Internet Romance: Classic Or Dud?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Now I've got you all hot and bothered with the 'get a room' thread...

(NB everyone I have ever mentioned this thread idea to has said it is a really bad idea.)

― Tom, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

dud. dud ten times over. dud and heartbreak and sadness and stilted 'poetic' posts followed by passive-aggressive ones and too- high phone bills and getting your skin all computer-pallored and and and dud. yeah.

(although it has allowed me to rack up some frequent-flyer miles here and there.)

― maura, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I'm all for bad thread ideas. I say DUD. Until it is socially acceptable (much like my stance on Terry Pratchett). I don't buy any arguments about this being mean to people who have trouble dating in the real world. Hell, I have trouble (if that's the right word) dating in the real world and I intend to keep it that way.

― Nick, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I am against it on principle and in theory. In practise this would totally not stop me falling for someone over the Interweb but like most vices it's nothing a cold bath and a pint wouldn't cure.

Using the Internet as a way of widening your group of real life friends though is classic.

Obviously sometimes it works and we have all heard heartwarming stories but my suspicion is those are the exceptions that prove the rule.

― Tom, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Thank you, Tom, I know you were keeping me close to your heart there. ;-)

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Dud. Dud. Dud. Dud. You are not getting the advertised product in real life. There is a reason the person can't get a date in real life 9 times out of 10 (no offense to Ned who is a very nice person and the 1 out of the 10 who is not false advertising in his Internet- sponsored relationship). Anyone can seem charming, witty, funny and social when they don't have to deal with a person in reality. Some of those same people turn into anti-social monsters with no ability to deal with a real human being with real feelings in real life, face-to- face. They need the distance, the solitude, the anonymity to say what they are thinking. This is poison, it's mental abuse.

That's all I will say on the subject as it could get me in trouble should I go further. I learned it the hard way, which didn't stop me from then, with all my reservations, sleeping with someone else I met online, but that was just that, it wasn't a relationship and it wasn't...I don't know. It wasn't a relationship, it was a friendship with that on the side.

But yes, using it to garner more friends is great to the nth degree. I wouldn't have met my wonderful boyfriend without the wonderful internet introducing me to new friends who in turn introduced me to their real life friends! Of course I'm all for meeting people you meet on the net and being friends with them. :)

― Ally, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

CLASSIC!

― fred solinger, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Do you mean romance or "romance"?

It happened once, sorta - ah, IRC on a mainframe. I was young & inexperienced. She was slightly older and domineering. Nothing much happened (despite her attempts otherwise). Smoooooth.

And how the hell do these people meet folks on the 'Net for snootchie bootchies? The only folks I chat with are folks I get to know slowly and surely. (And in case you're looking for some HOT CHAT, it's best not to start the conversation with "ASL?" It's confusing, and it's demeaning. I'm more than that, damn it!)

― David Raposa, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

28 M UK, no pic.

― Tom, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Having in fact just met Her Allyness properly on Saturday, along with her boyfriend Ramon, Otis and Ally's apartment-mate Steph, I can indeed confirm that Ally's got herself a fine fellow. Hurrah! Mutual admiration society!

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Oh, you meet people thru regular chat, anyone who'd meet up with someone in a "sex chat" room is a moron who deserves the dismemberment they're going to recieve upon meeting said person.

Though for the record I am not more than A/S/L. I mean, really.

― Ally, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

What's ASL?

― Richard Tunnicliffe, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Awww, cheers Ned :)

Aren't we DISGUSTINGLY ANNOYINGLY CUTE together? Everyone keeps saying that. We're like, dude, cute sucks, we are EVIL DICTATORS.

― Ally, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

ASL: Aging Sex Lord! Yes, that would be me (in 30 years).

