I read the article, and it wasn't all that insightful, to be honest.
However, this is a topic I'm very interested in because my fiancee is the first person I've ever met that does not reply back soon to a text message and hardly picks up her phone.
When we first started dating, this was a little strange. She would sometimes reply back within minutes. Other times she would take up to two hours. I couldn't gauge her interest in me.
It turns out due to her age and culture (non-Western), she just simply does not use her phone that much. So she isn't looking at it a lot.
We've argued that there must be a middle ground, though, and this is where it gets interesting.
This isn't really a technology problem. It is a philosophical one.
When we deal with people everyday, there is an unwritten and unspoken social contract we agree on. The case for not replying immediately to a stranger or an acquaintance is easily accepted, I believe. As the article says, you may be driving, you may be in another phone call, busy reading or studying. A stranger or acquaintance takes a longer time to sit higher up in your priority list. This is a basic socialization rule. I accept these things easily, and what's more, I act according to this concept. I basically categorise people's importance in my world. Even if I've read the text message, seen the missed phone call, or read the email. These categories are key, I believe.
However, when a loved one, your significant other, spouse, fiancee or fiance, messages you or phones you or emails you, it is a totally different ball game, in my view. Emergency purposes, communicating your whereabouts sooner makes cohabitation much easier, especially when planning your day, unexpected plans, people know your schedule/routine and any changes may cause grief to your loved ones, etc.
I do feel like family whom you do not live with is considered a step down in the priority list, but those you live with, specifically a partner, is different. And feeling insulted when they don't respond within 30 minutes at most generally, is pretty natural.
Learn to trust people, especially your significant other.
Their use habits have nothing to do with your relationship.
Demanding that someone change gets ugly quick, especially when you single them out as a unique case. Why don't those standards apply to everyone else?
Be honest about the role of fear in your rationalization. Sounds like there's a lot you can learn about living a more balanced life from this person. Unexpected events will always happen, technology won't change that, and blaming their occurrence (partially or totally) on a lack of communication is just not right.
My significant other and I are a lot alike. We've happily accepted what it takes to live with another person, as two people who were used to doing stuff on their own and living alone. She doesn't speak English well, and learning her language has been fascinating!
Thankfully, we are the happiest we've ever been. I think knowing someone who is from a totally different culture from you puts things in perspective and the dynamic is totally different from being with someone from your own culture.
We often read things in Western publications, and laugh and say, "Wow, this is so American/Canadian/Western". It's funny how everything we read in English totally never even considers that there might be another "normal". Even in scientific publications.
With regard to those standards applying to everyone, sorry, I'm not Christian and don't believe we should love everyone and give everyone our undivided attention. This, of course, is an ideological difference. My time is important. However, if I do choose to give you my undivided attention, I will listen to you very carefully.
Personally, I don't identify with any titles, and that's where my compassion for other situations comes from. (People do try though; just the other day someone attempted to label my image as "Amish surfer"...)
My point being: it's irrelevant wether someone is "Western", Christian or otherwise; all that is important is their desire. Language is often inadequate for expressing these motivations (even moreso when there is a barrier). Respect others as capable, intelligent humans who have experienced just as much circumstance as you, and allow them to make their own decisions.
Their conclusions will likely be different from your own, but that shouldn't be offensive. Everyone is unique.
This isn't really a technology problem. It is a philosophical one.
Yep. My cell phone is for my convenience not anyone else's (except my spouse). They're not paying my bill. For all intents and purposes people should think of my cell phone as a land line, assume it is plugged in charging next to my bed. Also, if I'm eating a meal, entertaining/have guests, not in the mood, I will not answer your call or immediately reply to your text messages.
Now, if you're my spouse, I expect more timely responses if you are aware of an attempt to communicate (text message, missed call, incoming call) but try to understand that they may be busy or unable to get back to me right away.
but those you live with, specifically a partner, is different. And feeling insulted when they don't respond within 30 minutes at most generally, is pretty natural.
I agree. That's my biggest irritation. If I get done with work and try to get a hold of my wife but can't. If I get home and she and the children are not there my blood boils. We have come to an agreement. If she leaves the house or will be away from her phone for a period (in the pool), especially around when I get done with work, that she will send me a text message letting me know. This helps greatly.
