Online relationships [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

View Full Version : Online relationships

Setra

2008-06-07, 07:00 PM

Midnight Son

2008-06-07, 07:11 PM

How old are you? If a teen, this probably won't help. Why do you have to go visit her and spend all the gas money. Why not meet half way?

Better yet, the world is in dire need of easier, quicker transport. I say invent a teleportation device and make the world a better place.

As far as advice on online relationships go, my last one went horribly wrong, so I shall refrain from giving any.

Innis Cabal

2008-06-07, 07:12 PM

i've known a fair few that have done it, and only several ever succesful. Not to discourage you, but long disntace relationships are hard, moving is harder but more worth it. Even a trip or two will only make that distance seem worse.

Solo

2008-06-07, 08:57 PM

I don't think online relationships are a good idea. I would have to meet someone in person before starting a relationship with them, even if I first got to know them online.

Setra

2008-06-07, 09:15 PM

How old are you? If a teen, this probably won't help. Why do you have to go visit her and spend all the gas money. Why not meet half way? 19, ideally we would meet halfway, but she can't drive yet.

I'm trying to spare only what I can afford to go see her, luckily I am not reckless enough to waste all of my money to go see her and then be surprised when I am without insurance next month (and behind on car payments).

Better yet, the world is in dire need of easier, quicker transport. I say invent a teleportation device and make the world a better place. Agreed

My stepmother and father met online and are happily married now (trying to ignore the fact they met online while he was still married to my mother), as well I know a few other couples who met online and are happy together.

i've known a fair few that have done it, and only several ever succesful. Not to discourage you, but long disntace relationships are hard, moving is harder but more worth it. Even a trip or two will only make that distance seem worse.To me, there is no point in this if I don't take a trip or two to see her.

Hopefully once I finish my degree I can get a better job and maybe a house. She has agreed to move in with me as soon as I can get one. This is a bit far off at the moment (almost two years) but I have hope...

FdL

2008-06-07, 09:20 PM

Sometimes you can't help falling in love with someone you meet online. But I still think I like as much real life and contact as I can get in my relationships...In fact, I don't like long or mid distance relationships either.

To some people i've talked with, LDR online relationships are barely relationships. To some extent, I agree. though it's more complex.

Setra

2008-06-07, 09:39 PM

Solo

2008-06-07, 09:42 PM

Sometimes you can't help falling in love with someone you meet online.

No, but that doesn't mean you can't stop yourself from losing your head in the matter.

Desidus

2008-06-07, 09:44 PM

Not sure if this would be considered odd or not, but meeting/seeing her in person is probably something you definitely should do. Long story short, she could be a saint online, but in person be completely different (not saying she is or isn't, just a hypothetical).

That being said, a Marine buddy of mine did the same thing, but did spend the money to see the girl in person, and it ended with her saying she didn't want a long distance relationship and him in severe debt. If you're going to go have the money ahead of time, and don't max/use credit cards if they can be avoided, because todays happiness could be tomorrows debt. Again, not saying the same thing will happen to you, just letting you know what I've seen and the worst case scenario (this way you're never disappointed only pleasantly surprised).

Best of luck though, sorry if I missed any glaringly important points.

RS14

2008-06-07, 10:37 PM

Now bus may not be the best way to travel, but I just checked fares, and Greyhound costs ~$200 to go from Louisville to Topeka, round trip. It's a slight improvement, though maybe not if either one of you is off the route serviced by the buses.

Or could you borrow a car which gets better gas mileage?

As for long distance relationships, I have had one, which failed, so I don't feel qualified to give any advice. Sorry.

FdL

2008-06-07, 11:31 PM

No, but that doesn't mean you can't stop yourself from losing your head in the matter.

Of course, I'm saying that.

I've grown to learn of myself that I shouldn't fall in love with someone online because it would hurt too much not being able to see her if it was reciprocated. And I'm really not inclined to any forms of travel, it's in my nature. So I save myself from that as much as I can.

Then again, I've met people online, special people for whom I have feelings, and sometimes it's hard to repress what you feel.

Edit: Bottom line? LDR/online relationships aren't easy. Relationships between humans are about being close and together in every way possible. One should strive for that.

NinjaHippy

2008-06-08, 12:23 AM

First off, I know what you mean. My girlfriend is away for the summer and it really sucks being away from her. Especially since I'm kinda poor and get paid once a month.

Secondly, though, how well do you know this girl in real life? I'm assuming that you must know each other well if you are planning on moving in together, but if you haven't had a lot of chances to be around each other for extended periods of time, don't rush into anything.

Thirdly, public transportation is your friend. Trains, buses, etc. Especially with gas at $4/gallon or whatever the hell it's up to now. Also, if you look at Amtrak, often they have a list of weekly specials on their website that will get you places for less of your hard-earned cash money.

Shadow

2008-06-08, 03:00 AM

My personal opinion, although you probably won't like it....

Online relationships are not truly relationships. They're just not. They may possibly become so at a later time, but until that step is taken in person these individuals should be considered nothing more than fond friends with hope for more.

The main concern is exactly what Desidus stated, and yet it's more.
Untl you meet this person, until you find out if you both feel that SPARK, then they CANNOT be anything more.

I remember when I was 19 and falling in love at every turn. Hell, I still do it. But I hope that, like me, you can have the foresight and sense to keep your head on your shoulders while your heart is sailing towards the ground like a comet.

This girl may absolutely be the perfect match for you. She absolutely may be the one to spend every waking moment of the rest of your life with.

Then again, how will you know that you want to spend every waking moment with her unless you've spent at least a few moments with her....?

Reserve judgment on this matter until that time comes.

But continue to look forward to that time with hope and bright eyes.

Bright eyes that continue to be open to the world and it's immense, countless possibilities for all things horrid and wonderful.

Rawhide

2008-06-08, 04:10 AM

http://www.geekgirls.com/rant_realrels.htm

xPANCAKEx

2008-06-08, 05:41 AM

it probably won't work out

im not gunna sugar coat that - and im glad no-one else seems to have either

but if you are intent on "making a go of things", then first of all you gotta sort out your finances. Being behind on car payment/no insurance = it will NEVER work. Thats not a "probably won't" or a "might not" - thats a NEVER.

If you're behind on car payments then moving ain't an option. moving is a BIG deal, and entails a hell of a lot of financial risk.

once you have your own finances sorted, then you can worry about the finance and logistics of travel. The golden rule is its gotta be an equal effort. If shes not willing to travel to see you 50% of the time then don't bother. I know this is someone you love, but if they love you too, they should make an equal effort. This is both a matter of mutual respect, and also if things fall apart, you won't feel like you've been taken for a ride.

finally - yes amtrak, yes greyhound. they are your best friend. book in advance and you can get 1000 for 70 bucks. Not to be sniffed at really... there are more less-than-legal methods of catching a train ride, but thats a personal choice on how many laws you advocate on breaking/how much legal hassle you're willing to face. And if you're taking a public transport, why not split the cost? that would only be fair after all.

---

but on the side issue of making it all actually work - although its an extra cost, i would advise that the first time (if not the first 2 or 3 times even) that you go see this girl, that you book yourself a motel room - single bed, no sleaze going down here - and stay there. It will give you both the personal space you require, and show her and her housemates/parents due respect too (something that can earn you early much needed brownie points if they are in the picture).

----

as for the subject of getting over shyness - well thats a whole thread of its own, but i'll gladly pitch you some advice on the subject if you need it

Player_Zero

2008-06-08, 05:42 AM

http://www.geekgirls.com/rant_realrels.htm

Hey, I'm practically mentioned by name in that article.

"We're all familiar with the long-standing image of the pallid, glasses-wearing, computer nerd who is so socially inept the only relationships he – and I mean he – can make are via the computer."

Awesome. And being this nerd, I advise against long distance relationships while you are so young. Not that I'm experiences in any manner whatsoever, it is merely my opinion.

Rawhide

2008-06-08, 07:18 AM

Solo

2008-06-08, 07:50 AM

Player_Zero

2008-06-08, 07:51 AM

Hey! That was hardly the point of the article :smalltongue::smallwink:.

The emotions that an online relationship can invoke are no less real than those from a face-to-face relationship.

Also, some people spend ages together, in person, before they realise that there is no 'spark' to their relationship.

Perhaps so, but on average a long-distance online relationship won't be as emotionally inspiring or personal. Just because a couple of cases work out for the better doesn't mean that this one will.

Special cases of online relationships working out better than reallife ones aren't fictional, they're just really unlikely to happen.

