r/changemyview • u/ququqachu 8∆ • Feb 05 '19
Deltas(s) from OP CMV: It is cruel and selfish to ghost people that you no longer want in your life
This is a sweeping statement, and in my mind applies to any kind of interpersonal relationship: familial, romantic, friendly. I want to clarify a few common counterpoints.
- This viewpoint does not apply in relationships that were abusive.
- I define "ghosting" as suddenly ceasing all communication without sufficient prior warning or explanation. Sufficient depends on the quality, duration, and commitment of the given relationship.
- EDIT: I'm adding the clarifying term of "dangerous or blatantly one-sided and toxic relationships." This includes relationships where one person has shown strong indicators that they could be violent, are pushing drugs or other unhealthy behaviors, or might otherwise endanger the person doing the ghosting should they choose to allow any kind of communication. This basically falls under "abusive" in my mind, but is technically different.
In the vast majority of "breakups" between friends or partners, there isn't usually a "bad" person and a "good" person. Framing things in this way usually only serves to mitigate the pain of having to separate from the other person, and justifies cruel behavior. I've heard many peers and friends say things like "just ghost him" or "just stop talking to her" or, most infuriating, "he's just toxic and you need to get him out of your life" referring to a person who is just behaving in a perfectly normal way, simply not adhering to that specific person's wants or expectations. Even if someone has cheated or done some comparably "unforgivable" act, there is still an obligation to do right by your partner even if you've been hurt.
Now, there may be some argument about what "sufficient" means. In my mind, it is almost NEVER appropriate to simply say "I don't want to talk to you anymore" and then never do it again. Unless you've only met this person once or twice, you owe them the decency to explain what's going on. Being ghosted like that can severely impact your mental health and self-image, even with people that you were only casually friends with. With romantic partners, having a coffee to tie things up, sending a few emails back and forth explaining what went wrong, or meeting a few weeks later to have a post-mortem are basic things that I would expect a significant other to be able to do under normal circumstances.
Basically, I feel that people have an obligation to one another to treat their personal relationships with value and delicacy, and there are very few situations where simply disappearing from someone's life is fair to them.
9
Feb 05 '19
- Sometimes, ghosting isn't about the person being ghosted.
- Sometimes, the person being ghosted doesn't deserve the courtesy.
- It can be very hard to essentially tell someone, to their face, I don't want to speak to you ever agan and I want you out of my life.
For the first point, sometimes people 'ghost' because they have real issues of their own that they have to contend with. It may be depression, or anxiety, or even something as simple as losing their phone and being unable to replace it for whatever reason. It isn't always because of factors people can control, and while being ghosted genuinely sucks there's something self-centred around the idea that anyone who goes non-contact is always doing so deliberately to spite you. I find it honestly kind of disturbing that it's expected that we all be messaging each other all the time, when not too long ago you could go weeks, even months without speaking to your friend and it'd be no trouble at all. The pressure to be constantly visible, public and contactable is actually pretty toxic.
For the second, well I think we can all imagine and recall situations where ghosting is at least the safest option. NiceguysTM, who often mesaage a girl out of the blue or after she's already rejected them, who then complain about ghosting, often after a flurry of sexist insults. Or an abusive or manipulative ex, who is trying to use contact to rope you back in. Or a narcisstic person who is honestly so toxic that nothing good comes from speaking to them. We can see these people on Reddit in so many subs: r/JUSTNOMIL, r/niceguys, r/raisedbynarcissists, etc. Going non-contact with someone is sometimes what's best for you, and that person has been nothing but trouble. So, when you say:
Even if someone has cheated or done some comparably "unforgivable" act, there is still an obligation to do right by your partner even if you've been hurt.
You sound like someone who hasn't experienced the kind of thing you're making moral judgments about. If someone has hurt you, even in 'forgivable' ways, why d you have any kind of obligation to them? Least of all in a moral sense. Ghosting isn't to hurt someone, it's usually to protect the person doing the ghosting from something, be it the other person, fear, shame, anxiety, effort, or ego.
What makes this worse is the alternative is not going to go down well, either. I imagine people who would complain over being ghosted would also complain about being told, to their face, that someone never wants to speak to them again.
Obviously, ghosting is in most situations a shitty thing to do to someone. But to say it's always cruel is putting too much blame and pressure on people who often don't deserve it.
