Question for happily married people

[Utah]

[ QUOTE ]
but who said those things were easy?

[/ QUOTE ]Actually, I am saying that they simply dont work for most relationships as they dont address core needs.

[ QUOTE ]
I know some great people who are completely doomed in any relationship because they have been screwed over in the past and just cannot brings themselves to really trust that this new person won't do the same.

[/ QUOTE ]That is an interesting comment. I guess someone can be damaged to the point of not being able to have a relationship. However, I think in general people are very resilient.

[ QUOTE ]
Not to mention that the world is filled with plenty of people with no desire to put the wants and needs of someone else in front of their own. If the relationship can't work entirely on their terms, [censored] it, move on to someone else.

[/ QUOTE ]Aren't we all like that at the core? We may compromise to get what we ultimately want, but it has nothing to do with putting the needs of others in front of ours. I am a firm believer that every act we take is selfish in the end.

[KingOtter]

[ QUOTE ]
I think KingOtter's comment reflect this well. He and his wife have little in common and they do not communicate well. Yet, they stay together and my guess is that it is because of the primary need to reproduce effectively.

[/ QUOTE ]

We've already reproduced, and yet we still stay together. And I have no desire to leave... don't get me wrong, my wife and I enjoy each other's company. We have a lot of fun.

We don't get hung up on petty differences or try to make the other person do what we want. We don't try to make the other person into someone they are not. You have to accept them as they are, at their core. This means you have to find out who they are, at their core, in the beginning.

That's why you can't prance and dance at the beginning of a relationship, putting on a show to attract your mate. You have to be who you are.

I think the reproduction 'need' you speak of is the first 2-3 months of the relationship... the chemical attraction, the lust, the desire. I don't see that as a real long-term need. And certainly not a relationship need.

Maybe in some women, the need to have someone guard over her children commits her to a man. But I don't feel the same protective instinct.

I have a rearing instinct, but find it usually comes down to wanting to make my boys into good, strong men, rather than a protective need.


[ QUOTE ]
btw - today is Mrs. Utah's and my 10th wedding anniversary and we have been together for 13 years.

[/ QUOTE ]

Congratulations! Our 10th was May 25th.

KO

[diebitter]

[ QUOTE ]

If it were that easy how come most marriages end in complete disaster? Respectfully, that advise sounds good on paper but almost never really works in practice.

Also, in regards to the original poster, I believe working on inner feelings and crap like that will have about zero success in helping future relationships. At the core of a person's desire for a relationship is their instinctual needs - which is primarily finding a mate with strong genes. The emotional state of the partner has little to do with it except in how that emotional state signals strong or weak genes.

I think KingOtter's comment reflect this well. He and his wife have little in common and they do not communicate well. Yet, they stay together and my guess is that it is because of the primary need to reproduce effectively. I am guessing his last comment about Milano was a bit of a joke but I think it is illustrative - for most men they would risk a happy marriage to fulfill their primary instinctual need to have sex with the perfect woman.

I am very happily married - fantastically so. However, I am about 100% sure I would risk it all to have sex with Sunny Leone. We are just built like that.

btw - today is Mrs. Utah's and my 10th wedding anniversary and we have been together for 13 years.

[/ QUOTE ]

Simple - these things, simply said, are exremely hard for many people to actually make real.

Grats on the 10 years, give my regards to Idaho. Have a great day [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

Who's the longest married in OOT, I wonder? I'll be 17 yrs in 4 monrths.

[dcasper70]

[ QUOTE ]
I believe working on inner feelings and crap like that will have about zero success in helping future relationships.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The emotional state of the partner has little to do with it except in how that emotional state signals strong or weak genes.

[/ QUOTE ]
Since working on inner feelings can greatly improve emotional state, and a better emotional state can signal stronger genes, then it seems logical that working on inner feelings can improve future relationships.

Wouldn't you'd agree that a person who works to improve their mental and emotional state will be more likely to have stronger, healthier personal relationships???

Sorry if I misinterpreted your post & congrats on 10 years.

[Riverman]

OP,

Most people are much more selfish on a day-to-day basis than people think just from knowing them socially/dating without living together.

