Fast and furious or slow and steady?

[Alpacalia]

I was thinking about this after one of my friends recently mentioned how most of her relationships seem to burn hot and fast when we were talking.

For some, this is followed by the agonizing process of recovering from something that began swiftly and abruptly ended.

So, what are your opinions on the matter? Do you favor slow-burning, smoldering romances that evolve over time, or super-charged, passionate romances that strike you in the feels right away? What are the benefits and drawbacks of each?

I've also heard that a good measuring stick for whether or not your new relationship will last is if you don't get "butterflies" when you think about the other person (or at least after the first few dates).

Not sure how much that rings true.

Edited December 3, 2021 by Alpaca

[Weezy1973]

I don’t think technically there’s a right or wrong answer to this. I’ve experienced both. I would say for sure that it takes a long time to get to know someone well enough to know if you’re compatible long term. The problem I’ve encountered with the supercharged relationships is that you get “addicted” to that early stage rush and will ignore flags to keep the “high” going. And that’s often followed by the crash afterwards. Two general “truths” that I believe are:

1. The vast majority of people are not compatible enough for a long term relationship.

2. It takes a long time to know someone well enough to commit to them long term. 
 

As long as you keep these in mind (assuming you’re looking for long term), what happens at the beginning of the relationship is largely irrelevant. Slow burn, super charged, and everything in between can work.

Edited December 3, 2021 by Weezy1973

[Alpacalia]

20 minutes ago, Weezy1973 said:

I don’t think technically there’s a right or wrong answer to this. I’ve experienced both. I would say for sure that it takes a long time to get to know someone well enough to know if you’re compatible long term. The problem I’ve encountered with the supercharged relationships is that you get “addicted” to that early stage rush and will ignore flags to keep the “high” going. And that’s often followed by the crash afterwards. Two general “truths” that I believe are:

1. The vast majority of people are not compatible enough for a long term relationship.

2. It takes a long time to know someone well enough to commit to them long term. 
 

As long as you keep these in mind (assuming you’re looking for long term), what happens at the beginning of the relationship is largely irrelevant. Slow burn, super charged, and everything in between can work.

Thanks.

It does take time to get to know someone well enough to determine long-term compatibility. That's why I suppose that experiencing those initial fireworks when meeting someone isn't always a good thing, even if I recognize the need for some form of a driving force.

Or, to be more specific, someone who makes you calm and at ease with some burning embers mixed in.

Edited December 3, 2021 by Alpaca

[Girl Fade Away]

Does it have to be either/or?  How about a mix of both?  A balance. 

I happen to enjoy the "butterflies" and fireworks.  I need to feel those emotions.  BUT that doesn't mean we rush right in supercharged and fast.  It's still possible to move at a slower, steady pace. Spend time, get to know each other. 

It does take discipline though, because your natural instinct is to want to be with each other as often as possible. 

But the pragmatic approach is always best to avoid burn out which is what typically happens.  I have actually had to slow a few men down.  Not for lack of feels, but because I wanted it to last and slow and steady was the best way.

Plus I like missing a man and wondering!  I still like those feelings from time to time even when in long term.  I think a bit of distance can add to a relationship.  

It's a balance of both the butterflies/fireworks but still taking things slow and steady that works best in my opinion and experience.

Edited December 3, 2021 by Girl Fade Away

[Alpacalia]

24 minutes ago, Girl Fade Away said:

Does it have to be either/or?  How about a mix of both?  A balance. 

I happen to enjoy the "butterflies" and fireworks.  I need to feel those emotions.  BUT that doesn't mean we rush right in supercharged and fast.  It's still possible to move at a slower, steady pace. Spend time, get to know each other. 

It does take discipline though, because your natural instinct is to want to be with each other as often as possible. 

But the pragmatic approach is always best to avoid burn out which is what typically happens.  I have actually had to slow a few men down.  Not for lack of feels, but because I wanted it to last and slow and steady was the best way.