― Dan Perry, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

To answer Dave's question -- in the case of Jane and I, we knew each other for a couple of years beforehand as she had joined the Oasis list I run, and we eventually got to talking. I liked her posts on the list because she seemed like a very intelligent and funny person, which unsurprisingly is exactly what she is. :-) So we were just simply net-pals for a long while, while I was planning a UK trip for summer 2000 to meet some friends like Tom. A few months before the trip Jane and I started realizing that we really did like each other a lot, and the trip confirmed that. The point being -- absolutely nothing was planned, it just happened. And why not? :-)

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Wait, so only Ally and Otis can say for sure whether Ned and I are distinct people. Which we are, of course.

― Dan Perry, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Sorry, Ally, you two are VERY soppy together. ;-) But it's not like you're talking in giggly smoochy voices or the like, in which case I would have made my excuses and got the hell out. ;-)

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Until joined together in the eyes of the Lord, obviously.

― Tom, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Just like only Ned can say for certain that Otis and Kris are two different people.

I could still be Mike Hanle y.

― Ally, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I dunno, Dan, if Ah-nold and Danny De Vito can be twins...

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Sorry, Ally, you two are VERY soppy together. ;-)

Grrr. It's ruining my image, for fuck's sake. I AM ANGRY. Not lovebirdy. Grrrrrr.

That was a really good time though, we should do that again.

With Tom, damnit. When you comin' over, boy? ;)

― Ally, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

ASL (as I learned during another chat session) stands for Age / Sex / Location. FYI, I'm 18 / F / Beverly Hills.

You know, that "question" (about the snootchie bootchies) was rhetorical, but I appreciate Ned's answer. Much obliged, Mr. R. I'm just trying to look for absolutes in a world of questions. I should just stick to the Absolut and shut up. (Or Schnapps - mmm, peaches...)

― David Raposa, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Yeah, Tom, the pressure is on. VISIT, VISIT!

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

i forgot that another sort of fun thing about internet romance is watching your access logs to see if you're being, you know. thought of.

is that stalkery?

― maura, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

And yes, Otis and Kris are now and clearly two different people. Be interesting to fuse them in one body, though.

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Internet romance can however bring people of very different backgrounds together, though - a jazz-loving philosopher and a monkey- loving linguist, say, could find themselves brought together by interweb magic when they would never in real life meet.

I used to do the access logs thing with humanclick, but I don't think any of the people who visited all the time were desperately in love with me.

― Tom, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

well see tom i just pretty much assumed that everyone was all the time in love with me. now that i am a washed-up internet hasbeen, i realize the error of my ways, but still, the thrill if tail -f is fun from time to time.

― maura, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

The thrill of internet romance is *all about* stalking. Also, secret comments in HTML code. Dud, nonetheless, although I know of one happy story that worked out last I heard.

― Sterling Clover, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

yay! comment tags!

― maura, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Comment tags = dud.

― Tom, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Hm. Well as long as it's kept online then fine. I 'spose. I've flirted - it's fun! But presuming it could turn into the real deal could lead you into a world of heck though, I imagine.

But then I've never been in a chat room or had -cough!- 'cybersex'.

But I've heard it goes on.

All over the shop apparently.

― David Merryweather, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

What are 'comment tags'?

Are they what the Commentariat use?

― the pinefox, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Claaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaasic!

― Mike Hanley, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

- a jazz-loving philosopher and a monkey- loving linguist
monkey loving linguist?? This detail is just too weird to be made up....

― Billy Dods, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I know a lot of people who met on the internet who are now happily together. As for myself, I can't do it. I have enough trouble flirting in real life. Flirting in text is impossible. But I have made quite a few friends over the internet.

― Melissa W, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Pray tell, Tom, where we could find this jazz-loving philosopher of which you speak. I hear tell of a monkey-loving linguist, which I may be able to point in your direction.

― Greg, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Does that sound rude?

― Greg, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Wait! I know *two* happy net-produced couples. Both involved v. different nations.

― Sterling Clover, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Perhaps Greg we speak of the same monkeyphiliac. Apparently the Midwest US is a good hunting ground for jazz-loving philosophers.

― Tom, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

We must find someone in the Midwest to help with the search.

― Greg, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Damn cagey bastards, the pair of ya!

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

My brother and his girlfriend of about 18 months are currently in holiday in Spain, and they met on the internet. That's all though, I can't think of any other examples.