[noggindoc]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
1. You have to be prepared to compromise
2. You have to be prepared to trust
3. You have to shake off any selfishness, and be prepared to put the needs/hopes of the other ahead of yours (sometimes, not all the time). Removing selfishness is extremely important if you are intending to have children, cos then, what's good for your children becomes paramount to pretty much anything.
4. You do have to find a place/space for your own time - even if it's 15 minutes in the bathroom each day reading the paper.

[/ QUOTE ]

If it were that easy how come most marriages end in complete disaster? Respectfully, that advise sounds good on paper but almost never really works in practice.

Also, in regards to the original poster, I believe working on inner feelings and crap like that will have about zero success in helping future relationships. At the core of a person's desire for a relationship is their instinctual needs - which is primarily finding a mate with strong genes. The emotional state of the partner has little to do with it except in how that emotional state signals strong or weak genes.

I think KingOtter's comment reflect this well. He and his wife have little in common and they do not communicate well. Yet, they stay together and my guess is that it is because of the primary need to reproduce effectively. I am guessing his last comment about Milano was a bit of a joke but I think it is illustrative - for most men they would risk a happy marriage to fulfill their primary instinctual need to have sex with the perfect woman.

I am very happily married - fantastically so. However, I am about 100% sure I would risk it all to have sex with Sunny Leone. We are just built like that.

btw - today is Mrs. Utah's and my 10th wedding anniversary and we have been together for 13 years.

[/ QUOTE ]

All the things mentioned by DB are not "easy" and I don't think he was alluding to that. Those things are very difficult. One reason many marriages go busto in our culture is because - "3. You have to shake off any selfishness, and be prepared to put the needs/hopes of the other ahead of yours " - rarely happens to the extent need for a lifetime together.

[Utah]

[ QUOTE ]
I believe working on inner feelings and crap like that will have about zero success in helping future relationships....The emotional state of the partner has little to do with it except in how that emotional state signals strong or weak genes.

Since working on inner feelings can greatly improve emotional state, and a better emotional state can signal stronger genes, then it seems logical that working on inner feelings can improve future relationships.

Wouldn't you'd agree that a person who works to improve their mental and emotional state will be more likely to have stronger, healthier personal relationships???

[/ QUOTE ]

First, I think it is next to impossible to change one's emotional state with therapy/reflection and I would challenge your assertion that working on inner feeling helps emotional state. I once challenged on OOT for someone to produce a valid scientific study showing this. No one did.

But, lets say you could improve your emotional state through working on inner feelings [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] I still think it would make little difference in your relationships because it wouldnt do much to help core instinctual needs. It may help you attract better mates, but there are MUCH better ways to do that than improving you emotional state.

I think we need to define what emotional state means - my interpetation of the OP was that it meant being able to feel, care, open up, trust, etc. IMHO, these things have almost no value anywhere any that are contrary to being a man.

However, if it means things like confidence, strength, drive, toughness, tenacity, honor, living by a code, etc. then it will have massive effects. But, to change those things one needs to be in the fight and to work hard, have discipline, make changes, accept challenges and take risks, fail and succeed, live through crisis, make tough/impossible decisions, etc. These traits can not be engineered through self reflection and "inner" work.

[gamblore99]

[ QUOTE ]
believe working on inner feelings and crap like that will have about zero success in helping future relationships. At the core of a person's desire for a relationship is their instinctual needs - which is primarily finding a mate with strong genes. The emotional state of the partner has little to do with it except in how that emotional state signals strong or weak genes

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you have a fairly good understanding of evolutionary psychology. We are attracted to others who we think have good genes. There is a reason why woman [censored] the bad boy, but marry the safe guy. The bad boy conveys strong genes through his looks and attitude, whereas the safe guy conveys good genes through resources and security. By working on his emotional problems and learning to communicate and trust more, he can be a better parent and husband offering more security to a woman and her children. This makes him a more attractive mate.

[Utah]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the reproduction 'need' you speak of is the first 2-3 months of the relationship... the chemical attraction, the lust, the desire. I don't see that as a real long-term need. And certainly not a relationship need.

[/ QUOTE ]There are 2 parts: the fun reproducing part and the child raising part. Humans are unique in that the time to raise a child is incredibly long. Therefore, if the man were to dissappear immediately after the mating part humans could not have developed into who we are today. The fact that men stuck around is what allowed the brain of humans to develop to such a high level. Therefore, for many men there is an instinctual need to stick around and help raise their children.

[RacersEdge]

I wish I could read these threads and come away with the idea that I really want to get married.