The Rise of the Situationship: Why We Fear Emotional Intimacy

Why Choose Between “Together” and “Apart”?

Why choose between being “together” or “apart” when you can have something in the middle? Love or friendship? It doesn’t matter. After all, not everything needs a name or a definition. Why put in the effort when life can be easy, light, and pleasant? But can one truly avoid making choices and build a healthy relationship based solely on transience? And why do we increasingly choose something fleeting and superficial instead of committing to serious, stable connections?

Modern individuals long for another human being and need closeness, yet simultaneously, they avoid emotional involvement to maintain their independence and autonomy. This mindset has birthed a model of functioning, characteristic of Gen Z (though not exclusively), which satisfies various needs while guaranteeing a safe distance. We call this a situationship—something between a relationship and a friendship. Or, in more colloquial terms, a relationship without commitment.

Together, Yet Separate

What is a situationship in practice and how can it be defined? Psychologists and sociologists, who are dedicating more research to these connections, primarily point to the presence of romantic features but without the greater involvement seen in planning a future, making binding declarations, or taking responsibility for a shared life.

It is not a classic relationship, nor is it a simple friendship, as sexual intimacy is a vital component. When asked to define the nature of their connection, people in this type of arrangement usually answer “it’s complicated,” which accurately captures the essence of the bond. On one hand, it is a relationship without commitment, but on the other, it is often based on some level of exclusivity. The description is misty and undefined—together, yet separate. However, it is worth identifying specific traits to help those who feel lost or uncertain in such a connection.

The “Here and Now” is What Counts

The primary trait is the inability to define the connection, because those involved do not want to (or perhaps cannot?) specify what binds them, and they make no promises or declarations. In other words: “only the here and now counts,” and the furthest plan is, at most, tomorrow’s coffee or dinner.

The lack of long-term vision is another characteristic based on the belief that “we live in the present because who knows what will happen in six months?” There is no talk of moving in together, formalizing the bond, buying an apartment, taking a shared mortgage, or having children. The only certainty is today. Even spending time together follows a specific approach: I need your company, but not for too long.

Situationships: Two Separate Lives

We talk because I need conversation, but on light topics that aren’t emotionally or ideologically demanding—more like a casual chat or an exchange of information. In a situationship, people avoid serious life topics, real problems, key past experiences, or committed future dreams.

These areas are too intimate, perhaps too risky, and sometimes too difficult and painful. An arrangement like this is meant to be light and pleasant because life itself is already demanding enough. Partners maintain separate lives; often, each functions within their own circle of friends who are never introduced to the other person. Furthermore, the partner is not introduced to the family, as this would unnecessarily complicate things, spark assumptions or hopes among loved ones, and tighten the bonds in the arrangement.

Why We Enter Relationships Without Commitment

The popularity of this type of connection is growing at an alarming rate, especially among young people. What causes this and what could be the consequences? First and foremost, psychologists point to an intensifying and deepening fear of intimacy in the 21st century.

This is usually the result of failed or even dysfunctional relationships with parents, from which a teenager enters adulthood with a significant burden of negative experiences. The model of closeness a child learns at home largely dictates how they build intimacy in their own adult life.

What Influences Our Relationship Decisions

If a home was filled with anxiety, parents didn’t guarantee safety, and their reactions were unpredictable or contradictory, it’s hard to imagine that person building a healthy model of closeness as an adult. Escaping emotional commitment is actually a defense mechanism against perceived rejection, pressure, or the high expectations experienced in youth.

On the other hand, regardless of childhood fears, everyone longs for closeness and desires it deep down, even if they fear it. That is why a situationship acts as a safe antidote to loneliness. For those who don’t want to sacrifice their independence, social meetings within this framework seem like an ideal solution. The need for conversation, watching a movie together, a walk, a shared meal, or satisfying sexual needs partially fills the inner void while leaving room for autonomy.

Career First?

Finally, another reason for the rise of this form of connection is the increasing emphasis on career and professional development. For many young people, full commitment in a serious relationship seems impossible to achieve alongside their professional goals. A situationship appears as a compromise: I prioritize my career and meet someone only when I have the time, energy, and desire—without pressure, expectations, or obligations from either side.

More Pros or Cons?

Undoubtedly, this setup must have many advantages given its popularity. It guarantees flexibility and convenience. Lack of commitment, no binding declarations, no pressure, and freedom of action are certainly the biggest pluses. However, the situation is not as comfortable as it may seem at first glance.

There is always the risk that one party will develop deeper feelings and want more than what was initially agreed upon. In such cases, the connection leaves behind only a broken heart and a sense of disappointment. Emotional instability seems to be inherently woven into the nature of the arrangement.

A Relationship Without Partner Support

You never know if you can truly count on the presence, company, or support of the other person, as everything is decided spontaneously. This fluidity creates a constant sense of instability. Since nothing is promised and everything is temporary and fleeting, the connection itself can be cut off from one day to the next. Even in a non-committal arrangement, it is hard to imagine that a sudden end won’t cause pain, longing, or a difficult sense of loss.

It is also worth asking to what extent building these superficial relations results from simple laziness and convenience. Serious emotional involvement is far more demanding.

Food for Thought

It’s not just about a pleasant afternoon twice a week; it’s about treating another person as a permanent presence in your life, as someone chosen as special. Being ready to make concrete choices seems to be an increasing challenge today. It is easier to eat dinner together and talk about nothing to “kill” boredom than to build a real bond.

That is why awareness is so important. This decision should be deep and well-thought-out—conscious not only of the immediate advantages but, above all, the hidden emotional dangers and risks inherent in a situationship.

Read the original article in Polish: Wybieramy „związek bez zobowiązań”. Efekt: rosnący strach przed bliskością