What a world. When a young man, I conducted serious conversations by mail.* Old USPS mail. Not “E” mail. A normal, lucky conversation span was send a letter on Tuesday, hope a local person gets it by Wednesday, hope they respond by Thursday, mail it on Friday, and I get an answer by Monday. When I used the phone, someone at the receiving location had to hear the landline ring before any conversation started and several tries had to be made before someone was near enough to answer. Even then, a father or mother might not have gotten the correct message to the son or daughter because of forgetfulness or old-fashioned parental caution. An aged parent or grandparent was always a crapshoot, especially if they asked you to repeat words.
These days a text, call, or email gets from my Personal Communicating Device (PCD), either a tablet, watch, laptop, or phone (TWLP pronounced twelp), gets to the receiving PCD, instantly*.
In all cases, however, the receiving party of any mode of communication has the power and the right to respond any time they want and in any way they want. Mailed letters were often responded to by a landline phone call with the accompanying requirement of me or another human being near enough to be an “answerer”. Thank God for answering machines, though they did add another level of doubt about the accurate receipt of the message by the intended. New, modern TWLP communications can also be responded to by the receiver in the way the receiver chooses, unless specific instructions say otherwise.
Modern or Old Fashioned, there is/was always an implied contract about what was required by both sender and receiver. Sidebar: In management schools and marriage counseling sessions, I learned about The Black Box (TBB) in the middle of all normal, human communications. Speaker A says “X” into TBB but there is no guarantee Receiver B hears “X” coming out of TBB.
Understanding TBB is the main impetus for the terms of the contract: the original sender is expecting an answer from the original receiver, unless otherwise clearly stated or dubiously implied. Note: subsequent communications can be outside the contract. especially if a responder enjoys sending insipid, repetitive texts.
“Ghosting,” per Google, “is when someone suddenly stops all communication and ignores all further attempts to connect without giving warning or explanation.” Ghosting has infected communications since we started talking to each other, and was easier—and unnamed–in the old days. Mail “didn’t get to me” or “I didn’t hear the phone ring” were rude, but still possibly innocent explanations for missed messages, especially given the time frame. Theoretically, a mailed letter or phone call could even be forgotten by the sender, himself**, without noting the lack of any response if enough time elapsed.
So what’s the harm in ignoring a received communication?
I’ll tell you. Forget about the “contract”, and think about the sender. It is a civic and societal duty to respond, period. It is also compassionate to respond, especially in romantic—or potentially romantic—situations. Especially if you are the “dumper” in a relationship and the “dumpee” is ignorant of his/her/their “mistakes”. The internet is full of stories about partners and spouses ghosting each other with dramatic and sometimes mortal consequences.
Common sense: communication can stop the drama.*** We won’t mention the Golden Rule, but imagine if every relationship had a breakup clause concerning implied communications based on the Golden Rule. And everyone obeyed the clause.
To all ghosters: how would you feel if you were the ghostee and someone did it to you?
You’d feel like crap. Please feel that when you ghost, too. Or worse.
*Indicators and notifications say so on my TWLP.
**Or herself. Or themselves.
***The sad thing about rules concerning society and common sense, is the number of odd humans who have no regard for either. If your partner or spouse is “out there”, all “contracts” are voided. But do NOT abuse this exception.
