Misery, Love, Relationships and Happiness Ever After...

[Homburg]

I also wonder if some confuse lust with love and vv....I hear a lot of people talk about how they fell instantly in love with their partner, then that ends and another relationship begins and they say the same thing, and it goes on with evry subsequent relationship....but the feeling of physical attraction on first meeting is not love IMO, it has to be something deeper which will still be there whether the physical is going to be possible to indulge or not.

Catalina

I think it is partially a matter of not having met the right person, and wanting to be in love badly enough to misinterpret thier feelings. As has been stated many times in this thread, people are driven to partner up by societal pressures as much as anything else.

In may case, I thought I'd been in love prior to meeting viv. It's sounds sappy and romantic, but it was a backhand across the teeth. Realising the depth of my emotion for her was like opening my eyes and seeing the sun for the first time in my life. All of what came before was pale and colourless.

Not saying that to sound lovey-dovey or superior, but it's the truth. When you find the right person, it is so very different. But the need to partner is such that Mr Right is less important than Mr Right Now. No thanks. I'd be alone before I do something like that.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Not saying that to sound lovey-dovey or superior, but it's the truth. When you find the right person, it is so very different. But the need to partner is such that Mr Right is less important than Mr Right Now. No thanks. I'd be alone before I do something like that.

Yep, I hear ya. Goldie Hawn was interviewed on Jonathon Ross (UK programme) last night and they got to talking about her and Kurt Russell and their 25 year relationship...why it worked etc., then moved onto relationships in general and the high divorce rate. She said one of the main reasons was that people enter a marriage expecting it not to last, to fail at some point. Because of that mindset, it is almost bound to fail as not only will they not be as prepared to put in the hard work over an extended period of time, be looking for something to go wrong, but they also never think about having to do anything to keep the romance alive. LOL, she said one of the things they do to keep it fresh is she dresses up in particular things....JR asked if she wanted to share what they were (if you know him at all you will have already mentally inserted his cheeky grinning face into that)..she just as cheekily declined.

Catalina

 

[Netzach]

I actually don't think our mileage has been that different in that my own parents were always arguing and I often asked why they didn't get divorced. That being said, it taught me a lot about what I didn't want in a relationship, and that in fact I didn't see that as being a couple. Getting married again in my 40's was the best thing I could have done, and a lot easier than in my 20's...I had already experienced a bad marriage and divorce, brought my children up, improved myself personally and professionally beyond what I had been told was reasonable and possible, knew myself and my needs so much better as they were past the stage of changing every other day or on a whim, and had a wealth of other life experiences from which to draw and learn from. I thinka lot of people learn valuable things from their first marriage which help the second succeed and function more realistically. I don't feel that because I am over 40 I have to stick anything out that isn't working...that just doesn't make sense to me to even think that at any age. I married a younger man in my 40's, so it couldn't be I think I no longer am able to find someone else if I wasn't happy and that was also how we both felt.

The idea of having a marriage between 2 people who as you say live mostly individual lives also doesn't necessarily speak success or happiness to me either. I have known enough couples who have divorced smply because they had grown so far apart living that way (especially when children are involved and for some it is a side effect of that)...actually one of my oldest friends married his 2nd wife on the agreement they live in separate houses and lead separate lives...it didn't last. I waited a long time and turned down a lot of offers of marriage waiting for if the right one ever came along and was happy to remain single if it didn't and just date or have relationships which didn't include living together or marriage. IMO that made sense as if I didn't want to spend a lot of time with another, didn't want to share my life with them, didn't want to do things together, what was a legitimate reason to live together or get married? I loved my independence, so to give it up even on paper, I wanted more than a room mate I would pass on the way out or in and share a bed and occasional meal with, and the bills. I guess it is another differnt strokes for different folks thing.

Catalina

cat, I meant the 1930s and the 1940s - there weren't a lot of options for people other than getting married and having their kids. That's what you did.

marriage to your soul mate's a good idea at any age. And I don't mean anything as radical as separate housing, I mean having your own art, your own voice in your art, your own resume and success if that's what's meaningful to you and acting in ways that foster both of these, not just one at the expense of the other.

Every marriage I'd met before that involved a woman losing any sense of identity and losing herself, and I never met anyone who had wanted her children. My mother included. Admittedly my social circle with adults wasn't huge.

Every single one - it was a different model for me.

Additionally when you have as much money as Goldie Hawn and Kurt Russel, it's really not that hard to maintain the freshness and romance. You can go somewhere else every weekend, hire a nanny for Baby Renee, dress up as the Marquis DeSade and a Giant Carrot and a Playboy Bunny all for one night. Money does enable a certain amount of spontaneity that us plebs are not privy to.

 

[catalina_francisco]

cat, I meant the 1930s and the 1940s - there weren't a lot of options for people other than getting married and having their kids. That's what you did.

marriage to your soul mate's a good idea at any age. And I don't mean anything as radical as separate housing, I mean having your own art, your own voice in your art, your own resume and success if that's what's meaningful to you and acting in ways that foster both of these, not just one at the expense of the other.

Every marriage I'd met before that involved a woman losing any sense of identity and losing herself, and I never met anyone who had wanted her children. My mother included. Admittedly my social circle with adults wasn't huge.

Every single one - it was a different model for me.

Additionally when you have as much money as Goldie Hawn and Kurt Russel, it's really not that hard to maintain the freshness and romance. You can go somewhere else every weekend, hire a nanny for Baby Renee, dress up as the Marquis DeSade and a Giant Carrot and a Playboy Bunny all for one night. Money does enable a certain amount of spontaneity that us plebs are not privy to.

I get what your saying.

In terms of GH and KR, it was brought up about their position and wealth and she said the things they did which kept the fires burning didn't require wealth, they were more about really appreciating each other and taking the time to remember that. There are plenty in Hollywood and elsewhere with more money who still do not manage it. She said each day she wakes up she approaches it with a positive mind and excitement. It is more about reminding themselves to remember who they are to each other, what they have, and by not being married, they both have the freedom to go at anytime but choose not to. I do think we have become desensitised a lot by our modern lifestyles, busy lifestyles and don't take the time to take such definate notice of each other, really looking at each other, what we really feel, give time to each other with more than a passing thought....complicated to word tonight as my mind is elsewhere temporarily but Lit is serving to keep it grounded to a degree.

Catalina

 

[LilyBart]

I get what your saying.

It is more about reminding themselves to remember who they are to each other, what they have, and by not being married, they both have the freedom to go at anytime but choose not to.

Catalina

In a partnership such as GH and KR, knowing that your partner could walk away encourages a different level of attentiveness to the relationship. And knowing that your partner could walk away (which would be easy), but doesn't, fans the flame all that more IMO.

OTH, my role models are a certain aunt and uncle, who have been married for almost 60 years and are still as obviously in love with each other as they were when they married. Maybe even more so. I asked them a few years ago to tell me how they met. It was a romantic story in itself, involving separation during the war and all that, but what I really enjoyed was how they told it...like they were reliving it in the telling - and looking at each other like they were both still 19. That, to me, is the bliss.