Situationships, Textationships, Cuffing—Gen-Z is now caught in a label soup

For a generation that doesn’t want to be defined as anything anymore, calling their new romantic liaison a ‘situationship’ only adds more confusion to the mix.

Illustration by Prajna Ghosh | ThePrint

The dating world is now more complicated than ever. Perhaps our first introduction to this labyrinthine space was when Justin Timberlake and Mila Kunis made ‘friends with benefits’ popular with their 2011 film. That same year, Ashton Kutcher and Natalie Portman also gave young millennials a taste of non-commital relationships—without the traditional courting, romance or love—and it was fresh and exciting. It was plain sex, and the boundaries seemed pretty clear: No holding hands like a couple in public, no romantic selfies, and nothing but sheer fun.

However, the non-committal spectrum has become much more baffling lately, and all the dating stages are out of whack, pointing to generational romantic doom. In traditional relationships, the ‘talking stage’ came first, followed by the ‘seeing each other’ bit and then finally, ‘dating’ — at least that’s what we were taught while growing up. But at this point, Gen-Zs and millennials have thrown all rules out of the window to give us ‘situationships,’ among a bunch of other confounding terms to define their romantic liaisons.

While it is possible that this term was sparsely used earlier too, it only became popular in 2019, when Alana Morrison, a participant in the reality TV show Love Island, used it to describe her dating history. In (not so) simple terms, a situationship is an undefined relationship where people are intimate but prefer not to be exclusive.

Commitment phobia is at an all-time high

Polyamorous individuals may disagree, but commitment is the cornerstone of a quality relationship. The severe lack of clarity and commitment in situationships only risks causing stress and frustration.

People are choosing to redefine lives in their own personal ways, putting marriage and serious relationships on the back burner. Not just relationships; we have even stopped committing to homes, cities and employers. Many pursue freelance gigs alongside their regular jobs or don’t think twice before dropping everything to move to the mountains in the middle of the year.

And now, with the likes of Uber and Rentomojo, we have even stopped committing to purchasing basic amenities like cars and furniture. A few clicks and taps, and you get anything you want without worrying about upkeep, care or possession.

Are we then moving toward more disposable relationships too? With ‘ghosting’ (ending communication without warning), ‘cuffing season’ (to ‘handcuff’ or trap short-term romantic partners in ‘cold and lonely’ winter months), and ‘textashionships’ (text-only virtual relationships) becoming more normalised than ever, a lot is changing in the way people approach commitment.

An easy way out

With the world’s growing challenges, some are starting to adopt a more robotic approach to their life and careers. But what they forget is that love and companionship are still primal needs—ones that will find their way in, no matter how much we try to put them off.

So while situationships feel like a solid middle-ground to revel in affection but avoid the commitment to be able to trail on that robotic, career-centric trajectory — it often results in a mess. This is because there are invisible strings drawing you to the person, ones you are unable to biologically or emotionally shun at that point. I mean, for how long can you really avoid the oxytocin and dopamine rush that can come simply from being held intimately? One person inevitably falls for the other and makes peace with their commitment phobia, only hurting themselves in the process.

The label conundrum

Romantic labels have an interesting history. While a situationship can cause immense heartbreak, it also points to a generation’s trouble with letting traditional words define them. In today’s world, where even calling someone a ‘he’ or ‘she’ without confirming their pronouns counts as questionable or incorrect conduct— more and more people don’t want to be bound in boxes.

Situationships bring their own drama, but also point to people’s habit of forming new nomenclature to do the exact opposite of what they intended to do. Such terms only signal a lack of clarity. Exhibit A: that time when Kim Kardashian, on season two of her reality show The Kardashians called herself a ‘flexitarian’ to express that she was a vegan, a non-vegetarian and a vegetarian, depending on the week and her schedule. The list goes on.

From ‘going steady’, ‘friends with benefits’, to ‘exclusivity’,  labels are how we have approached relationships for years. But for a generation that doesn’t want to be defined as anything anymore, calling their new relationship dynamics a ‘situationship’ only seems to add more confusion to the mix.

Definitions are hardly sacrosanct these days, and clearly, relationships aren’t either.

Views are personal.

(Edited by Zoya Bhatti)