Agree. If I have a formal relationship with you, or I'm just a casual not-so-great friend, I understand receiving messages at any convenient time. But with loved ones, especially if they've seen the message, a no-reply within a reasonable time would just indicate lack of interest in me. Of course they might be busy, in which case I'd expect a response indicating the same. Mobile communication is easy, it just takes some etiquettes you previously hadn't learned.
I would find it infuriating if I was expected to reply to every contact within 30 minutes. Sure, if it's important I'll reply. But otherwise? It feels control-freaky.
While I admit that at times I wish I could Reply Later to my wife, I remember that almost every time I text her, it's a matter of relative time sensitivity, even if not important.
"Do you want me to buy X or Y beer?" "Do we have soccer tonight?" "Do I need to come home early?", "what were the days of our planned vacation?"
Almost all of those are non-important questions. Not an emergency. However, in each case, I'm blocked from further action (or risk angering her when I buy the wrong things, come home late). It's frustrating to be standing at the grocery store, give up after two minutes, and then get a text when you're in line that X >> Y.
This is, frankly, one reason I really prefer using Facebook Messenger -- it's easy to send a thumbs-up response if I don't feel like typing, and I can respond easily on my computer rather than having to pick up my phone.
Totally agree that it's very controlling and somewhat selfish to expect quick replies. 30 minutes is just an arbitrary line waiting for a misunderstanding or argument. Face-to-face and phone calls are different. If it's important, call. If it's not, I'll get to a reply when I'm free or not interrupting someone else I'm actually communicating with IRL.
But isn't expecting your spouse to answer your call immediately being "control freak" as well? Who do you think I am to answer your call, a Slave? Seriously, this s*it has gone to annoying levels. Expecting timely response to time sensitive questions is just expecting the other person to have some basic "mobile etiquettes", not an intent to control them. Not all questions are life-or-death critical, some just needs quick response. "My friend is asking whether you'd like to come to dinner at his place tonight". A simple "Yes", or "No" would suffice. Calling for every such thing is actually much more time consuming for both parties involved (though that's the last option).
Comments
I read the article, and it wasn't all that insightful, to be honest.
However, this is a topic I'm very interested in because my fiancee is the first person I've ever met that does not reply back soon to a text message and hardly picks up her phone.
When we first started dating, this was a little strange. She would sometimes reply back within minutes. Other times she would take up to two hours. I couldn't gauge her interest in me.
It turns out due to her age and culture (non-Western), she just simply does not use her phone that much. So she isn't looking at it a lot.
We've argued that there must be a middle ground, though, and this is where it gets interesting.
This isn't really a technology problem. It is a philosophical one.
When we deal with people everyday, there is an unwritten and unspoken social contract we agree on. The case for not replying immediately to a stranger or an acquaintance is easily accepted, I believe. As the article says, you may be driving, you may be in another phone call, busy reading or studying. A stranger or acquaintance takes a longer time to sit higher up in your priority list. This is a basic socialization rule. I accept these things easily, and what's more, I act according to this concept. I basically categorise people's importance in my world. Even if I've read the text message, seen the missed phone call, or read the email. These categories are key, I believe.
However, when a loved one, your significant other, spouse, fiancee or fiance, messages you or phones you or emails you, it is a totally different ball game, in my view. Emergency purposes, communicating your whereabouts sooner makes cohabitation much easier, especially when planning your day, unexpected plans, people know your schedule/routine and any changes may cause grief to your loved ones, etc.
I do feel like family whom you do not live with is considered a step down in the priority list, but those you live with, specifically a partner, is different. And feeling insulted when they don't respond within 30 minutes at most generally, is pretty natural.
Learn to trust people, especially your significant other.
Their use habits have nothing to do with your relationship.
Demanding that someone change gets ugly quick, especially when you single them out as a unique case. Why don't those standards apply to everyone else?
Be honest about the role of fear in your rationalization. Sounds like there's a lot you can learn about living a more balanced life from this person. Unexpected events will always happen, technology won't change that, and blaming their occurrence (partially or totally) on a lack of communication is just not right.
There are a lot of assumptions you are making.
