[vijayr]

I dunno, wouldn't this amount to 'using' people? How would you feel if someone else did this to you so they could practice their relationship skills, in the hope of finding 'quality' people (as you mentioned) according to their definition of quality? It is true relationships come and go in our lives but deliberately using someone for relationship skills practice sounds kinda weird.

Interesting question though - thank you for bringing it up.

[devishard]

So, serious question, what kind of dating would you consider not using the other person? Isn't any sort of dating just an exchange where both parties hope to have their needs met? This just sounds like benten10 is just acknowledging that is current need is to gain experience dating. There are certainly lots of people out there with this need so I doubt benten10 will have trouble finding people whose needs are compatible with his.

Sure, there are people who don't want to go on "practice" dates, but there is literally no human characteristic that someone out there doesn't want. In the long run I want to have kids, so if I could somehow filter out all the people who won't want to have kids in 5-10 years, I'd do it, but it's not realistically possible to do that. Why is "I want practice dating" different from "I want to have kids"?

[vijayr]

There is a difference between

"I'm genuinely interested in this person, but it is a deal breaker if she doesn't want kids. I'm going on a date with her and I hope to find out soon" and

"I'm not interested in this person at all. But I'm going on a date with her anyway, just so I can gain some experience and courage to ask someone else out"

To me, the second one feels weird, as the other person's intentions might be serious.

Most people do some variation of the second one while looking for jobs, partners, friendships etc. I suppose it is just a personal thing.

[devishard]

Why is "Can I have kids with this person?" considered more interest in the person than "Can I get experience dating with this person?"

I think you're being pretty arbitrary in deciding that one of these is an attribute of the person and one isn't. I don't think that there's any basis for making that distinction.

What I'm seeing here looks a lot more like a visceral reaction that I see from a lot of people who come across some form of intentionality in seeking romance. There's an underlying idea that the only "correct" way to date is to just let nature take its course somehow. Any attempt to metacognate in that area is seen as dishonest, trying too hard, manipulative, etc. Here, you're characterizing the other person's intentions as "serious", implying that dating to get experience dating isn't serious. But for someone who finds their lack of dating experience crippling and yet, as a human, is to some extent unable to find happiness until they can find good relationships, getting dating experience is a very serious goal.

But in the end, dating is just about people meeting their goals. The initial stage is figuring out the other person's goals and seeing if they're compatible with your own. So I don't think we have any obligation to go into dating with any specific goals. As long as we're honest, open, and kind about our goals, there's no harm if our goals don't align with someone else's. Sure, maybe the other person is serious about forming a long-term relationship with you, but it's not your responsibility to meet that need; it's just your responsibility to be honest about your goals so you don't lead them on.

[klinskyc]

Well, as long as the actual relationship was fun and the mutual relationship expectations were in the same ball park, I don't think there's anything unethical.

I guess it'd be weird if the sole purpose was for relationship skills, but I think there's a large middle ground