Avoid the almosts: label-less love affairs are more pain than gain

Ah, the ‘C’ word; some hate it, some can’t function without it and some simply can’t seem to figure out how to use it. Defining ‘commitment’ has become increasingly difficult in a world where you can stream thousands of shows for an entire month and not have parted with a dime. So, is it any wonder that the ‘almost’ relationship has become the latest grey area of romantic status to rear its ugly head and leave us feeling frustrated? When boundaries are patchy, labels are hollow and the fear of missed opportunity overwhelmingly apparent, the room for miscommunication about intensity of feelings seems almost inevitable.

Our inability to place all our eggs in one basket actually makes a lot of sense – to forego the prospect of a greener field of grass, in order to successfully maintain your living, albeit sometimes patchy plot, is a concept some prefer to dodge. And while the short-term success of creating bonds and playing them out until you feel they’ve served their purpose might sound like every ‘commitment-phobes’ dream, the frankly callous ‘one can do better but this’ll do for now’ ideology is allowing us to waste the time of others without a hint of apology. The notion that a profound (sometimes lengthy) association with someone can be abandoned without any impactful repercussions for the decision maker - simply on a technicality - is baffling and more notably, immoral.

Now I’m not talking about a friendship and similarly, you can file ‘friends with benefits’ somewhere else too. I’m referring to a person you could (or have) considered as a potential partner, whether you’ve been physically involved or not. Someone you invest concern, time and trust in and without which, would leave a noticeable hole in your weekly routine. Before engaging in such a partnership, individual expectations need to be established to prevent the crossing of wires. Whilst a 5-year plan containing first-born name ideas and a map of your preferred retirement location is certainly not recommended (seriously, please don’t), both parties need to unify in their understanding of investment levels in order to avoid disappointment down the line. If for some reason these are incongruous, transparency is key and this is where the loophole of in-exclusivity lies.

These ‘title-less’ relationships are breaking hearts because they never officially begin; a reluctance to ‘start’ something creates a futility to ever end it, leaving an environment condemning the asking of questions. How can you reprimand someone for eking you out, when your position in their life was never a certainty to begin with? The 'will we?' 'won't we?' 'is she?' 'is he?' deliberation is not only exhausting, but can leave you feeling like an undesirable booby prize. If your effort levels are not being matched or worse, being met with vacillation, grab that red flag with both hands and run for the hills. You should never need someone to want you and if their indecisiveness leaves you feeling less than worthy, it's time to find someone who treasures your time.

For those who know this story all too well, decide now whether that person is holding you back or if in fact, you're doing just fine. If you conclude it's the latter, don't be afraid to change your mind if your growth as an individual becomes dependent on their recognition. Labels aren't necessary, nor do they devalue a relationship if you choose not to apply them, but a mutual understanding of how a connection might progress will save you feeling like you invested your time in the wrong person. Label-less dating is for the sprinters, but if marathon running is more your thing, devote your time to someone who wants to start at the beginning without a finish line in sight.