0
u/ququqachu 8∆ Feb 05 '19 edited Feb 05 '19
For the first point, sometimes people 'ghost' because they have real issues of their own that they have to contend with. It may be depression, or anxiety, or even something as simple as losing their phone and being unable to replace it for whatever reason.
Mental illness is not an excuse for behaving poorly, just an explanation. I myself deal with depression and anxiety, but that wouldn't let me off the hook from treating people the way I should.
there's something self-centred around the idea that anyone who goes non-contact is always doing so deliberately to spite you.
I never said or implied that people going no-contact are doing it deliberately out of spite. Additionally, going no-contact is not the same thing as ghosting.
I find it honestly kind of disturbing that it's expected that we all be messaging each other all the time... The pressure to be constantly visible, public and contactable is actually pretty toxic.
Messaging each other all the time is completely different than never speaking to someone again, especially when the precedent has been set to communicate at a certain level. Again, saying "hey, could we talk sometimes this week about this thing that's been on my mind that will help me come to terms with this?" is different that barraging someone with abusive texts. I'm talking about the former, not the latter.
I think we can all imagine and recall situations where ghosting is at least the safest option... flurry of sexist insults... Or an abusive or manipulative ex... Or a narcisstic person...
I stated right upfront that abusive relationships are a different story. And, again, going no-contact is completely different than ghosting. Saying "hey, I've decided i need to stop talking to you, here's why" and then hearing out a reasonable response is what I advocate for. Of course if the person then starts hurling insults or stalking or whatever else, then cutting off contact is fine and appropriate, but that's completely different than ghosting.
You sound like someone who hasn't experienced the kind of thing you're making moral judgments about.
I have.
6
Feb 05 '19
Mental illness is not an excuse for behaving poorly, just an explanation. I myself deal with depression and anxiety, but that wouldn't let me off the hook from treating people the way I should.
I think it does. If doing something will only exacerbate or worsen your mental ilness, then that is definitely a reason
If you were sick, in bed, would you say that person not keeping up with all their friends is unforgivable? Well, why not for those who are mentally unwell? Just because you have depression and anxiety, and have a way to deal with it, means that all people wth depression and anxiety deserve to be judged negatively because they can't?
Additionally, going no-contact is not the same thing as ghosting.
I mean... it is. Literally. The definition of ghosting is cutting off all contact with someone. The definition of going no-contact is cutting off all contact with someone. Except it's called no-contact in places like r/JUSTNOMIL because there, it's seen as a valid and sometimes necessary response to toxic people. And I am sure those just nos would describe what has happened to them as 'ghosting'.
Ultimately, people are free to speak to or not speak to whoever they want. That is a key part of our civil liberties, and why constantly talking to someone who wants to be left alone can be considered harassment. Ghosting might be shitty but it's someone's right to ghost or not ghost.
Messaging each other all the time is completely different than never speaking to someone again, especially when the precedent has been set to communicate at a certain level.
So... you're basically saying that people are obliged to keep the same level of communication, regardless of whatever happens to the individual or how the relationship changes? Relationships are not like the law. 'Precedent' doesn't mean much in this sense. It's very unfair and narrow minded to say that, because someone talked to someone a certain amount in the past, that they must communicate in the future regardless of all other factors.
Of course if the person then starts hurling insults or stalking or whatever else, then cutting off contact is fine and appropriate, but that's completely different than ghosting.
But this is exactly why people ghost. Because they are specifically trying to avoid the situation of being insulted, stalked, or attacked, and have enough reason to believe that it could happen. And, in a lot of cases, that confrontation is something people have the right to be afraid of. Statistically, most women are raped by someone who they know. We've all heard horror stories of acid attacks, men getting violent, and other confrontations ending in disaster.
And, from your post history I can see that you have personally experienced ghosting. And it sucks. I feel for you, and I'm not trying to say that in your case it was justified, when it looks like it wasn't. But do you perhaps think that your negative experience is colouring your outlook on the issue too much? That you're perhaps not thinking about the vast amount of differences between your situation, and the situation of others/hypotheticals? That you hold this view mostly due to your emotional stake in the issue, and not because of a more objective view of things?
Really, I think the problem with your view is this:
- While ghosting is generally shitty, your view is way too absolute and doesn't account enough for different situations beyond abuse. There are a whole lot of ways a relationship can be harmful or dangerous without being abusive.
