5 ms·

Sometimes I am amazed at the cognitive flexibility of a writer to turn something into a story. Couples that aren't married and live in different houses? So...

by parsimo2010 7y ago

Sometimes I am amazed at the cognitive flexibility of a writer to turn something into a story. Couples that aren't married and live in different houses? So... dating? This is a story about old people dating? Where a lot of them are divorced so they're maybe a little hesitant to move in together and get married? And there are a few long distance relationships as well? I know this is the kind of pessimism that attracts downvotes, but I can't hold my tongue. The WSJ not only paid someone to write this, but it actually made it into the print edition.

username90 7y ago
I've seen people "date" consistently with the same person for 30 years, doing joint family events like Christmas and Easter. I think calling them proper relationships is appropriate.
stephth 7y ago
You actually proved it’s a story: for some people it’s news that couples can live in different houses and have any other type of romantic relationship than dating.
wsc981 7y ago
In the past these kinds of relationships were called "Living Apart Together", or LAT-relationships [0]. --- [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_apart_together https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_apart_together
alexashka 7y ago
I found it endearing that older folks have someone to be with. It makes me happy - the same way a story about a rescued cat makes me feel warm and fuzzy. Perhaps it is not at all related to Hacker culture, but then again this is a free forum and if some cat rescue stories slip in every now and again, I don't mind :)
ntlk 7y ago
At a point in life where you include someone as the main beneficiary in your will / on your life insurance policy, you’re definitely not “dating”, even though you might live apart.
- RandomBacon 7y ago
  So; friends?
maaaats 7y ago
It's disingenuous to refer to their relationships as merely dating, when they have lasted for more than a decade. And when it's not dating, you don't really have a point.
- lr4444lr 7y ago
  What's disingenuous is the editor's hijacking our cultural assumption that the headline means couples who were happily married for decades have begun living separated in burgeoning numbers. If these are romances that only began in a later life stage, that should be transparent in the headline, not buried in attempted cleverness to get a page click.
_pmf_ 7y ago
Hamstering.
Fnoord 7y ago
Your American-English word 'dating' is inaccurate. Here, and elsewhere. When you are 'seeing someone' (cringe-worthy term as well) and this is on regular terms we call that a relationship. You don't have to live together to be in a relationship, not everyone has to know it, you might still feel insecure; that's all OK in a young relationship. It is a rather old fashioned way of thinking that such is A-OK. It just isn't always feasible or practical. This article is about this phenomenon. That being said I'd like to see the data as 'more older couples' raises questions. For me, the following: more than when? how much more? which areas in the world? The title is intentionally vague and I refuse to read an article to figure that out.
k__ 7y ago
"moving in together and get married" Are you from 1950? Relationships aren't only seen as a one-way-escalator anymore. You don't have to date, move in, and marry.
- stagger87 7y ago
  There OP did not imply this. The OP simply doesn't think that old people dating is news worthy.
  - k__ 7y ago
    "Where a lot of them are divorced so they're maybe a little hesitant to move in together and get married?" This is a strong implication that OP thinks this is the way to go and only because they had bad experiences in the past they are not following them. The point that "old people dating" follows from this implication being true. They had bad experiences => they date longer before moving in => this is an article about old people dating => boring They aren't "dating" in the classical sense, this IS how their relationship is => this is an article about shifting relationship structure in older people => interesting

username90 7y ago

I've seen people "date" consistently with the same person for 30 years, doing joint family events like Christmas and Easter. I think calling them proper relationships is appropriate.

stephth 7y ago

You actually proved it’s a story: for some people it’s news that couples can live in different houses and have any other type of romantic relationship than dating.

wsc981 7y ago

In the past these kinds of relationships were called "Living Apart Together", or LAT-relationships [0]. --- [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_apart_together https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_apart_together

alexashka 7y ago

I found it endearing that older folks have someone to be with. It makes me happy - the same way a story about a rescued cat makes me feel warm and fuzzy. Perhaps it is not at all related to Hacker culture, but then again this is a free forum and if some cat rescue stories slip in every now and again, I don't mind :)

ntlk 7y ago

At a point in life where you include someone as the main beneficiary in your will / on your life insurance policy, you’re definitely not “dating”, even though you might live apart.

RandomBacon 7y ago
So; friends?

maaaats 7y ago

It's disingenuous to refer to their relationships as merely dating, when they have lasted for more than a decade. And when it's not dating, you don't really have a point.

lr4444lr 7y ago
What's disingenuous is the editor's hijacking our cultural assumption that the headline means couples who were happily married for decades have begun living separated in burgeoning numbers. If these are romances that only began in a later life stage, that should be transparent in the headline, not buried in attempted cleverness to get a page click.

_pmf_ 7y ago

Hamstering.

Fnoord 7y ago

Your American-English word 'dating' is inaccurate. Here, and elsewhere. When you are 'seeing someone' (cringe-worthy term as well) and this is on regular terms we call that a relationship. You don't have to live together to be in a relationship, not everyone has to know it, you might still feel insecure; that's all OK in a young relationship. It is a rather old fashioned way of thinking that such is A-OK. It just isn't always feasible or practical. This article is about this phenomenon. That being said I'd like to see the data as 'more older couples' raises questions. For me, the following: more than when? how much more? which areas in the world? The title is intentionally vague and I refuse to read an article to figure that out.

k__ 7y ago

"moving in together and get married" Are you from 1950? Relationships aren't only seen as a one-way-escalator anymore. You don't have to date, move in, and marry.

stagger87 7y ago
There OP did not imply this. The OP simply doesn't think that old people dating is news worthy.
- k__ 7y ago
  "Where a lot of them are divorced so they're maybe a little hesitant to move in together and get married?" This is a strong implication that OP thinks this is the way to go and only because they had bad experiences in the past they are not following them. The point that "old people dating" follows from this implication being true. They had bad experiences => they date longer before moving in => this is an article about old people dating => boring They aren't "dating" in the classical sense, this IS how their relationship is => this is an article about shifting relationship structure in older people => interesting