- The palace letters reveal the self-serving nature of ‘The Dismissal’
- The coronavirus is not a wake-up call, it is much more than that
- America’s CAREN act will punish racially-motivated emergency calls
- Cutting taxes for the wealthy is the worst possible response to this crisis
- Hotel guests in Sydney CBD alerted to positive COVID test
According to a collective of psychologists, those who ghost are totally fine, because they actually believe in love.
The problem with the internet and inter-personal relationships is that it removes the individual from the relationship, and indeed, greater responsibility for all things done within it. Take “ghosting” for example. The fact that it is colloquially known as something that breeds clickbait kind of absolves you of fully taking responsibility. You’re not ditching this person without warning, you’re just a person who ghosts, an act emboldened by the sheer amount of people who also do it. They do it, it’s a known thing, so it’s not so bad. I’m a ghoster.
This week, Big Think put forward the idea that those who ghost are not only not so bad, they also possess a positive, relatable quirk. According to a collection of psychologists, ghosters believe in the concept of romantic destiny. Simply put, if you weren’t their version of everything, then they’re out, and that’s why their phone is off. It’s not something you should work on if it is not to be, right?
If you said ‘yes’ to the above, it might be time to take another break from dating.
The concept of ‘destiny’ is something that we’ve been taught extremely early. The idea of ‘the one’, in that somewhere in this problematic watery orb of so many people is that one person that entirely gets you, and you get to have them, and roll credits.
We’re taught this through fairy tales, where one partner lies in stasis until the right person comes along and literally gives them life; we’re taught through music, where the teenage dirtbag meets another and their perfect love is immortalised by the alluded twang of Iron Maiden. We even hear it from our older relatives at Christmas, when Great Aunty June met Great Uncle Pep-Pep at the junior sheep dip dance in Year 6 and were married through three wars, two Bush administrations and the death of imperial rule. I’m not questioning attraction, but for such long odds, 1 in 7,200,000,000, a lot of people are finding that person in the town they grew up in, or in the shared space of an office kitchen. With the majority of marriages failing, I call bullshit. If destiny exists, should be all not be happy?
It’s bogus. It’s either settling, or a herculean amount of effort to make it work, or luck, or all three.
Let us use an example we’re all familiar with, the McFlys of the Back to the Future universe.
Here, the concept of ‘fate’ is thrown around, selfishly, I might add. The patriarch of the family, uberdork George, literally speaks of the concept of ‘destiny’ to his one-day (and disinterested wife), a word suggested to him by the guy who is literally invested in them doing the ‘do, his son, Marty.
This clashes with the information we’ve already been presented with, as we know the only reason why Marty’s parents got married in the first place was guilt, a weakness that his mother always regretted (when daddy almost ran over that cuck), and they lived unhappily ever after. Leaving the obvious subtext, in that some 1980s kid went back in time solely to get what every 1980s kid wanted, to be rich as fuck, we can clearly suggest that the idea of romantic fate is celluloid nonsense.
That, or if one can consider that there are warring fates, and like the McFly family, some are feted to each other are destined to be loveless failures and forever harbour hate, it may have some legs. With the majority of marriages failing, and the proliferation of dating apps as a direct result of it, I suggest it’s time we consider a rethink. It’s not that you’re holding out for that perfect person, you’re just selfish.