Couples ignoring each other

andekwarhola

andekwarhola wrote: »

Figures.

Jaysus, a tad harsh, no?

Yourself isit

Yourself isit wrote: »

Not really. You might be having your own conversation with yourself but the thread title and OP is pretty unambiguous. This matters because people not talking in a cafe or having breakfast in the morning - something that was common before smartphones - is really not the same as ignoring your friends in a more social occasion.

Sorry I was playing Candy Crush, what where ya saying?

_Jamie_

For a couple, this is no big deal. It's important to be able to do nothing with your other half.

I do think it's odd to see groups of friends out, ignoring each other because of staring at their phones. Friend catch ups I have involve lots of chatter and in fact, we never get everything said that we want to!

_Jamie_

SteM wrote: »

This sounds obnoxious to be honest. Why are you more important than anyone else? It must be really wearing being your friend, always waiting for a reply straight away.

I know, right? Darn that person not answering his question straight away because they are conversing with someone else. How very self-absorbed of that poster.

DivingDuck wrote: »

Nobody is more important; everyone is treated equally at all times. The only difference is that this sort of arrangement doesn't favour the individual who's physically present and puts digital communications on par with face-to-face ones.

I'd put the person who took time out of their day to come and meet me to the top of the queue in terms of holding my attention. People's time is valuble and it should be acknowledged.

And by expecting an answer straight away from friends on a question you want answered via text or email indicates that you don't believe in equality when it come to communcations. You want to be dealt with straight away. That's not equal.

pilly

Deleted User wrote: »

Jaysus, a tad harsh, no?

Ah I've gotten worse than that, been told good luck with dying alone also! All for having an opinion.

andekwarhola

Deleted User wrote: »

Jaysus, a tad harsh, no?

Apologies, Sir Lancelot.

Just working through my emotional issues from being trapped in a staid relationship.

andekwarhola

Omackeral wrote: »

No comprehension issue here. My very first post on the thread addresses that. Threads evolve. Often. Online.

To be fair, there's a world of difference between staying on your phone in the company of another person and a couple both on their phones in the scenario outlined in the OP, which was the original point.

I suspect the reason the disucssion was steered toward the former was to conveniently switch the goalposts somewhat for the ME ME ME types as the original critique got a bit of resounding thumbs down.

andekwarhola

andekwarhola wrote: »

To be fair, there's a world of difference between staying on your phone in the company of another person and a couple both on their phones in the scenario outlined in the OP, which was the original point.

I suspect the reason the disucssion was steered toward the former was to conveniently switch the goalposts somewhat for the ME ME ME types as the original critique got a bit of resounding thumbs down.

Fair enough. I was just sharing my own experiences of people on their phone when it has been annoying or irritating. A broader approach to the initial OP, granted, but still related.

DivingDuck

_Jamie_ wrote: »

I'd put the person who took time out of their day to come and meet me to the top of the queue in terms of holding my attention. People's time is valuble and it should be acknowledged.

And by expecting an answer straight away from friends on a question you want answered via text or email indicates that you don't believe in equality when it come to communcations. You want to be dealt with straight away. That's not equal.

If Mick is with Paddy, and I text him to ask if he's busy this weekend, I expect Paddy to be okay with Mick responding to me.

If I'm with Mick and Paddy texts him, I have no problem with him telling me to wait while he replies.

If you don't consider those equal, I don't know what to tell you. You can consider it obnoxious if you like, but it's definitely not one-sided or unfair.

As for people's time— someone took to time to message me. Wouldn't it be wrong not to acknowledge it if their time is so valuable?

andekwarhola

andekwarhola wrote: »

Apologies, Sir Lancelot.

Just working through my emotional issues from being trapped in a staid relationship.

Great. Well at least you are not bitter :pac:

_Jamie_

DivingDuck wrote: »

If Mick is with Paddy, and I text him to ask if he's busy this weekend, I expect Paddy to be okay with Mick responding to me.

If I'm with Mick and Paddy texts him, I have no problem with him telling me to wait while he replies.

If you don't consider those equal, I don't know what to tell you. You can consider it obnoxious if you like, but it's definitely not one-sided or unfair.

As for people's time— someone took to time to message me. Wouldn't it be wrong not to acknowledge it if their time is so valuable?

Sending a text is not equal to coming out to meet someone. One takes a lot more time and effort. And it's not even close!

Expecting someone to answer a text from you straight away is demanding. The beauty of texts, Whatapp message and emails is that they don't need to dealt with straight away. That's why they are so popular. If I urgently need to reach someone I ring them. Phonecalls tend to be treated with more urgency. When people text/email/Whatsapp, they are sending out a signal that what's contained within can be answered in a more leisurely manner. Your example even highlights that. You text someone to ask if they are busy that weekend. The reply to that is something that can easily wait until the person you texted is on their own and can answer. You know, if the other person goes to the loo or the bar. You'd probably be waiting no more than half an hour. Hardly very long to wait.

If it's the norm in your group, fine, but you sound like a demanding bunch!

Widdershins

_Jamie_ wrote: »

Sending a text is not equal to coming out to meet someone. One takes a lot more time and effort. And it's not even close!

