7 ms·

i reached a point where i realised that my friends were more important to me than i was to them. it was a horrible feeling, but i couldn't blame them.. they wer

i reached a point where i realised that my friends were more important to me than i was to them. it was a horrible feeling, but i couldn't blame them.. they were all getting married and having kids - after which my friendship was waaay down their list of priorities. one of the benefits of being in a relationship is to have somebody to whom you're at the top of the list for. friends just cannot be counted on as much, a realization that only hit me after age 30.

77pt77 10y ago
> one of the benefits of being in a relationship is to have somebody to whom you're at the top of the list for Not true. If this were true sexual attraction would not be the primary driver for relationships. That's why you don't see heterosexual people marrying same sex people just because they are great friends and at "the top of the list". Relationships (romantic) are primarily sexual affairs. The whole "top of the list" thing is a recent western "invention". Edit: I guess you can also say they are economic affairs, but there is always a sexual/reproductive element involved way before friendship
- Blackthorn 10y ago
  I think that point went rushing way over your head. The key words you missed, even though you quoted, are "one of the benefits". Not "the only benefit" or "the most important benefit". Also this leads into some pretty important marital advice that just because you're at the top of someone's list doesn't mean you should stop trying to keep yourself there. Gotta put that effort in!
- iliketosleep 10y ago
  > If this were true sexual attraction would not be the primary driver for relationships. i think we need to distinguish between long-term and short-term relationships. sexual attraction might be the primary reason why a man and woman initially get together, but it's not necessary the reason they stay together for years or even decades. relationships evolve, and in the end, long-term relationships are built on a lot more than sexual attraction.
- ux-app 10y ago
  > Not true. maybe you haven't met the right person yet?
  - colx 10y ago
    In what way is this related to what was written in that comment? It seems like you are dismissing the argument with some nebulous personal attack.
- cortesoft 10y ago
  As a married man with a kid, there is something more to long term romantic relationships than sex and reproduction. There is a joining of your lives; since my now-wife moved in, my life centers on two people instead of one. I don't make all decisions about what I will do and what my life will be like on my own. There is both a loss of control and a comfort in this. Where are we going to live? How are we going to spend our weekends? How will we decorate? All of those things used to be my decision on my own; now, the two of us choose together.
- gdulli 10y ago
  > Relationships (romantic) are primarily sexual affairs. This is only true for a time when you're young, before you grow and realize what's more important.
- taneq 10y ago
  > Not true. Wrong. (You're blunt? I'm blunt. That's OK.) Poster said "one of the benefits", not "the primary driver of", and it absolutely is one of the benefits of a relationship. If you're not top of your partner's list (and vice versa) then you're not partners, you're just a mutual booty call.
- hackuser 10y ago
  All I can say is that, based only on the comment (I don't know you at all, of course) you may be missing out on literally the best things in life. I don't think I've seen a long-term relationship that matches your description, I haven't read an expert describe them that way, and I don't think it would be healthy or tenable. Sex drives, for example, diminish as people age; and IME relationships primarily focused on sex don't last to become long-term ones. Another way of looking at it is that long-term relationships with prostitutes would fit your description. Sex is great and valuable; it's probably necessary at certain points in the relationship; but it's certainly not sufficient or the most important thing. Love, intimacy and human bonding are far more rewarding and valuable (and all enhanced by positive sex). As another easy example, beyond a doubt anyone I know with kids would give up sex before they gave up their child; it wouldn't be a close decision - it would be offensive to suggest otherwise to them. EDIT: I omitted a very valuable reason for long term relationships: To have someone to care for, for whom you matter. I believe research (and plenty of anecdotal examples) shows that, lacking this benefit, isolated people feel like they don't really exist.