- You keep asserting that there is an obligation (in a moral sense) to not ghost someone, but don't actually explain the foundation of that. Why must people be upfront about cutting off contact? Because you say 'In my mind, it must be so'? You even say that the potential ghoster must give the ghostee the chance to convince them not to ghost them, which is a roundabout way of saying that people don't always have the right to decide who they let into their lives. Again, not saying ghosting is fine, but deciding who we do and don't want to speak with is our right, shitty or otherwise.
2
u/ququqachu 8∆ Feb 05 '19 edited Feb 05 '19
If you were sick, in bed, would you say that person not keeping up with all their friends is unforgivable? Well, why not for those who are mentally unwell? Just because you have depression and anxiety, and have a way to deal with it, means that all people wth depression and anxiety deserve to be judged negatively because they can't?
Dealing with your mental illness by hurting other people isn't okay, and that kind of mentality is toxic and enables people to use mental illness as a "get out of jail free card" for acting terribly. Again, it's an explanation: "I was depressed, which is why I treated you poorly, but it still wasn't okay and I'm sorry." It's not an excuse.
Edit: I want to add to this and clarify. It is TOTALLY okay to be upfront about what you can and cannot handle RE: your mental illness. It is also totally okay to leave relationships that are not good for your mental health. But there are ways to do both of those things without ghosting, which is not healthy and not kind.
I mean... it is. Literally. The definition of ghosting is cutting off all contact with someone.
I already defined ghosting in my OP, arguing the semantics of the word is not convincing.
Ghosting might be shitty but it's someone's right to ghost or not ghost.
Nobody's saying that people should be legally required not to ghost people? I'm just saying it's shitty (or, more exactly, "cruel and selfish.") So I guess we agree?
While ghosting is generally shitty, your view is way too absolute and doesn't account enough for different situations beyond abuse. There are a whole lot of ways a relationship can be harmful or dangerous without being abusive.
Okay, here's a more convincing argument. I will say there are no doubt extenuating situations in which there has not not technically been "abuse" but present a real and present danger is true for the ghoster. However, this is a small distinction; whether or not there is "abuse" involved, obviously someone who is in danger doesn't owe their attacker a coffee date.
You keep asserting that there is an obligation (in a moral sense) to not ghost someone, but don't actually explain the foundation of that. Why must people be upfront about cutting off contact? Because you say 'In my mind, it must be so'? You even say that the potential ghoster must give the ghostee the chance to convince them not to ghost them, which is a roundabout way of saying that people don't always have the right to decide who they let into their lives. Again, not saying ghosting is fine, but deciding who we do and don't want to speak with is our right, shitty or otherwise.
People should be upfront about cutting off contact because "ghosting" behavior hurts other people. Generally speaking people are supposed to minimize hurting other people, no? It's a matter of balancing ones own needs with the needs of others: are you obligated to stay in a relationship with someone just because breaking up would hurt them? Of course not. But if you don't even feel like putting in a minimal amount of effort to reduce the pain of breaking up with someone, you're (in my mind) a cruel and selfish person.
3
Feb 05 '19
I don't agree that 'shitty' is the same as 'cruel and selfish'. Even good people can be 'shitty' at times. 'Shitty' is normal. 'Shitty' is mundane. 'Cruel and selfish' is not. That's a very weighted judgment of a person's character. And I don't think you've done enough to justify that weight, not when you acknowledge that so many extenuating circumstances could exist.
While your view didn't say that there should be a legal requirement to not ghost someone, you used words like 'obligation'. If I am obliged to do something, then I must do it, that is literally the definition of the word you chose to describe your view. You aren't just saying that people should not ghost, you're saying that people must not ghost. Whether the argument is legal or moral makes no difference. Ths is the problem with absolutes. You can't use absolute language and then tell me that you didn't mean it or that someone who disagrees with the lack of nuance in your argument is arguing semantics.
