286 replies to this topic

[Bx2]

Over the course of my nearly a decade of online games, this has been an issue that has seemed relevant on every site. I will admit to having one in past, but generally I do not approve of them. Realistically, I feel that the people involved will most likely not actually have any flourish from it. However, with that being said, I have known of two relationships that have grown out of online relationships. In the first, the couple dated in real life for roughly two months, before calling it quits. In the other, the two were in an online relationship for nearly two and a half years before the man proposed to the woman involved. That happened a few years ago, and as far as I know, their marriage is still holding strong (the woman moved to the man's state).

[Feral]

There isn't a way to have an online relationship that stays online, in my opinion. At one point you have to meet in real life because people are not the same.

That being said, I did meet my soulmate online /pauses for awwwwws/ and we are very happy together. But we did meet each other in real life and it was definitely a necessary step for our relationship.

[Foxer]

I'm not ashamed of the fact that my boyfriend and I met online. We've been friends for six years, using first a writing forum (where we initially met), then MSN, and since we've been together, Skype to keep in contact. The forum where we met is a very small and close-knit community. We all know each other's names, what goes on in our respective lives, and we're not afraid to share our various joys and hardships together. My boyfriend and I have maintained a steady and prosperous relationship for two and a half years, and since we started dating, we've been physically together for just over a month. The first meetup was six months into the relationship and lasted 8 days. The second was just this December gone and he came to visit me, my friends and my family for three weeks.

Yes, there are difficulties, and yes it will never have the same depth as being physically together, but that doesn't mean we can't love each other and plan a future together. Furthermore, that very same forum where we met has seen numerous other "online" couples come together. One of these couples got married, moved together and now have a little daughter together. Another of these couples have moved in together and we're waiting to hear of the engagement.

Don't think that I am advocating online dating or the websites that go along with it. I was very sceptical and also very cautious when approaching this relationship. Many try and fail. Many trawl dating websites hoping to find a match, but those are mostly fruitless. What made me so certain was this: I was not lonely or desperate, and nor was he. We had not just met and decided we needed to be together, we were not rash or brazen about any of it, but took things at a quiet and steady pace. Neither of us were actually looking for a partner when we realized we liked each other, and neither of us were fooled into thinking we were in love by the mad feelings we felt. We both knew that love took time, and was a choice and a level of maturity reached together. Respecting that, we took things slowly.

Yes, the majority of internet relationships don't work out, yes it's difficult and yes a lot of the time it fails because either the people involved weren't mature enough to cope with the situation, or rushed into it, feeling they needed a partner to make them complete.

But when it does work out, and when things are right, it can be the most rewarding of relationships. I cannot think of a time when my boyfriend has ever taken me for granted, and I doubt he would any anything different about me.

<3

[imishyou]

Bad for me. We need physical contact. I really don't get how online relationships would work. I don't think you can actually call them relationships at all anyway.

[Foxer]

Bad for me. We need physical contact. I really don't get how online relationships would work. I don't think you can actually call them relationships at all anyway.

My primary love language is physical touch and I have survived two and a half years of long distance. Don't read me wrong, I'm not saying I wouldn't rather have my boyfriend here with me, but that doesn't mean I couldn't possibly survive without his being physically near me all the time. It's a fallacy of logic, that line of thinking, as there are plenty of people who don't particularly need physical contact to have a satisfying relationship with their partner.

As far as your fallacy about an online relationship not being able to be called a relationship, let's look at what couples do together.

Talk? My boyfriend and I use Skype to talk with each other every day. About three times a week we switch on our webcams and talk like that. We read books and articles to each other, use Synctube to watch stuff together, or he gives us a countdown and we both hit play on a movie at the same time. We write stories together using Google Docs, play together on a Minecraft server and use our Steam accounts to play other multiplayer games. He had flowers delivered to me on valentines day, and I got one of his friends to deliver a book and some chocolate to him. Heck, we even have webcam dinner dates when the fancy takes us. And yes, many long distance couples use the phone, Skype or webcams to be intimate with each other.

No, it's not the same, and yes the alternative would be preferable, but how is that not a relationship? All the right activities, thoughts and feelings are there, we have the same problems, arguments and everything else. Tell me why I can't be in a relationship with my boyfriend using the amazing technology available to us today?

[Frizzle]

You need a bit of cock in ya.

[ShadowLink64]

You need a bit of cock in ya.

Eventually, yeah, but to start off it's not too necessary depending on who you are.

[iargue]

My primary love language is physical touch and I have survived two and a half years of long distance. Don't read me wrong, I'm not saying I wouldn't rather have my boyfriend here with me, but that doesn't mean I couldn't possibly survive without his being physically near me all the time. It's a fallacy of logic, that line of thinking, as there are plenty of people who don't particularly need physical contact to have a satisfying relationship with their partner.

As far as your fallacy about an online relationship not being able to be called a relationship, let's look at what couples do together.

