Spain's El País sparks debate over 'passive ghosting' torture claim

Passive Ghosting: Torture or Double Standard?
On March 4, 2026, Spanish newspaper El País published an article by Marita Alonso describing "passive ghosting" as "torture." This practice involves giving ambiguous or evasive answers so the other person understands the relationship is over. Illustrated with a photo of a young woman checking her phone, the piece argued that many women suffer from this strategy of emotional wear and tear. The reaction was immediate: within hours, the debate exploded on social media and forums, with critics pointing to a blatant double standard.

What El País Means by Passive Ghosting
The article defined passive ghosting—also known as soft ghosting—as a form of silent rejection where one sends monosyllabic messages, passive-aggressive replies, or simple emojis, hoping the other party gets the hint. The author described it as "torture" for those receiving it, primarily women, according to the text's focus. Published in the society section, the piece offered no quantitative data but carried a tone of denunciation that many interpreted as a feminist argument.

The Skeptics' Response: A Double Standard
The backlash was swift and forceful. One line of opinion argues that passive ghosting is not exclusive to women but a widespread practice used by both parties when convenient. "When they do it, it's empowerment; when we do it, it's torture," summarized a recurring analysis. It is argued that women have historically used evasion and ambiguous messages as a rejection mechanism, and now that men replicate the same behavior, it is pathologized. A cited example: the classic phrase "it's not you, it's me" seen as an honest breakup when said by a woman, versus the same phrase when said by a man. The perception of hypocrisy is the core of the discontent.

The Background of the Attention Economy
Although the Economics subforum might seem unrelated, the debate connects to the attention economy in the dating market. Some analyses point out that the proliferation of dating apps has commodified relationships: there is an asymmetric supply where 10% of men capture most female attention, creating power dynamics. In this context, ghosting—active or passive—becomes a tool for managing an overabundance of options. On the other hand, defenders of the article's stance emphasize that emotional suffering is real and that deliberate ambiguity can be more hurtful than an explicit break-up.

Anecdote: MFH and Digital Communication
Among the most commented responses appeared an acronym, MFH (Lie, F***, Leave), which, as explained, describes the classic male pattern: contact, sens, and disappearance. Against this, passive ghosting is presented as a "cowardly" version that avoids direct confrontation. Some users shared personal experiences: one recounted that being direct with a date and stating he didn't want a partner resulted in a torrent of insults and being blocked. "Honesty isn't always well received," he concluded.

Where Does Balance Lie?
The El País article has peine a rift that goes beyond the battle of the sens. It reveals the difficulty of establishing common norms of courtesy in a digital environment where every gesture can be interpreted as aggression or defense. Labeling it "torture" may seem excessive to some, but for others it reflects real anxiety in a hypercompetitive dating market. What is clear is that, until there is consensus on what emotional demands are reasonable, ghosting—in any of its variants—will remain commonplace. And the debate, far from closing, will likely intensify with each new article attempting to name the discomfort.