Fancying your spouse forever.

Jimmy 5F

How realistic is it?

To me this is the problem with monogomy, I don't think we're built to live with and fancy the same person forever.

IMO the familiarity of cohabitation long term activates a mechanism that siblings have where attraction is killed.

Pherekydes

Jimmy 5F wrote: »

How realistic is it?

To me this is the problem with monotony,

Don't you mean mahogany?

foxinsox

Pherekydes wrote: »

Don't you mean mahogany?

Scrabble is much more fun!

Chattastrophe!

Old people holding hands is the cutest thing ever.

Zulu

Jimmy 5F wrote: »

How realistic is it?

Depends. Don't marry a bauwler with a face like a bag of hammers and you'll stand a much better chance.
You're chances will probably stretch if you marry someone with a similar personality...

Bipolar Joe

Tlachtga wrote: »

Old people holding hands is the cutest thing ever.

I remember a few years ago, with my then girlfriend in Kilkee, we were sitting on a bench by the beach, and an old couple sitting on the bench next to us. Old lady asks him "What shall we have for dinner?" and he tells her "We'll get chips and eat them up the hill." They got up, he held her hand and off they went. Was beautiful.

As for OP, he first says long-term cohabitation is a bad thing, then says it's what stops siblings wanting to ride each other :eek: :eek:.

Jimmy 5F

Bipolar Joe wrote: »

I remember a few years ago, with my then girlfriend in Kilkee, we were witting on a bench by the beach, and an old couple sitting on the bench next to us. Old lady asks him "What shall we have for dinner?" and he tells her "We'll get chips and eat them up the hill." They got up, he held her hand and off they went. Was beautiful.



As for OP, he first says long-term cohabitation is a bad thing, then says it's what stops siblings wanting to ride each other :eek: :eek:.

I read somwwhere that living in close quarters has a de sexualising effect over time. It's some sort of mechanism
We evolved to avoid incest.

REXER

Pherekydes wrote: »

Don't you mean mahogany?

Monotony and getting a woody are not the same thing, more of an anti-woody thing I think!

Jimmy 5F

Jimmy 5F wrote: »

How realistic is it?

To me this is the problem with monogamy, I don't think we're built to live with and fancy the same person forever.

IMO the familiarity of cohabitation long term activates a mechanism that siblings have where attraction is killed.

Do you perhaps mean you have stopped fancying your oh, and have extrapolated from this that it is caused by being monogamous and it if it has happened to you it must be happening to everyone! I hate to bursts your bubble but there are lots of people in long term monogamous relationships who fancy the pants of each other and are not bored with each other.

Jimmy 5F

mariaalice wrote: »

Do you perhaps mean you have stopped fancying your oh, and have extrapolated from this that it is caused by being monogamous and it if it has happened to you it must be happening to everyone! I hate to bursts your bubble but there are lots of people in long term monogamous relationships who fancy the pants of each other and are not bored with each other.

That's an intriguing little fantasy you conjured up. Perhaps write a novel about it.

This is a general question.

PinkLemonade

Jimmy 5F wrote: »

I read somwwhere that living in close quarters has a de sexualising effect over time. It's some sort of mechanism
We evolved to avoid incest.

Considering you started this thread you should really back this up with some kind of facts.

Wibbs

Jimmy 5F wrote: »

I read somwwhere that living in close quarters has a de sexualising effect over time. It's some sort of mechanism
We evolved to avoid incest.

Yea in children living together from an early age. In adults this mechanism wouldn't be in play. Interestingly some research shows men in long termers have less testosterone than single men of the same age. This might have an effect on male libido alright.

In any event I know couples who have been together for decades who still fancy each other. Is it rare or common? In my experience it's rare enough. No great surprise there as all too often mate choice is down to luck, horniness, social expectation and drink.

Jimmy 5F

PinkLemonade wrote: »

Considering you started this thread you should really back this up with some kind of facts.

I never stated this was a fact, I said I read somewhere about the effects of cohabitation. If you want you can search google for these studies.

MY point is perhaps instead of thinking it is caused by monogamy maybe just maybe you are in the wrong relationship and thats why you don't fancy your oh nothing to do with monogamy at all.

Turn the question on its head, how do you account for all the couples in long term relationships who fancy each other like mad after many years together.

Bipolar Joe

Is AH always this pissy in the morning?

50SofG

with my woman for 25years now and i tell you she is so hot,
only yesterday evening i had to take her unstairs because her top fell of her shoulder and it was sexy...
so yes you can still fancy them..

Bipolar Joe

Bipolar Joe wrote: »

Is AH always this pissy in the morning?

