yanking the chain of guys who she met on tinder. Maybe his last girlfriend turned into a psycho bunny killing bitch. The end result is the same, and since no one is owed an explanation, it is universally ok.

I can’t agree with this, unless you are limiting this to specific types of relationships. Dated a couple of times? Sure. Married to for ten years? There should be a reason.

Intent and motive matter even when they are secret.

[Dangerosa]

@wonky

I can’t agree with this, unless you are limiting this to specific types of relationships. Dated a couple of times? Sure. Married to for ten years? There should be a reason.

Intent and motive matter even when they are secret.

I’ve said upthread that we are not talking about committed relationships. We are talking about ghosting someone you have been on a few dates with - maybe seen for a few weeks.

And intent and motive may matter - but that is between the ghoster and their god (if they so believe). It is not for you to judge, because you are not entitled to the information to make a judgement. INHO is far better if you assume there is a good reason for the behavior and don’t assume that people are just mean bastards for the fun of it - when all that is on the line is your opinion of them.

[wonky]

@Dangerosa

I’ve said upthread that we are not talking about committed relationships. We are talking about ghosting someone you have been on a few dates with - maybe seen for a few weeks.

And intent and motive may matter - but that is between the ghoster and their god (if they so believe). It is not for you to judge, because you are not entitled to the information to make a judgement. INHO is far better if you assume there is a good reason for the behavior and don’t assume that people are just mean bastards for the fun of it - when all that is on the line is your opinion of them.

When all that’s on the line is my opinion of them, isn’t that none of anyone else’s business (using the same logic)?

[constanze]

@Dangerosa

I’ve said upthread that we are not talking about committed relationships. We are talking about ghosting someone you have been on a few dates with - maybe seen for a few weeks.

And intent and motive may matter - but that is between the ghoster and their god (if they so believe). It is not for you to judge, because you are not entitled to the information to make a judgement. INHO is far better if you assume there is a good reason for the behavior and don’t assume that people are just mean bastards for the fun of it - when all that is on the line is your opinion of them.

I found Miss Manners Explanation in the linked post quite interesting. Basically, it was less about “women feel unsafe/ are not taught to say “no” so they communicate indirectly” it was more “sure, it sucks now - but if she had told you explicitly with reasons why you suck, it would’ve dragged on as you tried to disprove her, and would’ve hurt much more. This way you can Keep believing she missed out on how awesome you are, instead of Hearing her tell you how much you suck”.

I hadn’t considered that aspect.

[Dangerosa]

@wonky

When all that’s on the line is my opinion of them, isn’t that none of anyone else’s business (using the same logic)?

Yep. But you are making your opinion of them other people’s business by stating it on a public message board. Any individual ghoster in question hasn’t.