Dating One Person At Once vs Multiple - Before Commitment

[Miguel1]

16 minutes ago, Xonas Pitfall said:

If at some point there’s only one person you really want to focus on, then focus on them.

This is the issue. It is not a matter of ”if”. It is a matter of conscious intention.

[Xonas Pitfall]

2 minutes ago, Miguel1 said:

This is the issue. It is not a matter of ”if”. It is a matter of conscious intention.

Interesting. Wouldn't you say there have been periods in your dating where you wanted to focus on a singular person? (Or at least "narrow" down to 2-3?) Perhaps I’m different here, but after getting to know several people, I usually have a very clear sense of who I want to focus on getting closer to. If I don’t have that feeling, then I simply don’t.

I suppose a useful step here is learning to recognize that feeling, but you might just be different in that regard.

Edited 1 hour ago by Xonas Pitfall

[Natasha Tori Maru]

1 minute ago, Miguel1 said:

Of course small talk is part of it. But should it last for the majority of the date? Or just the initial moments?

I am not trying to put you down, the fact that you even think so is a problem. I am just genuinely confused.

Notice, feelings are part of your truth. Not the whole truth.

Of course it's just the first few moments - but if it never gets beyond smalltalk, or smalltalk is that person's substance, then you know it's not the person for you. 

You are putting me down, you just can't see it. You are condescending. I don't care if you don't claim it. It still happened.

Never said feelings are the whole truth. 

[Joseph Maynor]

You can perceive the "creep vibe" in certain people if you are attuned enough.

[Joseph Maynor]

Pick up artistry people are nuts lol.  

[Natasha Tori Maru]

I am not sure if you are consciously aware of what you are doing @Miguel1 . Your rhetoric has a recurring tendency to sidestep the user's actual point by moving the conversation onto a conceptual frame where you have already established the terms. You are dismissing through reframing. Not engaging with what is said.

You did this to Xonas in your exchange, and with myself. 

It's this strange move toward epistemic positioning: you take the role of the person who identifies the deeper principle, correct the users framing, distinguishes the percived “real” issue from the superficial one, and explain the other's misunderstanding. This is subtly patronising and is not beneficial for the type of relational discussion you want. You position everyone as a subject to be corrected.

I know this isn't your intention.

But it is what is happening.

Edited 42 minutes ago by Natasha Tori Maru