― DG, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Maybe you'd have more luck if you left it as:

jazz-loving philosopher and a monkey

― Graham, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Internet romance seeking: dud
Internet romance: goes either way...I've known people who've had success, and people who have not.
Internet "romance": classic. I have three wives and three husbands whom I never expect to meet.

― Lyra, Monday, 13 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Can't say either way yet. I Am in the middle of my first online relationship. Nice to read some of ILE's thoughts on the subject.

― turner, Tuesday, 14 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Isn't it just the fact that internet is relatively new that makes it strange? It is as dud/classic as going to a club and looking for a partner. To say that people who look for romance online are mostly unable to do that in *real life* is generalizing. And even if that was the case, I would be happy for these people that internet existed. Don't we all want a partner? One of my friends met her husband after emailing him for a couple of months. They are happy. I am happy for them.

― nathalie (nathalie), Tuesday, 14 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

It would be really, really, cool if having an online relationship (like being in a real physical relationship) made you instantly more attractive to the opposite sex. Having your cake and eating it too= classic.

― turner, Tuesday, 14 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I really dont like this idea that being in a relationship makes you more attractive to the opposite sex. Is it science fact?

― Tom, Tuesday, 14 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Pointless, until they develop those VR things you can attach to your penis, which will also hopefully be self-cleaning

― dave q, Tuesday, 14 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I think its provable. Maybe we should write "Dear Dr. Science...."

― turner, Tuesday, 14 August 2001 00:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Skipping 37 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

Don't want romance with ANYBODY least of all Dastoor.

― Marcello Carlin, Tuesday, 22 January 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

You'd think on a thread full of Sinis "internet romance" would get a better rap. It worked fine for me, the gentle close of said romance having nothing to do with our unorthodox courtship (and two years later, besides).

So yeah, internet romance = classic, but GU status = heartbreaking DUD.

― Pyth, Tuesday, 22 January 2002 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

eight months pass...

romance?

classic.

― RJG (RJG), Sunday, 20 October 2002 03:10 (twenty-three years ago)

My friend once met with his internet romance for the first time and she just bashfully sat there unresponsive to anything he said. He had to call me for help and i just shook my head. DUD.

― Honda, Sunday, 20 October 2002 03:20 (twenty-three years ago)

Does it count as an "internet romance" if you start out as internet friends and become real-life friends and then have a real-life romance? Because that happened to me a few times, and things worked out fairly okay. :-)

― Jody Beth Rosen, Sunday, 20 October 2002 03:27 (twenty-three years ago)

okay, yeah.

anything that->real-life, proper happy-making romance=classic.

― RJG (RJG), Sunday, 20 October 2002 03:29 (twenty-three years ago)

yes i think it counts, after all, thats what happened to me too.

― donna (donna), Sunday, 20 October 2002 03:31 (twenty-three years ago)

I still don't see anything wrong with it. I know more happy couples that meetings that have gone wrong. And I know of so many more awful, horrible, destructive relationships built on deception that were formed in real life.

― Melissa W (Melissa W), Sunday, 20 October 2002 03:49 (twenty-three years ago)

Did you revive this for a reason, Richard?

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Sunday, 20 October 2002 10:12 (twenty-three years ago)

no.

― RJG (RJG), Sunday, 20 October 2002 17:07 (twenty-three years ago)

I would just like to say that TODAY internet romance is horrible but I don't want to talk about it.

― C J (C J), Sunday, 20 October 2002 17:46 (twenty-three years ago)

If it wasn't for internet romance.....

I would not have the great friend I have today....

I would not have the beautiful son I have today....

I would have been bored and alone or even haging from a tree somewhere...

― Perry Bernard (panterus), Monday, 21 October 2002 03:09 (twenty-three years ago)

aww.

― RJG (RJG), Monday, 21 October 2002 05:55 (twenty-three years ago)

I can't believe I've never posted to this one.

