How Do You Guys Do Monogamy?

[Chase]

Though I've come to realize toxicity isn't the same as drama, and that it's entirely possible to have a non-toxic high-sexually tense relationship. You don't need to grow gray hairs in order to have a sexually alive relationship, in my opinion. I think the aggravation cycle is only necessary if you lack healthy drama. Some health drama could include periods of physical distance from each other (naturally they will stop taking each other for granted - wonder what they're up to) and also just daily push-pull, constant teasing, surprises, having exciting shit going on in your life etc. I don't think it's necessary to have it to the point you're screaming fuck this I'm breaking up with you, over and over on repeat in order to have refresh the hot sex button.

Mr Variety

I like the idea in theory. A hot sex relationship where the couple just teases and surprises each other and has a bunch of other nice, pleasant tension going on, and that is enough to keep his dick hard for her and her pussy wet for him.

Do you have case studies / examples of this LONG term?

I have seen this kind of thing work okay for up to a couple of years, depending on the couple, but it still gets stale and dull toward the end of it.

I'd love to hear of some that endured, especially some from 10+ year relationships. I spent a long time looking for examples of "unicorn relationships" like that but never found any.

Particular interest would be >10 years in, hot sex 2-4+ times per week, truly aggravating "pull your hair out" drama less than twice per year, both partners completely monogamous.

That is basically the Holy Grail in the "monogamous relationship" niche... one all my studies have convinced me is a myth. At this point I have concluded it violates basic human and animal psychology (the acclimation effect). But I would love to be proven wrong.

It could be there's some guy out there running the 4-minute mile of monogamy and we just need to find that guy and figure out what he's doing.

Chase

 

[MrVariety]

I like the idea in theory. A hot sex relationship where the couple just teases and surprises each other and has a bunch of other nice, pleasant tension going on, and that is enough to keep his dick hard for her and her pussy wet for him.

Do you have case studies / examples of this LONG term?

I have seen this kind of thing work okay for up to a couple of years, depending on the couple, but it still gets stale and dull toward the end of it.

I'd love to hear of some that endured, especially some from 10+ year relationships. I spent a long time looking for examples of "unicorn relationships" like that but never found any.

Particular interest would be >10 years in, hot sex 2-4+ times per week, truly aggravating "pull your hair out" drama less than twice per year, both partners completely monogamous.

That is basically the Holy Grail in the "monogamous relationship" niche... one all my studies have convinced me is a myth. At this point I have concluded it violates basic human and animal psychology (the acclimation effect). But I would love to be proven wrong.

It could be there's some guy out there running the 4-minute mile of monogamy and we just need to find that guy and figure out what he's doing.

Chase

I'm surprised you haven't found any examples having actively looked for it. Though a detailed case study is pretty much impossible due to the nature of the study. And if you're looking for consistently 2-4+ times of hot sex a week, then there will be zero results. I think relationships and sexual energy ebb in and out like seasons - that's natural and fine. Nothing wrong with low sexual activity for a couple months here and there.

I don't have personal experience with VLTRs, but my general impression from witnessing things around me (not being able in a hostel to sleep due to a 50 y/o having monkey sex with his 40 y/o hot Colombian wife e.g.) leads me to believe it's definitely possible. Though I haven't had the nerve to pry in on anyone's weekly sexual habits of long term married couples. Maybe I should do that more. (I'm ordering some spy cameras as we speak.)

As for public figures, first guy who pops into my mind is Laird Hamilton who's married to Gabrielle Reece for 27 years. From the way I've seen they talk about each other and their relationship, I get the strong vibe that they're still having an active sex life. I mean no shit, Gabrielle and his family is worried he's going to die on a regular basis hitting world's largest waves. Talk about drama. Not to mention both of them are extremely healthy - Google Laird and you'll see a photo of an exaggerated version of Chad Thundercock.

Apart from that, an influencer I've followed pretty closely is Elliott Hulse, who married his high school sweetheart in his teens and talks constantly about how he's banging his wife. He's probably the most unfiltered public person about that front I've heard.

I also get the impression Joe Rogan, who has been married for about sixteen years, has actively sex with his wife and he loves her. I believe I've heard him slip the word "constantly."

