on ghosting and the ethics slow texting
I have been thinking a lot about the notion of ghosting, where someone suddenly steps out of a personal or romantic relationship by ending all digital communications. In my circles, this kind of behavior is generally denounced. The omnipresence and inexpensiveness of mobile texting has made it customary for any person to juggle intermittently updated conversations with numerous people at once. The expectation of quick responses is of course facilitated by features like 'read reciept' checkmarks, that make people anxious to check repeatedly how much the recipients of messages actually care for them.
I will admit readily that I can regularly take weeks or sometimes months to respond to people, even those that I hold dearly. My delay is almost never done out of personal spite; it is most often the consequence of a cumulation of other demands from life. Despite this, I used to hold others in contempt if they didn't respond quickly enough, often resorting to a desparate second or third message some weeks later. This contempt is however self-defeating, as it is clear that most people simply have a justifiable shortage of attention to match the amount of people they actually care for.
Recently, I have been trying to embrace a personal philosophy of slow texting, just sending a message and being grateful if a response ever comes. We should sometimes recognize the fundamental unilateralism of digital communication: you can't demand people to respond immediately to casual conversation, and I think that you shouldn't want to either.
This matter reminds me of the olden days, when communication wasn't instantaneous, and where personal relationships were supported through the exchange of letters. Some letters began with admissions of the writer's anxiety and uncertainty in waiting for months for any kind of response. One wrote with the expectations that their letter might be thrown in the trash, lost at sea, or eaten by the dog.
Email me with your own ideas about ghosting and slow texting, but read this treatise more carefully if you do so expecting a quick response.
---///---
«Previous