Rawhide

2008-06-08, 07:59 AM

I'm not denying that any long distance relationship is much more difficult to maintain, just that the relationship can't be considered any less real.

Player_Zero

2008-06-08, 08:02 AM

What about the fake ones? The ones where one or other of the two don't really believe that the relationship has any actual value but doesn't let on, or some other similar case. Aren't they less real?

Rawhide

2008-06-08, 08:05 AM

Is it any less real if you love your wife/husband/life-partner who you know in person but they are not letting on that they don't love you?

Player_Zero

2008-06-08, 08:10 AM

That still involves you more personally, though, doesn't it?

Besides, people on the internet lie. A lot. So the frequency of 'fake' relationships is gonna' be a whole lot higher on the bloggosphere.

Rawhide

2008-06-08, 08:16 AM

Emotionally, no it doesn't. Emotionally it can involve you just as personally.

People in person lie, a lot. The frequency of one side of a relationship being fake, does not change how real the emotions are.

SDF

2008-06-08, 08:24 AM

Player_Zero

2008-06-08, 08:25 AM

People are less likely to get emotionally attached over the internet, however. So on any random case you are more likely to find that in reallife the emotion response is greater than one online.

People can have highly emotional and rewarding relationships online, but it is very unlikely to happen. You are more likely to end up in a 'fake' relationship and you are less likely to care.

Also, I think we should stop flooding the threads with our internet argument. :smalltongue:

Rawhide

2008-06-08, 08:33 AM

I guess it depends on what you mean by real. In a relationship where you exclusively chat with someone online you can't use any of your senses, sight/sound/smell/touch, the very things that define reality for people. You can't sing to the person or go on an adventure with them. The article only does what other people have supplied in the topic, which is anecdotal evidence. His argument is against the stigma of online relationships, but he himself admits to never having met the subject of his story. Other people here have shared stories where they have actually met people from the internet, and how it hasn't worked out. Is one account more valid than the other? Well not really, but anecdotal evidence in this situation is worth about as much as it usually is... and that isn't a lot.

Well, you can definitely sing to them, and you can get to know someone, really know someone, before physical attributes are introduced.

Yes, there are many that fail, but yes, there are many that succeed, just like in face to face relationships. I'm not and haven't been discussing about how likely an online relationship is to succeed, just that the emotions involved are no less real and cannot be dismissed.

People are less likely to get emotionally attached over the internet, however. So on any random case you are more likely to find that in reallife the emotion response is greater than one online.

People can have highly emotional and rewarding relationships online, but it is very unlikely to happen. You are more likely to end up in a 'fake' relationship and you are less likely to care.

Also, I think we should stop flooding the threads with our internet argument. :smalltongue:

Again, I'm not and haven't been discussing about how likely an online relationship is to succeed, just that the emotions involved are no less real and cannot be dismissed.

SDF

2008-06-08, 08:46 AM

Rawhide

2008-06-08, 08:59 AM

Well yes, of course the emotions are real. Aren't they always? I don't know what a fake emotion would be. Emotions change drastically once you finally meet someone you've been talking to online for a time, though. The dynamic completely changes when the relationship goes from online to real life.

You can intellectually know someone well before you meet them, but I would disagree that you can really know someone before contact is made. Usually physical attributes do come into play before you meet someone from the internet, via a video or photo. But, a lot of arguments seem to be its great to get to know someone without knowing what they look like, ect. I would counter with physical attributes being important, and a significant part of the human experience.

This specifically is what I was addressing:

Online relationships are not truly relationships. They're just not. They may possibly become so at a later time, but until that step is taken in person these individuals should be considered nothing more than fond friends with hope for more.

As for the dynamic changing? Yep, not going to deny that (though there are several other things in face to face relationships that will change the dynamics just as drastically).

It also makes me wonder where one would draw the line of what would be considered a real relationship. Married with children? One where two people have dated for 2+ years but had no more physical contact than kisses? Dated for 3 months? Dated once?

Photos, movies, webcam, audioclips, phone conversations, all of those help flesh out the physical attributes, and it all depends on when you want to introduce those elements, as couples have complete control over it. Physical attributes play a part in many relationships, I won't deny that either, but meeting online can remove physical attributes as a 'first impression', allowing those to be introduced at a meaningful pace. This however goes out of the scope of my point of the relationships still being very real.

ZombieRockStar

2008-06-08, 10:19 AM

Oookay...

Obviously, I feel I should weigh in on this. I'm not sure if I want to and just stand off to the side and smugly think to myself that you're wrong. But...

Going on a year and a half. We've been able once, after a year. Current plans are a road trip down to Tennessee at the end of this month for the GitP meet-up there. So I think I can contrast the differences between knowing someone online and in person when it's the same person.

We are really, very much in love with each other. We have so much emotion invested in each other. So, really, I am very offended when someone says my relationship isn't real. At least not over AIM.

My argument boils down to this...it really, really depends on the people involved. Just like any relationship really. I suppose I can say with confidence that my relationship is real. Maybe Ego and I are just better at communicating than the rest of you. Maybe we're just more patient than the rest of you.

Online relationships are not truly relationships. They're just not. They may possibly become so at a later time, but until that step is taken in person these individuals should be considered nothing more than fond friends with hope for more.

I'm of the opinion that any romantic relationship has to be a friendship first...a really deep friendship. Really, the only difference I can see between one and the other is the acknowledgement of sexual attraction. Obviously, when you're in a relationship, the friendship gets deeper because you're in much closer contact and spending much more time with your other.

The main concern is exactly what Desidus stated, and yet it's more.
Until you meet this person, until you find out if you both feel that SPARK, then they CANNOT be anything more.

I really only have my own experience to say that this is wrong. Like I said, we have met in person, so I can compare. I felt a spark well over a year before I got to see her in person. I felt a spark in person. It was the same damn spark. The difference was we got to express affection physically. Now...that is a really important difference. Physical connection is important. But it's an expression of affection. It isn't a prerequisite of love, just a part of it.

You can intellectually know someone well before you meet them, but I would disagree that you can really know someone before contact is made. Usually physical attributes do come into play before you meet someone from the internet, via a video or photo. But, a lot of arguments seem to be its great to get to know someone without knowing what they look like, ect. I would counter with physical attributes being important, and a significant part of the human experience.

I think what people are saying is not that it's unimportant to know what someone looks like, or that feeling physical attraction isn't important. What I think that means is that it's great in the moment to have a conversation with nothing but words. You're not considering what they look like at that moment, or listening to their voice...you just have their words.

This is a complication, I guess. I've heard people say that you can't really communicate over AIM or something because you need bod language and tone of voice, and the only thing you have to make up for that is :smallbiggrin::smallwink::smallfrown::smalltongue: and perhaps a few more seconds to make your replies a bit more eloquent.

I've heard that from my Creative Writing professor, of all people, and all I could think was: "We're writers. It's our job to be able to communicate emotions with words." I guess he's going on the stereotype of someone using chat-speak and smilies every sentence, but I don't talk like that. Yeah, I wouldn't be able to connect emotionally to someone talking like that, but that's a fault of the other person, not inherent in the medium.

Here's the thing...I'm not denying that there is a few things that are really important missing in an online relationship, but that doesn't invalidate the relationship itself. The only prerequisite is that you connect emotionally. It is certainly harder with just words—my God, is it ever harder—but not impossible.

An online relationship is extraordinarily difficult. It requires you to put a hell of a lot of effort into maintaining that emotional connection because you have to be very good at telling the other person how you feel instead of just showing. It is inherently harder than a face to face relationship, but it is not impossible. You have to decide whether it's worth the extra effort. I have, because I've found someone who is so very special. I don't think I'd be willing to go through this for anyone else I've met online, especially since I went with the extra difficulty of both distance and age, but I am for her. And I'd say that our relationship is a hell of a lot more healthy that a great many in person relationships out there.

And, yeah, your final goal should be being together, if you wanna go that far. Otherwise, you'll just end up feeling like the relationship isn't going anywhere...just like if you were in a relationship where all you ever did was dinner and a movie. That doesn't make the time online any less real.

Like I said...it's the two people involved that make the difference. If you think that you can't do it, fine, but don't you dare imply that it's impossible.