Dud. In fact, all long-distance relationships SUCK BIG FUCKING TIME (take it from someone who's done it three times) and are not recommended. My Net romance came at just the right time to do something completely idiotic: when I was 19. (thank you, thank you very much.) I was in Minneapolis and took everything way too fucking seriously. She was in San Diego and took everything way too fucking seriously, only in a different way. I was a raver, she thought ravers were idiots and couldn't believe I was a raver. Hilarity (plus five months of insane phone bills and a nervous breakdown) ensued!

Really, don't do it. Though as JBR sez, getting to know someone as friends and then becoming entangled seems OK. But that's a real-life thing, too, not just an internet one.

― M Matos (M Matos), Monday, 21 October 2002 06:03 (twenty-three years ago)

aww.

― RJG (RJG), Monday, 21 October 2002 06:14 (twenty-three years ago)

My Net romance came at just the right time to do something completely idiotic: when I was 19.

Hey, me too! I was 19, he was 32. I was in upstate NY, he was in Philly. We lasted six months, and the phone bills were ridiculous.

Of the three major relationships I've had, two of them were A REALLY BAD IDEA. Well, I'm young and stupid; maybe I'll learn someday.

― Jody Beth Rosen, Monday, 21 October 2002 06:24 (twenty-three years ago)

(nb i don't think all distance-involving relationships are a bad idea - i am in one now and i am still very happy. but then again, i guess it boils down to what you consider a 'long' distance.)

― maura (maura), Monday, 21 October 2002 14:15 (twenty-three years ago)

Over 1.6 light years.

― N. (nickdastoor), Monday, 21 October 2002 14:23 (twenty-three years ago)

How to meet girls on the internet:
Tip #1: Never, EVER be honest. http://www.ukresistance.co.uk/pics2/icqhell.gif
http://www.ukresistance.co.uk/issue4.html

― Android (Android Elvis), Monday, 21 October 2002 14:24 (twenty-three years ago)

My mom's friend married a guy she had an internet romance with and they ended up divorcing not too long afterwards because it turned out that he was an alcoholic.
Translation = People who chat on the internet are alcoholics.

― Sarah McLusky (coco), Monday, 21 October 2002 14:30 (twenty-three years ago)

People who chat on the internet are alcoholics.

Fancy a pint?

― Jody Beth Rosen, Monday, 21 October 2002 16:26 (twenty-three years ago)

i have been living with her for, oh, 9 months now, give or take.

― jess (dubplatestyle), Monday, 21 October 2002 16:36 (twenty-three years ago)

Classic - met my gf of 2 years this way and altho it wasnt quite smooth running in the 'getting it together' phase its been alarmingly maintainable...this is mainly because we're not too far away geographically the majaority of the time and we see each other 3 weekends out of 4...it also worked because we both felt more comfortable pursuing romance/love/sex/whatever via the internet rather than hanging around in noisy expensive clubs, gigs or pubs and we aint no oil paintings basically (no condom-strewn unmade beds either tho)...plus i always find myself in male-dominated environments wherever i am, whatever i do. it does seem to be working out and on the basis of my experience here i'd say it can work but only if you're close enough to each other geopgraphically to make it worthwhile, regardless of how much you love the person if they're halfway across the world its just not worth it 99.9% of the time i figure

― blueski, Monday, 21 October 2002 16:38 (twenty-three years ago)

I don't think it's any more weird than walking up t a stranger in a bar/park/supermarket.

Never done it though (internet).

― Android (Android Elvis), Monday, 21 October 2002 17:03 (twenty-three years ago)

I like the times on Android's picture.

― Graham (graham), Monday, 21 October 2002 17:39 (twenty-three years ago)

Sharon to now be banned in favor of Shaz.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 21 October 2002 18:10 (twenty-three years ago)

I think the internet is as useful a "meeting" medium as any other, but like sources such as the bar, the singles club, the newspaper advertisement, etc., the successful batting average tends to the low side.