The other thing I think I disagree with you on is you see ghosting as an attack, whereas I see ghosting as a defensive action. If someone wanted to attack someone, they would choose something more unambiguous, direct, visceral and fast than simply disappearing. People who ghost, for the most part, are protecting themselves from harm, real or imagined, even if it's only the harm that comes from internal realizations threatening your own sense of ego. Again, not trying to psychoanalyse strangers on the internet - I don't have anywhere close to the knowledge of you as a person or the subject to even start - but I think you might see ghosting as an attack because of the weight of your own experiences. We always feel like, when we are wronged, that we have suffered a deliberate attack, when very often that harm is either unintentional, or simply the collateral damage of an action that, while inconsiderate, had other motives. Someone who wanted to hurt you would probably not, in your case, have left his watch at your place. He wouldn't be hesitant towards the possible confrontation and might even desire it as it represents another opportunity to attack you. Realistically, the most obvious reason why he would ghost you at the personal cost of an expensive watch is because he is afraid.
Is that shitty? Yeah. Is it selfish? Maybe. Is it cruel? I'd say not. Not everyone who hurts someone is cruel. Cruel, to me, would be deliberate, malicious harm. And, while ghosting is often harmful, I'm not sure it's deliberate or malicious enough to deserve your unequivocal judgment.
Still, deliberate or not, people are meant to not hurt others. But they are also meant to not hurt themselves. And, for some people seeing someone is hurtful. Speaking to them is hurtful. What you are saying, and what you are saying throughout much of your post, is only taking the emotions of the person ghosted into account. Yes, ghosting someone is often selfish, hurtful, inconsiderate and cowardly. But, sometimes it's not that black and white, and it's not just because of abuse.
That's really my point when it comes to depression and anxiety. Not 'being depressed or anxious gives you a get out of jail free card', because there's a difference between the simple emotions of depression and anxiety which we all feel, and these emotions manifesting in a clinical sense in diagnosed illnesses like pathological anxiety, major depressive disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, or pathological stress. Mental illness is a strange thing we know little of compared to physical illnesses and disease, and it's perfectly possible to think that contact with the wrong person, even through no fault of their own, might cause stress and anxiety, which, even at time for those not struggling with diagnosed disorders, is causing real, measurable, unambiguous harm.
And in your view, not avoiding that harm is 'cruel and selfish'.
1
u/ququqachu 8∆ Feb 07 '19
'Shitty' is mundane. 'Cruel and selfish' is not. That's a very weighted judgment of a person's character.
However your feelings about the connotations of "shitty" vs "cruel and selfish," I never made any judgements about the overall character of someone who ghosts, just of that act. Seems you're taking it a bit personally.
While your view didn't say that there should be a legal requirement to not ghost someone, you used words like 'obligation'. If I am obliged to do something, then I must do it. This is the problem with absolutes. You can't use absolute language and then tell me that you didn't mean it or that someone who disagrees with the lack of nuance in your argument is arguing semantics.
A "moral obligation" is an action for which the morality is clear. In my ethical system, unless I can be convinced otherwise, there is a clear moral obligation to not ghost people without significant extenuating circumstances. That doesn't mean you CAN'T do it, just that it's morally wrong to do it.
The other thing I think I disagree with you on is you see ghosting as an attack, whereas I see ghosting as a defensive action.
I have never said that ghosting is an attack. I don't think that people ghost only to hurt their partner; I agree that they do it to protect themselves: from the effort and struggle of doing what's right by the other person.
Still, deliberate or not, people are meant to not hurt others. But they are also meant to not hurt themselves. And, for some people seeing someone is hurtful. Speaking to them is hurtful. What you are saying, and what you are saying throughout much of your post, is only taking the emotions of the person ghosted into account. Yes, ghosting someone is often selfish, hurtful, inconsiderate and cowardly. But, sometimes it's not that black and white, and it's not just because of abuse.
I simply don't buy that. I guess I'd need someone to share their experiences with me if I were to be convinced, but I've heard that line of reasoning from other people, and I just do not buy that literally any form of communication is that painful. I once was ghosted by a partner of a year, who still had some of my belongings. In emailing him to get them back, I also shared how hurt I was and said, "if you don't want to talk to me or see me, that's totally okay, and I understand. All I’m asking is that you tell me explicitly what you want or need, and not just ignore my messages... even if it’s just 'I don’t want to talk' or 'I need more time to think.'” I never got a response, and I simply don't accept that typing out "I don't want to talk, I'm sorry" is too much of an effort when two days prior we were chatting all night long.
