The Silent Epidemic: How Ghosting Became the Language of a Broken Generation

When Disappearing Without a Word Becomes Our Default Mode of Human Connection

By Dr. Wil Rodriguez for TOCSIN Magazine

The last message sits there, forever frozen in time: “Had such an amazing time tonight! Can’t wait to see you again 😊” Sent at 11:47 PM on a Tuesday. Read at 11:52 PM. Never answered.

Three dates. Two months of daily texting. One night of what felt like genuine connection. And then—nothing. Complete, inexplicable silence that transforms confusion into anxiety, anxiety into self-doubt, and self-doubt into the kind of chronic emotional damage that makes future connection feel impossibly risky.

This is ghosting in its purest form: the sudden cessation of all communication without explanation, leaving the other person to decode silence like some kind of cruel archaeological puzzle. What was once relegated to the worst dating behavior has now metastasized into our default mode of ending not just romantic relationships, but friendships, professional partnerships, and even family connections.

We’ve created a culture where disappearing without explanation has become not just acceptable but expected. Where avoiding difficult conversations is considered self-care rather than cowardice. Where causing psychological harm through silence is somehow more ethical than having honest discussions about incompatibility or changed feelings.

But ghosting isn’t just a dating trend or generational quirk—it’s a symptom of something much deeper and more disturbing about how we’ve learned to relate to each other in the digital age. It’s the behavioral manifestation of a society that has forgotten how to have difficult conversations, how to tolerate discomfort, and how to treat other human beings with basic dignity when it’s inconvenient to do so.

The Architecture of Avoidance

Ghosting didn’t emerge in a vacuum—it’s the inevitable product of a technological ecosystem that makes disappearing easier than engaging, that rewards avoidance over confrontation, and that offers endless alternatives to working through relationship challenges with actual people.

Digital communication has eliminated most of the social pressure that historically enforced basic courtesy in human interactions. When ending a relationship required face-to-face conversation or at minimum a phone call, the social cost of poor behavior provided natural incentives for treating people with respect. The awkwardness of having to look someone in the eye while hurting them served as a barrier to casual cruelty.

But digital platforms have made ghosting functionally effortless. Blocking someone requires a single tap. Deleting their contact information takes seconds. Avoiding their physical spaces is easier when most interaction happens online. The person you’re hurting becomes an abstract concept rather than a human being you have to face.

“Technology has eliminated the natural friction that made treating people badly socially and emotionally costly,” explains Dr. Sarah Martinez, who studies digital relationship patterns. “When you can end a relationship without ever having to see the pain you’re causing, without having to hear their confusion or witness their distress, it becomes psychologically easier to choose the path of least resistance.”

This technological architecture has trained an entire generation to view human relationships as infinitely disposable and immediately replaceable. Why work through conflict when you can simply swipe to find someone new? Why have difficult conversations when you can just disappear and start fresh with someone who doesn’t know your patterns?

The Emotional Labor Dodge

At its core, ghosting represents a fundamental rejection of emotional labor—the work required to navigate human relationships with honesty, empathy, and respect. Having difficult conversations requires emotional intelligence, communication skills, and the capacity to tolerate both your own discomfort and someone else’s disappointment or pain.

Ghosting allows people to avoid all of this emotional work by simply refusing to engage. Instead of learning how to communicate incompatibility respectfully, how to navigate changing feelings with honesty, or how to end relationships with dignity, people choose the path that requires zero emotional investment: disappearance.

“Ghosting is essentially emotional labor refusal,” notes Dr. Lisa Chen, who specializes in interpersonal psychology. “It’s saying ‘I don’t want to do the work required to treat you like a human being with feelings and dignity.’ It prioritizes the ghoster’s comfort over the ghosted person’s basic right to closure and understanding.”

This emotional labor avoidance has cascading effects that extend far beyond individual relationships. When people systematically avoid practicing difficult conversations, they never develop the skills necessary for navigating conflict, expressing boundaries, or maintaining relationships through challenging periods. They remain emotionally adolescent, unable to engage with the complexity that characterizes adult human connection.

The result is a generation that struggles with conflict resolution, boundary setting, and emotional regulation because they’ve learned to avoid these challenges rather than develop competency in managing them.

The Commodification of Connection

Ghosting culture reflects our broader cultural shift toward treating human relationships as consumer goods rather than meaningful connections requiring investment and care. In a marketplace model of relationships, people become products to be evaluated, used, and discarded when they no longer meet our needs or when better options become available.