  - 77pt77 10y ago
    All I'm stating is that all romantic relationships start with sexual attraction. Otherwise they are friendships. The two are different concepts. They can and many times overlap, but don't have to. The conflation of these two concepts is a recent phenomenon and far from universal (far less common in the far east and in the so called underdeveloped world where survival is difficult) > Another way of looking at it is that long-term relationships with prostitutes would fit your description. There's not much data on that but I remember vividly reading an academic study that interviewed many prostitutes and cases where regular "clients" used their services for more than 2 decades while racking several divorces in that time where common. I was really surprised at the time. Maybe friends disappearing (like the article states) leads those men (in that study it was only male "clients") to pay to have a permanent human element in their lives.
    - coldtea 10y ago
      >All I'm stating is that all romantic relationships start with sexual attraction. You'd be surprised, but the qualifier "romantic" messes up with clearly addressing this (since it presupposes sexuality). Marriage in most cultures have been more about the economic and companionship part than about sexuality up until recently. Heck, marriages were mostly arranged in most cultures until the last 1-2 centuries... After all you can "play" around without getting married too, no need to marry for that.
- nxc182 10y ago
  I can't imagine anything more boring or unsatisfying than a relationship (longer than a night or two) driven by sex. I want to have a life partner, not (just) a warm body to ejaculate into.
taneq 10y ago
> they were all getting married and having kids - after which my friendship was waaay down their list of priorities You have to understand that if someone has a kid, let alone two, and they make the time and effort to see you even every couple of months, that's huge. The saying "days are slow but weeks are fast" is never more applicable than when you have small children. Months go by in a flash. Just keeping them cared for is a non-stop grind that takes most of your energy, and you start jealously guarding those few spare moments that you get to yourself. Leaving the house and socializing is the last thing you want to do. You certainly cannot count on them to be up for impromptu mid-week shenanigans, but that doesn't mean you're not important to them. They just no longer have as much to give. Think of it as if they're working for some crappy client who demands non-stop crunch time and lives at their house.
- nl 10y ago
  This is do true. My only downtime was taking an extra 5 minutes to pick up books I'd reserved at the library on the way to picking up take-away once a week. The idea of seeing friends every couple of months seemed impossible.
- Kenji 10y ago
  but that doesn't mean you're not important to them No, he's right. You're no longer important to them. They make their life choices and set their priorities such that you are so unimportant to them that they don't spend any time with you at all. Ask yourself this: If something or someone is important to you, do you make choices such that you stop spending time with them? There's your answer. And they can say "noo you are still important". They should show it or they are a hypocrite. Emotions that are not acted upon are useless.
  - taneq 10y ago
    Do you seriously not feel 'important' to someone unless you are more important to them than their own children? That is a truly staggering level of entitlement.
    - 10y ago