A Soporific

2008-06-08, 10:42 AM

How about this instead of rushing off to Kansas:

Pick an event being held this summer and both plan on attending. It could be located at a neutral site somewhere between your locations, or somewhere else entirely. Meet at the event, that way if things don't go the way that the two of you think they should it wouldn't be as much of a big deal as it would be otherwise. It would also provide conversation topics, a schedual of sorts, and a emotionally neutral location to get over the occasionally jarring change in the nature of the relationshp. You both can then take public transportation to and from, since you know that most events are held near hubs of public transit and the normal difficulties inherent in getting to and from individual houses using public transit disappear.

It also provides an exuse for family members who might not be as keen on the idea as the two of you.

Purple Dragon

2008-06-08, 10:46 AM

I'm new 'round these parts, so let me give you a little background before I toss my two cents on the pile.

I'm an old (creeping up on 40 in a hurry) married guy who happened to hit the jackpot. I met my wife online, and she moved 2000 miles to be with me. We first bumped into each other while playing a silly little online game, and hanging out on that site's forums. We eventually exchanged IM info, and everything grew from there - photos of ourselves, phone calls, and after about a year of this she flew halfway across the country to meet me face-to-face and spent a weekend with me (she was a college student). Our long-distance relationship continued, both online and on the phone, and she came to visit me twice more while she was finishing up college. On her third visit, I proposed to her. She said yes. She's the best friend I ever had, we've been married for four years, and our first child was born at the end of 2005. I'm happier than I've ever been. (My wife was actually my third attempt at an online relationship; the first two were disastrous. One turned out to be a gold-digging, lying two-timer, and the other turned out to actually be more than a little bit psycho...)

That said, it sounds like both Setra and his lady friend are very young. (Just to make sure - she IS of legal age, isn't she? I don't wanna offer advice to someone who's planning on doing something - or someone - illegal!) Setra, I've been in your shoes. When I was younger, I was so desperate to be in love that I'd fall HARD for just about any girl who'd even deign to talk to me in a friendly manner.

When I was 21, I drove from Iowa to Boston, Mass. to spend New Year's Eve with a girl I hadn't seen in over 2 years. We thought we were in love, but once we were face-to-face we figured out almost instantly that we were both wrong for each other. I'm glad I did it though; afterwards she and I talked a couple more times on the phone, but then we each just moved on. Sure, it sucked that she wasn't who I imagined she was, but until I saw her in person I was totally convinced I was in love.

Setra, can you give us some background here? Is she still living with her parents? If so, do her parents even know you exist? I think we need a bit more information to properly understand what's going on.

Miraqariftsky

2008-06-08, 10:56 AM

I am currently in an online relationship, she lives in Kansas, I live in Kentucky... all in all I calculate about a $300 round trip (in gas alone), and I don't have much money to spare.

It's very depressing to me, I more than anything wish I lived near her and could be with her. I'm trying to save up money to go see her but it's going to be a long time from now (As I have little to spare, only about $10 a week), which is of course depressing once again.

It's very frustrating to me but I love her very much.

Is anyone else in an online relationship? Anyone have any feelings to share on the subject?

Yo Setra. Be glad yer in the same bloody continent and use the same currency as yer lady. That be frustrating fer ye? Why, there be other folk who are separated by time, by space, by society, by economics, by religion and yet still love each other dearly.

Case in point: That of her beloved, beauteous majesty, the Daemonqueen and her loyal servant, myself. We're literally on opposite sides of the world.

Persevere, bub, persevere.

rubakhin

2008-06-08, 12:14 PM

Yeah, my boyfriend's up in Canada right now and even though we're crazy about each other it doesn't look like I'll be able to come up there, ever.

Because, um. *rubs face* I can't really talk about it but there are problems in his life that aren't ever going to go away that he wants to protect me from. He would make up reasons but finally I got the truth out of him. There's a problem that's out of our control. I don't care about it, it's not like his whole life has to stop because of this, but he'd shoot himself if something happened to me. I'm far less afraid of the problem itself than what it would do to him if something happened.

Did I mention that he's a model? And that we're just about the two most compatible people on Earth? If it's possible to die of sexual frustration my days are numbered. :smallsigh: Mikha, podarochka ...

He's happy with the way things are, doesn't mind just IMs, email, and phone. For the most part, anyway. He's always worried that I'm going to find another guy I like better (nobody does it for me like him ...), and right now he's petrified that I'm going to wind up leaving him for this kid Ilya who we both know (Ilya lives closer to me, but the magazine Mikha works for flew him up to Montreal for a photo shoot and I told him to keep Mikha company for a while) and who is crazy about me. I like Ilya. I don't know if I'm going to fall for him, only if it happens I can't help it! Even if it does happen I'll stay loyal. Not just for Mikha's sake. Ilya's trouble. But it's not like I want to go the rest of his life sleeping alone. I'm just hoping that he'll come around once he gets used to his situation.

It's just one thing after another with me. :smallsigh: Life, it's worse than grand opera. At least I'm constantly surrounded by good-looking men. There are plenty of people in the world being tormented by boys who aren't nearly as cute. :smallbiggrin:

Lorn

2008-06-08, 12:27 PM

Having been in a long-distance relationship, I'm (hopefully) able to help here.

Ok.

With me, things DID go wrong at the end of it all - though to be honest, it was more a case of we weren't so right for each other than anything else.

For what it's worth, it wasn't as far as yours - she lived in the West Midlands, me in the North East. About 180 miles between us.

The story:

Timescale:
When it started, we were both 16 and a bit. When we started going out about 16 and a half. When it ended, we were both about 17 and a half.

We started talking over a forum, ended up talking over MSN, both in August 2006.. Told each other we liked each other around December 2006. Met up for the first time in what was basically neutral ground - York, in Febuary 2007.

I do living history all over England, which made things easier. July/August 2007 was the first time we made it to each other's houses.

Things went well for a long time, until the relationship began to fall apart due to various factors, not least us both changing as people, and other factors such as her parents seemingly using "you can't talk to Phil for [time]" as a punishment for not doing homework, leaving the house late (even by a few minutes) and various other things to the point we almost missed meeting up on our anniversary because they wouldn't let her online so we could get everything sorted. At that point, things really went wrong; we ended up not talking as much, both getting increasingly annoyed etc before we decided to cut our losses and end it before it got worse in March 2008. Things went OK, we're still fairly good friends. The whole thing lasted exactly one year, one month and one week.

Analysis:

So - what went wrong?
Fairly basically, lots of things. At the end of the relationship was a general lack of trust on my side (for reasons I'd prefer not to go into), combined with us both being really annoyed at everything, which was caused by, mostly, the distance - or at least, problems caused by the distance (such as the above parent thing; if we hadn't lived so far away, it wouldn't be a problem at all, they wouldn't have been able to do so and if they had tried it wouldn't have presented so much of a problem.)

How could these have been prevented, though?
The lack of trust, to be honest, was to do with me - I find it really hard to trust people at all, and I tend to remember when things go wrong like that, worry about them too much, and let it become quite the demon in my own mind - and her, and to a fairly considerable extent the kind of friendship she had with lots of her (female) friends. Along with that was exam pressure, coursework pressure, and all the normal stuff that you'd expect two unemployed 6th formers to have.

Advice:

Ok. There were good points, and lessons learnt, from this relationship. Here's a few of the most prominent ones.

1. Travel
A. Fairness
NEVER have one person only going to the other person's house - even it out. Say, every four visits have two of person A going to person B, and two of person B going to person A.
B. Cost
Putting it simply, public transport can often be a lot cheaper than driving. Try the train - get a railcard! Over here, at least, a railcard means a third off all train transport for a year, and they cost £20. Seeing as a train journey would otherwise have cost £60, they paid for themselves on the first journey.
C. Timing
Oh, gods. This was hell. Basically, if you have the same holidays (assuming you're in education) then these are a perfect time to visit. New Years, Easter, maybe even Christmas if your families are OK with it. Halfterms, if you have them. Summer holidays are great.
Factor in what you both do as well. If, for example, one person does some sort of drama thing, think "how is this going to affect the visit?" If you're going to see each other for all of 4 hours, is there any point visiting at that point?
There's no point going there and getting back in one day. Think about it - it costs enough to get there and back, realistically you're going to end up spending the night at each others houses unless (possiby) you end up meeting in a neutral zone.

2. Communication
Just as in a normal relationship, communication is everything. Really, everything.
You're going to be out for a weekend/week? Tell them. Computer is being repaired and you won't be on MSN or whatever? Tell them. About to pernamently dye your hair all the colours of the rainbow randomly? For the love of god, TELL THEM - don't just appear on webcam with it and expect them to not be surprised by it at all. Your phone line is going down? Tell them. Banned from the computer, phone, mobile, etc? Tell them - even by letter if it comes to it. If parents end up doing this and not letting you tell them, you may be slightly screwed - which leads us onto the next point.