Talk? My boyfriend and I use Skype to talk with each other every day. About three times a week we switch on our webcams and talk like that. We read books and articles to each other, use Synctube to watch stuff together, or he gives us a countdown and we both hit play on a movie at the same time. We write stories together using Google Docs, play together on a Minecraft server and use our Steam accounts to play other multiplayer games. He had flowers delivered to me on valentines day, and I got one of his friends to deliver a book and some chocolate to him. Heck, we even have webcam dinner dates when the fancy takes us. And yes, many long distance couples use the phone, Skype or webcams to be intimate with each other.

No, it's not the same, and yes the alternative would be preferable, but how is that not a relationship? All the right activities, thoughts and feelings are there, we have the same problems, arguments and everything else. Tell me why I can't be in a relationship with my boyfriend using the amazing technology available to us today?

Because thats just friendship.

[Sweeney]

Because thats just friendship.

How would you know? Every interaction you've ever had was an attempt to manipulate somebody.

[redlion]

Because thats just friendship.

'Just' friendship?

Here's a thought: most successful relationships are founded on a friendship. Or a dowry. Or parental prearrangement. But that's not the point, the latter two are going out of style.

[Nymh]

My primary love language is physical touch and I have survived two and a half years of long distance. Don't read me wrong, I'm not saying I wouldn't rather have my boyfriend here with me, but that doesn't mean I couldn't possibly survive without his being physically near me all the time. It's a fallacy of logic, that line of thinking, as there are plenty of people who don't particularly need physical contact to have a satisfying relationship with their partner.

As far as your fallacy about an online relationship not being able to be called a relationship, let's look at what couples do together.

Talk? My boyfriend and I use Skype to talk with each other every day. About three times a week we switch on our webcams and talk like that. We read books and articles to each other, use Synctube to watch stuff together, or he gives us a countdown and we both hit play on a movie at the same time. We write stories together using Google Docs, play together on a Minecraft server and use our Steam accounts to play other multiplayer games. He had flowers delivered to me on valentines day, and I got one of his friends to deliver a book and some chocolate to him. Heck, we even have webcam dinner dates when the fancy takes us. And yes, many long distance couples use the phone, Skype or webcams to be intimate with each other.

No, it's not the same, and yes the alternative would be preferable, but how is that not a relationship? All the right activities, thoughts and feelings are there, we have the same problems, arguments and everything else. Tell me why I can't be in a relationship with my boyfriend using the amazing technology available to us today?

I did not want to participate in this debate, and still don't, but -

Wow

You don't know why this makes me so happy, but it does

[Sida]

I did not want to participate in this debate, and still don't, but -

Wow

You don't know why this makes me so happy, but it does

You're supposed to have one or the other, not both >.<

[Nymh]

You're supposed to have one or the other, not both >.<

These things take time

[iargue]

'Just' friendship?

Here's a thought: most successful relationships are founded on a friendship. Or a dowry. Or parental prearrangement. But that's not the point, the latter two are going out of style.

You misunderstood my point entirely.

The one thing that separates best friends from a relationship (Or the one thing that should. Not all relationships are as close as they should be, sadly) is physical contact. While you can do everything that you do with your boyfriend, except have physical contact. That's the same as having a really close friend, or friend with benefits if you do dirty things over the webcam too, not the same thing as being in an actual relationship.

I'm not saying that shes not in love, and I'm not saying that they are not happy, and that it wont work. I'm saying its nothing fundamentally different then having a close friend.

[Sweeney]

I'm fairly certain the thing that separates best friends from couples is, uh, non-platonic love.

[Nymh]

You misunderstood my point entirely.

The one thing that separates best friends from a relationship (Or the one thing that should. Not all relationships are as close as they should be, sadly) is physical contact. While you can do everything that you do with your boyfriend, except have physical contact. That's the same as having a really close friend, or friend with benefits if you do dirty things over the webcam too, not the same thing as being in an actual relationship.

I'm not saying that shes not in love, and I'm not saying that they are not happy, and that it wont work. I'm saying its nothing fundamentally different then having a close friend.

I'm gonna have to disagree with you on this one (here I go, in here again ugh I just can't stay away)

My pupils don't dilate, my cheeks don't flush, my heart doesn't flutter and my breath doesn't catch when I get a text from my best girlfriend, or when say Lisa or someone else I love comes on Tiny.

The difference is not physical touch. You said it yourself, she is in love. I am not in love with Lisa, but I do consider her a close friend and I do love her as a friend (and I would bone her, given the chance). That is the fundamental difference that you stated does not exist.

[iargue]

I'm gonna have to disagree with you on this one (here I go, in here again ugh I just can't stay away)

My pupils don't dilate, my cheeks don't flush, my heart doesn't flutter and my breath doesn't catch when I get a text from my best girlfriend, or when say Lisa or someone else I love comes on Tiny.

The difference is not physical touch. You said it yourself, she is in love. I am not in love with Lisa, but I do consider her a close friend and I do love her as a friend (and I would bone her, given the chance). That is the fundamental difference that you stated does not exist.

And do you still have that reaction after years of being with your boyfriend? Those reactions are common in the beginning of a relation, but die out the longer that it carries on. What keeps it from being just a close friendship, is the act of love, rather then the expression of love. Hundreds of thousands marriages end because it becomes too much like friendship, and not enough like a relationship. At one point, it will end up just like having a close friend (Maybe closer then most people are used to).