Probably yes. Its caused by not having ingested enough coffee yet.

Jimmy 5F

mariaalice wrote: »

MY point is perhaps instead of thinking it is caused by monogamy maybe just maybe you are in the wrong relationship and thats why you don't fancy your oh nothing to do with monogamy at all.

Turn the question on its head, how do you account for all the couples in long term relationships who fancy each other like mad after many years together.

Why are you assuming I'm in a relationship??? When did I say that, when did I even mention anything related to my personal life??

50SofG

Jimmy 5F wrote: »

Why are you assuming I'm in a relationship??? When did I say that, when did I even mention anything related to my personal life??

wooooooo someone needs a hug,

PinkLemonade

Jimmy 5F wrote: »

I never stated this was a fact, I said I read somewhere about the effects of cohabitation. If you want you can search google for these studies.

The studies refere to children not adults. That's why I asked you to back it up

Zulu

Jimmy 5F wrote: »

I read somwwhere that living in close quarters has a de sexualising effect over time. It's some sort of mechanism
We evolved to avoid incest.

Bit of a shit mechanism considering you'd have already committed incest numerous times before it kicked in.

If anything, surely it would be to ensure that you spread your DNA beyond one partner, thus ensuring greater variety?

...go back you your source and tell them they should really pursue their education past a junior cert level, if they are going to make such hypothesis.

Frank Black

It's totally possible to still fancy the arse off your long-term partner (no idea if it's common or not, just speaking from personal experience). I think people need to make the effort though. I've seen friends of my OH, who've totally let themselves go after having a couple of kids - it's like they don't even bother trying anymore.
I'm not saying it's all to do with physical appearance either - but it is a big factor.

I am sure stress, having a baby, illness etc can affect a relationship, but if you are in the right relationship its all temporary, lots of couples get a new lease of life when their children leave home for example.

The idea that if you are in the right relationship mealy living together is going to stop you fancying them seems fanciful to me.

folan

OSI wrote: »

People have had monogamous, successful relationships for thousands of years

Jasus, i dont even know anyone over the age of 100! who do you know thats been in a relationship for thousands of years?

Oh, and also, while they might have, divorce and polygamy and good old fashioned mistresses and male lovers (i dont know what a male mistress is) have been around just as long.

OnTheCouch

I fear that continued sexual attraction between co-habiting couples over a long period of time may become difficult although not impossible, certainly from what I know about human nature and its tendencies.

Many long-term couples I feel tend to become more like best friends rather than lovers, where they do loads of things together and confide in each other, but have lost the feeling of wanting to rip the clothes off of the other partner over time. You can even see signs of this in couples that have been together for a number of years but are not necessarily living with each other even.

This 'best friend' phenomenon is not necessarily a bad thing, especially at a certain age.

50SofG

OnTheCouch wrote: »

I fear that continued sexual attraction between co-habiting couples over a long period of time may become difficult although not impossible, certainly from what I know about human nature and its tendencies.

Many long-term couples I feel tend to become more like best friends rather than lovers, where they do loads of things together and confide in each other, but have lost the feeling of wanting to rip the clothes off of the other partner over time. You can even see signs of this in couples that have been together for a number of years but are not necessarily living with each other even.

This 'best friend' phenomenon is not necessarily a bad thing, especially at a certain age.

Feck that, rip the clothes of her... but i agree it doesn't alway be the same the other way around, she might be get to the "best friend" age:(. but not as long as i can still charm her.. so to the future ...make love not war...

how long do you need to be with someone to be "best friends" i thought that was why i married her 20 years ago

OnTheCouch

OnTheCouch wrote: »

I fear that continued sexual attraction between co-habiting couples over a long period of time may become difficult although not impossible, certainly from what I know about human nature and its tendencies.

Many long-term couples I feel tend to become more like best friends rather than lovers, where they do loads of things together and confide in each other, but have lost the feeling of wanting to rip the clothes off of the other partner over time. You can even see signs of this in couples that have been together for a number of years but are not necessarily living with each other even.

This 'best friend' phenomenon is not necessarily a bad thing, especially at a certain age.

But how much better to have a best friend and a lover, and by happy chance they are the same person:p

Kintarō Hattori

I believe I will as she's gotten more adorable with time and that endears her to my heart in a way that is stronger than just a physical attraction.

50SofG

Kintarō Hattori wrote: »

I believe I will as she's gotten more adorable with time and that endears her to my heart in a way that is stronger than just a physical attraction.

really well put my friend.

BraziliaNZ

OnTheCouch wrote: »

I fear that continued sexual attraction between co-habiting couples over a long period of time may become difficult although not impossible, certainly from what I know about human nature and its tendencies.

