Jump to content

Time vs time together intensity and impact


Recommended Posts

Mrlonelyone

I looked up a statistic on another thread regarding how much time married people actually spend together. Married cohabiting people spend an average of 2.5 non-sleep hours of quality time together. Happily married couples spend 15 hours a week of one on one quality time.

 

Can a couple spend so much time together that it is like cramming a couple years of marriage or many many many dates worth of intimacy into one year?

 

 

The specific situation that I keep returning to in my mind is that of myself and an EX I haven't seen in person in almost two years. She still contacts me though she has been dating another. I still respond even though I have dated others. Likely we are just tossing eachother breadcrumbs now and again. This is having an undue impact on me.

 

 

Can a relationship which is short (a year maybe two) calendar wise but intense or passionate have as much impact as a longer relationship* two to four years long which is less intense? Obviously decades of marriage is beyond any of that. I'm not talking about that.

 

What is more important in relationships intensity and passion or length? Lord knows many relationships just sort of limp on with none of that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
WhatYouWantToHear
What is more important in relationships intensity and passion or length?

 

The internet can't make value decisions for you. Seems like you are trying to help justify something.

 

Just tell her you can't go on like this. You either need to know you are getting back together or you need to stop having contact with her. This post really seems like you are grasping at straws to keep hope alive.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
Mrlonelyone
The internet can't make value decisions for you. Seems like you are trying to help justify something.

 

Just tell her you can't go on like this. You either need to know you are getting back together or you need to stop having contact with her. This post really seems like you are grasping at straws to keep hope alive.

 

A value decision? Not really. Some relationships have more impact than others. I am asking why. That's what I do.

 

If it was just me reaching out you would have a better point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends on a lot of factors...

 

For example, in the beginning of a RL, you need "length" of time to really get to know that person. I've seen people shack-up with someone they just started dating in only two months. What the heck do you know about a person in 2 months?

 

So, IMO, you need 1 1/2 to 2 years of actual "dating" to get to know someone. Why? Cuz "friends" isn't the same thing as dating, cuz you aren't going to do/say certain things cuz a romantic interest has not been established. "Shacking-up" does not count towards dating time either cuz when you move in, you start mixing finances and you start overlooking red flags cuz now you're sorta "invested" in the situation.

 

Oh, and LDR's? Well, when you only see a person now and then, you only see them at a limited view. For example, one of my relatives, his ex-wife and he were LDR. Cuz, he only saw her now and then, he wasn't exposed to the toxic relatives she had and didn't really get to know the influence these people had on her. So, you need to spend "time/length" to get to know someone and it must be "quality" time/length (i.e. living in the same area).

 

Now, when it comes to marriages - IMO, it's a combo of quality and length. I watch some of my neighbors - they are like ships passing in the night. Even though they live under the same roof, if you barely see that person - what quality of a RL is that? IMO, that's why some people have affairs at work. They spend like 8 hrs a day/40 hrs a week and all of a sudden they think the got some "connection" with the co-worker, when all they got is someone they're around a lot.

 

I mean, if you're not "there/present" - then you gotta work hard to make up the "quality" of the time you "do" get to spend with your SO. I mean, most of my RLs are FWB/casual things where I don't see them all the time...but, I'm a person that desires that level of contact - so, if I don't see them all the time, it doesn't make me loose interest...I pretty much make up for it when I "do" see them. But then again, as you see most FWBs/casual things don't last long - probably cuz you don't have a good "connection" with that person cuz you don't spend much "length" and/or "quality" of time with them.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
Mrlonelyone
Depends on a lot of factors...

 

For example, in the beginning of a RL, you need "length" of time to really get to know that person. I've seen people shack-up with someone they just started dating in only two months. What the heck do you know about a person in 2 months?

 

 

So, IMO, you need 1 1/2 to 2 years of actual "dating" to get to know someone. Why? Cuz "friends" isn't the same thing as dating, cuz you aren't going to do/say certain things cuz a romantic interest has not been established. "Shacking-up" does not count towards dating time either cuz when you move in, you start mixing finances and you start overlooking red flags cuz now you're sorta "invested" in the situation.

 

This is like the thing I was trying to discuss really. As "friends" you will hold back certain things that one would reveal to an intimate partner. I strongly believe that friendship can grow into an intimate relationship. A relationship is friendship + much more.

 

I also agree that two years of standard dating (say meeting at least twice a week for a number of hours or spending a weekend day is a good idea before moving in or getting really invested.

 

Shacking up...living together... I would think that is more intimate and more impressive than dating. There is no way to get to trust someone better than living with them, sharing bills, having eachothers names on the lease. I mean really get to know just how reliable someone is. To live with someone is to trust them greatly.

 

 

Oh, and LDR's? Well, when you only see a person now and then, you only see them at a limited view. For example, one of my relatives, his ex-wife and he were LDR. Cuz, he only saw her now and then, he wasn't exposed to the toxic relatives she had and didn't really get to know the influence these people had on her. So, you need to spend "time/length" to get to know someone and it must be "quality" time/length (i.e. living in the same area). .