Expecting someone to answer a text from you straight away is demanding. The beauty of texts, Whatapp message and emails is that they don't need to dealt with straight away. That's why they are so popular. If I urgently need to reach someone I ring them. Phonecalls tend to be treated with more urgency. When people text/email/Whatsapp, they are sending out a signal that what's contained within can be answered in a more leisurely manner. Your example even highlights that. You text someone to ask if they are busy that weekend. The reply to that is something that can easily wait until the person you texted is on their own and can answer. You know, if the other person goes to the loo or the bar. You'd probably be waiting no more than half an hour. Hardly very long to wait.

If it's the norm in your group, fine, but you sound like a demanding bunch!

Calls are for important and urgent things to my mind, too. I would never expect someone to look at a text straight away. I don't expect them to answer a call straight away either but if it was a call to my other half I know if he was driving he would pull in at the first opportunity and check his phone, and call me back. If I only want him to pick up some bread on his way home, it's a text, which he read at the end of the day if at work, or whenever he isn't busy and can be bothered if he's at home. Anyway important things should be spoken as it's hard to convey your tone in text and there can be misunderstandings.

pilly

DivingDuck wrote: »

If Mick is with Paddy, and I text him to ask if he's busy this weekend, I expect Paddy to be okay with Mick responding to me.

If I'm with Mick and Paddy texts him, I have no problem with him telling me to wait while he replies.

If you don't consider those equal, I don't know what to tell you. You can consider it obnoxious if you like, but it's definitely not one-sided or unfair.

As for people's time— someone took to time to message me. Wouldn't it be wrong not to acknowledge it if their time is so valuable?

So if you're only asking Mick if he's busy this weekend, what's the big panic? Why can't you just wait until he's on his own and can answer. Honestly, people who text and then get pissed off when someone doesn't answer straight away do my nut in. How do you know someone is not driving, running, in the shower, in the bath?

_Jamie_

pilly wrote: »

So if you're only asking Mick if he's busy this weekend, what's the big panic? Why can't you just wait until he's on his own and can answer. Honestly, people who text and then get pissed off when someone doesn't answer straight away do my nut in. How do you know someone is not driving, running, in the shower, in the bath?

Or even just relaxing. If someone is reading, it's understandable that they might leave the phone away from them for a while to just switch off completely.

And in DD's above example, I don't think he'd be waiting even half an hour for a response. The next loo or cigarette break, a reply can be written. But the person who showered, spruced themselves up and travelled to meet me is getting more of my attention than the person who lifted their arm to compose and send a text.

Depends on the situation really..

If I do something proper with my girlfriend, no phones. If we nip out for a coffee beside the house for an hour, phones are grand and we're usually showing each other stuff from reddit if we do that. We live together so it's not like we need or want to have a big conversation over coffee.

Work friends at the cafe every morning beside work, phones are grand. Meet friends or ones from work specifically for coffee or beer, no phones except for the odd checking of something.

It's about routine vs. occasion basically.

leanonme

I dont think you can tell much from the original post.
It depends on the Sanrio, if your going for a nice dinner with someone, then no I don't use my phone etc.
But if I'm out spending the day with my other half shoping etc, and we decide to have a coffee, then cause we're sitting we might take that time to look at our phones, answer texts, even we could be looking at what we're doing next, making plans etc.

_Whimsical_

I wouldn't read too much into it. If you're with someone for a long time there's nothing nicer than a companionable, comfortable silence. You know they'll tell you when they come across something interesting and read out the parts they know will interest you and you'll do likewise for them. You know they're there and you're both just taking a breather and will pick up in a while where ye earlier left off. I think some shared downtime is essential in any good relationship. If you can have a bit of space with someone it's better than having space without them there too.

Now that said I've seen situations in cafes where very often a woman sits for an hour and stares glumly at the back of the newspaper her partner has pulled around himself like a wall and only ever responds to her attempts at conversation with "hmmmm". That's a different kettle of fish. That's not nice to see happen to anyone.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

road_high

fizzypish wrote: »

Pfft thats nothing. My parents ignored each other for years! Amateur hour.

Mine too..they could literally go 6 months without saying a word to one another. They really should have separated or gotten divorced.
As a kid I used think my parents were the only ones like this

_Jamie_

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I don't think the bystander would want to remedy it. The OP just started a discussion on the subject, they didn't want to interfere. It was just an observation they made.

fizzypish

road_high wrote: »

Mine too..they could literally go 6 months without saying a word to one another. They really should have separated or gotten divorced.
As a kid I used think my parents were the only ones like this

Yup. The sister had a friend over once for dinner years ago. She was freaked out by the fact that no one talked for the duration of the meal. For a long time I thought if you had a fight with someone, you dealt with it by not talking to them and it just went away. I have evolved my thinking:
Do I wish to continue having a relationship with this person? If yes converse and analyses the problem (usually solved by me apologizing for being a twat). If no thoroughly burn the bridge and never utter a word to that person again.

Cupcake_Crisis

I find it a bit weird. Maybe it's because I'm a chatty person, or maybe it's because my mam and dad couldn't go 10 minutes without talking to each other but whenever I'm with company, be it a partner or a friend, I like to have conversation! I'm long enough on my own!