While I don't know much about their marriage, I can't imagine anything else than Tony Robbins and his wife banging constantly. lol. and I can't imagine a guy like Tony Robbins and his wife constantly have to stir up drama. Though this might be hero-worship on my part.

When it comes to 10+ years, I've observed that the common denominator isn't who's creating jealousy, aggravations, fights, etc. but more basic things such as his testosterone level and that both keep themselves fit and healthy - that both partners are keeping them selves market-ready. Sure there needs to be constant tension that way - but that doesn't necessarily imply throwing shit at each other or dealing with arguments without mature, assertive communication.

Regarding the aggravation cycles -

I used to see what you'd call a BPD girl, and I put up with the emotional drainage, in part because I was thought that feminine energy is inevitably chaotic, and the desire to pull my hair out is the price I had to pay for our crazy hot sex. Then I improved myself, I met healthier and healthier women emotionally, but the surprising thing was the sex was even better.

From this I make a logical inference that since sexual polarity and "moral virtue" (for a lack of better phrase) are "decoupled," two separate things, there aren't any hard limits to how loving and healthy a relationship can be, and that does not limit the intensity of the sexual chemistry. The "Hot / crazy" scale whether you're talking about a girl, or a relationship, albeit a funny meme, is an unfortunate self-limiting belief which just isn't the case.

Mr Variety

 

[OldGuy]

When my dad had some prostate issues, my mother was complaining about lack of sex after 30+ years of marriage, and she wasn't even in love with him!

 

[D. Gately]

Honestly, I cannot do sustained monogamy and I think my LTRs benefitted once I realized that. I could do it for months to a couple of years and that's it. Not all women like all the things I like to do. Which is fine!

 

[Just a Man]

Eventually you "do monogamy" by accommodating yourself to the fact that humans are non-monogamous in evolutionary terms.

What that means will vary according to your circumstances and cultural frames. Could be, e.g.

-- being faithful and unhappy
-- divorce
-- open marriage by explicit agreement
-- open marriage by tacit understanding
-- outside arrangements that entirely dupe the other partner.

 

[Chase]

And if you're looking for consistently 2-4+ times of hot sex a week, then there will be zero results. I think relationships and sexual energy ebb in and out like seasons - that's natural and fine. Nothing wrong with low sexual activity for a couple months here and there.

Right. Ebbing sexual desire among long-term partners is the natural result of acclimation. The more "sure" a relationship feels, the lower the drive drops.

Maintaining / restoring hot sex is the "stimulus required" element of the relationship. When I was younger I hoped you could maintain hot monkey sex through just playful flirtation, teasing, etc., but experience seems to show you need much more dramatic stimulation than that.

In theory you could construct a hot sex drama-free monogamous relationship if you simply engineered a constant stream of exciting new stimuli. e.g., there was a news story about a pastor and his wife who had a goal of having sex in every state in the U.S. My guess is every time their sex ebbed too much they just flew to another state and banged in the cornfields of Nebraska or the deserts of Nevada or what have you.

In practice, the "engineered high stimuli" relationship is probably going to be more work than it's worth for most folks (but still is an option, I suppose. For as long as you can maintain it, anyway).

I don't have personal experience with VLTRs, but my general impression from witnessing things around me (not being able in a hostel to sleep due to a 50 y/o having monkey sex with his 40 y/o hot Colombian wife e.g.) leads me to believe it's definitely possible.

Married to a Colombiana, you say?

I do not think there is such a thing as a "calm, peaceful, reasonable Colombiana."

I can guarantee you that is a dramatic relationship. That is why they are still having hot monkey sex

As for public figures, first guy who pops into my mind is Laird Hamilton who's married to Gabrielle Reece for 27 years. From the way I've seen they talk about each other and their relationship, I get the strong vibe that they're still having an active sex life. I mean no shit, Gabrielle and his family is worried he's going to die on a regular basis hitting world's largest waves. Talk about drama. Not to mention both of them are extremely healthy - Google Laird and you'll see a photo of an exaggerated version of Chad Thundercock.

