Single in the City: The Situationship Dilemma

Situationship

Noun

A romantic or sexual relationship that is not considered to be formal or established. (Oxford Dictionary)

An issue that I'm sure weighs on all of us to some extent is our relationship status. Single, situationship, it's complicated, dating someone (or even a few people), hooking up, lack of hooking up, relationship, fresh breakup. Whatever it is, it weighs on us.

The situationship, I would say, is the most insidious of all. Not quite single, not quite together: all the intimacy of a relationship without actually committing to anything. And more often than not, somehow capable of creating all the emotional complications of both. 

And, there isn't just one kind of situationship:

The Mutually understood Situationship

Both people understand they are not in a formal relationship, and they're perfectly okay with this. There is communication; no one is secretly waiting for anyone to change their mind.

The Accidental Situationship

It starts as casual dating. Nobody makes the first move to define it for whatever reason. Six months to a year later, they're going through the motions of a relationship with absolutely no label or commitment. (God help any of you currently in this)

The Unequal Situationship 

One person wants a relationship. The other doesn't. They continue on anyway because one person hopes the other will change their mind. (Spoiler alert: they rarely do. And a lot of Jeff Buckley will be consumed)

The Convenient Situationship

Both people enjoy the emotional and physical benefits of a relationship while deliberately avoiding the expectations or obligations associated with one.

I am primarily interested in the final three. The situationships of doom and despair.

So, What are We?

I’ve been watching too much Sex and the City. Not productive of me, I know, but as a journalist I’m just going to call it research. Carrie Bradshaw's infamous column got me thinking. A lot. Since Candace Bushnell's book was first published in 1996 and later adapted into the TV show we all know and love, dating, sex, and relationships have not gotten any less complicated, confusing, or downright weird. In fact, if anything, I'd say it's gotten even stranger (and yes, I’m aware I wasn't even alive at this time, let alone on the 90s/00s dating market). We now have dating apps, the god-awful concept of the situationship, and the minefield that is being left on delivered, read receipts, snap scores, Instagram following lists, and the soft launch.

It seems we’ve all just collectively settled into this new era of dating (or not dating) as the norm. When I’d say it's anything but normal (I’m allowed my opinion). But just because it's ‘normal’ doesn't mean it isn't hellish. Somewhere along the line, we conceptualised and put a name to relationships that aren't relationships; we invented the situationship.

Every month a new research study comes out: people getting married later than ever, more marriages ending in divorce than matrimonial harmony, less dating, Gen Z having the least sex of any generation, and so on; the dirge continues. And then every so often we get hit with articles such as Vogue's ‘Is Having A Boyfriend Embarrassing Now? ’ By Chanté Joseph, which has the effect of a nuclear bomb dropping on the internet. 

I think my point is that in the digital age, this rubbish economy and the other unique socio-economic situations my generation have found themselves in, human connection has been warped, put off, sanitised, commodified and digitalised.

Maybe most people in their early twenties and older aren't having sex because they still live in their childhood bedrooms, and who wants their sneaky link bumping into their parents? And maybe a good majority of the ones who are are now viewing sex and relationships as a trivial and emotionless experience, when I think a lot of us can agree that sex, regardless of what intentions we enter into it with, is something that, on the very least a biological level, is something that creates emotion, attachment, and bonding. Are we now fighting human nature? The very hormones that run through our systems? In a culture where sex is the most instantly available it has ever been, why are we having less sex? Perhaps it's nothing to do with lack of interest in the act. Instead, we’ve simply become disconnected from the intimacy that makes sex meaningful.

Have we as a society become better at consuming sex mindlessly than experiencing intimacy in all its forms?

I think it would be naive of me not to raise my hand and point a finger directly at porn. Gen-Z is the first generation to grow up with essentially unlimited access to porn, and I think we have to at least confront the question of what this could possibly have done to the way we view relationships and intimacy. Porn has turned sex into entertainment. You might tune into Family Guy one night, Rick and Morty the next, and who knows, the following night some hardcore porn. But what porn fails to depict is that sex is fundamentally, for many, a deeply intimate act requiring communication, vulnerability, and emotional responsibility. Porn is purely sex stripped down to its most easily consumable, non-complicated form. Ringing any bells? Is the situationship not just relationships also stripped down to their most consumable, uncomplicated, and emotionally non-committal form?

I think we need to ask what happens when the way a generation consumes sex, learns about sex, and is often first exposed to sex is through porn? What does this do to our expectations and understanding of intimacy?

I'm not sure. I'm rambling on. 

My point is that this whole situationship concept feels weird. It feels exploitative. They often follow some variation of no to low commitment, no clear boundaries, no to very little communication on exclusivity, no end goal, no stability or security, or just the motions and performance of a relationship with absolutely no labels. How much of ourselves are we giving up in these situations? How many of our emotional needs are being unmet? Why are we doing relationship stuff without the label? 

Yes, I hear some of you mutter, ‘it's just a label’. But is it? Is it really just a label? 