Many long-term couples I feel tend to become more like best friends rather than lovers, where they do loads of things together and confide in each other, but have lost the feeling of wanting to rip the clothes off of the other partner over time. You can even see signs of this in couples that have been together for a number of years but are not necessarily living with each other even.

This 'best friend' phenomenon is not necessarily a bad thing, especially at a certain age.

Yes but it's just a reality that the rip the clothes thing wears off as you get more comfortable with each other and get used to the fact that your partner isn't going anywhere. That's not a problem if you're still having a healthy sex life.
You could always take it as a sign that your relationship is over and move onto the next one, but it will wear off with the new person too, in my opinion. You can still fancy the asses off each other but the initial lust wears thinner after a while.

IM0

OnTheCouch wrote: »

I fear that continued sexual attraction between co-habiting couples over a long period of time may become difficult although not impossible, certainly from what I know about human nature and its tendencies.

Many long-term couples I feel tend to become more like best friends rather than lovers, where they do loads of things together and confide in each other, but have lost the feeling of wanting to rip the clothes off of the other partner over time. You can even see signs of this in couples that have been together for a number of years but are not necessarily living with each other even.

This 'best friend' phenomenon is not necessarily a bad thing, especially at a certain age.

oh I totally get you, it makes 100% sense too when you think about it. that is if your not religious ect and or narrow minded. its a bit like opening a packet of biscuits, the first couple are nice and quench that want, but the more you eat of them the more and more bland they become

familiarity breeds contempt. all this oh till death do us part nonsense is beyond cringworthy live your life, **** and then **** some more the more people the merrier, THIS is what you evolved for!!

foxy06

Me and oh are together nearly 13 years with 5 kids and still very happy :-D

50SofG

does the lust have you wear off?
if a man still has lust in his veins say for other women then why can he not hold on to it for his partner.

should relationships allow the lust factor to disappear is that not what keeps us young?

or do we just get tired trying.

OnTheCouch

50SofG wrote: »

how long do you need to be with someone to be "best friends" i thought that was why i married her 20 years ago

In my experience, this can happen relatively quickly, after only two or three years of dating sometimes. Obviously the longer you stay together, the higher the chances of it becoming a reality.

mariaalice wrote: »

But how much better to have a best friend and a lover, and by happy chance they are the same person:p

Quite and this would be my ideal relationship (as I'm sure is the case for many others). However, life does not necessarily work out the way you intended, the two relationships I had where I had thought the girl fell into both the best friend and lover category, ended very abruptly, which I didn't see coming on both occasions.

I think the phrase 'familiarity breeds contempt' is unfortunately based on elements of truth.

IM0

50SofG wrote: »

does the lust have you wear off?
if a man still has lust in his veins say for other women then why can he not hold on to it for his partner.

should relationships allow the lust factor to disappear is that not what keeps us young?

or do we just get tired trying.

because he has shagged her countless times before, and she isnt going anywhere there is no thrill or lust, did you not see my biscuit metaphor?

50SofG

my wife for 20years is still my lover, i still lust for her and wait for it
she is my best friend BFF

OnTheCouch

IM0 wrote: »

oh I totally get you, it makes 100% sense too when you think about it. that is if your not religious ect and or narrow minded. its a bit like opening a packet of biscuits, the first couple are nice and quench that want, but the more you eat of them the more and more bland they become

familiarity breeds contempt. all this oh till death do us part nonsense is beyond cringworthy live your life, **** and then **** some more the more people the merrier, THIS is what you evolved for!!

Ha, I didn't see you'd used the 'familiarity breeds contempt' line as well. I like the biscuit analogy also.

I have to applaud couples who keep the spice in their relationship over many years and avoid the above, as I believe it to be quite a challenge to say the least.

50SofG

IM0 wrote: »

because he has shagged her countless times before, and she isnt going anywhere there is no thrill or lust, did you not see my biscuit metaphor?

and i did her twice only yesterday, it's still there sorry to disapoint you

IM0

OnTheCouch wrote: »

Ha, I didn't see you'd used the 'familiarity breeds contempt' line as well. I like the biscuit analogy also.

I have to applaud couples who keep the spice in their relationship over many years and avoid the above, as I believe it to be quite a challenge to say the least.

I would say its down to a very low sex drive. or rather a higher one, but not getting what you want when you want [as in sex] tied in with the phenonemonon of people usually want what they cant have more than what they can have easily

Crooked Jack

50SofG wrote: »

does the lust have you wear off?
if a man still has lust in his veins say for other women then why can he not hold on to it for his partner.

should relationships allow the lust factor to disappear is that not what keeps us young?

or do we just get tired trying.