Wasn't familiar with him, but he's married to a former pro volleyball player. Pro athlete chicks are all crazy high sex drive. She's on record calling her husband "the most sensitive one in the family" and he's on record saying his way of keeping the peace with her is that "I just agree with everything that she says, and then it works fantastic." But then she also advocates wives being "submissive." Men don't usually say "I just agree with whatever she says" when they have placid, tranquil wives -- that's the "guy who's trying to avoid the drama" line. There is also this quote:

The couple is candid about going through rough patches in their marriage and the work they’ve put into their relationship. Reece also shares that she had to learn how to have healthy confrontation in a marriage, discuss uncomfortable subjects, and express her real feelings with her partner.

"Healthy confrontation" lol. Wonder what her prior confrontation looked like. Wonder how disciplined she is about "always healthily confronting!"

Keep in mind: couples do not usually advertise their drama (except in some divorce cases), nor do they generally advertise if they are swinging or cheating, generally.

But this one sounds like it's probably pretty dramatic, at least.

They are going back and forth between him going "-sigh- I just do whatever she says!" vs. her saying "It's better if I submit to him."

That is the definition of drama followed by re-conquest. It's why their sex stays hot.

Tony Robbins bangs his female fans, so I don't think he counts for the "totally monogamous hot sex" blueprint... One-sided monogamy perhaps, but that is easy to maintain hot sex in because she knows you are banging fresh strange.

I don't know about the other guys (Elliot Hulse / Joe Rogan) but I'll bet if you look into it you can either find drama, swinging, or the guy is banging fans.

Just how it goes...

Regarding the aggravation cycles -

I used to see what you'd call a BPD girl, and I put up with the emotional drainage, in part because I was thought that feminine energy is inevitably chaotic, and the desire to pull my hair out is the price I had to pay for our crazy hot sex. Then I improved myself, I met healthier and healthier women emotionally, but the surprising thing was the sex was even better.

From this I make a logical inference that since sexual polarity and "moral virtue" (for a lack of better phrase) are "decoupled," two separate things, there aren't any hard limits to how loving and healthy a relationship can be, and that does not limit the intensity of the sexual chemistry. The "Hot / crazy" scale whether you're talking about a girl, or a relationship, albeit a funny meme, is an unfortunate self-limiting belief which just isn't the case.

Mr Variety

Well I'd love to find an example of a "very" long-term relationship that doesn't have aggravating drama, doesn't have swinging, and where both partners are 100% monogamous and the sex remains hot and frequent mostly consistently.

Still haven't seen it, but again, if anyone has that experience, would love to hear about what he does to maintain it and pick the guy's brain. I would also need to verify he is not leaving anything out, though...

Chase

 

[MrVariety]

Married to a Colombiana, you say?

I do not think there is such a thing as a "calm, peaceful, reasonable Colombiana."

I can guarantee you that is a dramatic relationship. That is why they are still having hot monkey sex

Mentioning she was Colombian did not make my case stronger. Strategic blunder on my part.

Wasn't familiar with him, but he's married to a former pro volleyball player. Pro athlete chicks are all crazy high sex drive. She's on record calling her husband "the most sensitive one in the family" and he's on record saying his way of keeping the peace with her is that "I just agree with everything that she says, and then it works fantastic."

I don't think you're giving this one a fair review. Common sense would have it, knowing Laird's personality from podcasts (and just looking at the guy), that this was said in jest. That was made undeniable when it was explicit in the article, when your quote was preceded with "Hamilton jokingly adds".

"Healthy confrontation" lol. Wonder what her prior confrontation looked like. Wonder how disciplined she is about "always healthily confronting!"

Keep in mind: couples do not usually advertise their drama (except in some divorce cases), nor do they generally advertise if they are swinging or cheating, generally.

I guess all we can is wonder. Right. I suppose our beliefs of what is possible just reinforce our assumptions when we don't know. Any uncertainty of what happens behind the four walls of any relationship just adds to the proof of our respective theories.

I'm much more interested in what characterizes a relationship rather than it being entirely pure. When I hear you say "aggravation cycles keep the sex hot," I imagine they are purposefully poking each other's hot buttons to invoke strong emotional reactions, often to the brink of ending the relationship, only to keep the hot sex alive.

Just because a couple isn't holy saints and sometimes have disagreements about stuff, doesn't mean that is what keeps the sex alive. Actually - disagreement is inevitable. When two people with their own values and opinions live together - constant disagreement and conflict is a sign that they are both invested in the relationship, because they are expressing their own will and willing to make it work despite the uncomfortable conflict.

