The Insidious SMS

Text messaging is not addressed in The Rules for Online Dating, but there is a bit of guidance out there on the subject. The one time I received a text from a dating prospect during this experiment, I did not respond per this article:

The only way to make a guy take things to the next level is to keep some things sacred. With texting that's impossible. Until he asks you out for a Saturday night date, do not reply to his texts.

Whereas the Rules permit a return e-mail after 24 hours, they forbid replying to texts at all until a Legit Date is on the radar. This seems extreme. Since the article's publication date in August of 2008, texting has become much much more common, and it's not as easy just not to respond. In 2008 I seem to think it was a realistic possibility that someone might not have signed up for texting on their cell phone plan; today, not so much. It's also generational; Fein & Schneider are from a generation that just doesn't use texts as much. I am from a generation that uses them all the frigging time. I myself prefer texts to phone calls for logistical matters.

That said, I think that absent special circumstances, the no-texting rule is spot on. By texting you indicate constant availability. I have single girlfriends who are avid texters, and the relationships that develop as a result always seem to be disappointing - often casual and dead-end.

Plus, the texting rule doesn't lend itself to the 24-hour rule the way e-mailing does. If you have your phone with you all the time as almost everybody does, you saw his text message before 24 hours were up. Given that text messages are so quick, there's no real reason to wait to respond other than game-playing, including being too busy, an excuse that might work for the first text, but will likely become transparent rather quickly. This is a bit of a fiction, given that many people get e-mails the way they get texts nowadays and the type of e-mails you're allowed to send are also extremely quick. For now though, it is a fiction that people are willing to put up with.

While setting up a date over e-mail has become accepted (as acknowledged in the Online Dating Rules, Rule #14: Don't Force the Relationship from E-mail to Phone), setting up a date over the instantaneous and low-commitment text still seems lazy, crude, and just wrong. This video seemed apropos even though it's a different kind of relationship maneuver.




In early 2009, one guy wrote an article aimed at female SMS victims:

[A]long comes text messaging, beep beeping like a beacon of light towards the shallow world of manhood, offering the perfect weapon against verbal interaction. We can make you feel desired whilst having a beer with our mates at the pub. We have time to deliver the perfect funny line. It enables us to absorb your probing questions and reply with confidence. Even end the conversation with a suggestive rendezvous, without committing to a date, and still come out looking good...

So what’s the answer if you really like the guy? Stop making it easy for him to keep you at arms length. He’s riding Message Street and there’s no sign of traffic. If you want him, you have to turn the tables. It’s time to get out of the frozen party pies, and into the pepperoni. It means taking text to the trenches. Where the hunter becomes the hunted and one false move can be fatal.

The author proceeds to recommend a protocol for taking the relationship off text. You start by ignoring a guy who midnight texts you for three days, then send a short reply saying you've been busy. When the guy responds, you can respond and suggest he call - the Rules would not approve. Then the author includes this excessively metaphorical gem:

When he calls, be friendly but not over-enthusiastic. If he asks to meet you within the next 3 days, stick him on a plate, Glad Wrap him, and plonk him behind your box of choccy’s and half finished bottle of bubbly. If he suggests next week, pull him off the hook, tell him to kiss your proverbial goodbye, and throw him back in the sea.

Putting aside the groan-worthy style, this passage is intriguing. This is (I think) a guy essentially advising girls when the guy is a schmuck, but in a way that is the exact opposite of The Rules. The Rules suggests that asking for next week = booking time with you in advance = good. This dude seems to think asking for next week = lack of interest = bad? It's not really clear. Plus, I honestly have no idea what is meant by "kiss your proverbial goodbye" or "Glad Wrap him." However, it is a guy, wouldn't he know better than a couple of middle aged women what indicates interest and not?

Dating coach Evan Mark Katz similarly writes:

And as long as you let them do it, they will continue to do it. Because texting is only enabled by the person who writes back to the text. If you don’t respond to texts, guess what? You’re letting him know that it’s a poor way to reach you.

...

[T]he truth is, Rikki, you don’t need men who won’t call you. It’s a self-selecting process. If he’s a good man who is genuinely interested in you, he will make the kind of effort that reveals this. If five minutes on the phone is too much work for him, it speaks for itself.

This guy's approach is a little more flexible, suggesting that you might even go so far as to tell him that texting isn't a good way to reach you or that you prefer phone.

The flip side is the advice guys are getting on texting.

The best usage of the post-first-date text is its perceived innocence. Acceptable messages would be: “Hey, I had a great night with you. I can’t wait to do it again,” or, “Just heard someone laugh exactly like that woman we sat next to the other night, except this time she was 60 and had a German accent.” Little tidbits are reminders that you haven’t lost sight of the time you spent together, but avoid formalities that should be settled in person.

Under no circumstances should a man plan his second date with a woman through text. Things like, “Hey, can I pick you up at eight o'clock on Tuesday for a follow-up?” can be detrimental to an early couple’s dynamic. Leave second date plans, or any follow-up plans for that matter, for the traditional phone conversations we all know and love though increasingly try to avoid.

I think the Rules would approve of Askmen.com's take, but would not permit the girl to respond to the post-first-date text unless perhaps it had a direct question in it. If it had a direct question, The Rules might permit a response after the date.

As mentioned above, I only have one piece of anecdotal evidence so far, and it's mixed. I did not respond to a post-meeting text that was similar to Askmen.com's recommended post-first date text. The guy did not call. Some have suggested that by not responding to the text I indicated a lack of interest and discouraged him from calling. The Rules responds that if so, the guy is weak and deserves to be nexted.

Aside: in trying to google for this article, I found my blog.