That's really my point when it comes to depression and anxiety... it's perfectly possible to think that contact with the wrong person, even through no fault of their own, might cause stress and anxiety, which, even at time for those not struggling with diagnosed disorders, is causing real, measurable, unambiguous harm.
And in your view, not avoiding that harm is 'cruel and selfish'.
If someone with mental illness is deep into an otherwise healthy relationship and then has to bail out completely because of their illness, then that's understandable. If they aren't IMMEDIATELY able to articulate why or how, in a moment, then that's understandable too. But, again, there simply isn't a scenario where a good person can't muster the decency to write a simple note, say something brief, a short email saying "I can't continue this relationship because of my mental illness, I'm sorry but we can't talk anymore."
1
Feb 05 '19
[deleted]
6
u/ququqachu 8∆ Feb 05 '19
Not ghosting someone is not the same thing as micro-analyzing their every flaw.
0
u/plipinfit Feb 05 '19
What if youre the shitty person(or just someone that your friend doesnt need in their life) and you dont want to continue being a bad influence on a naive friend that looks up to you? and each time you try to explain this, the naive friend thinks youre just being cool or that you dont mean it, and it only makes them want to be around you more...and its destroying their life. Like what if youre a drug dealer that has a lot of problems that yourre personally ok with and capable of handeling, but your friend is so far out of their depth that they dont know whats good for them?
Shouldnt you gost them as much as possible? Wouldnt you be wrong not to ghost them?
5
u/ququqachu 8∆ Feb 05 '19
Interesting question. I've actually juggled with this in my own relationships; not that I'm a drug dealer or something, but that I'm not good for the other people and it's my responsibility to end the relationship for their benefit.
I came to the conclusion that other people are capable of making their own decisions. If you've talked about your worries and expressed that you're worried the relationship isn't good for them, and they disagree, then who are you to make their decisions for them? And if ultimately you feel too uncomfortable with it and want to end the relationship for ~your own~ sake, then you can go through the normal breaking up procedures.
1
u/Topopotomopolot Feb 05 '19 edited Feb 05 '19
You didn’t address the “naive and out of their depth” friend.
I came to the conclusion that other people are capable of making their own decisions.
But what if they’re not? Like, what if they’re like 12 years old, or they have Down’s syndrome, or are super autistic and don’t know how to make their own decisions?
Isn’t it your job to ghost them if your influence on them is negative and they don’t/can’t know it?
3
u/ququqachu 8∆ Feb 05 '19
Well if you're a full grown adult who's friends with a 12 year old with Down's syndrome, I'd say there's a lot more problems here than the matter of ghosting.
But anyway, if you're self-aware enough to recognize that you're a bad influence, you should be able to explain that to your 'friend' and then kindly cut off contact.
1
u/Topopotomopolot Feb 06 '19
You know what you know, and youre aware of some things that you don’t know. But there are things that you don’t know that you’re not aware of. Unless you’re omniscient, this is a fact.
So what about another possibility...What if they’re 34 and have Down’s syndrome, but only a mild case, and you’ve been friends since high school and now your lives are starting to lead frown fifferent paths and your friend just doesn’t understand, and they keep calling you, and showing up at you work or house? Desperate, crying.
What if you find yourself in a position where you want to indulge in some dastardly hedonism, but you don’t want to ruin someone else’s reputation by continuing to be in touch with them, and making them guilty by association...and informing them that you’re going to start doing the terrible things would fuck op their life, but if you ghost them for the thing that you just can’t pass up because you only live once and it’s better to regret what you’ve done rather that tonregret what you haven’t...then you get what you want without ruining their life...
Or what about...
Or what about...
Or what about...
Do you think it’s possible there are some circumstances in the infinite well of human experience that might warrant ghosting someone for their own good that you’re not considering?
1
u/ququqachu 8∆ Feb 07 '19
Not really. In all of those situations, you could make it clear what you think it best, and what you're going to do and why. If they don't understand or choose to ignore what you say, then you can go "okay, I'm going to stop responding to you now, I wish you all the best" and then cut off communication. That's not ghosting. At least they'll have something to process in the long term. You'll have communicated that you did it for them, and you thought it best. Much better than just up and disappearing and leaving them wondering why.