Dating apps have accelerated this commodification by presenting potential partners as an endless parade of options requiring minimal investment to explore. The abundance of choice creates what researchers call “relationship shopping behavior,” where people approach connections with consumer rather than relational mindsets.

“When you have hundreds of potential partners available through dating apps, the investment in any single connection feels minimal,” explains Dr. Robert Taylor, who studies digital dating culture. “People develop what I call ‘abundance mentality dysfunction’—they become unable to invest deeply in any relationship because they’re constantly aware of other options. Ghosting becomes an easy way to keep those options open.”

This commodified approach to relationships extends beyond romantic connections to friendships, professional relationships, and even family dynamics. People learn to evaluate all relationships based on what they provide rather than what they require, leading to systematic abandonment of connections that require effort, compromise, or growth.

The Conflict Avoidance Epidemic

Perhaps the most damaging aspect of ghosting culture is how it reinforces broader patterns of conflict avoidance that are crippling our collective ability to navigate disagreement, negotiate differences, and work through challenges together. When ghosting becomes the default response to relationship difficulties, people lose practice in the essential life skills required for maintaining long-term connections.

This conflict avoidance extends far beyond personal relationships into professional, political, and social contexts. People who learn to ghost romantic partners often apply similar avoidance strategies to workplace conflicts, family disagreements, and community challenges. They develop what psychologists call “avoidant attachment styles” that make it difficult to maintain stable, secure relationships throughout their lives.

“I see clients in their thirties who have never learned how to have a difficult conversation with someone they care about,” reports Dr. Patricia Williams, a relationship therapist. “They’ve spent their entire adult lives avoiding conflict by ending relationships rather than working through problems. They lack the basic skills necessary for maintaining long-term partnerships, friendships, or professional relationships.”

The cultural normalization of ghosting sends the message that human feelings are disposable, that other people’s emotional needs are optional considerations, and that avoiding discomfort is more important than treating people with basic respect and dignity.

REFLECTION BOX

The Mirror of Disappearance

Before judging ghosters too harshly, examine your own patterns of avoidance and communication. How do you handle difficult conversations? When someone needs to hear something they don’t want to hear from you, do you address it directly or find ways to avoid the interaction?

Consider your own experiences with being ghosted. What did that silence communicate to you about your worth, your relationships, and your understanding of human connection? How did it affect your ability to trust future partners or friends?

Now consider your own ghosting behavior. Have you ever ended a relationship, friendship, or professional connection by simply disappearing? What made avoidance feel easier than conversation? What were you trying to avoid—their reaction, your own discomfort, or the complexity of human emotions?

The goal isn’t self-judgment but honest recognition that ghosting culture affects all of us, both as perpetrators and victims of emotional avoidance. Healing these patterns requires acknowledging our own participation in systems that prioritize convenience over compassion.

The Psychological Casualties

The mental health impact of ghosting extends far beyond the immediate hurt of being abandoned without explanation. Research shows that people who are frequently ghosted develop symptoms similar to those experienced by people with complex trauma: hypervigilance in relationships, difficulty trusting partners, chronic anxiety about abandonment, and persistent self-doubt about their worthiness of love and connection.

“Being ghosted triggers the same psychological mechanisms as other forms of social rejection and abandonment,” explains Dr. Amanda Foster, who studies attachment and relationship trauma. “But it’s uniquely harmful because the absence of explanation forces people to create their own narratives about what happened, and those narratives are usually self-blaming and self-critical.”

The psychological damage of ghosting is compounded by its unpredictability. Unlike clear relationship endings that provide closure and understanding, ghosting leaves people in a state of chronic ambiguity that prevents psychological resolution. They can’t grieve the relationship properly because they don’t know if it’s actually over. They can’t learn from the experience because they don’t understand what went wrong.

This ambiguous loss creates what researchers call “complicated grief”—a form of psychological distress that persists because the loss can’t be processed normally. People remain psychologically attached to relationships that have ended because they never received confirmation that the ending actually occurred.

The Empathy Erosion

Ghosting culture represents a broader societal erosion of empathy and perspective-taking skills that has profound implications for human connection and social cooperation. When people systematically avoid considering how their behavior affects others, they lose the capacity for emotional understanding that makes meaningful relationships possible.