Plus I like missing a man and wondering!  I still like those feelings from time to time even when in long term.  I think a bit of distance can add to a relationship.  

It's a balance of both the butterflies/fireworks but still taking things slow and steady that works best in my opinion and experience.

Yes, that's a nice way to look at it!

Though, too many fireworks gives me anxiety.

 

[Girl Fade Away]

6 minutes ago, Alpaca said:

Though, too many fireworks gives me anxiety. 

Oh man Alpaca, you know I would LOVE to dig deeper into that one, lol .   But I won't, it's off topic anyway.   But it's interesting you feel that way, I don't think you're alone. 

Edited December 3, 2021 by Girl Fade Away

[Alpacalia]

Just now, Girl Fade Away said:

Oh man Alpaca, you know I would LOVE to dig deeper into that one, lol .   But I won't, it's off topic anyway.   But it's interesting you feel that way, I don't think you're alone. 

That's good.

And, I respectfully ask that you don't.

[Fox Sake]

1 hour ago, Alpaca said:

I was thinking about this after one of my friends recently mentioned how most of her relationships seem to burn hot and fast when we were talking.

For some, this is followed by the agonizing process of recovering from something that began swiftly and abruptly ended.

So, what are your opinions on the matter? Do you favor slow-burning, smoldering romances that evolve over time, or super-charged, passionate romances that strike you in the feels right away? What are the benefits and drawbacks of each?

I've also heard that a good measuring stick for whether or not your new relationship will last is if you don't get "butterflies" when you think about the other person (or at least after the first few dates).

Not sure how much that rings true.

Interesting ….

I think there are 3 kinds of relationships. 
1 He always wins. 2 She always wins. 3 They both win together.
Hot and fast can probably fall under any of these categories but mostly 1&2. Occasionally you’ll meet a hot and fast who’s a number 3, and those are the power couples. 

Every time I meet someone I actually get butterflies with, I totally f**k it up if its not exactly equally reciprocated.
In fact, I’m even doing it right now It started hot and fast but there’s not enough fuel to keep it going by the looks of it. 
The worst part is I’m aware of it and can hold myself back from the usual mistakes only 75% at times then scold myself for it. Ive a bad habit of burning things down in those moments, to help myself learn and move on but it hurts cos that was some heat it started with! 

Your concept is totally a new thought for me to question myself over.  If I don’t get butterflies I don’t proceed with serious dating because it seems like something I don’t desire. In those moments I feel strong and with options. 
I’ve also settled before tho through her sheer persistence ,  and ended up falling in love over time and a connection grew, but it took me so long it pushed her away by the time I came around. 

I think a hot fire needs more than some tinder and kindling to keep going through the night ,both people need to bring the fuel and that I’ve only experienced once.  Before I was stupid enough to think I could do better and broke it all! 
 

 

[Alpacalia]

29 minutes ago, Fox Sake said:

Occasionally you’ll meet a hot and fast who’s a number 3, and those are the power couples. 

I always wonder about those types of couples. Maybe like an example is Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson. I wonder what their style is

[Gaeta]

Looking back, my relationships/dating experiences that started hot & heavy right off the bat all ended abruptly. 

Of course I like experiencing butterflies, chemistry, anticipation but I think it's more promising when we experience them gradually  after a few dates.

[Fox Sake]

2 minutes ago, Gaeta said:

Looking back, my relationships/dating experiences that started hot & heavy right off the bat all ended abruptly. 

Of course I like experiencing butterflies, chemistry, anticipation but I think it's more promising when we experience them gradually  after a few dates.

Your second paragraph was literally my shower thoughts/realisation just now !!!  You must have sent it to me subliminally! 

[Girl Fade Away]

17 minutes ago, Alpaca said:

Maybe like an example is Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson. I wonder what their style is

Alpaca you might find this interesting:

"Tom met Rita in the early 1980s while he was starring in the ABC sitcom Bosom Buddies. Rita appeared in an episode about a video dating service. Then, they co-starred (along with John Candy) in the film Volunteers. At the time, Tom was still married to his college sweetheart, Samantha Lewes. But Tom has been credited with telling GQ that he and Rita felt an immediate spark: "Rita and I just looked at each other and — kaboing — that was that. I asked Rita if it was the real thing for her, and it just couldn't be denied."

