nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

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.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

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!

[Deleted User]

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.

[Deleted User]

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..

[Deleted User]

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.

[Deleted User]

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

[Deleted User]

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!!