 

LDR's without end are not relationships at all. A relationship is nourished and fed by regular close contact (not just sex). You have to look them in the eye, smell their smells, feel their presence.

 

 

Now, when it comes to marriages - IMO, it's a combo of quality and length. I watch some of my neighbors - they are like ships passing in the night. Even though they live under the same roof, if you barely see that person - what quality of a RL is that? IMO, that's why some people have affairs at work. They spend like 8 hrs a day/40 hrs a week and all of a sudden they think the got some "connection" with the co-worker, when all they got is someone they're around a lot. .

 

Very true about married people who barely spend time together and who might as well be single.

 

That said, Many marriage relationships started from people who work together or who lived in the same dorm/nearby dorm in college. The connection grows from the time spent together and the intimacy shared.

The purely sexual relationship can grow into a deeper relationship. Most of the time it does not last.

 

I mean, if you're not "there/present" - then you gotta work hard to make up the "quality" of the time you "do" get to spend with your SO. I mean, most of my RLs are FWB/casual things where I don't see them all the time...but, I'm a person that desires that level of contact - so, if I don't see them all the time, it doesn't make me loose interest...I pretty much make up for it when I "do" see them. But then again, as you see most FWBs/casual things don't last long - probably cuz you don't have a good "connection" with that person cuz you don't spend much "length" and/or "quality" of time with them.

 

FWB's on the other hand time does not matter. They are a F buddy nothing more.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
Mrlonelyone

Any other insights on how the intensity of a relationship can effect how we get over it or the impact it can have on us?

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO you need both length (as in, objective duration of the relationship) and time spent together. The latter is tricky, as you really need a balance rather than cramming in as much as you can - you do no one a favour if you let your career, friendships, and all other hobbies slide. On the other hand you certainly need enough - 15 hours a week as you quoted in your OP sounds good to me.

 

Intensity on the other hand is different - again I prefer balance in this. While it's natural for fireworks to be flying especially during the honeymoon phase, those who burn real hot and fast tend to wash out fairly quickly IMO. A quote that best describes my thoughts on this is: it's not just the highs that determine a relationship, but also how you weather the lows. Intensity is important to an extent because with zero intensity there is zero real relationship... but there is so much else that is equally important in a LTR. I would describe my preferred intensity more as a slow boil rather than dramatic firework explosions, though.

Edited by Elswyth
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
casey.lives

All i know, is that i don't like when relationships are so intense. it makes me feel like the relationship is shaky.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle ma Belle
IMO you need both length (as in, objective duration of the relationship) and time spent together. The latter is tricky, as you really need a balance rather than cramming in as much as you can - you do no one a favour if you let your career, friendships, and all other hobbies slide during the honeymoon phase. On the other hand you certainly need enough - 15 hours a week as you quoted in your OP sounds good to me.

 

Intensity on the other hand is different - again I prefer balance in this. While it's natural for fireworks to be flying during the honeymoon phase, those who burn real hot and fast tend to wash out fairly quickly IMO. A quote that best describes my thoughts on this is: it's not just the highs that determine a relationship, but also how you weather the lows. Intensity is important to an extent because with zero intensity there is zero real relationship... but there is so much else that is equally important in a LTR.

 

I think this is bang on. Both are equally as important to any healthy and happy relationship.

 

Another ingredient that I think is missing but also just as important to consider is quality. You can have many years together and lots of passion but neither of them are worth sh*t if it ain't quality stuff :bunny:

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
Mrlonelyone
IMO you need both length (as in, objective duration of the relationship) and time spent together. The latter is tricky, as you really need a balance rather than cramming in as much as you can - you do no one a favour if you let your career, friendships, and all other hobbies slide.

 

 

So true. The duration is important, most certainly. The balance likely comes in a longer relationship. When a relationship is new a couple wants to spend all the time in the world together.

 

 

On the other hand you certainly need enough - 15 hours a week as you quoted in your OP sounds good to me.

I found it in a couple of places. The Policy of Unidivided Attention

is a good one.

 

I personally think tips that work for marriage work for serious LTR's.

 

 

Intensity on the other hand is different - again I prefer balance in this. While it's natural for fireworks to be flying especially during the honeymoon phase, those who burn real hot and fast tend to wash out fairly quickly IMO. A quote that best describes my thoughts on this is: it's not just the highs that determine a relationship, but also how you weather the lows. Intensity is important to an extent because with zero intensity there is zero real relationship... but there is so much else that is equally important in a LTR. I would describe my preferred intensity more as a slow boil rather than dramatic firework explosions, though.

 

Basically if there is little to no emotional intensity, little/no passion, and little/no time spent together (in the same room, preferably alone, not necessarily having sex) then there is no relationship.

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...