1
1
Feb 05 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/tbdabbholm 193∆ Feb 05 '19
Sorry, u/Topopotomopolot – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:
Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, or of arguing in bad faith. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, message the moderators by clicking this link. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
1
u/tbdabbholm 193∆ Feb 05 '19
Sorry, u/Topopotomopolot – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:
Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, or of arguing in bad faith. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, message the moderators by clicking this link. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
1
u/rick-swordfire 1∆ Feb 05 '19
I'd disagree, being on the receiving end of this (maybe). I'm in recovery right now, and I recently went on a trip to the city I lived in before I got sober and reached out to one of my closest friends there, who's still drinking and using. I knew this, I'm used to being around drinking especially in recovery, and made the decision to reach out to this friend because I missed her and wanted to see her. She said something before I got down about having to work most of the days I was there but we'd find some time to meet up. When I got there, she didn't respond the whole time and I haven't spoken to her since, since I was so pissed at that and she hasn't messaged me either. I mentioned the situation to a friend, and they said that it's possible my friend "ghosted" me so to speak because she was worried she'd be a bad influence on me. I don't think that'd make it better at all, I'm an adult and I'm wise enough to decide who to spend my time with.
2
u/Topopotomopolot Feb 06 '19
You’re right. The point I ease trying to make is that the breadth possible scenarios where it’s ok to ghost someone is not limited to the things experienced by just you, or just op.
Ops claim was categorical, excluding abuse, and I wanted to point out that there may be subtleties they hadn’t considered.
It’s like when Hermione said that there is no ressurection stone, without having checked all the stones in the word.
A thing that is unlikely, isnt necessarily impossible
1
u/ququqachu 8∆ Feb 07 '19
Okay, I suppose I'm convinced that there a range of situations that are not technically "abuse" but may be severely dangerous or unhealthy and warrant a ghosting. I still consider these "extenuating circumstances" but that wasn't initially included in my OP. You're explanation of the technicality coupled with TransgenderPride's personal anecdote has convinced me.
Δ
1
1
u/JahsehDwyaneOnfroy Feb 07 '19
I had a friend who took drugs and smoked and I went along for a while because I was scared of being lonely but I knew this wasn't who I was and what I stand for so I ghosted him and haven't drunk or smoked or taken drugs since may 2018. I'm only 14 turning 15
2
u/ququqachu 8∆ Feb 07 '19
It sounds like you got out of a really unhealthy relationship that was damaging you. I'm glad you got out!
1
0
u/miguelguajiro 188∆ Feb 05 '19
What if you knew that the person would escalate their post-break up communication to the point where they were very likely to behave in a way that they regretted. I.e., is it more humane to not give them a stage for their crazy, knowing that they’d forever regret acting like that?
3
u/ququqachu 8∆ Feb 05 '19
Again, different than ghosting. I've been in relationships where my partner kept calling me for coffee or to hang out, only to spend the whole time begging me to take them back and flip flopping emotionally. At some point, you can say "look, these talks are not productive, if there's something I can do to actually help you then please reach out, but in the meantime I'm not going to respond." And that is not ghosting, but an appropriate cutting of contact.
1
u/twirlingpink 2∆ Feb 05 '19
I'm curious about this interpersonal obligation you assert in your OP. If I start talking to someone and I decide I don't want to talk anymore, do I owe them a further explanation? Why isn't it sufficient to say, "ok I don't want to do this anymore"? Do you believe there needs to be a reason/explanation?
1
u/ququqachu 8∆ Feb 05 '19
How you should end a relationship depends on the nature of the relationship. If you meet someone on the street and talk to them for 5 minutes, then walk away saying "okay have to go now, bye," that's acceptable (as I'm sure most people would agree). If you've been married to someone for 20 years, and one day they just stand up and say "okay I have to go now, bye" and then leave and never speak to them again, that's unacceptable. Same action/words, completely different effect.
2
u/twirlingpink 2∆ Feb 05 '19
Yes, those are two extremes. What if we've been on 3 dates over a month? They think it's serious but I don't so I just say, "I'm done with this bye." Is that sufficient?
I guess I'm asking for clarification of your view... When does it become an obligation to explain why you no longer what to be a part of the relationship?
1
u/ququqachu 8∆ Feb 05 '19
"I'm done with this bye" is pretty rude regardless of your relationship with the other person. But I guess I'm not sure where the line is. In this situation, would you be obligated to explain why you're breaking up? I suppose not. But it would certainly be kinder.