The practice of ghosting requires a form of emotional compartmentalization where people disconnect from awareness of the pain they’re causing. They develop cognitive strategies for not thinking about how their silence is interpreted, what anxiety it creates, or what damage it causes to someone’s sense of self-worth and relational security.

“Chronic ghosting behavior is essentially empathy avoidance training,” notes Dr. Michael Torres, who studies antisocial behavior patterns. “People learn to turn off their natural capacity for emotional perspective-taking because acknowledging the harm they’re causing would require them to change their behavior. Over time, this selective empathy shutdown can become generalized, affecting their ability to connect authentically with anyone.”

This empathy erosion has cascading effects throughout society. People who learn to avoid emotional responsibility in personal relationships often apply similar patterns to professional, political, and social contexts. They become unable to engage constructively with feedback, criticism, or different perspectives because they’ve learned to disappear rather than engage when interactions become challenging.

The Cultural Permission Structure

Perhaps most concerning about ghosting culture is how it’s become not just accepted but actively defended as healthy boundary-setting and self-care. Popular psychology has reframed emotional avoidance as personal empowerment, treating the ability to disappear from relationships as evidence of self-respect rather than recognizing it as interpersonal dysfunction.

“You don’t owe anyone an explanation,” has become a rallying cry that conflates basic human decency with unhealthy obligation. “Protect your energy” has become justification for treating other people as disposable. “Block and delete” has become relationship advice rather than crisis intervention.

This cultural reframing of ghosting as self-care reflects broader patterns of individualistic thinking that prioritize personal comfort over collective responsibility, immediate gratification over long-term relationship building, and self-protection over mutual care and respect.

“We’ve created a culture where basic courtesy is reframed as emotional labor that people have the right to refuse,” observes Dr. Jennifer Liu, who studies contemporary relationship patterns. “But relationships require mutual emotional investment. When one person consistently refuses to engage in the work of connection, relationships become exploitative rather than mutual.”

The Professional Spillover

The normalization of ghosting in personal relationships has begun affecting professional contexts in ways that threaten basic workplace functionality and economic cooperation. Young professionals are applying ghosting strategies to job interviews, work projects, and business relationships, creating significant challenges for organizations that depend on reliable communication and follow-through.

“We’re seeing candidates who interview for positions and then simply disappear rather than declining offers or providing feedback,” reports Dr. Lisa Martinez, who consults with organizations on generational workplace differences. “We’re seeing employees who ghost meetings, ghost project deadlines, and even ghost their jobs by simply stopping showing up rather than having conversations about problems or giving notice.”

This professional ghosting reflects the same underlying patterns as personal ghosting: conflict avoidance, emotional labor refusal, and treatment of relationships as disposable rather than requiring mutual investment and care. The economic costs are substantial, but the cultural costs are even higher.

Organizations are being forced to develop systems that account for widespread communication unreliability among younger workers. They’re implementing redundant follow-up protocols, building buffers into project timelines to account for ghosting behavior, and struggling to maintain collaborative cultures when team members regularly disappear from difficult conversations.

The Attachment Disaster

From a developmental psychology perspective, ghosting culture is creating widespread attachment disruption that affects people’s capacity for forming secure, stable relationships throughout their lives. When disappearing without explanation becomes normalized, people learn that human connections are fundamentally unreliable and that investing emotionally in others is dangerous.

This creates what attachment researchers call “earned avoidant attachment”—people who might naturally be capable of secure attachment but who learn avoidant strategies as protection against chronic abandonment experiences. They develop defensive patterns that make genuine intimacy difficult because they’re constantly prepared for people to disappear without warning.

“We’re seeing young adults who have never experienced a relationship that ended with honest communication and mutual respect,” reports Dr. Rachel Green, who specializes in attachment and relationship development. “They literally don’t know what healthy relationship endings look like. They’ve learned that people just vanish when things become difficult, so they either become ghosters themselves or develop hypervigilance about being abandoned.”

The intergenerational effects of this attachment disruption are only beginning to become apparent. People who grew up with ghosting as normal relationship behavior are now becoming parents, partners, and community leaders. Their capacity for modeling healthy relationship skills, teaching conflict resolution, and creating stable family environments has been compromised by years of avoidance-based relationship patterns.

