by Max Quay
DISCLAIMER: If you have to ask whether or not you are “in a relationship” then, I am sad to say, you are certainly not in one.
There exists a phenomenon which has plagued maturing hearts since at least the dawn of the internet age, but has certainly been problematic for many years prior, perhaps even since the day when cave people learned how to whistle at the attractive body parts of another.
I will call this phenomenon the “Half-Relationship.” It is half because it is almost always a romantic relationship that is defined by only one half of the people involved (for the sake of concision I will be discussing monogamous relationships).
The half-relationship is that long gradient between singlehood and partnership. Half-relationships range in definition from a mistaken one-night-stand, two friends with romantic complications (including but not limited to: sex, kisses, awkwardly long hugs, sharing of deep secrets, occasional hand-holding, etc.), silent yet always-obvious crushes, and so on.
It is this shaky definitional ground that defines the half-relationship’s undefined existence. Life is not discrete, and surely one should not expect it to be. However, the widespread toxicity of these phenomena has a tendency to cause deep insecurities for those involved and they probably deserve addressing.
While the silent admirers often know exactly what needs to be done to assuage their romantic anxiety (i.e. just say something, you wuss), and truly their silence is a symptom of the same cause, it is the openly negotiated half-relationships that deserve the most attention.
In a half-relationship there are two people which split roughly into two categories. This split is along the line of what meaning is to be derived from the relationship. One party inevitably finds meaning from the relationship in the form of stability and comfort, a place where their feelings can be explored and flourished. The other part is “fine with the way things are” because “what would it be worth to alter it.”
Condescension aside, it is never a crime to desire one’s feelings to be fulfilled. Nevertheless, there is no clear villain in such a pair; both parties are most likely idiots, and suffer accordingly. This being said, the party wanting more is always left to grapple with the static party’s definition of the relationship, or so it would seem.
Still the question is: why? Why not just make the leap into definitional commitment? Perhaps it is a victim of language’s fallibility; no “label” could ever justify the unique relationship.
“Facebook Official” is the laughable manifestation of internet culture that has the odd ability to screw with the “real” lives of internet-using lovers. Facebook has made the boyfriend/girlfriend commitment a matter of bureaucracy, red-tape that undermines the emotional experience.
It is as frustrating to budding couples as a marriage license to the engaged, sparking such conversations that at best mock a post-Derridean discussion like: “What does girlfriend even mean?.” Thus, would-be couples find themselves debating the necessity of defining their relationship according to Facebook’s narrow labels.
Could it be, however, that Facebook has been scapegoated into this bureaucratic demonism? I mean to ask: Why does a public announcement such as Facebook give lovers pause, and could it be that there is a deeper insecurity that produces such scorn for “labels”?
This is where I’d like to assert that the half-relationship is most certainly not an issue of linguistics, of a definition that is too narrow, but instead is an issue of trust and commitment, two things that my contemporaries and I are deeply hesitant of.
The label is not the problem. My friends, it is our own decrepit hearts that cause one to gasp in excitement and fear at the possibility of committing oneself to another and creates a less-than-healthy amount of cynicism. By now, I hope I have you wondering about prescription, about how we can heal our hearts from the uncertainty that our skeptical intellects created.
To those happy with the undefined nature of their relationship, I have only this to say: take a leap. Risk the cliché, all that is assumed by employing labels, and love yourself for the benefits or losses you incur.
You never know until you try. Either that, or let the begging party go. I don’t need to tell you about having your cake and eating it. Rigid decisiveness doesn’t always have to be dangerous in its creation of limitations.
To those who are standing at your would-be-lovers step, with your heart in your hands, the issue is not as simple. First, ask, just to make sure, why you want what you want. While I’m certain that your desire began innocently, your yearning at this point may have become an aberration that encompasses not a small amount of self-delusion.
Look at yourself, hopeless romantic, and ask if your pursuit isn’t a reassignment of blame, that it hasn’t simply become a way for you to displace the unhappiness in your life. He/she doesn’t want a relationship with you. Is that the end of it, or do you find yourself blaming your object of affection for the ice cream that fell from your cone on your way out of the MDR?
Wonder for a minute whether your life is actually incomplete without this other person’s commitment. Chances are you’ve let this flaky person speak for the universe, let your half-relationship tell you that the entire world must be against you because you are unfulfilled. Maybe this weekend you should set down the huge romantic gesture you have planned (You know, the one that is finally, this time, going to sway her/him to return your affection), and remind yourself that unrequited love is a speed bump and not a brick wall.
In the end, my advice to both parties is the same. Relationships, like language, are only effective when trust is involved, and half-relationships are allowed to circumvent trust. So when you hear “boyfriend” or “girlfriend,” maybe it isn’t a chokehold. Maybe, just maybe, it is a symbol of trust. Furthermore, the same goes for being “single.” Define yourself by it and subsequently, then, trust yourself.
Maybe proclaiming that I am or we are “this” isn’t suffocating. Generalities are necessary to keep the particulars exhilarating. Cliché is not the enemy, how you experience it, on the other hand, very much is. Besides, Valentine’s Day is just a commercial holiday, right?
mquay@capital.edu
