EricaH329 Posted December 30, 2009 Posted December 30, 2009 For those of you who have experienced both a comfortable relationship, and one filled with butterflies and giddy-ness, which of the two seemed to work out better? I've spoken to several people about this, and they all basically say that there are positives and negatives to both. Which makes sense.
sally4sara Posted December 30, 2009 Posted December 30, 2009 Most of the relationships I've had involved the butterflies and giddiness for an initial period followed by a a period of being joined at the hip. The ones that survive past being joined at the hip (they didn't get on my nerves from being around too much) settled into comfort. But I can say the ones that were really heavy on the giddiness usually burned out faster and were more immature relationships.
ordinary_girl Posted December 30, 2009 Posted December 30, 2009 Most of the relationships I've had involved the butterflies and giddiness for an initial period followed by a a period of being joined at the hip. The ones that survive past being joined at the hip (they didn't get on my nerves from being around too much) settled into comfort. But I can say the ones that were really heavy on the giddiness usually burned out faster and were more immature relationships. same here as well
Author EricaH329 Posted December 30, 2009 Author Posted December 30, 2009 But I can say the ones that were really heavy on the giddiness usually burned out faster and were more immature relationships. I was thinking this also. So you've never gone into a relationship without the giddiness at first? Would you not consider entering into a relationship that was comfortable right out of the gate?
laRubiaBonita Posted December 30, 2009 Posted December 30, 2009 i think most start out giddy, then you get comfy.... but it's imposrtant to be able to still get the giddy feelings now and again. so i think the realtionships that go to giddy to comfy with spurts of giddy work out well.
Author EricaH329 Posted December 30, 2009 Author Posted December 30, 2009 same here as well I'd like to hear your opinions on the questions I asked Sally also. I'm too curious
sally4sara Posted December 30, 2009 Posted December 30, 2009 I was thinking this also. So you've never gone into a relationship without the giddiness at first? Would you not consider entering into a relationship that was comfortable right out of the gate? Yeah. I took my mothers advise one time and found a nice church raised boy with family values..... Ugggh. Unexamined republican (believes what his parents believes), closed off and racist. Till I uncovered those qualities I just thought he was bland but reasonably polite. Gave it a good try; almost a year. He was who I dated before I met my fiance.
Author EricaH329 Posted December 30, 2009 Author Posted December 30, 2009 Yeah. I took my mothers advise one time and found a nice church raised boy with family values..... Ugggh. Unexamined republican (believes what his parents believes), closed off and racist. Till I uncovered those qualities I just thought he was bland but reasonably polite. Gave it a good try; almost a year. He was who I dated before I met my fiance. So do you think that the relationship failed not because it was comfortable, but because of the qualities about him that you did not like?
carhill Posted December 30, 2009 Posted December 30, 2009 The balance of unattractive to attractive qualities was insufficient to retain bonding. The risk of 'comfort' is a personality which gravitates to and promotes this dynamic is generally not one of risk taking and drama, necessarily requiring a partner who values stability over such aspects; IOW, lacking the 'highs', it's easier to see and be affected by the 'lows', even if relatively minor in scope.
sally4sara Posted December 30, 2009 Posted December 30, 2009 So do you think that the relationship failed not because it was comfortable, but because of the qualities about him that you did not like? Yeah, I was at ease with him, but I think that has more to do with having gone to 9 different schools and having learned to be at ease around many different kinds of people. I had some lively debates with him about whether his political views were valid or just regurgitated from his elders. It got "meh oh well" pretty quickly though. And all his friends were either Asberger-ish or obnoxious good ole boys. Then a few things made me start seeing how he behaved around people of color and urban situations. I started getting tired of trying to come up with new things for us to go do and being told "thats not my thing" even though most options were nothing he had ever explored before.... He cried when I broke up with him and that was the most emotion I saw out of him in the entire relationship. I decided right there that I just needed to stick with the kind of guys I found appealing and it work out great. I now think most of dating is knowing yourself and trusting that knowledge. If a guy seems not your type even after a date or two - he isn't your type. Don't waste his time.