The Technology Design Problem

The rise of ghosting culture isn’t accidental—it’s the predictable result of technology design choices that prioritize user engagement over relationship quality. Dating apps and social platforms are designed to keep people using the platform rather than forming stable, lasting connections that might reduce usage.

These platforms make ghosting functionally effortless while making honest communication relatively difficult. Blocking someone requires one tap, but having a nuanced conversation about incompatibility requires sustained emotional investment across multiple interactions. The design incentives favor quick, disposable connections over slower, more meaningful relationship development.

“Dating apps are optimized for generating matches and maintaining user engagement, not for facilitating successful long-term relationships,” explains Dr. Susan Martinez, who studies technology design and human behavior. “Their business model depends on people remaining single and actively using the platform. Creating features that facilitate healthy relationship endings or honest communication would actually be counterproductive to their commercial interests.”

The algorithmic design of social platforms also contributes to ghosting culture by creating environments where people interact with curated versions of others rather than complete human beings. When relationships develop through heavily filtered digital presentations, people may feel less obligation to treat their connections as full humans deserving of respect and honest communication.

The Global Phenomenon

Ghosting culture has spread rapidly across different cultural contexts, adapting to local communication norms while maintaining its core characteristics of avoidance and abandonment. Research shows that societies with strong traditional emphasis on honor, respect, and social obligation are experiencing particular disruption as digital communication patterns conflict with established cultural values.

“We’re seeing ghosting behaviors emerge even in cultures where direct communication avoidance would traditionally be considered deeply shameful,” notes Dr. Elena Vasquez, who studies cross-cultural relationship patterns. “Digital platforms seem to override traditional cultural norms around interpersonal respect and obligation. Young people are adopting ghosting behaviors that would be unthinkable in their offline cultural contexts.”

This global spread of ghosting culture represents a form of cultural imperialism where Western digital relationship norms are exported worldwide through international platforms. Traditional communication patterns that emphasize community responsibility, intergenerational respect, and collective harmony are being replaced by individualistic avoidance strategies that prioritize personal comfort over social obligation.

The Economic Implications

The normalization of ghosting has created significant economic costs that extend far beyond individual relationship disappointment. Organizations are spending increasing resources on systems designed to cope with unreliable communication patterns among younger workers and customers.

Recruitment costs have skyrocketed as companies deal with candidates who ghost interview processes, requiring multiple backup candidates and extended timelines to account for people who simply disappear. Project management has become more complex as teams develop protocols for managing team members who may vanish from collaborative efforts without explanation.

“We estimate that ghosting behaviors cost our organization hundreds of thousands of dollars annually in lost productivity, recruitment redundancy, and project management overhead,” reports Jennifer Walsh, director of human resources at a major technology company. “We’ve had to build entire systems around the assumption that people won’t follow through on communication commitments.”

The service industry has been particularly affected, with businesses reporting increased no-shows for appointments, reservations, and service commitments as ghosting behaviors extend from personal to professional contexts. Small businesses, which often operate on thin margins, are particularly vulnerable to the financial impact of customers who simply disappear rather than canceling or rescheduling appointments.

The Democratic Breakdown

Perhaps most alarmingly, ghosting culture is beginning to affect civic and political engagement in ways that threaten democratic institutions and community problem-solving processes. When people learn that avoiding difficult conversations is acceptable in personal contexts, they often apply similar avoidance strategies to political and social challenges that require sustained engagement and compromise.

Political discourse increasingly resembles large-scale ghosting, where people simply stop engaging with perspectives that challenge their beliefs rather than working through disagreement constructively. Online political communities frequently use blocking and unfriending as primary tools for managing ideological difference, creating echo chambers that prevent the kind of cross-perspective dialogue necessary for democratic decision-making.

“We’re seeing ghosting behaviors applied to civic engagement, volunteer commitments, and community organizing efforts,” observes Dr. Marcus Rivera, who studies political psychology. “People commit to political activities and then simply disappear when the work becomes difficult or time-consuming. This makes sustained political organizing extremely challenging.”

The breakdown of communication norms also affects local community building and problem-solving. Neighborhood organizations, parent groups, and community associations report increasing difficulties maintaining consistent participation as members apply ghosting strategies to civic commitments, disappearing from projects and responsibilities without explanation or transition.