The truth of the matter is that the warm fuzzy of a cyber {{{{HUG}}}} just isn't the equivalent of a flesh and blood warm body next to you. The internet might be appropriate for long-distance and long-term friendships (I have a few of these myself and don't regret for an instant that I've come to care for others, quite deeply in at least one instance), but it can't sustain a romantic coupling for very long. Unless one or both of you is committed to moving to your cyber-love's city/state/province/country/continent/hemisphere, I think it's best that the relationship remain in "just friends" territory. Anything else is likely to produce a broken heart.

For those of you who want to better understand the dynamics of cyber-relating, here's a useful article on Cyber Romance. The entire site is quite fascinating, so click around.

― ragnfild (ragnfild), Monday, 21 October 2002 18:11 (twenty-three years ago)

My Halloween costume:

http://www.rider.edu/users/suler/psycyber/romance.jpg

― Jody Beth Rosen, Monday, 21 October 2002 18:19 (twenty-three years ago)

Some of us live by cyber dating! The online part of it is just exploratory for me, a way of trying to find people who might be suitable, before meeting IRL.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Monday, 21 October 2002 18:55 (twenty-three years ago)

four years pass...

http://www.superchefblog.com/images/knifeheart.png

― roxymuzak, Thursday, 27 September 2007 07:19 (eighteen years ago)

Oh dear - are you okay, roxy?

― C J, Thursday, 27 September 2007 07:35 (eighteen years ago)

http://www.bensonchamberaz.com/images/Cowboy_computer.gif

― chaki, Thursday, 27 September 2007 07:38 (eighteen years ago)

http://www.goroadachi.com/etemenanki/car-burning.jpg

― roxymuzak, Thursday, 27 September 2007 07:39 (eighteen years ago)

Ugh, ouch, never again, etc.

― Trayce, Thursday, 27 September 2007 07:47 (eighteen years ago)

http://i.realone.com/assets/rn/img/6/1/5/6/12986516.jpg

― chaki, Thursday, 27 September 2007 07:48 (eighteen years ago)

http://www.gogo-gadgets.co.uk/ekmps/shops/gogogadgets/images/usbhamster.jpg

― roxymuzak, Thursday, 27 September 2007 07:50 (eighteen years ago)

http://kevinrothermel.typepad.com/kevinrothermelcom/images/jdate.png

― chaki, Thursday, 27 September 2007 07:53 (eighteen years ago)

OK now you guys are just being WEIRD.

― Trayce, Thursday, 27 September 2007 07:56 (eighteen years ago)

trayce you're back!

― ken c, Thursday, 27 September 2007 07:57 (eighteen years ago)

rubyredd ta fred

― Upt0eleven, Thursday, 27 September 2007 09:23 (eighteen years ago)

I'm a bit back, a bit front, a little bit wurrrr, little bit wheeey.

― Trayce, Thursday, 27 September 2007 09:47 (eighteen years ago)

trayce left?

― kenan, Thursday, 27 September 2007 09:53 (eighteen years ago)

sorry, roxy, whatever it is your pictures mean. They speak negative to me. :(

― kenan, Thursday, 27 September 2007 09:54 (eighteen years ago)

I... had a break. I'm still not here as much as I was.

― Trayce, Thursday, 27 September 2007 09:57 (eighteen years ago)

I... had a break.

No, sorry. If you have posted a self-taken picture of yourself in the last week and two in the last month, you do not qualify for paid vacation.

― kenan, Thursday, 27 September 2007 10:12 (eighteen years ago)

paying close attention, are we kenan?

― The Cursed Return of the Dastardly Thermo Thinwall, Thursday, 27 September 2007 14:59 (eighteen years ago)

had a good wank over it

― ken c, Thursday, 27 September 2007 15:11 (eighteen years ago)

Damn Ken!

― kv_nol, Thursday, 27 September 2007 16:25 (eighteen years ago)

Sorry, that was just... needlessly vulgar/creepy. Even by ILX, and it's users, standards.

― kv_nol, Thursday, 27 September 2007 16:26 (eighteen years ago)

Oh come on, it's Ken (and yes, I think some posters CAN get away with that kind of thing)

― Mark C, Thursday, 27 September 2007 16:29 (eighteen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.