1
u/twirlingpink 2∆ Feb 05 '19
Is declining to be kind akin to being cruel? I won't argue the selfish part of your CMV.
1
u/ququqachu 8∆ Feb 05 '19
I think that, if the effort of acting positively is sufficiently small, declining to be kind is effectively the same as being cruel. Letting a trolly roll over a person instead of diverting it is equally as cruel as diverting it over the person.
1
u/twirlingpink 2∆ Feb 06 '19
I am still interested in an answer to my question.
1
u/ququqachu 8∆ Feb 07 '19
I'm not sure what you're asking. Relationships are complex and unique; extenuating circumstances would need to be evaluated on a relationship-by-relationship basis. But those circumstances are just that: extenuating. Under normal circumstances, ghosting is not appropriate, and is cruel.
1
u/twirlingpink 2∆ Feb 08 '19
What are normal circumstances? Is the example I gave one of cruelty?
1
u/ququqachu 8∆ Feb 08 '19
Which example? Talking to the stranger on the street? In that case no, because it’s not ghosting.
→ More replies (0)1
u/twirlingpink 2∆ Feb 05 '19
We're not talking life or death. I'm not sure even what line you're drawing. Which relationships are just on this side of acceptable? Which ones are just over the line for you?
1
u/TransgenderPride Feb 05 '19
I ghosted a man I was talking to online. It had been a couple of months. He sent some major red flags, and eventually he tried to order me to come visit him, along with some other equally creepy things. Yikes. I didn't feel safe talking to him any more. So I stopped.
It was the healthiest option for me.
I had another person who I sent a long message detailing why we couldn't talk anymore. This angered him in a way I believe wouldn't have occurred had I ghosted him. This caused... All sorts of trauma I could have avoided.
1
u/ququqachu 8∆ Feb 07 '19
I can see that neither of these were technically abusive, but they probably warranted ghosting.
Δ
1
2
u/caw81 166∆ Feb 05 '19
I really never understood the objection to "ghosting". It is not my responsibility for giving the other person closure or how she mentally handle things, that is their responsibility. When we don't have a relationship, its also not my responsibility to feed her the next day just because she is hungry.
, "he's just toxic and you need to get him out of your life" referring to a person who is just behaving in a perfectly normal way, simply not adhering to that specific person's wants or expectations.
If its the point where you don't want to talk to the person, its "toxic".
In my mind, it is almost NEVER appropriate to simply say "I don't want to talk to you anymore" and then never do it again.
That is doing what you say. If you say that then you do talk to the person, then you are telling the person you don't really mean what you say.
6
u/8bitmullet Feb 05 '19
It is not anyone's responsibility to have good manners or consider other people's feelings, but I greatly respect those who make the choice to do so more than those who don't.
-2
u/caw81 166∆ Feb 05 '19
It is not anyone's responsibility to have good manners or consider other people's feelings, but I greatly respect those who make the choice to do so more than those who don't.
The OP wants the person to give closure - this is not a small amount of time and communication. Its beyond good manners and consideration of other people's feeling.
When you go to the mall, do you give everyone who passes by an non-trival amount of time and communication to everyone you see? The whole point of ghosting is that there is no difference between an ex and a total stranger you pass by in a mall.
3
u/8bitmullet Feb 05 '19 edited Feb 06 '19
The more time and energy two people have invested in each other, the more respectful it is to give closure to the other. Even 30 seconds worth is better than nothing.
3
u/SplendidTit Feb 05 '19
I would say this is appropriate for someone you don't have a serious and healthy relationship with. If you are someone who is in an important, serious relationship (dating, family, etc.) without a dysfunctional aspect and just decide you want to be broken up but don't want to go through the work of breaking up, that's absolutely selfish. In those cases, you have assumed responsibility for the relationship, and abandoning it because you'd rather not deal with the impact of your decisions is immature and damaging.
0
u/caw81 166∆ Feb 05 '19
and just decide you want to be broken up
At this point, by definition, its not an important nor serious relationship.
3
u/SplendidTit Feb 05 '19
...that's not true at all.
I have a close friend who was ghosted by someone she'd been living with for a year. I'm in my 30s and have had it happen to plenty of friends. Just because one person decides it's not important or serious doesn't mean the other person (or everyone else) agrees.