Edited December 3, 2021 by Girl Fade Away

[mark clemson]

2 hours ago, Alpaca said:

What are the benefits and drawbacks of each?

Every couple is a little different and will have their own unique "chemistry" as a couple. This can range from very staid to very crazy to intermittently crazy, etc, etc.

Also circumstances and people will change over time. Ultimately the relationship boils down to a mutual decision to stay together (regardless of whatever may be going on WRT specifics).

That said, I've read and heard that the high intensity/high emotion relationships have a tendency to burn out, where the slower burn ones, while perhaps not as intense as experiences, are more likely to last long. (Of course there are always exceptions.)

Highs may have corresponding lows, which can (sometimes) become exhausting, and strong emotions can cause a desire to stick together that masks serious incompatibilities or other problematic issues. "Settling" for pretty good (not just anything) is from what I've read often how stable LTRs and families get made.

Since relationships are basically a choice and people are not all the same (neurologically and in terms of their personalities and attitudes, etc), you get all sorts of variations on this basic theme, e.g.:

- People who find someone early and stay bonded for life, relatively contentedly

- People who are fine just dating or who choose to leave relationships "once that initial spark wears off"

- Roommate marriages/"arrangements"

- People who seem to stick together despite hating each other

-Polyamorous couples

- Plenty of divorces (where they are culturally accepted)

- Etc, etc.

Biologically humans tend to be serial monogamists; however societies tend to overlay that with cultural expectations/norms, etc.

I will caveat that I'm not an expert in this area. There are always exceptions to the generalizations above and (as many people have discovered) never any guarantees.

Edited December 3, 2021 by mark clemson

[mark clemson]

^^ too late to edit, but I probably should have added "reasonably happy marriages with some ups and downs" to the list as that is certainly out there and may be a worthwhile goal to shoot for.

YMMV

Edited December 3, 2021 by mark clemson

[Calmandfocused]

Really interesting thread

Just to add: 

Hot and heavy, whirlwind romances are hallmarks of narcissistic/ abusive individuals. “Lovebombing” can be a red flag where these individuals  are concerned. It’s a mechanism to get their victims hooked. 
 

Im not suggesting that all whirlwind romances involve narcissism but I’m just saying that everything might not be as it seems. 
 

Anyway, I have to feel “something” and some sort of desire to see that person again. If I don’t feel anything the reason is usually because I’m not attracted to them. And If I’m not attracted to them I can’t develop romantic feelings for them. And if I can’t develop romantic feelings the relationship will end anyway. 
 

I’ve tried dating men who I’m not attracted to because I’ve recognised that their good people, hoping that my attraction will grow. It didn’t

[glows]

Slow burner here also favouring other slow burners. I like it.

[dramafreezone]

Love and relationships are not really the same thing.  You can have love without an established relationship and vice versa.

If you want a relationships, then the passion is great but doesn't really serve the purpose of the relationship.  The passion usually tapers off quite a bit, so what do you have left once that's gone?

The "fast and furious" is based off of raw attraction.  A successful relationship is based off of mutual respect.  If you have both that would appear to be the ideal combination.

The issue is people don't tend to vet the object of their attraction (when that attraction is very high) for qualities that they respect, they just get lost into the raw attraction so when that wears off they're like "why did I ever like this person?"

Edited December 3, 2021 by dramafreezone

[Alpacalia]

1 hour ago, Girl Fade Away said:

Alpaca you might find this interesting:

"Tom met Rita in the early 1980s while he was starring in the ABC sitcom Bosom Buddies. Rita appeared in an episode about a video dating service. Then, they co-starred (along with John Candy) in the film Volunteers. At the time, Tom was still married to his college sweetheart, Samantha Lewes. But Tom has been credited with telling GQ that he and Rita felt an immediate spark: "Rita and I just looked at each other and — kaboing — that was that. I asked Rita if it was the real thing for her, and it just couldn't be denied."