4. Parents
If you live with them and they still have some form of dominance over your life, ensure that they are not going to make this harder. In the event of something happening for whatever reason, tell the other person how long it's likely to last - not "about a week," but "until next Wednesday." Have other means of contact - letters, emails from the library etc. Seriously, if you DO end up getting banned from use of the computer for a week or whatever, and it's your primary means of communication, then if you don't make it clear to the other person there's every chance they end up worrying for a fair amount of the week. If it comes to it, guilt the parent into letting you send a few texts to the other person or whatever.

5. Be Prepared
Yep, the Scout motto - but it's more applicable here than anywhere else. Be prepared for this. It will NOT be easy, it will NOT be fun all of the time - especially when you're driving or riding the train away from them - and there's thousands of things that could go wrong.

6. Negativity
It's to be expected that you're going to garner some negativity from people who don't support LDRs. Ignore it, ignore them, they don't matter.

Disclaimer:

By the communication point above, I am by NO MEANS saying "make sure you know everything about them every second of the day." That's creepy. I'm saying, basically, if you won't be able to talk then just mention it to them beforehand.
In the event of something going wrong, don't blame me - it's not my fault. If some of the advice up there does not apply to you, then it's your responsibility not to take it.
There are still quite likely to be some less great times, but the good times will hopefully make up for them.

Good luck :)

On people who say the relationship isn't "real" or whatever:

First, let's make sure there's a clearly defined difference between an online relationship and a long-distance relationship (LDR.)

Online relationship - relationship purely online. The people have never met up in person. This can change to an LDR.

LDR - the people have met up, and do so when they can. Aside from the extra-long journey to see the other person, the longer distance and any extras caused by this, there is no real difference between their and a "normal" relationship.

Ok. I've heard a lot of people say, back in the day when I was in one, "your relationship can't be real, you never see them."

How do you define a real relationship? Is it the emotional connection? Is it the mutual attraction?

Both. And let me tell you - a long distance relationship is NO less of a relationship, because it has these - they may even be amplified by the distance. Next time someone says "this relationship is not real, you never see each other," just think "well, we're connected and attached to each other long enough to see this through. We're emotionally connected enough to travel over a [distance] to see each other. This is a strong connection."

I've heard people say that the connection felt is "fake." How do you define a real connection? And what right do you have to say to someone else that what they feel, in their own minds, is fake - is a lie? How can you tell how deeply someone feels for someone? How can you tell, how do you have the right, and how the hell do you have the sheer nerve to tell someone "your relationship is not real, will never be real, and the feelings you share with that person do not exist?"

I'll give you the answer. You can't tell. You don't have the right. There's no way you can tell what the inner workings of someone's mind are.

Hell, one of my friends recently found herself in an LDR. She'd known the guy for ages beforehand. But as soon as they started going out, her own parents - who, forgive me if I'm wrong or transgressing - are meant to offer support, said "no, it won't be a real relationship. You'll never see each other."

Bull****.

So, you can be friends over a longer distance. Great. But no, no. Can't go out with someone, the physical aspect of it is missing.

That's a load of rubbish, and as someone who's maintained an LDR for over a year, I know it to be false. It might be harder sometimes, but all it really means is the time you do spend together is more special.

And the people who seem to think everyone met online is, in fact, a repeat-sexual-offender, the opposite sex to who they say they are, and a rapist: Grow up.

And that is all, for now. Hope the advice helps.

Shadow

2008-06-08, 01:02 PM

I couldn't help but laugh a little as everyone was debating Rawhide's message via link, while I knew that he was debating my personal comment.

Let me clarify:
I agree with everything that he stated after that link. Every bit of it. My slight difference of opinion with Rawhide (if it even is such) was more on par with something that ZRS said, and that is: Physical connection is important. In my opinion it is tantamount to a romantic relationship. And I don't just mean physical connection in a sexual way, but also with simple proximity taken into account. If either of you has any little quirk that the other cannot deal with, if there's no physical attraction whatsoever; any number of things can sour the idea of romance once two people are in the same room.

I will also agree that the emotions are no less real, and didn't try to imply that they were. Notice that I never said that these things didn't work out. Others did that. I simply stated that I believe that until two people have met, there are far too any things that could possibly sour the idea of romance, and therefore these people should be considered "fond friends with hope for more."

People say that looks don't matter.
I'll tell you that they do matter. Just not as much as people believe. Looks matter because first impressions matter, and a lot of first impressions are generally based on looks. The wonderful thing about people who meet over the internet is the fact that you can get to know them before any of that has happened. The fact that looks usually matter has been sidestepped by this, and it's about damned time.

Hopefully I've made my point a little more clear; that point being that while the emotions are no less real, those emotions cannot be trusted until personal time has been spent together. There's just too many variables until that point. All of these emotions and these connections are the foundation of a romantic relationship. The truth of the romantic relationship has to wait until it can be confirmed or denied in one's presence. These are my opinions.

So now I'll end this the exact same way I did before.

Reserve judgment on this matter until that time comes.
But continue to look forward to that time with hope and bright eyes.
Bright eyes that continue to be open to the world and it's immense, countless possibilities for all things horrid and wonderful.

Rawhide

2008-06-08, 08:47 PM

And any number of things can sour the relationship once two people move in with each other, any number of things can sour the relationship once two people sleep with each other for the first time, any number of things can sour the relationship when you meed each other's families, discuss different outlooks on life (money, religion, politics, personal beliefs and values), as well as other things such as the uncovering of hidden or long forgotten truths.

Physical proximity does not define a relationship and not being within touching range does not mean the relationship is any less real. You can have all the same emotions and they can be shattered in just the same way.

You fall for a personality, not a person, this is even more true online, but has examples in face to face relationships as well. If all of a sudden (or gradually), your partner decided he or she was a completely different person. (ie. She married a restful, suburban loving and community oriented lawyer. But ever since getting a job at a top law firm, he's been chasing the money, fast cars and alcohol, doing dodgy underhanded deals. She may not like this new personality.)

I agree with you on pretty much every point, it is more fragile and should be approached with caution, it is not something to rush into without considerable thought, and personalities that work online don't necessarily work offline (although they can and do). The only thing I'm disagree with is a matter of semantics, you're saying that online relationships are not real relationships, I'm saying that they are. Online relationships are just as real as those that develop face to face, they are just different to and challenging the traditional concept of a relationship.

Syka

2008-06-08, 09:37 PM

My first relationship was over three years, 16-19, and long distance (Fl-NJ). We only managed to visit every 6 months and for the first year we didn't get to see each other at all, most of the relationship was conducted through AIM and the phone. However, we had met in person originally (it's complicated).

LDR's, especially when you do not have reliable money or transportation, is incredibly tough. But it was worth everything, including the crappy ending (which may or may not have had to do with the distance, it was definitely a factor though). I can't give you advice on visitation, since our parents paid for plane tickets, but I can give general tips. Talk every day, even if for 5 minutes before sleeping, have things (like TV shows) to share and talk about, etc. It definitely can work.

Right now I'm in an LDR where he only lives three hours away and I'll be moving home at the end of December and we probably won't have to separate after that (if everything goes according to plan). It's been 9 months so far, and best relationship either of us have had. Once again, mostly phone and AIM unless we're visiting which we've managed to average every 2-3 weeks, and my vacations home.

It can work. It's just harder. :) Good luck.

Cheers,
Syka

FdL

2008-06-08, 10:05 PM

Besides, people on the internet lie. A lot. So the frequency of 'fake' relationships is gonna' be a whole lot higher on the bloggosphere.

Yeah. It's not that they "lie" per se, which they do. It's that in a best case scenario, it's "easy" and too comfortable pretending to have a relationship like that, a relationship that, sorry if it sounds harsh, you can turn on and off with the press of a button or the click of a mouse.

Again, I think that romantic relationships, online or otherwise, are built on the premise of two people who want to be physically together and share their lives. If this is not the initial circumstance it's the aim.

I understand a relationship as spending your time and life with someone you love. One thing is feeling emotions, which can be as fake or real as in person. But for me the difference between an online relationship and a real one is as simple as the difference of typing the word *hug* and giving a hug to the one you love, feeling her warmth, her embrace, smelling her, etc. (And this point is not about sensorial perception, as the jaded among you will think).