The Pandemic Acceleration

The COVID-19 pandemic dramatically accelerated ghosting culture by normalizing social isolation, reducing in-person interaction opportunities, and creating additional justifications for avoiding difficult conversations. “Social distancing” became a blanket explanation for all forms of social withdrawal, including those that had nothing to do with public health.

During lockdown periods, people learned to function in increasingly isolated environments with minimal face-to-face interaction. This isolation made ghosting even easier while reducing the social costs of disappearing behavior. When everyone was staying home anyway, ghosting someone required no change in lifestyle or social patterns.

“The pandemic gave people a socially acceptable excuse for all kinds of avoidance behaviors,” reports Dr. Jennifer Walsh, who treated anxiety and relationship disorders throughout the pandemic period. “People who might have felt social pressure to maintain connections could now justify ghosting as responsible social distancing. This created permission structures for avoiding relationships that persisted long after public health justifications disappeared.”

The post-pandemic period has seen ghosting behaviors continue and intensify even as social interaction opportunities have returned to normal. People who developed avoidance patterns during isolation have often struggled to re-engage with the emotional labor required for maintaining relationships, leading to increased ghosting in both new and existing connections.

The Mental Health Paradox

Ghosting culture creates a psychological paradox where the behavior that people use to protect their mental health actually undermines their long-term psychological wellbeing. While avoiding difficult conversations provides immediate relief from anxiety and discomfort, it prevents the development of communication skills, emotional resilience, and relationship competency that are essential for mental health.

People who regularly ghost others often report feeling guilty, anxious, and ashamed about their behavior, but they lack the skills to change patterns that have become habitual. They become trapped in cycles where avoiding emotional discomfort creates more emotional discomfort, leading to increased isolation and relationship difficulties.

“Chronic ghosters often suffer from significant anxiety and depression related to their relationship patterns,” notes Dr. Lisa Chen. “They want meaningful connections but they’ve developed behavioral patterns that make meaningful connection impossible. They end up lonely and isolated despite having access to numerous potential relationships.”

The people who are ghosted also experience significant mental health impacts including depression, anxiety, attachment trauma, and social trust issues. These effects can persist long after the ghosting incident, affecting their capacity for future relationship formation and emotional security.

REFLECTION BOX

The Mirror of Silence

Before condemning ghosting culture entirely, examine your own relationship with difficult conversations and conflict avoidance. When was the last time you had to deliver disappointing news to someone? How did you handle it? Did you address the situation directly, or did you find ways to avoid or delay the conversation?

Consider your own ghosting experiences, both as the person disappearing and the person abandoned. What made avoiding conversation seem easier than engaging? What would have been required for you to handle those situations with more honesty and respect?

Think about the broader patterns of avoidance in your life. Do you ghost not just romantic connections but also friendships, professional obligations, family expectations, or social commitments? Have you noticed your tolerance for discomfort decreasing as your access to avoidance options has increased?

The goal isn’t self-judgment but honest recognition that we all participate in cultural patterns that normalize emotional avoidance. Changing these patterns requires individual commitment to practicing more honest and direct communication even when it feels uncomfortable.

The Empathy Deficit

Ghosting behavior reflects and reinforces broader cultural deficits in empathy and perspective-taking that have profound implications for social cooperation and human flourishing. When people systematically avoid considering how their behavior affects others, they lose the capacity for emotional understanding that makes healthy relationships and functional communities possible.

The practice of ghosting requires active empathy suppression—ghosters must consciously avoid thinking about how their silence is interpreted, what confusion and pain it creates, and what long-term damage it causes to someone’s sense of security and self-worth. This selective empathy shutdown can become habitual, affecting people’s capacity for emotional connection across all relationship contexts.

“People who regularly ghost others often develop what we call ‘compartmentalized empathy,’” explains Dr. Robert Taylor. “They can feel empathy in abstract situations or for distant others, but they’ve learned to turn off their emotional perspective-taking when it would require them to change their behavior or tolerate discomfort.”

This empathy erosion has broader social implications beyond individual relationships. Societies depend on citizens’ capacity to consider how their actions affect others, to make personal sacrifices for collective benefit, and to engage constructively with people whose experiences and perspectives differ from their own. When these empathy skills deteriorate, social cooperation becomes increasingly difficult.

The Solution Architecture

Addressing ghosting culture requires both individual behavior change and systematic modifications to the technological and social environments that enable and encourage avoidance behaviors. On an individual level, this means developing emotional tolerance for difficult conversations, learning communication skills for ending relationships respectfully, and practicing empathy for people whose feelings we might hurt.