Or is it a verbal agreement of commitment, mutual care, and consideration? A promise of a shared present and future? And what do we lose when we remove these aspects or, at the very least, somewhat divorce them from dating (or in the case of the situationship, probably more appropriately, not dating)?

Yes, sometimes things are blurry. When you start seeing a person, or five, things sometimes aren't off the bat formalised, discussed openly, or even emotionally clear. And in some ways the situationship is inevitable. 

I don't necessarily have a critique of that form of situationship in early dating, other than I believe communication, honesty around intention, and clarity are important.

What I do take issue with is when this temporary state extends for months upon months, into years. 

A situationship can work. There, I said it. If two people genuinely want something casual, non-exclusive, or undefined, and they have actually communicated that to each other, I’m not sure there is a problem to solve. Not really my business, is it? The problem starts when “undefined” means something completely different to each person. When one person thinks they’re casually dating and the other thinks they’re slowly building towards a relationship. When one thinks they’re exclusive and the other thinks they’re absolutely not. When someone says they don’t want a relationship but still wants the emotional intimacy, sex, and companionship of one. At that point, the lack of a label isn’t the issue. The lack of agreement is.

One quick doom scroll on TikTok and I come across at least one video of a girl around my age lamenting her situationship: It's been two years, they've met each other's parents, they sleep together, share friends, and spend significant chunks of time together, and yet, yet nothing. Literally nothing. The situationship. 

To be honest with you, it was actually a phone call with an old friend that got me thinking about situationships. 

She called me a few days ago. Before I knew it, a quick catch-up turned into a three-hour unpacking of her relationship, or lack thereof. She had met a man last year, hit it off extremely quickly: long dates multiple times a week, staying at each other's places most days, introduced into each other's social worlds, naturally sleeping together too. She expected, and reasonably so, with the connection going so well, he would surely, surely, bring up the R word soon. 

But he didn't, and six weeks turned into three months and then the seventh month finally hit. Naturally, she tried to explain this timeline in her head- maybe he takes commitment very seriously; he clearly had feelings for her? I mean, he would kiss her goodnight, and they’d fall asleep in each other's arms. They had shared their deepest secrets, fears, and traumas with each other. She’d even met his mum and stepdad.

 This man had even dropped the L bomb. 

That was when she saw a text on his phone from a mysterious “Kris”. She asked him lightheartedly who this was, expecting “a friend”, “someone on my uni course”, “we work together”. But instead he says confidently, “just a girl I'm talking to”. I can only imagine my friend's reaction as “The fuck do you mean? A girl you're talking to?”

So he tells her, “Yeah, well, it's not like we’re together, is it?”

And with those words, the last seven months came crashing down. She thought they were something or at the least building towards something. Turns out she had been the victim of the situationship from hell. 

Now, I'm sure a lot of you reading this right now are having the same reaction I did: why didn't she speak up sooner, why were these conversations surrounding expectations, exclusivity, and commitment not had way before the over half year mark?

That’s the million-dollar question, right? Why are people putting up with this? 

This is what seems to happen in a lot of situationships. Behaviour, words, and status never seem to match up, or even make logical sense. 

Perhaps for her, “I love you”, quality time and integrated social worlds had already answered the “what are we” question. 

Are we as a generation scared of commitment, or do we simply want to have our cake and eat it too?

Maybe it is commitment we’re scared of. Or maybe it’s the vulnerability that comes with it. Because asking “what are we?” means admitting that you want an answer. And once you’ve asked, you have to be prepared for the possibility that the answer isn’t the one you wanted.

Now, all of us are different. Some of us love no strings attached sex, hookups, situationships. Some of us are serial cheaters. Some of us simply want to play the field. Some of us believe in dating to marry. Some of us just want a lighthearted bit of fun. Some of us are straight sociopaths. Some of us are Samantha Jones and some of us are Charlotte York.

I'm not shaming or judging anyone. Like at all. Have sex with who you want. And as many people as you want. Seriously. But communicate. I think that's what I'm saying. 

Gen-Z is officially the loneliest generation ever. Perhaps that loneliness is what makes so many of us tolerate these forms of relationships that cause us so much suffering. We don't want to communicate wants and needs, boundaries, or relationship status for fear of being difficult or making things uncomfortable, afterall we now live in an age where dating is pretty much online shopping (just open up an app and swipe away). Perhaps people are now feeling replaceable, or are in fact too easily and readily replaceable? Is it easier to be silent and stay in a situationship for some people than it is to verbalise the dreaded "What are we?"

What if the problem isn't that she didn't have a label? What if the problem was that she thought they had the same understanding when they didn't?

Maybe all along the question isn't “what are we?” 

Maybe the question is “what do you think we are?”

A situationship isn't inherently bad. Neither is casual sex. Or non-exclusive dating. 

But our romantic and sexual connections are rarely as simple as good or bad. They require communication, even when that communication is uncomfortable. Because the absence of a label isn't necessarily what makes a situationship so painful and confusing; it's the absence of shared understanding.

So if you take one thing from this, maybe it's this: ask “what are we?” Even if you’re terrified of the answer.