I'd be careful not to confuse the "safe, non-drama" relationships CAUSING "low sex" What's far more likely is when there's zero drama, it means they are just not invested in the relationship anymore. Again - inevitably in any relationship with invested partners there is going to be conflict - but when they are too apathic to deal with it - they just brush it away.

Tony Robbins bangs his female fans, so I don't think he counts for the "totally monogamous hot sex" blueprint... One-sided monogamy perhaps, but that is easy to maintain hot sex in because she knows you are banging fresh strange.

According to Buzzfeed. Yes.

I would also need to verify he is not leaving anything out, though...

Yup. Which makes this whole thing almost impossible to verify. Even if someone is speaking honestly, they are speaking honestly from their reticular activation system. If they are happy in their relationship they will selectively remember good things - and if they are unhappy it will be vice versa. Again - it seems like given your determined beliefs, it seems to me that anything else than a Truman show video footage would account for anything resembling proof. That's why I'm more inclined to use logical inference.

Mr Variety (ironical name, given what I'm posting)

 

[Chase]

Again - it seems like given your determined beliefs, it seems to me that anything else than a Truman show video footage would account for anything resembling proof. That's why I'm more inclined to use logical inference.

Low self-awareness post.

I presented a functional explanation for relationship sexual behavior based on well-understood human and animal psychology.

I discussed my attempts to find counterexamples to this and my conclusion that, so far as I can tell, they don't exist. I noted that this has been the case across a decent sample size (several dozen or so) of very long-term relationships I have had extensive looks into and I have not found exceptions.

You then extrapolated suppositions about very long-term relationships from your own (presumably much) shorter relationships, then added in examples of older couples who still have sex whose relationships you do not know anything about other than "they are over 40 and they still have sex", then concluded that "since they are over 40 and still have sex, they must have drama-light or drama-free, fully monogamous, but highly sexually active relationships." Then dubbed this "logical inference."

When I went to the trouble to dig up clues one of the couples has out there about the actual nature of their relationship, you proceeded to hand-wave part of it away with "Well, it was a joke, therefore means nothing." Not only does that display a lack of insight into human psychology, it demonstrates a low understanding of relationship dynamics:

1. Men who never deal with their women trying to dictate to them do not have it "occur" to them to joke about "always doing what the wife says." Have you ever heard a man in a tranquil relationship with a docile wife make that joke? Me neither.
   
   
2. Men who don't need to defuse the egos of headstrong partners also do not engage in "appeasement humor."

After that you hand waved the rest with "I guess all we can do is wonder / we all just fall back onto our own beliefs!"

If you want to bring examples, make them solid ones, not superficial ones ones ("saw this guy in some videos, because he seems like a BOSS I'm confident he doesn't have drama and the sex is still hot." What is that confidence based on, exactly? Because he is a BOSS? Boss players have some of the heaviest drama. Look at Sean Connery, forced to slap his women to get them to stop; Mel Gibson, with rants against his woman on tape -- definitely picked the wrong girl in that case, but still. Being a BOSS PLAYER does not except you from drama).

If you want to rebut my rebuttal, make it a solid one, not a hand wavey one ("Oh well I guess we can just never know" with examples you yourself introduced. Come on, man!).

According to Buzzfeed. Yes.

According to recordings of Tony Robbins, sworn statements, etc.

It was clearly a hit piece but he's clearly also a dude who loves his poon. Strictly monogamous men don't tell their female audience members to simulate orgasms then yell at them to "come up on stage and make love to me!" (which is hilarious, btw)

Nothing wrong with that. I'd probably be doing the same thing if I was Tony Robbins, lol!

But this dude is not Captain Monogamy, and if you think he is, you have much to learn, my sweet summer child

Chase

 

[MrVariety]

Have you ever heard a man in a tranquil relationship with a docile wife make that joke? Me neither.

Have you ever heard about a man in a tranquil relationship with a docile wife - ever? If so, that's a sorry situation in my eyes. Maybe I just don't share your (robot-slave?) wife happily-ever-after ideal. In my eyes, healthy relationships aren't supposed to be docile and tranquil. Maybe we just have different definitions here of what it the aggravation cycles mean. I'm not arguing that Laird has a docile wife - I'm arguing they don't need to constantly push each other to the brink of madness --- creating what I see as toxic drama --- to fuck, even after decades together. It's really as simple as that.

