My partner and I just had a talk about it. Basically, she celebrated her birthday today. I was on her party, and it was fun, but I left after around 2 hours to get home and relax a bit. After I arrived, a friend of mine texted me and asked me if I wanted to go to a lake and see the sunset. I agreed, we went to the lake and went swimming in it; it was really nice. Later, after arriving at my partners, she talked with me that it hurts her that I went out with someone else on her birthday, doing a romantically coded activity.
To be honest, I realize that I don't have a single clue what is coded as a romantically coded activity. For me, this was something completely okay and appropriate, because it is for me clearly a friend-thing; but my partner explained to me that the combination of going out with another person on her birthday and going to a sea, which is a secluded place, just heavily connotates it in a romantic way.
I understand that what I've done here wasn't right, and that I have responsibility here. Even though I didn't want to hurt my partner, it is still my responsibility to inform myself here on romantically conmotated things you shouldn't do in a partnership. So, dear people of Lemmy, what does constitute a romantic moment?
Edit: I've left out some information which seems to be important for the whole picture . I've copied it out of my comment and adding it here:
Me and my gf got together in August of last year, so basically 8 months ago; we were friends for half a year before that. She got cheated on in her long distance relationship before.
The friend who invited me to the sea I actually know for almost as long as my partner, from the beginning of Uni. She had a breakup from a three-year old relationship a few months ago, and I was there to support her. I didn't clarify before though if she was okay with me cuddling with people or not; I assumed it was with her, because it was okay in her LDR before - which was wrong of me. I overstepped the boundaries of my partner here.
The friend in question kissed me at the neck while I was at hers. I talked with her about it and let her know that I wasn't okay with it, to which she reacted quite hurt. She then told me that we shouldn't be friends, but two weeks ago she collapsed at Uni and I brought her home. Now we are meeting again.
While I'm writing this down, I'm actually starting to notice that there are a lot of other factors playing in why my partner is upset here. She has been cheated on in the past, which definitely leads her to feel uncomfortable about my actions, even though I obviously don't want to cheat. I broke a societally unwritten rule of not meeting people in romantically coded settings on your partners birthday. And I overstepped the boundary of my partner before by cuddling with the friend without my partners consent.
Almost stopped reading here. There is no "NT world". It's just...the world. And it's made up of all sorts of people. I don't give a fuck about implied social contracts in relationships as they are bullshit. You talk together and figure out what your relationship is about. End of.
...this is a gag, right? You're having me on?
What you've written is not unlike a middle school persuasion paper: Written by someone with little understanding of the requisite material while using strained arguments to put forth an air of confidence in their position.
Absolutely stopped reading here.
The requisite material for the topic at hand is "dating a person who clearly thought there are implied social contracts at play, and attempting to make it work out anyway"
OP is asking about "How do I fit into society?" not "How should society function?"
I agree with you that a lot of implied social contracts are bullshit. But also they exist. Until you have had that talk together to figure out the relationship, there has to be some assumptions. People don't always have deep "what is this relationship" 2 minutes into the first date. Assumptions are not always bad.
Your stance is that the assumption is "I have no obligations until I've agreed to them." This is itself merely an assumption to make and not just "fact" of some sort. The vast majority of society has the assumption of "The relationship IS an obligation to some degree based on context." I'm not saying which assumption is "right," I'm just saying how it works for most people.
If I'm in a relationship where I'm committed enough to refer to the other person as "my partner" then I'm going to err on the side of not hurting them, regardless of who is to blame. If I can prevent the other person from being hurt just by working along with their assumptions until we can have a conversation where we make things explicit and there are no more assumptions, then why wouldn't I do that, unless "being right" is more important than my partner.
I'm gonna jump into this thread here :)
My partner knows that I'm autistic, so she specifically clarified she has understanding of my inability to read social rules. I completely agree that the societal contracts often are bullshit, and I urge to clarify to me if something doesn't work for her, not to assume that I know that anyways (because 99% of the time I don't know).
And I agree with you, that for me not hurting my partner here is more important than saying "I'm right though". While of course we didn't talk before about this specific boundary and we had different assumptions, I don't want to hurt my partner and I'm doing my part (obligatory Starship Troopers reference) to make sure I am not harming her more than necessary.