Edit: The thing about online being unrestricted communication of thoughts and feelings to the point you know and truly love the other person is valid. But there's also real life, and real life does have a great impact on a relationship. We don't exist outside of real life, we cannot just forget about it and be abstract beings of thoughts and feelings and have our souls meet and love. Again, it would be too easy and comfortable if we could. And I'm sure there's people who can see and love themselves beyond this, I'll just say that it's not a common thing and that it takes something special on their part, and that as everything in this world, means you're paying a price, or making a sacrifice.

NinjaHippy

2008-06-08, 10:11 PM

http://xkcd.com/352/

This comic keeps coming up in online conversations between me and my SO... and it's a good illustration (no pun intended) of FdL's point.

FdL

2008-06-08, 10:22 PM

Typing *hug* could never come even close to the coldest hug between people v.v

Pocketa

2008-06-08, 10:54 PM

Typing *hug* could never come even close to the coldest hug between people v.v

I'm going to disagree. If the person that I like both online and offline typed anything remotely that sweet, I'd be on cloud 9 for days. It all depends on the person. An apology from somebody who never says sorry is worth more than one from somebody who is always messing up and making excuses. IMHO.

Still, I think the idea of meeting at an event is good. If you two go to something like E3 or something (sorry, mind blanking) and run out of conversation topics (believe me, it can happen even with somebody you click very well with) then you two can converse about whatever it is that is really cool at the event or challenge her to a round of DDR or something.

The thing you are very lucky about is the fact that your SO returns your feelings of affections. IMO, I think its' a whole lot better to have somebody that loves you online and to whom you return the same amorous feelings than to have somebody that in reality, will never, ever return your feelings of affections and has made it clear.

Rawhide

2008-06-08, 11:03 PM

Yeah. It's not that they "lie" per se, which they do. It's that in a best case scenario, it's "easy" and too comfortable pretending to have a relationship like that, a relationship that, sorry if it sounds harsh, you can turn on and off with the press of a button or the click of a mouse.

You can't just 'switch on and off' the emotions, you can't just 'switch on and off' the relationship. Just because you turn your computer does not make your or their emotions go away. Closing your chat program does not make the feelings of admiration, respect or love go away. Just as going home, to separate houses in a face to face relationship, does not make those same feelings and emotions go away.

FdL

2008-06-09, 06:09 AM

I'm not talking about switching off your feelings. I'm talking about "being there". Literally being there.

But from what I've read there's no point in arguing, those who have a different point of view than mine won't change it for the little I can say.

Rawhide

2008-06-09, 08:34 AM

Ah, now I see where you are coming from. I personally have avoided the term 'real life', because in this context it is too confusing, opting instead for 'in person' or face to face'.

I object to the notion that online relationships are any less real than face to face relationships, online relationships are just as real and have real life consequences. But as everyone, myself included, are saying, any kind of long distance relationship is different and much harder to maintain.

Typing *hug* could never come even close to the coldest hug between people v.v

While I disagree here, I accept that to you it might be. But to some people who really care about someone they have never met or who they have met but are currently far away from, some of the simplest kind words can really make a difference. Sometimes however, this can be bitter-sweet, as the xkcd comment covered, it can really hurt not being able to do more than type your intentions.

I'm not sure if that covered "being there", as I'm not sure what you meant by it.

Shadow

2008-06-09, 09:08 AM

Physical proximity does not define a relationship and not being within touching range does not mean the relationship is any less real. You can have all the same emotions and they can be shattered in just the same way.I will agree with that completely.
But I will also reiterate my personal opinion, which is:
The relationship is no less real. But we're talking about a romantic relationship which is very different. A romantic relationship needs a personal touch in my opinion. Period.

I agree with you on pretty much every point, it is more fragile and should be approached with caution, it is not something to rush into without considerable thought, and personalities that work online don't necessarily work offline (although they can and do). The only thing I'm disagree with is a matter of semantics, you're saying that online relationships are not real relationships, I'm saying that they are. Online relationships are just as real as those that develop face to face, they are just different to and challenging the traditional concept of a relationship.
You said it yourself.
We're arguing semantics.

I saw earlier a post differentiating a slight difference between LDR and OLR. Long Distance Relationships and Online Relationships.
I can't seem to find it at this moment because I could use some sleep to remove some of the barley and hops from my system, but I agreed with it completely.
Online relationships, regardless of how immensely we may feel them, are attributes of strong emotional connection, sure. But they are attributes of strong emotional connections of a friendly nature. Not of a romantic nature. Romance is a personalized thing in every single case. Something that personal cannot be the fruition of a non-personal medium such as the internet.
I'm saying that online relationships are friendly relationships, while long distance relationships are a completely different entity altogether; and may possibly be "real" relationships.
Remember that this entire debate was assuming a romantic relationship, and not merely a friendly relationship. If we disagree about this, while agreeing on everything else....?

Once you've met, it's a different thing.
That's my opinion.

If we still disagree on this, then I guess we'll just have to agree that everyone has their own opinions; or agree to disagree, as they say.

Solo

2008-06-09, 09:17 AM

The SHADOW

The Shadow!
The Shadow?
The Shadow.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Anyways, I shall contribute to the discussion my own tale of long distance/online relationships.

I knew a girl for several years purely through the internet, and we became good friends and flirted with each toehr a lot. I thought about askign her to become my girlfriend, but I couldn't help but feel that I had to see her in person if I wanted to get serious with her, and she agreed, so we were just freinds (iwth an interest in another) until I got accepted into college on her coast.

We met up after I had gotten settled down in college, found that we liked each other in person as well, and then decided to start a relationship.

My relationship with her is still mostly internet/long distance, but it only started after we met.

Don't know if that helps with your exact situation, though.

Rawhide

2008-06-09, 09:40 AM

Yes, semantics,

Noun: semantics
1. The study of language meaning
2. The meaning of a word, phrase, sentence, or text

[WordWeb.info]

You're saying that an online relationship cannot be a real romantic relationship (and perhaps semantics comes into play here too because romantic is...

Adjective: romantic
1. Belonging to or characteristic of Romanticism or the Romantic Movement in the arts
2. Expressive of or exciting sexual love or romance
3. Not sensible about practical matters; idealistic and unrealistic

Noun: romantic
1. A soulful or amorous idealist
2. An artist of the Romantic Movement or someone influenced by Romanticism

[WordWeb.info]

which definitely is possible, but I'll give you the benefit of the ambiguity) and I'm saying that all the same emotions, feelings and desires can be felt. An online relationship can be just as intense, just as intimate, just as passionate, in every way except physically. I'm saying that it is real in every sense of the word.

Pretty much the only thing I object to in your statements is the notion that somehow a relationship is not 'real' just because two people have never met face to face, to say that is to dismiss the strong, online romantic relationships many people have or have had as fake.

Player_Zero

2008-06-09, 09:49 AM

The SHADOW

The Shadow!
The Shadow?
The Shadow.

Pft. Been done. See: Cute, but ___ Thread. I know I'm the epitome of cool an' all, but you don't have go so far as to copy me. :smalltongue:

Also, to remain vaguely on-topic I am sticking with my original opinion: if you want a relationship then having one online isn't the best way to go about it.

Solo

2008-06-09, 09:52 AM

Pft. Been done. See: Cute, but ___ Thread. I know I'm the epitome of cool an' all, but you don't have go so far as to copy me. :smalltongue:

Just.... you..... get!

Also, to remain vaguely on-topic I am sticking with my original opinion: if you want a relationship then having one online isn't the best way to go about it.
Seconded, somewhat.

ps. Rawhide, if you read this, check your PM box and get back to me.

Calamity

2008-06-09, 09:53 AM

Also, to remain vaguely on-topic I am sticking with my original opinion: if you want a relationship then having one online isn't the best way to go about it.

Speaking from first hand experience, sometimes it's unavoidable... I was against online relationships until about a year ago.

Castaras

2008-06-09, 09:55 AM

Online relationship here. Only started though after we met IRL at the first UKitp meetup. I am too paranoid to start going out with someone I haven't met IRL. =P

Online relationships are not truly relationships. They're just not. They may possibly become so at a later time, but until that step is taken in person these individuals should be considered nothing more than fond friends with hope for more.

But is it an online relationship when you met in real life first, to find out you have "a spark", or something?