Awe, thanks. 

"Kaboing" that's funny.

Wow, there's some really great responses in this thread.

I have to run out soon but will respond when I get back.

 

[Lotsgoingon]

People can have instant spark for sure, but that doesn't mean they are rushing things. They can have strong, immediate spark and proceed at a moderate pace, being aware that they are different and that every couple has to come to terms with working with their differences.  

The fast and furious problem is that for a while we fantasize that the differences between us are not a problem. We actually seem to believe that. But look, some people can start fast and relax and pause along the way and allow themselves time to come out of the high. Some people can go sorta fast and yet set boundaries along the way.

A good friend of mine started hot and heavy with someone but he's also setting boundaries. He has an activity hobby and about two weeks into the hot and heavy, he is making sure he attends his activity hobby meetings. He's setting that boundary, saying in effect, hey this is a huge part of me and the relationship has to work with this part of me. And I'm prioritizing my activity because I don't know how long we'll last and I don't expect you to be some substitute for the rest of my life.

In fact, my buddy set a boundary, talked about a key part of his life, even as he approached his gf. He shared about a key health issue he's facing and did it in a clever and funny way.  So he's proceeding kinda fast but he is not losing his individuality at all. And he's aware of his gf's vulnerabilities (she also disclosed key trauma early on), and is not overlooking them even as he enjoys time with her. 

The relationship does not have to work out for him to be happy. He's not canceling at all the rest of his life. 

 

[Foxhall]

7 hours ago, Alpaca said:

Do you favor slow-burning, smoldering romances that evolve over time, or super-charged, passionate romances that strike you in the feels right away?

My own current one is the former scenario which suits me and am content with I guess.

the more instant super charged one- I think I lost a potential golddust situation previously because I did not move fast enough- 

if you dont seize the moment- the doubts creep in and maybe she will look elsewhere. (particularly for younger couples)

[Ami1uwant]

11 hours ago, Alpaca said:

I was thinking about this after one of my friends recently mentioned how most of her relationships seem to burn hot and fast when we were talking.

For some, this is followed by the agonizing process of recovering from something that began swiftly and abruptly ended.

So, what are your opinions on the matter? Do you favor slow-burning, smoldering romances that evolve over time, or super-charged, passionate romances that strike you in the feels right away? What are the benefits and drawbacks of each?

I've also heard that a good measuring stick for whether or not your new relationship will last is if you don't get "butterflies" when you think about the other person (or at least after the first few dates).

Not sure how much that rings true.

Hot and fast is always a concern.

 

it’s driven by attraction and some common connection but you really don’t know long term chances of how comparable you are.

[lana-banana]

Butterflies and fast and furious is all well and good, but if it hits the point where other people think you're going too fast, it's out of control. Every time I was in a healthy relationship, everyone agreed. When I was truly blinded by infatuation, I had friends who called me on it, and I ignored them (to my own detriment). I think it's fine to be completely wrapped up and in love with somebody if it's mutual and it doesn't get destructive.

[chillii]

No rules, nothing can say this can't or that won't work , or that will. Everything anything has worked for someone somewhere , people become involved , marry , in all kinds of ways.

For me , my ex of over 20yrs, was instant , very fast and very everything else, and my partner now was the same, so maybe that's how it goes for me, who knows , but l do know it when l see it. Someone else , who knows, anything and everything , any combo , can happen and does , everyday.

[Happy Lemming]

Similar sentiments to @chillii I don't think there is any rhyme or reason as to what works for each person or couple.

I've had long term relationships that were both "fast and furious" and "slow and steady", so I think its just whatever works at that particular time with that particular partner.

I did know one "crazy couple" that drove to Las Vegas and got married on their first date.  They have been married over 25 years.

[Alpacalia]

Thank you for your comments, everyone!

I can relate to a lot of them.

Any who, just something I was mulling over.