Situationship Trap: Why ‘No Label’ Relationships Hurt More Than Actual Breakups

Hiya | New Delhi : In the modern dating era, few words carry as much weight and as much confusion, one of them is “situationship.” What is situationship? This term was used informally as early as the mid-to-late 2000s. While journalist Carina Hsieh is credited with coining and popularising its modern definition in 2017 with her article, describing situationship as a hook-up with emotional benefits. And with time, it’s true.

The emotional grey zone of modern dating

The modern “situationship” occupies an emotional grey zone; they are increasingly defined not by commitment, but by how free you can let me be, how less you can interfere with my life and while it may appear harmless at first, its long-term effects can be quite exhausting. Situationships thrive on ambiguity. There are no labels, no clear expectations, and often no shared understanding of where things are headed. The absence of structure can initially feel freeing, no pressure, no demands, no difficult conversations. But over time, that same freedom begins to feel like emotional instability. When nothing is defined, everything becomes open to interpretation, and the interpretation demands constant emotional labour.

Emotional imbalance and silent conflict

The imbalance of emotional investment is the most draining aspect of it. While both parties may agree to “keep things casual,” emotional attachment rarely follows verbal agreements. One person often ends up hoping for more, while the other enjoys the comfort of connection without responsibility. This imbalance creates a quiet internal conflict: the desire to ask for clarity battles the fear of pushing the other person away.

Mourning potential instead of reality

Breakups, painful as they are, at least offer validation of emotion. They acknowledge that something meaningful existed and that its end deserves grief. They draw a clear boundary between what was and what is no longer. Situationships deny this boundary. In a situationship, however, you aren’t mourning a reality, you are mourning potential. Because there was never a formal label, the “ending” is often just as vague as the beginning. This lack of closure keeps the brain in a state of high alert, constantly scanning for “signs” or “mixed signals.”

You aren’t just losing a person, you are losing the hope of what they might have become. There is a slow erosion – effort fluctuates, affection appears and disappears without explanation. They leave people feeling as though their hurt is exaggerated, their expectations unreasonable, their emotions misplaced with unanswered questions and unfinished conversations.

This emotional invalidation is often what lingers the longest. This makes it difficult to process loss, move forward, or heal. Over time, individuals learn to minimise their feelings rather than confront the absence of mutual intent and what it’s actually supposed to be.

When situationships begin to erode self-worth

What makes situationships particularly exhausting is their ability to blur self-worth and make the person doubt themselves. When affection feels conditional or inconsistent, people often begin to question themselves. Am I asking for too much? Should I be more patient? Why am I not enough for clarity? These questions quietly chip away at confidence, making individuals fight a silent inner battle, mentally and emotionally, and making it look like a personal failure rather than a structural flaw in the relationship.

The mind stays alert, searching for signs, analysing silences, reading meaning into delayed replies. Unlike traditional relationships, where expectations are stated or at least implied, situationships rely on unspoken rules that shift without notice. How the simple act of waiting for a blue tick is physically and mentally more exhausting than a final “Goodbye” text. This prolonged uncertainty often leads to anxiety rather than affection. We often think we need the other person to “explain” why they don’t want a label, but in situationships, the lack of a label is the explanation.

Why situationships are becoming more common

Fast-paced lifestyles, traditional family expectations, global dating trends, professional uncertainty, and shifting social norms have changed the way people approach intimacy now. Another reason that’s being talked about is the current economy (high rents, long work hours, inflation), making a full relationship feel “too expensive” emotionally and financially. And with a growing discomfort with emotional vulnerability, many people want companionship while resisting responsibility, which results in the hesitation to commit to anything that might disrupt personal freedom. The result is a generation that is constantly connected yet emotionally unsure, sharing intimacy without security and closeness without accountability.

Technology and the rise of situationship fatigue

In 2025, technology has only worsened this exhaustion. In a situationship, it is the ritual of checking “blue ticks” on WhatsApp, the anxiety of seeing them view your Instagram story without replying to your text, and the modern torture of your thoughts spiralling. It has the intimacy of a partnership but the exit strategy of a ghost.

In a way, situationship fatigue is emotional endurance. It reflects the toll of sustaining relationships that offer connection without certainty. As conversations around mental well-being gain notice, it becomes necessary to examine the emotional structures we normalise.

Finding closure without a label

The exit from a situationship requires a shift in perspective. True closure doesn’t come from a final “talk” with the other person, it comes from an internal realisation. It is about understanding that “no label” is, in itself, a label. To stop this exhausting loop, one must recognise that emotional investment without reciprocation is a debt that never gets paid.

While it may seem like a safe place to hide from the risks of love and responsibility, the hidden emotional cost of staying there is often much higher than the cost of being in that situation. Yet, situationships continue because they promise safety from heartbreak but ironically deliver a slower version of it. They allow people to avoid difficult conversations, delay decisions, and escape accountability. But emotional avoidance, over time, becomes emotional fatigue.

Choosing clarity over confusion

Clarity in relationships is often misunderstood as a loss of freedom. In reality, it provides emotional safety and mutual respect. In an already uncertain world, choosing clarity, even when uncomfortable, is not running away from intimacy but it’s a return to it. As conversations around mental health and emotional well-being grow louder, perhaps it is time to question not just how we love, but how clearly, we choose to do so.