Ego Slayer

2008-06-09, 10:00 AM

Also, to remain vaguely on-topic I am sticking with my original opinion: if you want a relationship then having one online isn't the best way to go about it.
Did you not read what Zombie posted? >.< It depends on the people involved. If you or someone else is not cut out for it that's fine, but don't make the assumption that everyone else can't make it work either, because it's untrue. It can and has worked. :smallconfused: In my very opposite opinion, I personally dread the thought of starting a relationship offline.

Solo

2008-06-09, 10:02 AM

Player_Zero

2008-06-09, 10:06 AM

Did you not read what Zombie posted? >.< It depends on the people involved. If you or someone else is not cut out for it that's fine, but don't make the assumption that everyone else can't make it work either, because it's untrue. It can and has worked. :smallconfused: In my very opposite opinion, I personally dread the thought of starting a relationship offline.
So you're saying that it is better to live in an online bubble and try to spark a relationship despite the obvious risks there rather than to pull yourself together and try to meet people in the real world? Is that really better for you, or is it just easier?
http://www.crscientific.com/retort2a.jpg

Quincunx

2008-06-09, 10:10 AM

If I may interject, and to my astonishment, in defense of FdL:

Earlier he mentioned something about hating the delays in a chat program, the rudeness and the paranoia of having to wait several minutes for a response. At the time, I was miffed. However, now that I've put that together with this, I've realized that there are several little differences in the rules of online politeness and closeness compared to RL politeness and closeness, and FdL (for his own reasons) doesn't use the different standard for online interactions. They are always measured to the RL standard and always fall short of the RL standard. Most of us here have forgotten that there are different bounds of politeness or our RL interactions were always obeying the online rules before online existed (online, acting shy/coy/paranoid/hesitant is acceptable and normal).

That being said, I'm now married to someone I would not have dared approach in real life.

Ego Slayer

2008-06-09, 10:13 AM

Zero: Obvious risks? And I didn't say it was better... its just able to work for some people.

Why? A preference for the security an anominity of the interweb?
No, the need to really know someone before I feel comfortable enough for anything beyond a hug. I'm not a first-date-kiss kinda girl. :smallyuk:

Player_Zero

2008-06-09, 10:17 AM

As previously stated I am of the opinion that almost everyone lies over the internet, from gender and age to personality and appearance. The risk of an online relationship is deception.

Ego Slayer

2008-06-09, 10:31 AM

It's sad you think that... Maybe I'm just horrendously tired of hearing "the internet is dangerous." Old fear, man. Let go of the 90's. Yeah, there are creeps out there... there are also creeps outside of the internet. It's just a different kind of creepy. I see no difference between wasting time with someone in person who turns out to be a creep, to wasting time with one online. And I only know of one person who was lied to...

Player_Zero

2008-06-09, 10:37 AM

Well, I'm lying to you for a start.

And yes, I'm not a trusting or trustworthy person. I don't think anyone is particularly so. So, as sad as that may be, I'll keep my endless reserves of paranoia and dish them out whenever I feel the need to, cheers.

And as such I don't believe online relationships are so great.

Calamity

2008-06-09, 10:39 AM

@Ego: Couldn't agree more

As previously stated I am of the opinion that almost everyone lies over the internet, from gender and age to personality and appearance. The risk of an online relationship is deception.

One of the risks of any relationship is decpetion.

Player_Zero

2008-06-09, 10:44 AM

One of the risks of any relationship is decpetion.

Where is it more facilitated than the internet though? In real life you'd have to be lying to someone's face, whereas I can lie to whomever I want from behind a keyboard and get away with it quite easily online.

Solo

2008-06-09, 10:50 AM

Where is it more facilitated than the internet though? In real life you'd have to be lying to someone's face, whereas I can lie to whomever I want from behind a keyboard and get away with it quite easily online.

Is that the truth?

Ego Slayer

2008-06-09, 10:54 AM

Well, I'm lying to you for a start.
I'm not lying to you. Never have lied. :smallbiggrin:

Maybe I'm just mislead by this board where it's pretty much fact that a good number of us are good 'ol nice normal people... I'd know, I've met some of them, and I will be again soon. :smallconfused:

Telonius

2008-06-09, 10:56 AM

Every relationship has the possibility of lying involved, and some people are just as adept at lying in person as they are over the internet.

Then again, I do live in the Washington DC area. So bear that in mind.

Anyway, the key phrase should be, trust but verify.

Player_Zero

2008-06-09, 11:04 AM

Is that the truth?

Nothing I say is the truth. :smallamused:

I'm not lying to you. Never have lied. :smallbiggrin:
Oh? And how can I trust you?

Solo

2008-06-09, 11:07 AM

Nothing I say is the truth. :smallamused:

But... wait.... how can....DOES NOT COMPUTE!

Ego Slayer

2008-06-09, 11:13 AM

Oh? And how can I trust you?
Would you trust me any more if I said that to your face? :smallamused:

Solo

2008-06-09, 11:21 AM

Would you trust me any more if I said that to your face? :smallamused:

I can roll sense motive checks in person without the -20 penalty I get from electronic communication

Player_Zero

2008-06-09, 11:22 AM

Would you trust me any more if I said that to your face? :smallamused:

Yes. Because it'd be harder to lie to someone to their face. People have more compunctions about lying in real life, whereas I could quite happily go onto a message board and claim to be absolutely anyone I wanted to be online.

You seem to be saying that people lie to each other in real life just as much as on the internet. Which I don't believe is correct at all.

Ego Slayer

2008-06-09, 11:37 AM

I wasn't trying to make a point.

Tom_Violence

2008-06-09, 11:39 AM

The emotions that an online relationship can invoke are no less real than those from a face-to-face relationship.

Also, some people spend ages together, in person, before they realise that there is no 'spark' to their relationship.

I didn't manage to read the entirety of this thread, but here's my two bits anyway:

Yes, the emotions in an online relationship are as 'real' as in a real-life relationship, but that's not really the key issue. The issue, as I see it, is that online relationships and real-life relationships are fundamentally different. They are a different 'type' of relationship. What that means is that an online relationship can be great and fulfilling etc. etc., as an online relationship, following the rules, conventions and standards that govern that type of relationship. But I'm willing to bet that most people don't want to stay in an online relationship, and would rather change it into being a real-life one. That requires a change in the type of relationship that you're engaging in. Its like going from being friends to dating, or from dating to moving in together, and so on. The situation changes significantly. You stop only talking online to having actual face-to-face conversations, you see an awful lot more of each other, things like that. And its this change that can cause things to go either way.

Its a well-known idiom that you can never totally know another person. Knowing someone online probably gives you very little actual contact with them as a person - so many little bits of their personality remain hidden to you. Of course, in real-life vast tracts of someone's self is also inaccessible to others, but the point is that so much more is generally hidden online. Hence there is a much higher possibility that you'll discover something about the other person that you really don't like.

Ultimately, its all about playing the odds. And the odds are a lot easier to read in person.

You can't just 'switch on and off' the emotions, you can't just 'switch on and off' the relationship. Just because you turn your computer does not make your or their emotions go away. Closing your chat program does not make the feelings of admiration, respect or love go away. Just as going home, to separate houses in a face to face relationship, does not make those same feelings and emotions go away.

Hmm, I'd kinda disagree here actually. Especially if the feelings aren't really there (however that may be understood) in the first place. An online relationship for a lot of people is likely to have a lot less significance and importance to it - its kind of automatically assumed to be 'less real' from the get go. This drops a lot of barriers, and lets people feel emotions that otherwise they might not. It doesn't make the feeling less real (that wouldn't make logical sense), but it can take away the implications behind the feeling. You close your chat program and go back to your everyday life, in which the relationship may not factor at all.

This probably sounds a lot meaner than it actually might be. I'm not saying that most people consciously sit there and think "my heart's not in this, but I'll stick with it anyway". Rather I think its something more subtle that people can fall into because of the somewhat lessened status of an online relationship. It depends how much importance one puts into these things.

No, the need to really know someone before I feel comfortable enough for anything beyond a hug. I'm not a first-date-kiss kinda girl. :smallyuk:

You do know that that can happen quite easily in real-life as well, right? Its called 'getting to know people'. :smalltongue:

Player_Zero

2008-06-09, 11:45 AM

I wasn't trying to make a point.

I don't believe you. :smalltongue:

FdL

2008-06-09, 03:35 PM

In my very opposite opinion, I personally dread the thought of starting a relationship offline.

Ego, don't take this bad, but you are aware that what you said does sound at least a bit weird, right? And that it could be just taken as a testament of your particular shortcomings in socializing?
People meeting "in real life" is the normal thing, last time I checked.