Author EricaH329 Posted December 30, 2009 Author Posted December 30, 2009 The balance of unattractive to attractive qualities was insufficient to retain bonding. The risk of 'comfort' is a personality which gravitates to and promotes this dynamic is generally not one of risk taking and drama, necessarily requiring a partner who values stability over such aspects; IOW, lacking the 'highs', it's easier to see and be affected by the 'lows', even if relatively minor in scope. I do see what you are saying, but isn't it possible for it to work both ways? Being in a comfortable relationship, wouldn't you be able to see the highs as easily as the lows? I decided right there that I just needed to stick with the kind of guys I found appealing and it work out great. I now think most of dating is knowing yourself and trusting that knowledge. If a guy seems not your type even after a date or two - he isn't your type. Don't waste his time. Isn't it possible, though, to be interested in someone without having those giddy feelings? For example, when you go out with this person, you have a great time. Conversation flows easily and you are able to enjoy yourself. But, you aren't nervous or excited. You are comfortable. Sort of like, dating your best friend. You go out with them often, and you truly enjoy their company, but you don't get all worked up before going out with them. And you aren't worried about saying something that's going to make you look dumb. Do you see what i'm saying?
sally4sara Posted December 30, 2009 Posted December 30, 2009 Isn't it possible, though, to be interested in someone without having those giddy feelings? For example, when you go out with this person, you have a great time. Conversation flows easily and you are able to enjoy yourself. But, you aren't nervous or excited. You are comfortable. Sort of like, dating your best friend. You go out with them often, and you truly enjoy their company, but you don't get all worked up before going out with them. And you aren't worried about saying something that's going to make you look dumb. Do you see what i'm saying? Yeah, but that happens when I make friends. I think it is a common human reaction to respond to at least mild anxiety. A bit of the flutter in the belly. It is what breeds the comedy and urgency of sexual chemistry. Anticipation? Prevoyez!
carhill Posted December 30, 2009 Posted December 30, 2009 I do see what you are saying, but isn't it possible for it to work both ways? Being in a comfortable relationship, wouldn't you be able to see the highs as easily as the lows? IMO, that would be dependent upon your personality being adequately, and equally, sensitive to those dynamics. This is an aspect of compatibility we examined in MC, one component of emotional compatibility. It is also an aspect of the dynamic of compatibility versus attraction, which we most often see here on LS as the divergence between intellectual and attractive (libidinous) 'want'. Also, examine the dynamic within the context of intimacy levels and styles. Using your example, with your 'best friend', when comparing the emotional content of a date to that with your best friend (assuming hetero here), what is going on in your mind? What aspects of attractiveness are being subconsciously assigned to the date? Why? Cool stuff
threebyfate Posted December 30, 2009 Posted December 30, 2009 Don't confuse excitement with drama. The drama-coaster relationships of highs and lows, can be addicting, but is pure poison on your emotional core. It's rarely that simple of the two extremes where it's either best friend comfortable or panic mode. It's possible to be comfortable talking to someone, with great conversation, and still have that dynamite sexually charged atmosphere!
ordinary_girl Posted December 30, 2009 Posted December 30, 2009 I'd like to hear your opinions on the questions I asked Sally also. I'm too curious ok well it seems there are ways to interpret giddiness or butterflies. I always want to feel at ease with the man I am seeing because why would I want to be with someone who makes me nervous? But in the beginning at least I still get butterflies. to me being at ease and being excited about seeing them are not mutually exclusive things. then eventually the butterflies go and the comfort remains.
laRubiaBonita Posted December 30, 2009 Posted December 30, 2009 It's possible to be comfortable talking to someone, with great conversation, and still have that dynamite sexually charged atmosphere! exactly!!!