My significant other and I are a lot alike. We've happily accepted what it takes to live with another person, as two people who were used to doing stuff on their own and living alone. She doesn't speak English well, and learning her language has been fascinating!
Thankfully, we are the happiest we've ever been. I think knowing someone who is from a totally different culture from you puts things in perspective and the dynamic is totally different from being with someone from your own culture.
We often read things in Western publications, and laugh and say, "Wow, this is so American/Canadian/Western". It's funny how everything we read in English totally never even considers that there might be another "normal". Even in scientific publications.
With regard to those standards applying to everyone, sorry, I'm not Christian and don't believe we should love everyone and give everyone our undivided attention. This, of course, is an ideological difference. My time is important. However, if I do choose to give you my undivided attention, I will listen to you very carefully.
Hope you're doing well.
Personally, I don't identify with any titles, and that's where my compassion for other situations comes from. (People do try though; just the other day someone attempted to label my image as "Amish surfer"...)
My point being: it's irrelevant wether someone is "Western", Christian or otherwise; all that is important is their desire. Language is often inadequate for expressing these motivations (even moreso when there is a barrier). Respect others as capable, intelligent humans who have experienced just as much circumstance as you, and allow them to make their own decisions.
Their conclusions will likely be different from your own, but that shouldn't be offensive. Everyone is unique.
Yep. My cell phone is for my convenience not anyone else's (except my spouse). They're not paying my bill. For all intents and purposes people should think of my cell phone as a land line, assume it is plugged in charging next to my bed. Also, if I'm eating a meal, entertaining/have guests, not in the mood, I will not answer your call or immediately reply to your text messages.
Now, if you're my spouse, I expect more timely responses if you are aware of an attempt to communicate (text message, missed call, incoming call) but try to understand that they may be busy or unable to get back to me right away.
I agree. That's my biggest irritation. If I get done with work and try to get a hold of my wife but can't. If I get home and she and the children are not there my blood boils. We have come to an agreement. If she leaves the house or will be away from her phone for a period (in the pool), especially around when I get done with work, that she will send me a text message letting me know. This helps greatly.
Agree. If I have a formal relationship with you, or I'm just a casual not-so-great friend, I understand receiving messages at any convenient time. But with loved ones, especially if they've seen the message, a no-reply within a reasonable time would just indicate lack of interest in me. Of course they might be busy, in which case I'd expect a response indicating the same. Mobile communication is easy, it just takes some etiquettes you previously hadn't learned.
I would find it infuriating if I was expected to reply to every contact within 30 minutes. Sure, if it's important I'll reply. But otherwise? It feels control-freaky.
While I admit that at times I wish I could Reply Later to my wife, I remember that almost every time I text her, it's a matter of relative time sensitivity, even if not important.
"Do you want me to buy X or Y beer?" "Do we have soccer tonight?" "Do I need to come home early?", "what were the days of our planned vacation?"
Almost all of those are non-important questions. Not an emergency. However, in each case, I'm blocked from further action (or risk angering her when I buy the wrong things, come home late). It's frustrating to be standing at the grocery store, give up after two minutes, and then get a text when you're in line that X >> Y.
This is, frankly, one reason I really prefer using Facebook Messenger -- it's easy to send a thumbs-up response if I don't feel like typing, and I can respond easily on my computer rather than having to pick up my phone.
Totally agree that it's very controlling and somewhat selfish to expect quick replies. 30 minutes is just an arbitrary line waiting for a misunderstanding or argument. Face-to-face and phone calls are different. If it's important, call. If it's not, I'll get to a reply when I'm free or not interrupting someone else I'm actually communicating with IRL.
But isn't expecting your spouse to answer your call immediately being "control freak" as well? Who do you think I am to answer your call, a Slave? Seriously, this s*it has gone to annoying levels. Expecting timely response to time sensitive questions is just expecting the other person to have some basic "mobile etiquettes", not an intent to control them. Not all questions are life-or-death critical, some just needs quick response. "My friend is asking whether you'd like to come to dinner at his place tonight". A simple "Yes", or "No" would suffice. Calling for every such thing is actually much more time consuming for both parties involved (though that's the last option).
Yes, to every contact is just really strange. I'd like to clarify that is not what I meant, in case my response read like that.