If I may interject, and to my astonishment, in defense of FdL:

Am I indefensible? :s What's the point here? I don't remember us disagreeing strongly or you clearly expressing that you don't like me. But let's move on.

Earlier he mentioned something about hating the delays in a chat program, the rudeness and the paranoia of having to wait several minutes for a response. At the time, I was miffed. However, now that I've put that together with this, I've realized that there are several little differences in the rules of online politeness and closeness compared to RL politeness and closeness, and FdL (for his own reasons) doesn't use the different standard for online interactions. They are always measured to the RL standard and always fall short of the RL standard. Most of us here have forgotten that there are different bounds of politeness or our RL interactions were always obeying the online rules before online existed (online, acting shy/coy/paranoid/hesitant is acceptable and normal).

This is pretty weird to me to read. First because I really wouldn't think anyone actually gives any though to what I write here. So that's good.

And your is an interesting analysis. But it's still an ad-hominem argument.

It's true, I said that then because it annoyed me as one of the vices of online communication and chat. And at that time I found myself suffering the consequences of it.

Reading what you wrote, I think you're right, that the rules of politeness may be different online, if there's even any. I have a personal policy of not being different online than in person, so I'm clearly guilty of this. Call me what you want, but I still think that if you're engaged in a realtime communication with someone, you have an obligation of answering them in as little time as you can. Otherwise just don't do it. If you are going to have someone wait 20 minutes until you get a response, you might as well logout and write an email. Yes, I think it's rude, I don't care if anyone else does.

I also don't accept shyness/coyness/etc as a substitute for respect and politeness. What is "acceptable and normal online" are defects steming from the anonimity of the medium.

Still, the point about internet communication not having the same rules of politeness only reinforces my side of this bigger argument positing the artificiality of the medium versus real communication in real life. More later when I sort stuff in my head.

Edit:
Tom Violence put it pretty well, I agree with his post.

Basically, the thing is that in real life you are putting your face and your body into it. You're going to places, talking to people to their faces and staying to hear them talk back: you're taking risks. Online you're not taking any risks, so it's a too easy game to play. You're sitting in your chair, in the safety of your home, and that does have a big impact on what you do. You're just not putting any chips into it, not betting anything, unlike in person, when you're taking full responsibility of what you say, ultimately with your life.

It's obvious that not many people would do or say the same things than they do online when faced with real people.

PhoeKun

2008-06-09, 03:58 PM

You know what the problem with this whole argument is? Miscommunication (ironic, no?).

So let's set the record straight. There is nobody who really wants an "online relationship." But an "online relationship" is a different thing from a "relationship which uses the internet". Any real relationship is going to seek togetherness (and likewise, will be willing to wait and settle for what it can get until the timing is right. No rushing off and doing something stupid until all parties are prepared and comfortable with a shift in the dynamic), by which I mean a more physical relationship... by which I mean a relationship with two people in close physical proximity to one another. And even that sounds sexual. Sometimes I think the English language was designed to be one giant double entendre... :smallsigh:

*ahem* Anyway, my point is is that real people feel real emotions for each other and form real connections on the internet. Those of us who do would like nothing more than to "really" be with these people, not just in spirit but in body as well. Long distance relationships suck - we yearn for intimacy, which can often be difficult over great distances. But despite the difficulties (and if you're being paranoid, dangers) inherent to the system, you shouldn't decry it as false. Everybody online in a real, successful relationship will eventually do what it takes to reach each other and be indistinguishable from already supposedly "real" relationships. Where it starts and where it ends is up to the couple, and where they meet is entirely a matter of circumstance.

If two people meet online, fall in love, and spend the next two years getting to know each other on forums, e-mail, and IM programs, and then are able to make the leap to living with each other for another two years, how old would you say their relationship is? Are you really going to tell me it's 2 years, and not 4?

Tom_Violence

2008-06-09, 04:30 PM

If two people meet online, fall in love, and spend the next two years getting to know each other on forums, e-mail, and IM programs, and then are able to make the leap to living with each other for another two years, how old would you say their relationship is? Are you really going to tell me it's 2 years, and not 4?

That's all well and good, but there's still the fact that communication via forums, e-mail, IM programmes, telephone, etc. are significantly different to sitting down and talking to someone face-to-face. And those differences only become more and more important as time goes on. No matter how much two people get on over a distance, when they meet and start spending a lot of time in each other's company, things might change an awful lot.

PhoeKun

2008-06-09, 04:57 PM

That's all well and good, but there's still the fact that communication via forums, e-mail, IM programmes, telephone, etc. are significantly different to sitting down and talking to someone face-to-face. And those differences only become more and more important as time goes on. No matter how much two people get on over a distance, when they meet and start spending a lot of time in each other's company, things might change an awful lot.

Any change in the dynamic of a relationship can potentially cause its downfall.

But that's irrelevant. The problems inherent to a system of communication do not make relationships formed through that system illegitimate. By all means, people should be as careful as necessary to keep themselves safe when dealing with others in any type of situation, but that caution or skepticism should not turn into a derision of others.

Pyrian

2008-06-09, 05:25 PM

If two people meet online, fall in love, and spend the next two years getting to know each other on forums, e-mail, and IM programs, and then are able to make the leap to living with each other for another two years, how old would you say their relationship is? Are you really going to tell me it's 2 years, and not 4?If consenting adults want to claim their relationship is however old, I'm not going to argue with them, which is why I haven't jumped into this thread much. But if it's ME, that's a two-year relationship preceded by two years of close friendship. Call me shallow if you like, but if I can't kiss you, you're at most a friend.

NinjaHippy

2008-06-09, 05:28 PM

Agree to disagree? No seriously, people have different preferences. I, personally, view physical proximity as the only thing that really separates a dating relationship from just being close friends, and the thought of only communicating with somebody online doesn't sound like much fun at all.

However, I recognize that there are others who do not have the same views on relationships as myself, who would perhaps be more comfortable with the anonymity and distance of an online relationship, at least in the early stages. While I, personally, would not be content with an online relationship, others perhaps would be.

Although I think we can all agree that after a certain point, we would prefer our relationships to be close, personal, and nearby.

Tom_Violence

2008-06-09, 05:45 PM

Any change in the dynamic of a relationship can potentially cause its downfall.

But that's irrelevant. The problems inherent to a system of communication do not make relationships formed through that system illegitimate. By all means, people should be as careful as necessary to keep themselves safe when dealing with others in any type of situation, but that caution or skepticism should not turn into a derision of others.

I didn't say it makes them illegitimate, nor did I realise that anyone here was the subject of derision. What I am saying is that an online relationship is largely defined by the system of communication, as not only does it completely limit what is possible within that relationship, it also allows for things that wouldn't be possible in a face-to-face relationship (hiding aspects of one's personality, often entirely unintentionally, for example). This means that the 'change in the dynamic' can often be a lot greater than one might expect.

A couple that has known each other face-to-face for 4 years has known each other in that context for that long. A couple that has known each other online for years but never met has not known each other face-to-face at all. Which couple do you reckon has a better understanding of how their partner acts in face-to-face, everyday life, all other things being equal? And given that we've agreed that the face-to-face life is what we all want, I vote that the first couple has the better odds at long-term success, cos they're more used to living with each other in this 'end game' scenario.

FdL

2008-06-09, 06:19 PM

To put it in simple terms, I really don't know if you can know someone "the way it matters" if you have never seen them in person. Much less for a romantic relationship...

PhoeKun

2008-06-09, 06:22 PM

Cobra_Ikari

2008-06-09, 06:27 PM

Hmm. I've seen one downfall with my online relationships so far.

...all the early stages of the relationships get covered online. You know, the flirting and getting to know each other. By the time we meet in person, I just seems to be an explosion of physical affection...and then we go back to the early stages when we're back home. :smallfrown:

FdL

2008-06-09, 06:37 PM

The Rose Dragon

2008-06-09, 06:40 PM

I am wary of online relationships, mostly. They can turn out to be scams, men, non-Asian or even Amish.

OK, they are probably not Amish, but you get the point.

However, since the bulk of my interactions happen online, and there are some great people online, so I happen to fall for people online... a lot, seemingly. And since there are little to no Turkish girls online, if my feelings are reciprocated, all the interactions are bound to be online.

I used the word online five times in two sentences. Not quite enough.