Author EricaH329 Posted December 30, 2009 Author Posted December 30, 2009 IMO, that would be dependent upon your personality being adequately, and equally, sensitive to those dynamics. This is an aspect of compatibility we examined in MC, one component of emotional compatibility. It is also an aspect of the dynamic of compatibility versus attraction, which we most often see here on LS as the divergence between intellectual and attractive (libidinous) 'want'. Also, examine the dynamic within the context of intimacy levels and styles. Using your example, with your 'best friend', when comparing the emotional content of a date to that with your best friend (assuming hetero here), what is going on in your mind? What aspects of attractiveness are being subconsciously assigned to the date? Why? Cool stuff You've brought up a tonn of good points. Lots to consider. I believe that the difference between a best friend relationship and a romantic relationship are expectations. Which are different for everyone. I'm beginning to think that the best friend aspect is more appealing. I know that they are there for me, I can tell them everything, I don't have to 'watch what I say' or be afraid to open up. There are a ton more insecurities that are attached to the romantic relationships than the best friend relationships. For me, realistically, the comfort from a best friend is.. well... comforting . Who doesn't like comfort? However, the comfort from a romantic relationship is more about where the relationship stands at that moment in time. Which brings me back to the idea of your original point. Highs and lows. Tons to consider. Don't confuse excitement with drama. The drama-coaster relationships of highs and lows, can be addicting, but is pure poison on your emotional core. It's rarely that simple of the two extremes where it's either best friend comfortable or panic mode. It's possible to be comfortable talking to someone, with great conversation, and still have that dynamite sexually charged atmosphere! Highs and lows are a necessary part of every relationship. If they become too frequent, then it's unhealthy. But I believe that having the right amount of both, can lead to a very mature and strong relationship. Have you ever heard someone say "If my best friend were a girl/guy (opposite sex), I would marry them." ? I have 2 best friends. I have known them both for 10 years. They are my longest relationships (outside of family). Makes me wonder why that is? Maybe the giddiness of most relationships (while fun at first) turn out to be the shortest lived? Maybe the more comfortable relationships are the ones that last the longest?
threebyfate Posted December 30, 2009 Posted December 30, 2009 Highs and lows are a necessary part of every relationship. If they become too frequent, then it's unhealthy. But I believe that having the right amount of both, can lead to a very mature and strong relationship.No, those highs and lows aren't necessary, only the highs. Mature and loving relationships aren't built on drama. Have you ever heard someone say "If my best friend were a girl/guy (opposite sex), I would marry them." ? I have 2 best friends. I have known them both for 10 years. They are my longest relationships (outside of family). Makes me wonder why that is? Maybe the giddiness of most relationships (while fun at first) turn out to be the shortest lived? Maybe the more comfortable relationships are the ones that last the longest?No doubt friendship is an important component to lasting relationships. But it doesn't have to be dull and boring. You can challenge each other intellectually, while maintaining emotional equinamity. That's where respect and trust come into play where you love and know you're loved but still maintain playfulness, banter and intense conversations about all kinds of interests.
anne1707 Posted December 30, 2009 Posted December 30, 2009 Highs and lows are a necessary part of every relationship. If they become too frequent, then it's unhealthy. But I believe that having the right amount of both, can lead to a very mature and strong relationship. No, those highs and lows aren't necessary, only the highs. Mature and loving relationships aren't built on drama. Lows are not a necessity but the ability to deal with them is. That may be the true test of a relationship.
Author EricaH329 Posted December 30, 2009 Author Posted December 30, 2009 No, those highs and lows aren't necessary, only the highs. Mature and loving relationships aren't built on drama. So how do you ever learn what makes your partner tick? What upsets him/her? What they don't like you doing, as opposed to what they do like you doing? There needs to be some sort of lows to learn more about the other person. I'm not talking about serious relationship-deal breaker type of lows. Or the constant lows (which is commonly referred to as drama), i'm talking about the necessary lows. No doubt friendship is an important component to lasting relationships. But it doesn't have to be dull and boring. You can challenge each other intellectually, while maintaining emotional equinamity. That's where respect and trust come into play where you love and know you're loved but still maintain playfulness, banter and intense conversations about all kinds of interests. Oh no, I think you might have misunderstood what I was saying. I'm not referring to the boring, dull relationships. Personally, when I go out with my best friends it is anything but boring and dull . They keep me intellectually intrigued. Our conversations are endless, and we are constantly keeping eachother entertained. None of that is boring. That is the type of relationship I am referring to. Now take that and apply it to the opposite sex. There are no butterflies, but the conversation and the time you have with that person is great! You feel at ease, and they are constantly challenging you to become a better person. To me, that is comfort. There is no desire to impress this person, the time you have with them consumes any thought of nervousness or anxiety.