If you want to rebut my rebuttal, make it a solid one, not a hand wavey one ("Oh well I guess we can just never know" with examples you yourself introduced. Come on, man!).

To be fair - you quoted a couple Yahoo interviews and made a sweeping generalization of someone's relationship from a couple quotes. Who's hand waving?

My point is that sure, I can't claim that any of the examples I gave give definitive proof. But I still stand by they are good examples of non-toxic relationships that are sexually active after decades of marriage. If you require definitive proof, then I wonder, what would be sufficient evidence? It would all come down to someone's words anyway, their subjective opinion on how hot their sex is, how non-toxic their relationship is. etc.

Mr Variety

 

[Skills]

I'm surprised you haven't found any examples having actively looked for it. Though a detailed case study is pretty much impossible due to the nature of the study. And if you're looking for consistently 2-4+ times of hot sex a week, then there will be zero results. I think relationships and sexual energy ebb in and out like seasons - that's natural and fine. Nothing wrong with low sexual activity for a couple months here and there.

I don't have personal experience with VLTRs, but my general impression from witnessing things around me (not being able in a hostel to sleep due to a 50 y/o having monkey sex with his 40 y/o hot Colombian wife e.g.) leads me to believe it's definitely possible. Though I haven't had the nerve to pry in on anyone's weekly sexual habits of long term married couples. Maybe I should do that more. (I'm ordering some spy cameras as we speak.)

As for public figures, first guy who pops into my mind is Laird Hamilton who's married to Gabrielle Reece for 27 years. From the way I've seen they talk about each other and their relationship, I get the strong vibe that they're still having an active sex life. I mean no shit, Gabrielle and his family is worried he's going to die on a regular basis hitting world's largest waves. Talk about drama. Not to mention both of them are extremely healthy - Google Laird and you'll see a photo of an exaggerated version of Chad Thundercock.

Apart from that, an influencer I've followed pretty closely is Elliott Hulse, who married his high school sweetheart in his teens and talks constantly about how he's banging his wife. He's probably the most unfiltered public person about that front I've heard.

I also get the impression Joe Rogan, who has been married for about sixteen years, has actively sex with his wife and he loves her. I believe I've heard him slip the word "constantly."

While I don't know much about their marriage, I can't imagine anything else than Tony Robbins and his wife banging constantly. lol. and I can't imagine a guy like Tony Robbins and his wife constantly have to stir up drama. Though this might be hero-worship on my part.

When it comes to 10+ years, I've observed that the common denominator isn't who's creating jealousy, aggravations, fights, etc. but more basic things such as his testosterone level and that both keep themselves fit and healthy - that both partners are keeping them selves market-ready. Sure there needs to be constant tension that way - but that doesn't necessarily imply throwing shit at each other or dealing with arguments without mature, assertive communication.

Regarding the aggravation cycles -

I used to see what you'd call a BPD girl, and I put up with the emotional drainage, in part because I was thought that feminine energy is inevitably chaotic, and the desire to pull my hair out is the price I had to pay for our crazy hot sex. Then I improved myself, I met healthier and healthier women emotionally, but the surprising thing was the sex was even better.

From this I make a logical inference that since sexual polarity and "moral virtue" (for a lack of better phrase) are "decoupled," two separate things, there aren't any hard limits to how loving and healthy a relationship can be, and that does not limit the intensity of the sexual chemistry. The "Hot / crazy" scale whether you're talking about a girl, or a relationship, albeit a funny meme, is an unfortunate self-limiting belief which just isn't the case.

Mr Variety

Brother Tony Robbins wife is a lesbian... I know someone in their circle... Joe Rogan cheats... You have no idea what goes behind close doors. .

 

[MrVariety]

Brother Tony Robbins wife is a lesbian... I know someone in their circle...

lol. Now I know why he has so much surplus energy.

Yeah no I know basically nothing about his marriage. Most likely hero projection on my part. Picked a public figure om top of my head that seems too mature to lie, indulge in petty drama and at the same time have a high sex drive.