You're suggesting that it's some sort of choice, when it isn't. That's like saying, "why not hold on to your youth and avoid getting old."
It's just not something you have control over.

Jimmy 5F

OnTheCouch wrote: »

Ha, I didn't see you'd used the 'familiarity breeds contempt' line as well. I like the biscuit analogy also.

I have to applaud couples who keep the spice in their relationship over many years and avoid the above, as I believe it to be quite a challenge to say the least.

That's the thing, if it were natural it wouldn't be a challenge or require "work".

Jimmy 5F

OnTheCouch wrote: »

Ha, I didn't see you'd used the 'familiarity breeds contempt' line as well. I like the biscuit analogy also.

I have to applaud couples who keep the spice in their relationship over many years and avoid the above, as I believe it to be quite a challenge to say the least.

That's the thing, if it were natural it wouldn't be a challenge or require "work".

50SofG

ok, i have an extermily high sex drive the OH doesn't, if i got what i wanted when i wanted she be exhausted,LOL. however married life or LT relationships learn how to work this out.
it doesn't have to be all about the sex, but still flirt,tease,charm,romance
we as humans don't loose it we just forget that it can still and stop using it...

witchgirl26

I know a few older couples who do still fancy each other. My aunt is convinced that her husband is the most attractive man on the planet & of course everyone fancies him etc. It's quite sweet really.
I don't know if it's commonplace for lots but I think there's reasons beyond lust & fancying someone that keep relationships going for years. I don't believe that familiarity breeds contempt - I think if you're not happy with yourself, it's easy to take it out on others & generally you'll do that on the ones closest to you. And that's where the sniping comes in.

50SofG

Crooked Jack wrote: »

You're suggesting that it's some sort of choice, when it isn't. That's like saying, "why not hold on to your youth and avoid getting old."
It's just not something you have control over.

like getting old we can choose to still play football in the park for as long as our bodies let us or we get tired trying to play fooball long before our bodies tell us to.

i know there is an age that will come that everything will stop. but by then the wisdom and experience we've gather should help the spark stay and the best friend and love should take us to the end of the book

IM0

50SofG wrote: »

ok, i have an extermily high sex drive the OH doesn't, if i got what i wanted when i wanted she be exhausted,LOL. however married life or LT relationships learn how to work this out.
it doesn't have to be all about the sex, but still flirt,tease,charm,romance
we as humans don't loose it we just forget that it can still and stop using it...

you accidentally a word there I think, can you clean that sentance up it doesnt make much sense as is

and dont lose what?

Fizgig Bandicoot

I've been with my boyfriend for 8 years and I still think he's a roide! Our sex life hasn't dwindled thus far and I can't imagine it will !

Jimmy 5F

Jimmy 5F wrote: »

That's the thing, if it were natural it wouldn't be a challenge or require "work".

No one is going to win this argument.

The basic attraction has to be there in the first place that does not change.

The "effort" bit is to do with life and how life can get in the way so to speak, for example on holiday a couple might have sex every day or even a few times a day because they have the time, but at home everyday life can get in the way so there has to be an effort to make time and to make it a priority.

That not an effort to force yourself to fancy someone.

KyussBishop

I would say most relationships end up losing sexual attraction at some stage, with it potentially rekindling later, but it still getting lost at some stage.

It would be a shame to either 1: Lose a great relationship (where how well you mesh personally is critical) by leaving, or 2: going without sex, or not having a fully fulfilled sex life, if attraction disappears (without knowing if it will ever return).

For those reasons (among many more), I think polygamy is greatly desirable, if you (and your partner(s)) can manage it, without it being a head-fúck (which isn't easy).


I would like to think I might be able to manage that, but am a long way away in personal development it'd be something I'd like to try though, and at least be able to be comfortable with it.

IM0

witchgirl26 wrote: »

I think if you're not happy with yourself, it's easy to take it out on others & generally you'll do that on the ones closest to you. And that's where the sniping comes in.

I do know couples like that actually. and sniping is the exact word I use for that behaviour too, its a really horrible way to be and to be 'stuck' in a relationship like that. why dont they split? well because obviously one is the submissive and one is the dominant they both 'need' it to be that way without realising it

IM0

IM0 wrote: »

I do know couples like that actually. and sniping is the exact word I use for that behaviour too, its a really horrible way to be and to be 'stuck' in a relationship like that. why don't they split? well because obviously one is the submissive and one is the dominant they both 'need' it to be that way without realising it

That is an example of a point I was making, some couple are just in the wrong relationship and that is the cause of the lack of sex. It is not caused by being in a monogamous relationship.