Originally Posted By: Pepperband
Dating is renting. Trying the relationship on for size/fit, while not partaking in relationship negations per se. Taking the relationship for a test-drive, if you will.
Which is why living together while dating can be so confusing and probably mis-guided.
Often, in this modern world, dating couples move in together as "the next step". Meaning, I presume, a step towards marriage.
But, there's a catch. (as usual)

Dating while living together = rental agreement becomes the relationship standard.

Does this make sense?


Not yet; but it might if you can help me understand a couple things.

Your statement "Dating is renting" throws me off because I think dating can either be freeloading OR renting. From the chapter, "What You See Is What You Get," Dr. Harley clearly states that he was a Freeloader while dating:

Quote:
I began dating when I was fifteen [...] Between the ages of fifteen and seventeen, I was a Freeloader. I expected the girl I dated to put up with whatever I had in mind

Assuming you agree that dating can be either freeloading or renting, what perplexes me is, why would you choose to be a Renter?

From the section, "The Renter's Agreement Inspires Arguments and Fights":

Quote:
While both the Buyer's and the Freeloader's agreements limit the influence of the Giver and Taker, the Renter's agreement places no restrictions on them. In fact, it actually encourages the worst influences of each.

Why would you want to adopt a dating strategy that encourages the worst influence of your Giver and Taker?

I'm not doubting Dr. Harley's assertion that Renting is an essential phase in the development of a romantic relationship; I just want to understand why it's essential. Clearly there's a drawback, but what's the benefit?