MV

 

[JasonH]

Right. Ebbing sexual desire among long-term partners is the natural result of acclimation. The more "sure" a relationship feels, the lower the drive drops.

Maintaining / restoring hot sex is the "stimulus required" element of the relationship. When I was younger I hoped you could maintain hot monkey sex through just playful flirtation, teasing, etc., but experience seems to show you need much more dramatic stimulation than that.

In theory you could construct a hot sex drama-free monogamous relationship if you simply engineered a constant stream of exciting new stimuli. e.g., there was a news story about a pastor and his wife who had a goal of having sex in every state in the U.S. My guess is every time their sex ebbed too much they just flew to another state and banged in the cornfields of Nebraska or the deserts of Nevada or what have you.

In practice, the "engineered high stimuli" relationship is probably going to be more work than it's worth for most folks (but still is an option, I suppose. For as long as you can maintain it, anyway).



Married to a Colombiana, you say?

I do not think there is such a thing as a "calm, peaceful, reasonable Colombiana."

I can guarantee you that is a dramatic relationship. That is why they are still having hot monkey sex



Wasn't familiar with him, but he's married to a former pro volleyball player. Pro athlete chicks are all crazy high sex drive. She's on record calling her husband "the most sensitive one in the family" and he's on record saying his way of keeping the peace with her is that "I just agree with everything that she says, and then it works fantastic." But then she also advocates wives being "submissive." Men don't usually say "I just agree with whatever she says" when they have placid, tranquil wives -- that's the "guy who's trying to avoid the drama" line. There is also this quote:



"Healthy confrontation" lol. Wonder what her prior confrontation looked like. Wonder how disciplined she is about "always healthily confronting!"

Keep in mind: couples do not usually advertise their drama (except in some divorce cases), nor do they generally advertise if they are swinging or cheating, generally.

But this one sounds like it's probably pretty dramatic, at least.

They are going back and forth between him going "-sigh- I just do whatever she says!" vs. her saying "It's better if I submit to him."

That is the definition of drama followed by re-conquest. It's why their sex stays hot.

Tony Robbins bangs his female fans, so I don't think he counts for the "totally monogamous hot sex" blueprint... One-sided monogamy perhaps, but that is easy to maintain hot sex in because she knows you are banging fresh strange.

I don't know about the other guys (Elliot Hulse / Joe Rogan) but I'll bet if you look into it you can either find drama, swinging, or the guy is banging fans.

Just how it goes...



Well I'd love to find an example of a "very" long-term relationship that doesn't have aggravating drama, doesn't have swinging, and where both partners are 100% monogamous and the sex remains hot and frequent mostly consistently.

Still haven't seen it, but again, if anyone has that experience, would love to hear about what he does to maintain it and pick the guy's brain. I would also need to verify he is not leaving anything out, though...

Chase

In yours and others experience what strategies are best to maximise excitement over the long term. Especially when already co-habiting.

I think these are key
- maintaining frame, leadership, continuing to be the same guy, balancing investment and attention, good sex.

in addition
- Her seeing how other women interact with you and them seeing you as attractive will always maintain some excitement
- Periods of travel away (conference, travel)

but it seems there has to be something more
- Growth towards goals: marriage, kids, travel.

 

[Ratata]

Tldr been seeing this girl since late December and official after an std test which was definitely my fault (my first ever std lol) in February

Anywhoo, I dunno if it's a confidence thing or a delusional thing but I feel like a lotta women are suddenly into me as I go about my day. Even today a girl covered in tats immediately gave me her full body attention, a hair flip and removed her shades in the span of like... 30 seconds after an opener

But sadly I had to bounce. It woulda been easy to just ask her to sit with me or trade numbers since I was being pulled away (she had an order waiting on the phone line and I was waiting to be seated)

But again, monogamy

She's head over heels for me and I really dig her. Though I stop myself from getting too attached since I want to leave the country and she doesn't

I love hanging out with her but most of the time, I just don't want to fuck her. I still do to make her happy but it's mostly for her. Like 75% of the time

My sex drive is drying up more and more everyday and I just want some new pussy lol

But I won't cheat cuz then I wouldn't be able to use one of my fun one liners about [now almost] never being monogamous but never cheating

So yeah... What can I do to drive away the demons/delusions[?] As well as increase my sex drive for my girlfriend?