77pt77 10y ago

> one of the benefits of being in a relationship is to have somebody to whom you're at the top of the list for Not true. If this were true sexual attraction would not be the primary driver for relationships. That's why you don't see heterosexual people marrying same sex people just because they are great friends and at "the top of the list". Relationships (romantic) are primarily sexual affairs. The whole "top of the list" thing is a recent western "invention". Edit: I guess you can also say they are economic affairs, but there is always a sexual/reproductive element involved way before friendship

Blackthorn 10y ago
I think that point went rushing way over your head. The key words you missed, even though you quoted, are "one of the benefits". Not "the only benefit" or "the most important benefit". Also this leads into some pretty important marital advice that just because you're at the top of someone's list doesn't mean you should stop trying to keep yourself there. Gotta put that effort in!
iliketosleep 10y ago
> If this were true sexual attraction would not be the primary driver for relationships. i think we need to distinguish between long-term and short-term relationships. sexual attraction might be the primary reason why a man and woman initially get together, but it's not necessary the reason they stay together for years or even decades. relationships evolve, and in the end, long-term relationships are built on a lot more than sexual attraction.
ux-app 10y ago
> Not true. maybe you haven't met the right person yet?
- colx 10y ago
  In what way is this related to what was written in that comment? It seems like you are dismissing the argument with some nebulous personal attack.
cortesoft 10y ago
As a married man with a kid, there is something more to long term romantic relationships than sex and reproduction. There is a joining of your lives; since my now-wife moved in, my life centers on two people instead of one. I don't make all decisions about what I will do and what my life will be like on my own. There is both a loss of control and a comfort in this. Where are we going to live? How are we going to spend our weekends? How will we decorate? All of those things used to be my decision on my own; now, the two of us choose together.
gdulli 10y ago
> Relationships (romantic) are primarily sexual affairs. This is only true for a time when you're young, before you grow and realize what's more important.
taneq 10y ago
> Not true. Wrong. (You're blunt? I'm blunt. That's OK.) Poster said "one of the benefits", not "the primary driver of", and it absolutely is one of the benefits of a relationship. If you're not top of your partner's list (and vice versa) then you're not partners, you're just a mutual booty call.
hackuser 10y ago
All I can say is that, based only on the comment (I don't know you at all, of course) you may be missing out on literally the best things in life. I don't think I've seen a long-term relationship that matches your description, I haven't read an expert describe them that way, and I don't think it would be healthy or tenable. Sex drives, for example, diminish as people age; and IME relationships primarily focused on sex don't last to become long-term ones. Another way of looking at it is that long-term relationships with prostitutes would fit your description. Sex is great and valuable; it's probably necessary at certain points in the relationship; but it's certainly not sufficient or the most important thing. Love, intimacy and human bonding are far more rewarding and valuable (and all enhanced by positive sex). As another easy example, beyond a doubt anyone I know with kids would give up sex before they gave up their child; it wouldn't be a close decision - it would be offensive to suggest otherwise to them. EDIT: I omitted a very valuable reason for long term relationships: To have someone to care for, for whom you matter. I believe research (and plenty of anecdotal examples) shows that, lacking this benefit, isolated people feel like they don't really exist.
- 77pt77 10y ago
  All I'm stating is that all romantic relationships start with sexual attraction. Otherwise they are friendships. The two are different concepts. They can and many times overlap, but don't have to. The conflation of these two concepts is a recent phenomenon and far from universal (far less common in the far east and in the so called underdeveloped world where survival is difficult) > Another way of looking at it is that long-term relationships with prostitutes would fit your description. There's not much data on that but I remember vividly reading an academic study that interviewed many prostitutes and cases where regular "clients" used their services for more than 2 decades while racking several divorces in that time where common. I was really surprised at the time. Maybe friends disappearing (like the article states) leads those men (in that study it was only male "clients") to pay to have a permanent human element in their lives.
  - coldtea 10y ago
    >All I'm stating is that all romantic relationships start with sexual attraction. You'd be surprised, but the qualifier "romantic" messes up with clearly addressing this (since it presupposes sexuality). Marriage in most cultures have been more about the economic and companionship part than about sexuality up until recently. Heck, marriages were mostly arranged in most cultures until the last 1-2 centuries... After all you can "play" around without getting married too, no need to marry for that.
nxc182 10y ago
I can't imagine anything more boring or unsatisfying than a relationship (longer than a night or two) driven by sex. I want to have a life partner, not (just) a warm body to ejaculate into.

taneq 10y ago

> they were all getting married and having kids - after which my friendship was waaay down their list of priorities You have to understand that if someone has a kid, let alone two, and they make the time and effort to see you even every couple of months, that's huge. The saying "days are slow but weeks are fast" is never more applicable than when you have small children. Months go by in a flash. Just keeping them cared for is a non-stop grind that takes most of your energy, and you start jealously guarding those few spare moments that you get to yourself. Leaving the house and socializing is the last thing you want to do. You certainly cannot count on them to be up for impromptu mid-week shenanigans, but that doesn't mean you're not important to them. They just no longer have as much to give. Think of it as if they're working for some crappy client who demands non-stop crunch time and lives at their house.

nl 10y ago
This is do true. My only downtime was taking an extra 5 minutes to pick up books I'd reserved at the library on the way to picking up take-away once a week. The idea of seeing friends every couple of months seemed impossible.
Kenji 10y ago
but that doesn't mean you're not important to them No, he's right. You're no longer important to them. They make their life choices and set their priorities such that you are so unimportant to them that they don't spend any time with you at all. Ask yourself this: If something or someone is important to you, do you make choices such that you stop spending time with them? There's your answer. And they can say "noo you are still important". They should show it or they are a hypocrite. Emotions that are not acted upon are useless.
- taneq 10y ago
  Do you seriously not feel 'important' to someone unless you are more important to them than their own children? That is a truly staggering level of entitlement.
  - 10y ago