|
|
Post by McRoomMate on Feb 28, 2017 10:29:39 GMT -5
Excerpt from article (Link is below) "See how you would rate your closest romantic relationship (marriage or otherwise) on these 12 key dimensions: 1. Thinking positively about your partner. 2. Thinking about your partner when apart. 3. Difficulty concentrating on other things when thinking about your partner. 4. Enjoying novel and challenging activities. 5. Spending time together. 6. Expressing affection. 7. Being turned on by your partner. 8. Engaging in sexual intercourse. 9. Feeling generally happy. 10. Wanting to know where your partner is at all times. 11. Obsessively thinking about your partner. 12. Having a strong passion for life. Full article here: www.psychologytoday.com/blog/fulfillment-any-age/201206/the-12-ties-bind-long-term-relationships
|
|
|
|
Post by baza on Mar 1, 2017 1:52:08 GMT -5
I read the article so as to put your post in context Brother McRoomMate.
FWIW, if *I* was writing that article, I'd have opened with #8 (are you engaging in sexual intercourse) in which case the other 11 points would fall into order.
If you answered "yes" to #8, then I reckon you will also respond in generally positive terms to the other 11.
If you answered "no" to #8, then I reckon you will respond in generally negative terms to the other 11.
#8 is the absolute best indicator of how things are generally going in a relationship.
But really, this shows why Arthur Aron is a psychologist, and I am a part time postie !
|
|
|
|
Post by McRoomMate on Mar 1, 2017 2:16:19 GMT -5
I read the article so as to put your post in context Brother McRoomMate. FWIW, if *I* was writing that article, I'd have opened with #8 (are you engaging in sexual intercourse) in which case the other 11 points would fall into order. If you answered "yes" to #8, then I reckon you will also respond in generally positive terms to the other 11. If you answered "no" to #8, then I reckon you will respond in generally negative terms to the other 11. #8 is the absolute best indicator of how things are generally going in a relationship. But really, this shows why Arthur Aron is a psychologist, and I am a part time postie ! Thanks Brother baza Yes indeed. Just to nuance / split hairs perhaps that it is 6 thru 8 that lead up naturally. 6. Expressing affection. 7. Being turned on by your partner. 8. Engaging in sexual intercourse. So the "Conditions Precedent" to 8 for sex of 6 Expressing Affection and 7 Being turned on naturally lead into 8 engaging in sex. Otherwise, going straight to "engaging in sex" is a bit animalistic lust and I think we all want the INTIMACY (whole package) that 6 thru 8 flow into. I am not on a search just to "get laid" any more - Lord knows I (we?) have been there done that. Looking for the "Real Deal." Like I said, maybe I am "splitting hairs" and your point is well taken. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Mar 1, 2017 10:31:26 GMT -5
My personal reflection about the article:
If my wife made the list of 12 things, #8 (are you having intercourse) wouldn't be there. It would be replaced by "#8: does your partner make you feel safe.". Not sure what "love language" that is... but she has spoken of it often in the past ~10 years whenever I've tried to bring the low/no sex state of our intimacy.
For the first two decades of my marriage I would have had to say "yes" to #8... but there is this weird pair of caveats/follow ons. It would go like this:
#8a: are you having intercourse? yes
#8b: is it with sufficient quantity and variety that you are satisfied with your sex life? definitely not
#8c: but are you hopeful it will at least someday achieve a level you are happy with? yes
#8b canceled #8a.... but #8c canceled #8b.
From my current vantage point, I can now see it was that HOPE of fixing our sex life that lead me to still "stay in love" with her. There are many reasons I had this hope: a) I'm generally an optimist, b) I'm generally a "can do/let's fix this" kinda guy, c) I'm an engineer; I'm really good at fixing things, d) the consequences of it not being fixable were too hard to accept.
Maybe this was some male version of the trap often ascribed to women in a relationship: "I can change him." My version was: "I can love her out of this. Lift her up. Fix her. Get her to the point where she will naturally want the level of marital intimacy that I want/crave."
Time has changed not her, but me: that hope is now gone. Hanging out in ILIASM has helped me remove those blinders: she isn't going to change. She is baked this way. Love her the way she is and live with it, or move on.
Anyway, here's where I am now on 8a/8b/8c: nope. nope. nope.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Mar 1, 2017 13:18:34 GMT -5
An intellectual review of the article:
The article seems to stop short of saying "these 12 things cause long-term closeness"... good thing. If it did, I would have a serious bone to pick with the article, because I don't see how the study can distinguish causation from correlation.
Does the "strength of their passion" cause positive thinking, the desire to spend time together, feelings affection, signs of respect, and engaging in sex... or to those things cause a strong, long term -- and even passionate -- relationship?
Mostly I'd say neither causes the other! I think this list is entirely "definitional": a strong long-term relationship is defined by higher scores on each of those twelve features.
So -- sorry to be a bit disparaging -- but to the ILIASM reader I'd say "don't look to this article for a blueprint on HOW to rekindle sex or intimacy".
---
Lastly, I gotta point out the eyebrow-raising #10 and #11: "#10: Wanting to know where your partner is at all times." and "#11: Obsessively thinking about your partner."
As for #10, funny that they ascribe this as more commonly to men; and that it is healthy/positive. (I have a friend in her 40s who is nearly early cut off from the world by a psychologically abusive husband who needs to know her whereabouts at all times; will even give her hell if she leaves her phone off for two hours to go do something that he can't track.) And in my case, early in the marriage my wife was IMO a bit crazy about where I was. I don't think it was distrust, I think it was extreme pessimism. I think I was once two hours late coming home from work, and she had called the State Police, expecting to hear that I was found dead in a ditch somewhere. I came home to her sobbing happy-mad at me that I was still alive.
As for "#11: Obsessing"... well, I kinda see the point that if I obsessively want to be sweet to my dear one, and she obsessively wants to be sweet to me, well, great. We'll just be circling around each other like to lovebirds, I guess. But that sounds a bit like the proverbial "honeymoon phase" of a relationship. Two problems borne of obsessing are: a) when the level of obsessing itself becomes a mismatch -- a problem just like when libidos become a mismatch; b) when it transforms in to something darker, stalkerish. (See #10 above, and the story of my friend's husband nearly stalking her IN the marriage.)
|
|