Starts thread about monogamy. Immediately delves into an aside about some random chick that turned him on lol.
Dude you're not ready for monogamy!

 

[D. Gately]

The older I get, the more I learn about other people's marriages/VLTRs that are open via tacit understanding. For either men or women, esp if one partner has a lower sex drive or is not 100% healthy.

I read somewhere about 3 rules that some couples use to make that work well:
1) No sleeping over, i.e. you always come home at night to partner,
2) No catching feelings [can be quite hard, probably where this fails most]
3) Nobody from the social circle.

 

[Chase]

Maybe I just don't share your (robot-slave?) wife happily-ever-after ideal.

Straw man. That is not my position.

In my eyes, healthy relationships aren't supposed to be docile and tranquil.

And now you agree with me.

Maybe we just have different definitions here of what it the aggravation cycles mean. I'm not arguing that Laird has a docile wife - I'm arguing they don't need to constantly push each other to the brink of madness --- creating what I see as toxic drama --- to fuck, even after decades together. It's really as simple as that.

Adopting my position after straw manning it.

Your debate skills are lacking, my friend.

To be fair - you quoted a couple Yahoo interviews and made a sweeping generalization of someone's relationship from a couple quotes. Who's hand waving?

False equivalence.

There's no comparison between "Here's this guy I've seen in interviews, I'm sure he must run relationships in my ideal way based on how he carries himself" versus "Here is the stuff these two people have said about the actual dynamic of their relationship."

My point is that sure, I can't claim that any of the examples I gave give definitive proof. But I still stand by they are good examples of non-toxic relationships that are sexually active after decades of marriage. If you require definitive proof, then I wonder, what would be sufficient evidence? It would all come down to someone's words anyway, their subjective opinion on how hot their sex is, how non-toxic their relationship is. etc.

Mr Variety

Begging the question.

"No proof will ever be enough for you because no one can ever provide proof enough, is that right?"

That plus your earlier ad hominems (the repeated claim that you are using "logical inference", in opposition to me, who is apparently using "irrational emotionality" or something) really undermine any claims you might be trying to make (which I've also already deconstructed).

I understand if I struck a nerve with my replies to this thread. A lot of guys cling to that dream of "happily ever after." It is distressing to think that dream may not come true precisely in the way you envision it.

Still, if you are going to go debating someone, then begin ad hominen'ing him while mischaracterizing his position, I suggest you ensure your case is absolutely airtight and your opponent does not know how to debate back and call you out on it, first.

Otherwise it just turns into a self-own.

Of course, if your case is airtight and your opponent is not a skilled debater, you are probably not going to need to resort to logical fallacies to try to win.

---

Anyway, I have sympathy.

I imagine you are young. Probably under 30.

That youthful idealism has its uses and will push you to try to achieve things that others say can't be done (such as achieving a "non-aggravating permanently hot sex very long-term fully monogamous relationship"). A lot of great discoveries and inventions happen this way. It is part of the generational refreshment of the species.

While I think it goes against nature and is likely not achievable as envisioned (like saying "I'm sure there must be a way to fly if you flap your arms hard enough and practice long enough" -- there ARE ways to get humans into the air, but not exactly that way), should you manage to pull it off down the road I would love to hear about how.

Warmly,
Chase

 

[MrVariety]

Straw man. That is not my position.

And now you agree with me.

@Chase , this is getting ridiculous.

You asked for an example of 2-4 hot sex per week, 10+ years, monogamous, and less hair-pulling drama than twice a year.

I gave an example that I think shows this is likely, from my perspective.

You discarded the example because the wife isn't completely docile.

You're shifting the standards of what meets your expectations based, coming up with additional criteria "The woman can't be anything but non-docile". You didn't ask for an example where there are no arguments or discussions. So I can't see where your objection is coming from.

I never said I subscribe to a happily-ever after marriage, but I do believe you can have emotionally healthy, yet sexually active long-term marriage.

You claim I subscribe to a "non-aggravating permanently hot sex very long-term fully monogamous relationship" - I've made it crystal clear multiple times that my view is more nuanced than this.