threebyfate Posted December 30, 2009 Posted December 30, 2009 So how do you ever learn what makes your partner tick? What upsets him/her? What they don't like you doing, as opposed to what they do like you doing? There needs to be some sort of lows to learn more about the other person. I'm not talking about serious relationship-deal breaker type of lows. Or the constant lows (which is commonly referred to as drama), i'm talking about the necessary lows.We don't have dramatic lows. If something annoys either one of us, we speak up and it gets resolved permanently. This way, issues don't fester and resentment never builds to the point of lows. There is no desire to impress this person, the time you have with them consumes any thought of nervousness or anxiety.Do you really try to impress, thus prove yourself as a worthwhile partner to someone? I would firmly suggest that this is something to reconsider.
anne1707 Posted December 30, 2009 Posted December 30, 2009 So how do you ever learn what makes your partner tick? What upsets him/her? What they don't like you doing, as opposed to what they do like you doing? There needs to be some sort of lows to learn more about the other person. I'm not talking about serious relationship-deal breaker type of lows. Or the constant lows (which is commonly referred to as drama), i'm talking about the necessary lows. But what are you classing as necessary lows? To me, the lows are issues such as ill health, death of close family/friends. Things at this level are not necessary to have a healthy relationship however this is when a couple can support each other more so than at any other time. If you mean lows such as "get up, go to work, come home, have dinner, go to bed" lows then that is just allowing yourself to get stuck in a rut with day to day routine. That will only become a real low if allowed to continue.
Author EricaH329 Posted December 30, 2009 Author Posted December 30, 2009 We don't have dramatic lows. If something annoys either one of us, we speak up and it gets resolved permanently. This way, issues don't fester and resentment never builds to the point of lows. Do you really try to impress, thus prove yourself as a worthwhile partner to someone? I would firmly suggest that this is something to reconsider. I have a feeling you are taking everything I am saying to the extreme. By lows, I am not referring to dramatic lows. The question I am trying to raise has nothing to do with extremes. It's actually the very opposite. When I say 'impress' I mean the more subtle things. Sometimes I say dumb things, not because I am dumb (because i'm not by any means) but because I can be goofy. Depending on who I am talking to, and what we are talking about, I refrain from making those little comments because I feel it's unnecessary and it'd come across as something completely different to someone who doesn't know me. Hence, the comfortable aspect comes in. Everyone refrains from doing certain things in the beginning. Again, I am not speaking of extremes. In the best friend type of relationship (or another way of putting it, is the type of relationship where you feel as though you've known this person for years), you tend to let loose.
threebyfate Posted December 30, 2009 Posted December 30, 2009 I have a feeling you are taking everything I am saying to the extreme. By lows, I am not referring to dramatic lows. The question I am trying to raise has nothing to do with extremes. It's actually the very opposite.Okay, then plse provide an example of what you consider a relationship low, since I'm not understanding it. When I say 'impress' I mean the more subtle things. Sometimes I say dumb things, not because I am dumb (because i'm not by any means) but because I can be goofy. Depending on who I am talking to, and what we are talking about, I refrain from making those little comments because I feel it's unnecessary and it'd come across as something completely different to someone who doesn't know me. Hence, the comfortable aspect comes in. Everyone refrains from doing certain things in the beginning. Again, I am not speaking of extremes. In the best friend type of relationship (or another way of putting it, is the type of relationship where you feel as though you've known this person for years), you tend to let loose.But this is what I'm talking about. Just be yourself during the dating experience and you won't have to "relax", once you're in a relationship.
Recommended Posts