A couple is pursuing a romantic or sexual relationship, but there is no commitment established in this relationship. They’re not friends, but they are not officially a couple too. They go on dates, but they are inconsistent; They talk stuff, but they don’t make future plans together; they are together in a way, but they don’t meet each other’s friends or family. This is being called "situationship," a new dating trend.
We had a phase of "friends with benefits," "flings," and "hookups," and the new term buzzing around is situationship. Simply put, a situationship doesn’t qualify as a committed relationship but is more than friendship. It’s an undefined, casual, and commitment-free relationship.
While this has been an emerging dating trend among youngsters, especially GenZers, both parties involved should walk into this romantic arrangement with their eyes wide open. Situationships can be a fine option only for those who are strong enough to pursue a relationship without getting emotionally attached to the other person otherwise it’s only going to end in heartbreak. That being said, five women share what they feel about the new dating trend of "situationship" with SheThePeople.
Modern Women On Situationship
Shreya Nandha, an interior designer, said, "Some like it, while others don't. Some people respect other people's decisions and choices. But situationship only work if the people involved don’t expect a long-term relationship or visualise a future. The moment they start developing expectations from their partner, that is the moment things start to go wrong."
She added that situationships are common among Genzers because they are comfortable with it as they are young and wish to have their needs met without any commitments or responsibilities.
"I feel that situationship isn’t a bad thing as long as people don't get attached to each other. The couple might talk every day or even do activities together, but you are still officially not in a ">relationship. After putting so much effort in, if one person gets emotionally attached and the other doesn’t feel the same way, then one of them is going to get hurt. Situationship is fine until there is no emotional attachment. If one of them develops feelings, they should let the other person know their feelings and ask them if they feel the same or not. So that you’ll know where to take the things," said Nikitha, social media manager at SheThePeople
Viji Balachandran, an IT professional, said that she would never get into a situationship because she'd eventually get emotionally attached to the person. "If an individual can pursue a relationship without emotional attachment, they could be in one; otherwise, it would be emotionally draining. People who are not really into a committed relationship or marriage because of the social pressure that comes with it might choose to be in a situationship and that’s completely fine," she added.
Deepika, an entrepreneur feels that situationships isn’t entirely a new concept and that it's been around for ages under different names. "It’s a beautiful way to hold on to a company when people are sailing through loneliness, singlehood and want to fulfil their biological needs. However, it might turn bitter if one of them develops emotional or financial dependence. Situationship can be fun if handled without emotional attachments or when people don't intend to hurt others. As long as both parties involved engage in open and honest communication and agree on terms, it's fine," she said.
"If two consenting adults are very sure that getting into a situation will not affect them emotionally when one of them leaves, then it is fine. Otherwise, there will surely be one person who ends up getting hurt. As long as they know what they are doing and aren’t intending to hurt anyone, it’s fine. No third person has the right to judge a couple involved in a situationship, because, at the end of the day, it's a personal choice," said Kiruthiga Elumalai, an IT professional.
Suggested Reading: 6 Toxic Dating Trends To Keep An Eye Out For While Searching For ‘The One’
Views expressed by the author are their own