[Sweeney]

And you wonder why every relationship you've ever had has been a failure.

[luvsmyncis]

I did not want to participate in this debate, and still don't, but -

I know what you mean. This whole conversation is just everyone's stinkin' butthole opinions.
I can't love someone, or be devoted to someone just because our only contact is online? Ridiculous.

I mean, maybe it's hard for phony, lying, pissant little shitheads to have meaningful relationships online, but that doesn't mean it's true for everyone. Certainly a sexual relationship with someone is more difficult, but there's always webcams or dirty poems to get you through the day, and I don't think it's pathetic to engage in these activities if the willing parties are motivated by genuine affection. I love my online relationships, and I love the unconventional IRL relationship I've been in with the same person for 7 years. And I don't give a fuck, my heart does flutter when I see certain members of Neocodex browsing the forum.

[Boggart]

Pssh, you don't need physical touch for love. I was in love with someone and we did not have sexual physical contact. And before you say it wasn't love, stfu.

Sure physical contact is often a way of expressing it, but it's not needed. What's much more important is the interaction between people and for many people, online is enough. I know many people who have long-distance relationships and they skype and talk on the phone all the time and obviously never touch. Have they fallen out of love? Uh, no.


Also, dirty poems? Saucy.

[Sida]

Pssh, you don't need physical touch for love. I was in love with someone and we did not have sexual physical contact. And before you say it wasn't love, stfu.

Sure physical contact is often a way of expressing it, but it's not needed. What's much more important is the interaction between people and for many people, online is enough. I know many people who have long-distance relationships and they skype and talk on the phone all the time and obviously never touch. Have they fallen out of love? Uh, no.


Also, dirty poems? Saucy.

My auntie is friends with a gay couple that have been together for like 20 years and they're both disgusted at the idea of gay sex. Hasn't happened once during that time, and they're still going strong.

I know there was no reason for me to quote you on this reply, but, well it just felt natural

[redlion]

And I don't give a fuck, my heart does flutter when I see certain members of Neocodex browsing the forum.

Ooooh, do tell. Come on girl, out with it.

[likerobots]

i was admiring nymh and punkrock's love for codexians and then a cat came up

[weaboo]

I don't think they'd work out much, anyways.

[Foxer]

You misunderstood my point entirely.

The one thing that separates best friends from a relationship (Or the one thing that should. Not all relationships are as close as they should be, sadly) is physical contact. While you can do everything that you do with your boyfriend, except have physical contact. That's the same as having a really close friend, or friend with benefits if you do dirty things over the webcam too, not the same thing as being in an actual relationship.

I'm not saying that shes not in love, and I'm not saying that they are not happy, and that it wont work. I'm saying its nothing fundamentally different then having a close friend.

Love is exactly what the difference between a friendship and a relationship is. Think about it, if physical attraction was the only difference, what does that say about asexual people? Can they never be in relationships because they have no interest in sex? What about people who are somehow unable or simply don't want to? I know of a man who had an accident and can no longer have sex, but that doesn't automatically mean he is no longer in a relationship with his wife. There are a great many couples who are celibate by choice or necessity who still share a deep love with their partners.

Furthermore, you're making some pretty big assumptions. The difference between my boyfriend and my other online friends is that we're actually planning a future together. We can actually see ourselves getting married and even plan some of the details of it. We've discussed children and our views on various important things which we will have to deal with later in life. There is a kind of depth of affection that is profoundly different from any other kind of platonic relationship. If you have not experienced the feeling of loving someone else than that is probably why you can't imagine an online relationship working out.

And let me clarify what I mean by love. I don't mean the hot-headed emotional feelings which people often mistake for love. I'm talking about the very quiet subtle kind of love which is, first and foremost, a choice to love perfect someone who is by nature imperfect. That means choosing to overlook their faults, seeking their good over your own, and shutting your mouth rather than saying something hurtful in the heat of an argument. Many people misunderstand love such that they "fall" for someone easily, invest their hearts and get them broken when they discover they weren't really that keen on the person anyway. For a good long while, I was in love with the idea of love, with the idea of having a boyfriend rather than with my boyfriend himself. I took a good year before I was able to assure myself that, yes, I have taken off my rose-tinted glasses, glimpsed his ugly sides and still love him in spite of those things, and that is a choice, not some wishy-washy feeling.

So yes, there is a big difference between friendship and a relationship, and contrary to your beliefs, it is not sex.

To the people who say "I don't think they can work out but I've seen some of them work out", what you really should say is "I don't think it could work for me." Which is true, because a lot of people wouldn't be able to cope with the distance. It takes a really strong connection to last for any length of time and two mature people who're not slaves to their sex drives to make it work. If you wouldn't be able to do it, that's your position on the matter, but please don't just declare online relationships as completely and utterly unsuccessful 100% of te time, you're committing a fallacy of logic, and I am living proof of that.

Edited by Foxer, 03 February 2012 - 02:35 AM.