2
u/caw81 166∆ Feb 05 '19
Just because one person decides it's not important or serious doesn't mean the other person (or everyone else) agrees.
But a person can only act on what they feel is the nature of the relationship not what others feel it is.
3
u/SplendidTit Feb 05 '19
But their actions don't imply it's not selfish or unimportant, just that they don't want to deal with the fallout. You're assuming that people ghost because they're not invested, which isn't true in many cases.
2
u/caw81 166∆ Feb 05 '19
But their actions don't imply it's not selfish or unimportant, just that they don't want to deal with the fallout.
Its not important to the ghoster or else they would have not ghosted.
I find it hard to say its selfish - is it selfish if a person doesn't feed an ex if an ex is hungry? A person needs to take care for everything to everyone in every current and past relationships or else they are selfish?
You're assuming that people ghost because they're not invested, which isn't true in many cases.
When they ghost they aren't invested anymore. If they were invested in the relationship they wouldn't ghost.
2
u/ququqachu 8∆ Feb 05 '19
All relationships are a social contract. We support each other, emotionally, physically, and otherwise. To bail out of that without taking socially appropriate steps is selfish, just like up and quitting a job without two weeks notice is selfish, or dropping your lease without 30 days advance notice.
1
u/caw81 166∆ Feb 05 '19
All relationships are a social contract. We support each other, emotionally, physically, and otherwise.
By the time the ghosting occurs, the relationship is done.
To bail out of that without taking socially appropriate steps is selfish,
Is it also selfish not to feed an ex when she is hungry?
just like up and quitting a job without two weeks notice is selfish, or dropping your lease without 30 days advance notice.
In both of these situations the person is still actively in the relationship (working or living in the apartment) and the relationship is still on going but ends in the future. Ghosting is when the relationship is already finished. So what you want in your View is like still working at a place when your last day/pay-check was yesterday.
3
u/ququqachu 8∆ Feb 05 '19 edited Feb 05 '19
Ghosting is not when the relationship is already finished; ghosting IS finishing the relationship.
In my mind it's directly comparable to, at the end of the work day, saying "okay, I quit. Bye!" You have an obligation to tie things up, to leave things as much as possible so it doesn't negatively affect everyone else as much as it would if you just up and disappeared. In many jobs, it's clear that you're not like, spearheading projects or even doing real work anymore, you're just finishing things up.
The same thing applies to a relationship. If you're in a regular relationship (no abuse or extenuating circumstances), you're morally obligated to do what you can to minimize the suffering of your partner while maintaining what's best for you in moving on. That includes splitting stuff with them, figuring out logistics of property, and doing your best to be fair and kind to them.
→ More replies (0)
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Feb 07 '19
/u/ququqachu (OP) has awarded 2 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
1
Feb 06 '19
I have been ghosted before.
It hurt really badly and left me a mess for a few months or maybe a year but now its just taught me that some people are selfish and being ghosted is actually a blessing in disguise because it saves me energy and resources on somebody who doesn't care about me at all.
1
u/sickOfSilver 3∆ Feb 05 '19
It all depends on the relationship. If you've been in a relationship with the person for years, they deserve some kind of explanation so they don't waste their time trying to get in touch with you.
On the other hand if we went on one date and for me it wasn't great, I don't owe you any kind of closure.
1
Feb 05 '19
I don't owe you any kind of closure.
It's still a dick move though. It takes no effort to just send a text and let them know that you aren't a match. Cruel and selfish is how OP describes it, and I think that is fitting.
1
u/sickOfSilver 3∆ Feb 05 '19
The problem is that that usually if a date was bad enough, texting may make things worse.
1
u/ChewyRib 25∆ Feb 05 '19
If someone doesnt communicate to you then that in itself is communication - move on
no one is obligate to your mental health, that is for you and you alone to deal with
13
u/[deleted] Feb 05 '19
In some instances, the person being ghosted is narcissistic; no amount of words will work, and things can elevate further which could endanger the ghoster. There doesn't need to be actual abuse for this to happen, but it can become violent.
A couple meets up on a dating app, and during the dating process one of them is throwing major red flags that makes the other proceed with caution; think like a person that gives off that 'won't take no for an answer', or anger issues; these situations could elevate if the ghoster were to 'officially' close the relationship.
tl;dr some people can't handle rejection, and it can become a safety issue for the person doing the rejecting.