In the early 2000s, a new word started popping up to describe the ever-changing dating scene — situationship.
Officially added to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary in September 2023, it has since become a staple for how Gen Z describes their love lives. For those unfamiliar with the term, it’s defined as “a romantic relationship whose members have not officially committed to it.”
Simply put, it’s all the benefits of a relationship, with none of the burden. Participants aren’t forced to emotionally invest because the physical aspects of a relationship happen regardless of whether or not they actually care about the other person. Situationships create a false sense of intimacy — knowing someone without really knowing them. Once the emotional factor of the relationship is removed, all that’s left is a physical exchange with the other person. With this comes the transaction of love: human connection becomes a commodity rather than a profound, emotional experience.
Are we to blame for this change? Is there someone to blame? The answer lies beyond modern perspectives on love: the commodification of connection has been carefully guided by how much the “free market” way of thinking has seeped into our everyday lives.
Neoliberal economic theory has profoundly shaped the United States and, therefore, impacted how we as Americans interact in society. In order to properly understand how neoliberalism functions, a few fundamental definitions need to be addressed.
First, we prioritize goods based on how much value we instinctively assign to them. In economics jargon, this is called marginal benefit, or how much satisfaction one gains from consuming an additional unit of any given good or service. Consumers reach their optimal level of consumption when the marginal benefit of a good equals its price. At this point, the value of consuming one more unit is exactly equal to its cost, making every additional unit not worth purchasing. The basis of the U.S. economy, and by extension, Americans’ lives, relies on this idea of supply and demand. However, theory doesn’t always translate to reality. In the real world, there isn’t always an infinite supply of goods, which leads to scarcity. With scarcity, the perceived value of the good increases, making it a more valuable commodity.
Another fundamental tenet of neoliberal economics is meritocracy. In a neoliberal system, meritocracy is the fundamental belief that achievement is rewarded with success. In other words, the harder the worker works, the more valuable the labor, the more likely they are to be successful. Though you may not realize it, many decisions we make in our day-to-day lives are influenced by these principles. Sometimes, even feelings like love, which inherently need to be separated from neoliberal economic models, fall prey to their attractive certainty.
At its core, love doesn’t act on a level of rationality the way the “free market” does. Love requires individuals to fully immerse themselves in its intensity and passion. However, love is also terrifying. It requires both parties to open their souls to each other. That level of vulnerability, especially in a day and age where public personas are so highly curated, is hard to stomach. The raw, imperfect, human sides of ourselves are on display for another human being to see, with no place to hide. For fear of showing vulnerability, one will do anything to maintain control. Our understanding of control is influenced by systems we know well: supply and demand, scarcity, and meritocracy. However, once one applies neoliberal ideas to love and relationships, situationships begin to form.
There is an interplay of supply and demand and scarcity to the extreme in situationships. One of the two individuals that are entangled often has an upper hand, creating a dichotomous structure within the interaction. When the perpetrator begins to put their guard up against vulnerability, they inadvertently create a scarcity of attention. The other individual begins craving more attention, making the perceived value of the perpetrator’s attention skyrocket. So the victim works harder, doing everything they can as they hope for an iota of attention in return. And when that desire is met, that hard work feels as though it was worth the struggle. The victim then needs to up the ante for every other iteration of this draining game of cat and mouse. They must work harder, but the reward doesn’t change. This enables a vicious cycle that never really ends, unless the perpetrator’s willingness to provide attention ends or the victim no longer feels satisfaction from the entanglement.
Further, when relationships are viewed through a neoliberal lens, repressive systems like meritocracy are reinforced. It becomes a competition of individuality, instead of a communal experience, which is what unconditional love provides. Even when you do “succeed” by having the upper hand, you inevitably lose. In the short term, you feel in control, but that control is a mirage. It’s true, you have the other person’s beating heart in the palm of your hands. But eventually, the validation dries up, and you have nothing to show for your time together besides another person’s heartbreak.
This idea is similar to the assumptions meritocracy makes. Realistically, meritocracy forsakes the many facets of society that can prevent success. Workers put as much energy and effort as they can into their work, yet they won’t make any sort of lateral movement in society. This leaves them burnt out and with emptier pockets than before. As such, situationships model the harsh reality that the neoliberal system refuses to admit. Both require a certain level of denial to properly function.
In order to break free from this way of thinking, we must be willing to examine our value systems and embrace a society that prioritizes authenticity and vulnerability over commodification and scarcity. Our love for one another in relationships should be provided unconditionally and without reservation. In other words, we must stop treating relationships and human feelings like commodities when in reality they are public goods.
When referring to public goods, I don’t mean it in the pure economic sense (a good that is non-rivalrous and non-excludable, like a public library), but rather from a social perspective. Public goods do not fit into the framework of neoliberalism because they are inherently inefficient and are accessible to everyone. Our society has implicitly done the same, trading pure romantic feelings for commodity and marginal value. When choosing efficiency over commitment, the tradeoff becomes a lack of empathy and a shortage of real human connection.
We need love to thrive. Without it, what does humanity have to show for? Having relationships where we can be vulnerable teaches empathy and selflessness, both of which are fundamental to the continual success of humankind. Unconditional love is how our ancestors were able to persevere in the wake of adversity, be it war, famine, or natural disaster.
But beyond just the continuation of humanity, love changes lives. Take the landmark civil rights case Loving v. Virginia, where Richard Loving and Mildred Jeter’s love helped overturn longstanding legal precedents and led to the legalization of interracial marriage. Or take science, where Marie and Pierre Curie’s devotion to each other is what fueled Marie to continue pursuing scientific research even after Pierre had passed. She secured her second Nobel Prize, alongside making other groundbreaking contributions to science.
Neither of these accomplishments would have ever occurred without the help of unconditional love. Do you really think Marie and Pierre would’ve achieved all they did if they were in a situationship? Radioactivity would have to figure itself out. Would Loving v. Virginia even have gone to court if Mildred and Richard were playing a game of cat and mouse? Their stories serve as proof that when the court of public opinion comes to order, the jury agrees unanimously that unconditional love must be provided free of restraint.
Undoubtedly, our infatuation with situationships signals a deeper concern — our lives have slowly been stripped of true meaning and unbridled passion. The most instinctive feeling a human can possess, love, has been subjected to the cruel calculus of economics.
To combat this, we must make unconditional love the norm. Forsake efficiency and opt for the uncomfortable, arduous, long-lasting journey that is true partnership. Abandon convention and choose to have those intimate conversations. Do the difficult task of being vulnerable with a fellow human being. Stop putting up a facade, because the “devil-may-care” attitude is so last year.
Go out there and love! Love without hesitation, because that’s the bravest thing to do in a world that views it as a cardinal sin.
Featured Image: Adobe Stock
