5 ms·

We can't have many discussions if we don't talk in generalities. Of course you can't apply all advice to large groups of people because there's different situat

We can't have many discussions if we don't talk in generalities. Of course you can't apply all advice to large groups of people because there's different situations and personalities involved. Yet there are huge industries of people that are advice columnists like the author, psychologists, marriage counselors, etc. The author suggests that the mundane slog of marriage is romantic. So as you reject what some consider "healthy" in this thread, some of us reject the author's definition. Maybe her slog is healthy for her husband and her marriage. I have no idea. But I don't believe that is a reality for most marriages. For every cute old married couple who did the romantic slog together and made it; there's plenty others that didn't and got divorced. Or 100 others that didn't get married because they saw a slog coming. This notion, especially with kids, that you don't have to be husband and wife anymore after being married for some time is a problem in my opinion. Is it beautiful that two people get consumed by kids and make it through the shit together? Sure. But it's also sad because parents get so consumed by kids that they forget to nurture their relationship which existed before. Kids learn a lot from observing that relationship. Daughters learn what a good husband is. Sons learn what a good wife is and how to respect and appreciate her. If they just watch you beaten down all the time being their slaves in their shit show - what do they learn? That they have all the control. And potentially that marriage is what they witnessed. Endless cycle. IMO it's better for every married couple to put in a lot of effort into nurturing their personal relationship with one another than telling themselves the slog of parenting is romantic and being completely consumed by kids and externalities.

general_ai 10y ago
I'm not even talking about the article per se. I'm more taken aback by people here saying that if after 10 years of marriage, with career and kids to contend with, you're not having sex every day you're somehow a failure and your relationship is doomed. Could it be that this is not all there is to life? Could it be that a marriage can be quite all right without much stereotypical "romance"? Could it be that people are just different and some of them are quite fine with having no romance or sex for that matter for months at a time? That's something that takes some time and life experience to absorb. In particular, it's not "sad" to be consumed by kids and/or career if that's something you both want. My wife and I have been married for 17 years and "consumed" by kids and careers for 15. We open a bottle of wine every Friday, we go out to a restaurant every now and then -- that's the extent of our "romance" at this point. And you know what? It's great for both of us. Before someone jumps in with manufactured outrage, no, I don't suggest that you ignore your partner or tolerate the lack of "romance" from their side. If that's something you (or they) need in your life, by all means, hash it out and have a mutually agreeable relationship. Just realize that some people are quite happy in other circumstances.
- exclusiv 10y ago
  I don't think anyone said anything about having sex everyday is realistic or the key to maintaining romance. I'm going on 10 years and that's definitely not realistic for almost every couple at that stage. Your note about having a mutually agreeable relationship is very important though. Expectations should be discussed. I think that's where it can get unhealthy - when everything changes like with kids and one person has different expectations and the communication isn't there for whatever reason. Maybe the wife assumes all is romantic and perfect despite the shit because the man doesn't raise any red flags, they've been together for a long time, and he's a good dad which she finds attractive/sexy. But men tend to not talk about feelings and expectations as much. And for many couples, it harbors resentment and dissatisfaction, often even later (15+ years of marriage) after the kids are gone. It is easy to get consumed by kids; it's an amazing thing. I'm just saying that I think most men see romance differently from the author and both sides have to put in a conscious effort to maintain the romance, esp. with kids, or at least have a mutual understanding like you mentioned. That and I do think good things happen for everyone (parents & kids) when the husband/wife relationship has more of a focus. Too much helicoptering and slaving going on with parents these days.

general_ai 10y ago

I'm not even talking about the article per se. I'm more taken aback by people here saying that if after 10 years of marriage, with career and kids to contend with, you're not having sex every day you're somehow a failure and your relationship is doomed. Could it be that this is not all there is to life? Could it be that a marriage can be quite all right without much stereotypical "romance"? Could it be that people are just different and some of them are quite fine with having no romance or sex for that matter for months at a time? That's something that takes some time and life experience to absorb. In particular, it's not "sad" to be consumed by kids and/or career if that's something you both want. My wife and I have been married for 17 years and "consumed" by kids and careers for 15. We open a bottle of wine every Friday, we go out to a restaurant every now and then -- that's the extent of our "romance" at this point. And you know what? It's great for both of us. Before someone jumps in with manufactured outrage, no, I don't suggest that you ignore your partner or tolerate the lack of "romance" from their side. If that's something you (or they) need in your life, by all means, hash it out and have a mutually agreeable relationship. Just realize that some people are quite happy in other circumstances.

exclusiv 10y ago
I don't think anyone said anything about having sex everyday is realistic or the key to maintaining romance. I'm going on 10 years and that's definitely not realistic for almost every couple at that stage. Your note about having a mutually agreeable relationship is very important though. Expectations should be discussed. I think that's where it can get unhealthy - when everything changes like with kids and one person has different expectations and the communication isn't there for whatever reason. Maybe the wife assumes all is romantic and perfect despite the shit because the man doesn't raise any red flags, they've been together for a long time, and he's a good dad which she finds attractive/sexy. But men tend to not talk about feelings and expectations as much. And for many couples, it harbors resentment and dissatisfaction, often even later (15+ years of marriage) after the kids are gone. It is easy to get consumed by kids; it's an amazing thing. I'm just saying that I think most men see romance differently from the author and both sides have to put in a conscious effort to maintain the romance, esp. with kids, or at least have a mutual understanding like you mentioned. That and I do think good things happen for everyone (parents & kids) when the husband/wife relationship has more of a focus. Too much helicoptering and slaving going on with parents these days.