A lot of people have different opinions of what makes a skilled debater. It seems like you esteem yourself in that regard. In my opinion though, those who have valid arguments don't try to attack the other's character and try to be overly condescending. At this point you're overdramatically flailing your arms and it's a bit embarrassing.

I have certainly not changed my view since posting in this. But if I do "now agree" with you - then our apparent difference in views might be mostly caused by ambiguity of what it means to be "happily ever after," or "drama free," "docile," and "aggravating." If I do have the same opinions as you, then I certainly wouldn't mind it, it would be reassuring.

Mr Variety

 

[Just a Man]

A lot of guys cling to that dream of "happily ever after." It is distressing to think that dream may not come true precisely in the way you envision it.

Being myself in an >20 years LTR, of which >15 married, I welcome this realism. A book I would recommend on the subject is Esther Perel's Mating in Captivity. It is no coincidence - because of the responses she was getting to that book - that she went on to write The State of Affairs. (I think the titles speak for themselves.) Each book was also the basis for a TED Talk, with multi-million views in each case. I recommend the talks as a good insight into her work. (She is a professional therapist.)

The core issue here is that it's unrealistic to expect marriage (or comparable LTR arrangement) to keep delivering forever all the demands we tend to place on it. And the eroticism part of it is actually just about the toughest to maintain, even when there is still plenty of love, because love and domestic security are actually total passion-killers. As a species and as a culture, we are stuck with this bind. We generally crave both aspects (the loving security and the erotic desire) but they are almost impossible to combine in one person over the long haul.

 

[Just a Man]

The older I get, the more I learn about other people's marriages/VLTRs that are open via tacit understanding.

Indeed. There's a great deal to be said for it.

 

[JasonH]

Being myself in an >20 years LTR, of which >15 married, I welcome this realism. A book I would recommend on the subject is Esther Perel's Mating in Captivity. It is no coincidence - because of the responses she was getting to that book - that she went on to write The State of Affairs. (I think the titles speak for themselves.) Each book was also the basis for a TED Talk, with multi-million views in each case. I recommend the talks as a good insight into her work. (She is a professional therapist.)

The core issue here is that it's unrealistic to expect marriage (or comparable LTR arrangement) to keep delivering forever all the demands we tend to place on it. And the eroticism part of it is actually just about the toughest to maintain, even when there is still plenty of love, because love and domestic security are actually total passion-killers. As a species and as a culture, we are stuck with this bind. We generally crave both aspects (the loving security and the erotic desire) but they are almost impossible to combine in one person over the long haul.

It’s refreshing to hear this from someone who is actually in a very LTR.

How do you go about maintaining the erotic desire deep into marriage (or similar arrangement)? Any key frames, strategies or arrangements?

A lot of it is the circumstances around the relationship rather than the individuals themselves.
- As chase said we acclimatise and the biggest driver of this is co-habitation (rather than marriage itself, although they usually go together).

There are examples where the sex is hot for periods:
- travelling away/haven’t seen each other in a week
- Marriage without Co-habitation

but these aren’t always regularly maintainable solutions.

Do we accept and maintain that hot sex cannot be maintained in VLTR?
If so what should our frame and expectations be as the leader of the relationship:
- sex 1-2/week (which varies) + a healthy overall relationship, respect, shared goals & growth, submissive wife who supports etc

 

[Just a Man]

It’s refreshing to hear this from someone who is actually in a very LTR.

How do you go about maintaining the erotic desire deep into marriage (or similar arrangement)? Any key frames, strategies or arrangements?

A lot of it is the circumstances around the relationship rather than the individuals themselves.
- As chase said we acclimatise and the biggest driver of this is co-habitation (rather than marriage itself, although they usually go together).

There are examples where the sex is hot for periods:
- travelling away/haven’t seen each other in a week
- Marriage without Co-habitation

but these aren’t always regularly maintainable solutions.

Do we accept and maintain that hot sex cannot be maintained in VLTR?
If so what should our frame and expectations be as the leader of the relationship:
- sex 1-2/week (which varies) + a healthy overall relationship, respect, shared goals & growth, submissive wife who supports etc

Thanks. And a very good set of questions. It's a profound issue and I do have some thoughts on it. But rather than a quick answer here, I've been wondering for a while about a thread post on the thing. I'm going to circle back.