Courtship is extinct, dating is dead, and...

... "hooking up" is the now new relational game in town. Actually, it's not that new; apparently it's been around for a while now. From what I can figure out, "hooking up" is another way of saying you're having casual sex with your friends, a sort of "swinging" that is quite popular—or should I say "normal"?—among teens and young singles.

I recently watched an episode ("Red Tide") of the television drama, "The Mentalist," in which "hooking up" played a central role in the plot. I was pleasantly surprised by how the show made a clear connection between casual sex and the loss of other moral inhibitions. The writers did a good job of showing, without being preachy or heavy handed, how human sexuality is not a toy or tool that can be simply compartmentalized, but is a powerful force that can destroy lives (both physically and otherwise) when handled wrongly. Sadly, of course, many of the detrimental, destructive effects of casual sex, "hooking up" and so forth aren't always immediately obvious, or they ever are obvious, to those engaged in them.

A recent column by Charles M. Blow in The New York Times talks about the "pros" and "cons" of "hooking up":

To help me understand this phenomenon, I called Kathleen Bogle, a professor at La Salle University in Philadelphia who has studied hooking up among college students and is the author of the 2008 book, “Hooking Up: Sex, Dating and Relationships on Campus.”

It turns out that everything is the opposite of what I remember. Under the old model, you dated a few times and, if you really liked the person, you might consider having sex. Under the new model, you hook up a few times and, if you really like the person, you might consider going on a date.

I asked her to explain the pros and cons of this strange culture. According to her, the pros are that hooking up emphasizes group friendships over the one-pair model of dating, and, therefore, removes the negative stigma from those who can’t get a date. As she put it, “It used to be that if you couldn’t get a date, you were a loser.” Now, she said, you just hang out with your friends and hope that something happens.

And that is a "pro"? I suppose the simplicity of this, uh, relational riual makes it easy to market: "Hooking Up in Three Easy Steps: Hanging, Hoping, and Happening!" Frankly, it sounds like a horrible combination of sloth and lust hiding in the guise of friendship. So, what about the "cons"?

The cons center on the issues of gender inequity. Girls get tired of hooking up because they want it to lead to a relationship (the guys don’t), and, as they get older, they start to realize that it’s not a good way to find a spouse. Also, there’s an increased likelihood of sexual assaults because hooking up is often fueled by alcohol.

Sloth. Lust. Betrayal. Sexual objectification. Drunkenness. Yeah, come to think of it, going on a date is downright boring and dull compared to dealing with all of that nastiness. (And, yes, we all know that there are a lot of different types of "dating," many of them no better than "hooking up.")  I'll even go out on a limb and bet that this combination of dubious qualities doesn't often result in long-lasting, authentic, loving relationships. Just a wild guess.

That’s not good. So why is there an increase in hooking up? According to Professor Bogle, it’s: the collapse of advanced planning, lopsided gender ratios on campus, delaying marriage, relaxing values and sheer momentum.

It used to be that “you were trained your whole life to date,” said Ms. Bogle. “Now we’ve lost that ability — the ability to just ask someone out and get to know them.”

The key word here, I think, is "trained." Without decent fathers, young men don't easily learn how to treat women, how to court, how to think about marriage (or being single). Without decent fathers, young women don't know what it's like to be treated with respect and given unconditional love. Without stable families, young people don't even have a concept of familial or relational stability, but are thrown early on into a mad cycle of finding temporary pleasure and meaning on a carousel of casual sex and shallow friendship. So, yes, a little preaching to the choir. But also a reminder to myself, as a father, of what is out there—and what I can and must do to fight it.

• Do Boys Need Dads? An IgnatiusInsight.com Interview with Maggie Gallagher, President of the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy

Comments

[Trubador]

I must say that when I was in my 20s in the 1980s the term "hooking up" didn't necessarily mean casual sex. It COULD mean that, but it also just meant that you went out with your friends and happened to meet someone at the nightclub you were at... got her number... maybe made out on the dance floor or in the parking lot, got her phone number.

It seems as though the term "hooking up" has evolved into a very specific meaning that wasn't always the case just 20+ years ago.

Back when my parents were growing up, having a "gay ol' time" meant something a LOT different than what that phrase has meant since then.

[Deacon Harold]

There's also "friends with benefits," which I'm sure you can imagine what that means (no, the benefits are not medical or dental!)

[Ed Peters]

Dating and courtship will come back when girls insist on it. If they don't, guys will never bother with it on their own.

[Telemachus]

I found this to be the most disturbing:

"According to her, the pros are that hooking up emphasizes group friendships over the one-pair model of dating, and, therefore, removes the negative stigma from those who can’t get a date... Now, she said, you just hang out with your friends and hope that something happens."

This is my interpretation / prediction: a young person essentially joins a tribe of intra-sexual cohorts, gradually coming to have a sexual relationship with every single one of them (homo- and hetero-, you know its coming eventually) until he effectively has a sexual relationship with the COLLECTIVE. There are no real emotional ties to any single one of them; he *might* be interested in "settling down" temporarily with a single one, but really, why not two? Three? Ah heck, "marry" the whole group and get the State tax-breaks!

Or perhaps he gets bored with them, or moves on to another "phase in life." Chances are he will take up with a new cohort, a new sex-collective... and...

Need I even mention "Brave New World"?

"Without decent fathers, young men don't easily learn how to treat women, how to court, how to think about marriage (or being single)."

Yup, and I'll testify to this personally, having grown up without a father since age two, and having had a sexual relationship with a woman for five years during my early twenties. We both figured we'd get married eventually... and then I began reverting to Catholicism and she couldn't handle it. Darn you Catholic Church for showing me the Light of Christ! :-D

[Dan]

This is the barbarity into which the Western world has fallen. Society has turned its back on the civiling influence of the Church and these are the results. It is beyond ironic that "feminist" ideologies have resulted in such a degredation of women.

[Skyhawk]

Exactly!

Which is the point Wendy Shalit made in "A Return to Modesty", good book...

[nan]

I don't see the issue of STDs mentioned in this discussion. Is it a pro or a con to share those lovely diseases with your friends? A sign of inclusiveness perhaps? An added bonus - if you decide to, or have the misfortune of, having a baby,you can share them with the li'l one too. And as taxpayers, we can share in the medical and societal costs of treatment. It's a win-win situation!

[Karl]

During the initial interview in the defense of our marriage, which my wife tried to have declared null, I was asked how long we courted before we were married. When I replied, about six months, I was treated to an admonisment from the Canonist/Priest for having not taken very long. This bigoted attack began a back and forth exchange which lead to the Priest telling me to leave and that he could/would not represent me in the defense of our marriage, as I would not put up with his defense of a Church hell bent on nullifying a Sacrament. Before he could hustle me out of his office I asked him how long his parents had been married, to which he answered over fifty years, to which I retorted regarding how long they had courted.

The priest ceased talking and his countenance changed from angered to pensive to somewhat embarrassed as he, after a distinct period of thought, answered, they had courted even a shorter time than my wife and I.

My point was made as he told me to leave.

It is not only men who "violate" courtships. But that is another battle.

We did not "hook up". We knew what we were doing and made our choices. Time is irrelevent regarding courtship. The exchange of consent is what matters.

[Adult Toys]

I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don't know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.