But individual solutions aren’t sufficient for addressing what has become a cultural epidemic. Technology platforms must take responsibility for designing features that encourage honest communication rather than just facilitating easy avoidance. This might include tools for facilitating difficult conversations, incentive structures that reward communication completion, and design changes that make ghosting slightly more difficult while making honest communication slightly easier.

Educational systems must also adapt to teach the communication and emotional regulation skills that people need to navigate relationships successfully in digital environments. This includes conflict resolution training, emotional labor education, and empathy development programs that help people understand the impact of their behavior on others.

The Cultural Intervention

Most importantly, addressing ghosting culture requires cultural intervention that reframes avoidance behaviors as interpersonal dysfunction rather than self-care. This means challenging popular psychology narratives that justify emotional labor refusal, promoting communication skills as essential life competencies, and creating social pressure for treating others with basic dignity and respect.

“We need cultural messaging that positions honest communication as an essential life skill rather than optional emotional labor,” argues Dr. Patricia Williams. “Having difficult conversations shouldn’t be something people can opt out of—it should be understood as part of being a responsible adult and community member.”

This cultural shift also requires acknowledging that the appeal of ghosting reflects genuine problems with how we’ve traditionally approached relationship endings. Historical models of relationship termination often involved unnecessary cruelty, public shaming, or prolonged emotional manipulation. The goal isn’t returning to those patterns but developing new approaches that combine honesty and directness with compassion and respect.

The Stakes for Human Connection

The stakes in addressing ghosting culture extend far beyond individual relationship satisfaction to the fundamental question of whether we can maintain human societies based on mutual care, respect, and cooperation. When basic courtesy becomes optional, when empathy becomes inconvenient, when treating others with dignity becomes extraordinary rather than expected, we lose the social bonds that make collective human flourishing possible.

The children growing up in ghosting culture are learning that human connections are disposable, that emotional responsibility is optional, and that avoiding discomfort is more important than maintaining relationships. They’re developing attachment patterns and communication styles that will shape their capacity for partnership, parenting, and community participation throughout their lives.

But it’s not too late to change course. The same technologies that enabled ghosting culture could be redesigned to support healthier communication patterns. The same social media platforms that normalized disappearing could promote connection and follow-through. The same cultural values that justified avoidance could be redirected toward honesty, empathy, and mutual respect.

The question is whether we’ll continue building a society where human beings are treated as disposable and where emotional responsibility is considered optional, or whether we’ll commit to the more difficult but ultimately more rewarding work of learning to communicate honestly, even when it’s uncomfortable.

Margaret never got her explanation. She never understood what she did wrong, why someone who seemed so interested could disappear so completely, or how to protect herself from similar experiences in the future. She’s left to decode silence, to create stories from absence, to rebuild her capacity for trust from the wreckage of abandonment.

But maybe the next person won’t have to. Maybe we can build a culture where disappearing without explanation becomes as socially unacceptable as other forms of interpersonal cruelty. Maybe we can learn that treating people with basic dignity isn’t emotional labor—it’s just being human.

The choice, as always, is ours. We can continue perfecting the art of disappearing from each other’s lives, or we can rediscover the revolutionary power of simply staying and having the conversation.

REFLECTION BOX

The Author’s Closing Reflection

Ghosting may look like silence, but it speaks loudly about who we are becoming as a generation. In every unanswered message, in every sudden disappearance, there is a story about our fear of conflict, our shrinking tolerance for discomfort, and our struggle to hold onto empathy in a fast, disposable world.

My hope is not only that we see ghosting for what it is—a wound in our culture of connection—but that we also recognize the possibility of repair. Every conversation we choose to have instead of avoid, every word of honesty we offer instead of silence, becomes an act of resistance against a culture of disappearance.

The future of human connection will not be decided by technology alone, but by the choices we make in our daily relationships. Will we continue to vanish when things get hard, or will we take the risk of staying, speaking, and honoring each other’s dignity?

The revolution begins in the smallest of gestures: answering, explaining, and choosing presence over absence.

TOCSIN Magazine invites readers to join our ongoing conversation about rebuilding authentic human connection in the digital age. How do you handle difficult conversations? What would change if ghosting became as socially unacceptable as other forms of interpersonal cruelty?

Go to: tocsinmag.com