Rawhide

2008-06-09, 07:06 PM

The issue, as I see it, is that online relationships and real-life face to face relationships are fundamentally different.
(I made a clarification change, correct me if I am wrong with your meaning)

But I'm willing to bet that most people don't want to stay in an online relationship, and would rather change it into being a real-life one. That requires a change in the type of relationship that you're engaging in. Its like going from being friends to dating, or from dating to moving in together, and so on. The situation changes significantly.
(I've left out some of the rest of that paragraph, opting for what seemed the important points, the rest was not ignored however)
I agree, most people in an online relationship eventually do want to change the dynamic by meeting each other face to face, just as most people who date eventually want to find someone they can move in together with, then, more often than not, later marry. They are all fundamentally different stages. The difference is not in how 'real' the relationship is however, it is merely a different formula.

Hmm, I'd kinda disagree here actually. Especially if the feelings aren't really there (however that may be understood) in the first place. An online relationship for a lot of people is likely to have a lot less significance and importance to it - its kind of automatically assumed to be 'less real' from the get go. This drops a lot of barriers, and lets people feel emotions that otherwise they might not. It doesn't make the feeling less real (that wouldn't make logical sense), but it can take away the implications behind the feeling. You close your chat program and go back to your everyday life, in which the relationship may not factor at all.

This probably sounds a lot meaner than it actually might be. I'm not saying that most people consciously sit there and think "my heart's not in this, but I'll stick with it anyway". Rather I think its something more subtle that people can fall into because of the somewhat lessened status of an online relationship. It depends how much importance one puts into these things.
I'll clarify this one, I'm saying that if the feelings are really there, you can't just switch then on and off. If the feelings aren't really there, then it is no different from being in a face to face relationship when your feelings aren't really there. Someone can say goodnight to their boy/girlfriend and return to their everyday life, persisting with the relationship even when their heart is not in it, even though they are in a face to face relationship. All of these problems are by no means inherent to online relationships and existed well before online relationships were even possible.

---

Basically, the thing is that in real life you are putting your face and your body into it. You're going to places, talking to people to their faces and staying to hear them talk back: you're taking risks.
True (except for the people that don't take risks)

Online you're not taking any risks, so it's a too easy game to play.
Not true (except for the people that don't take risks)

First, let me clarify those remarks. On or offline, you are dealing with real people (always remember that there is a real person behind the keyboard with real feelings and real emotions). You can feel for someone just as much who you have never met face to face as you can offline, you can hurt or be hurt by a word just as much online as off. You can risk just as much emotionally online as you can offline. Just because it might be easier to not take risks, doesn't mean that those that do take risks are any less valid. The rest of your points seem reasonable.

Trog

2008-06-09, 07:27 PM

*tosses in two copper pieces*

Online relationships, long distance relationships and in person relationships are not the same thing. Obviously there is a certain measure of being distant from one another (only reading type in e-mail, forums, PMs, IMs, etc. - talking with one another on the phone all the time but seeing one another only rarely - being with one another for extended periods of time, insert other distinction here but you get my point I think). Does the distance negate the relationship? Well no. But it does hold the relationship at arm's length if you will. You can only advance so far in each. Farthest in in-person relationships where you see one another on a pretty regular basis.

The key to advancing the relationship is to try (in that oh-so careful way we do) to make some sort of future plans together. Whatever that may be. Whatever you both decide. Having that helps you to grow closer. Possibly. It might be that the possibility of growing closer cannot happen for whatever reason. Often financial. Or having to do with obligations. Or perhaps even disinterest after a while.

Should you not pursue online relationships? That's really up to you. Each person is different and has different needs. So I'm not sure it's for anyone to say.

But I see no reason more informal relationships cannot be started first with the hopes of something more. After all isn't that what people always say when they talk about being friends first? :smallconfused:

NinjaHippy

2008-06-09, 07:29 PM

... :smallsigh:

Maybe I don't have much of an argument, because I have met and been with my girlfriend in the much vaunted "real world", but for proximity reasons it's still a mostly online relationship, and sure I don't want it to stay that way, but damn it, it's real!

I give up. Go ahead and consign me to failure, or whatever each individual here wants to do. I don't even think we're having the same conversation...

No no no no NO. Sorry if I miscommunicated... nobody's consigning you to failure, and nobody's demeaning your relationship (or at least, nobody's intending to...). If that's the way anybody came across, let me be the first to say I'm sorry.

I believe Internet/long distance relationships can work. I truly do; I've seen it happen (even in the 90s, when everyone was spooked about who you might run into on the Internet). My aunt and uncle met online and they've been married for over ten years and have two children.

I think you hit the nail on the head when you said "For proximity reasons it's still a mostly online relationship, and sure I don't want it to stay that way, but damn it, it's real!" Relationships can work over long distances, now more than ever thanks to cell phones, Skype, and teh Intarnetz. Distance shouldn't have to be a deterrent to being with the person you want to be with, but I'm sure we'd all agree that we'd rather have a face-to-face relationship. Distance doesn't make relationships any less real, it just makes them more difficult.

Especially with gas at $4/gallon... *mutter mutter mumble gas prices bah humbug mumble mumble.

Edit:
*tosses in two copper pieces*

Online relationships, long distance relationships and in person relationships are not the same thing. Obviously there is a certain measure of being distant from one another (only reading type in e-mail, forums, PMs, IMs, etc. - talking with one another on the phone all the time but seeing one another only rarely - being with one another for extended periods of time, insert other distinction here but you get my point I think). Does the distance negate the relationship? Well no. But it does hold the relationship at arm's length if you will. You can only advance so far in each. Farthest in in-person relationships where you see one another on a pretty regular basis.

The key to advancing the relationship is to try (in that oh-so careful way we do) to make some sort of future plans together. Whatever that may be. Whatever you both decide. Having that helps you to grow closer. Possibly. It might be that the possibility of growing closer cannot happen for whatever reason. Often financial. Or having to do with obligations. Or perhaps even disinterest after a while.

Should you not pursue online relationships? That's really up to you. Each person is different and has different needs. So I'm not sure it's for anyone to say.

But I see no reason more informal relationships cannot be started first with the hopes of something more. After all isn't that what people always say when they talk about being friends first?

My name is NinjaHippy and I endorse this message.

FdL

2008-06-09, 10:04 PM

Of course, I can understand LDRs. Those are relationships which are hindered by distance. And they are more difficult, but it's about people trying to make it work. Which doesn't always, the stress it can put can wear it out. After all, ¿is not being in love about wanting to be near the loved one?

But even then, this should be even more obvious to those in LDR relationships aided by internet, it's a poor substitute of the real thing.

So yeah, I make a clear distinction between LDRs and purely online relationships, which are those that I personally don't like and to some extent I don't believe in.

In an LDR, an intention to make it against these conditions, and the fact of meeting every now and then does make it more of a relationship. But then again, it lacks the commitment and nurturing that a relationship needs, and I think that it can ultimately cause it to thin and tire people in it. Again, because not being together is against the very concept of a romantic relationship. It's going against your basic human insticts, I'd stretch out to say.

Tom_Violence

2008-06-10, 06:50 AM

(I've left out some of the rest of that paragraph, opting for what seemed the important points, the rest was not ignored however)

Ditto. :smallwink:

I agree, most people in an online relationship eventually do want to change the dynamic by meeting each other face to face, just as most people who date eventually want to find someone they can move in together with, then, more often than not, later marry. They are all fundamentally different stages. The difference is not in how 'real' the relationship is however, it is merely a different formula.

Indeed, that's pretty much exactly my point. The main issue I'm raising is that people may well underestimate the extent to which the two are different kinds of relationship, and the completely different behaviours that go on in each.

I'll clarify this one, I'm saying that if the feelings are really there, you can't just switch then on and off. If the feelings aren't really there, then it is no different from being in a face to face relationship when your feelings aren't really there. Someone can say goodnight to their boy/girlfriend and return to their everyday life, persisting with the relationship even when their heart is not in it, even though they are in a face to face relationship. All of these problems are by no means inherent to online relationships and existed well before online relationships were even possible.

True indeed. My point here though is that I fear it may be significantly more likely that the feelings aren't really there in an online relationship.

Basically, my overall point that chances are you'll know a lot less about someone if you only know them online. Sure, you can know a bunch of facts about their personal history, their likes and dislikes etc., but that pales in comparison to knowing how they hold a face-to-face conversation (which will always be a different thing to a phone conversation), or knowing how they react to different situations, or really knowing anything about them at all beyond what they tell you. And since you know a lot less about them, its natural for people to kind of 'make up' the rest in some way, with the obvious resulting danger being that when you actually do meet the person they might be someone slightly different to what you've got in your mind.