"it" (whatever makes a relationship good) isn't this, it isn't that, you say. WHAT, exactly, do you think it is that makes a relationship not only work, but be good?

I think the willingness to forgive is important. And I don't mean just forgiving unfaithfulness, or an attempt on one's life by one's partner. Sometimes we have to forgive, or maybe a better word would be"overlook" or "tolerate" other people's flaws.

After all, everyone has flaws, and most of us have at least one or two glaring flaws that are hard to ignore. But... our good mates overlook them, ignore them, or forgive them. And we in turn forgive their foibles, flaws, and fiascos.

There is, however, a limit. A "mean drunk" alcoholic can be just too exhausting to put up with. A chronic gambler may be as exhausting as an alcoholic. Violence (hitting, striking, kicking, etc.) and frequent abusive speech ("you stupid, ugly slut"; "you worthless piece of scum" and so on) shouldn't be tolerated for long.

Regardless of the manner you describe proper love, it's possible two people are incompatible. — Hanover

It is possible, you are right. However, if you ended up in a romantic relationship with them, presumably you did get along with them at some point I would think, and so you weren't incompatible. So from where the incompatibility? I have to say that I've seen a lot of couples fighting but these incompatibilities arise with time, which means that in my opinion they are more superficial. For example, there were "incompatibilities" in my relationship with my first girlfriend that arose, but there was nothing that could not be surmounted.

I think incompatibilities - provided that there exists (or once existed) a background of compatibility which accounts for the commitment in the first place - arise out of selfishness or inability to love the other.

I cannot possibly be incompatible with a woman at the time I commit to the relationship, for then I wouldn't commit would I? First I make sure that - in my case - she's the kind of person who likes intelligent conversation, doesn't get easily bored, is independently minded, takes sexual morality seriously, is a spiritual person and so on so forth. If she doesn't meet this criteria why would I enter into a relationship with her in the first place? Even if I loved her, I would try to prove my love to her as a friend, and subtly through self-sacrifice convince her of the right values, and only then would I commit to her and enter into a romantic relationship. She must understand who I am as a character, and that it is good to be like this. Just like in war, there is lots of groundwork there, it's not so easy.

If I love my wife for example, and she feels my job is incompatible with our relationship, what shall I sacrifice? Her, or my job? I think the answer is very clear, my job, if I love her. And the sacrifice of my job will carry a lot of weight in proving who I am to her. Self-sacrifice is essential for love.

Now it is possible to get to be in a relationship with a selfish and abusive person. But I have not met such cold-hearted people (who nevertheless are compatible enough at first) who cannot be mellowed and broken down with the application of the right strategies. For example, if your wife offends you time and time again, but you bear the offence, does that not show greatness of character? What if you show her mercy multiple times? Does that not show magnanimity? For how long will she ignore it? There may be people who will keep on abusing - but I'm just saying I haven't personally met people who cannot be won over - or at least made to feel very guilty and regret what they've done - by the application of the right strategies. In fact, it may be possible to turn such a person from someone who hates you at the time, into someone who deeply loves you once they realise who you really are.

I think the willingness to forgive is important. — Bitter Crank

It shows magnanimity of character - which typically impresses all but the most cold-hearted people, but there are limits to it as you say. Nietzsche said a great man can tolerate even his parasites - he has sufficient strength for it. But all this must be skillfully used to change the other person so that in the future there is no more need for forgiveness.

Much of what you said isn't interesting. Your experience offers me nothing because it is obviously considerably less than and different than mine. What I can say is that dating is a process where you learn about the other person over time, and over that time you often learn they're not the right match for you. If that weren't the case, everyone would marry their first girlfriend or boyfriend and live happily ever after.

"Then came Peter and said to him, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? until seven times? Jesus saith unto him, I say not seven times; but... How many times did Jesus recommend? (And was it a command or a recommendation?)

490. That should get you a ways through a few years of your relationship. She of course will have to forgive you 490 times. (Or did he mean 70 squared? 4900 seems a little high to me. If you were to live 60 more years, you might have to forgive her (and she you) every 4.4 days, max.

For which of you, your bride or her groom, will there be more difficulty forgiving 490 times?

by the application of the right strategies. In fact, it may be possible to turn such a person from someone who hates you at the time, into someone who deeply loves you once they realise who you really are. — Agustino

Perhaps you could share just what those strategies are that can turn someone who hates your guts into somebody who realizes who you really are, and then in love falls deeply with you.

It sounds a bit far fetched to me. I passed it by a jury of 12 sentimental drag queens and they delivered a unanimous verdict (with very little drama) that it was highly unlikely you could do any such thing. They know a really bitchy queen, however, they would like you to demonstrate your methods on.

Well let's see... intelligent, independent, compassionate, — Agustino

If she had those qualities, how could you ever be sure she did not take you in out of pity?

If she had those qualities, how could you ever be sure she did not take you in out of pity? — Sir2u

ouch

The angle: many men look for a spouse that is like their mother, and many women look for a spouse who is like their father. They usually have a difficult time finding a spouse who makes the grade. — Bitter Crank

Like in what way? I'm fortunate enough to have a wonderful mother, but dare I say many, perhaps most, children don't have wonderful mothers or respect them to the moon and back.

I think the willingness to forgive is important. And I don't mean just forgiving unfaithfulness, or an attempt on one's life by one's partner. Sometimes we have to forgive, or maybe a better word would be"overlook" or "tolerate" other people's flaws. — Bitter Crank

Isn't this why someone would love another? We need love because we are all flawed and I don't think love is a "toleration." I wouldn't describe a mutual growing between two persons in a loving relationship as a mutual toleration of flaws. Potaytoh, potahtoh maybe...

There is, however, a limit. A "mean drunk" alcoholic can be just too exhausting to put up with. A chronic gambler may be as exhausting as an alcoholic. Violence (hitting, striking, kicking, etc.) and frequent abusive speech ("you stupid, ugly slut"; "you worthless piece of scum" and so on) shouldn't be tolerated for long. — Bitter Crank

I think many people's limit on flaws is reeeeeeeeeaaaaally shallow and counterproductive to fostering intense and prolonged intimacy when people can't get past silly hurdles in a relationship.

Like in what way? — Buxtebuddha

They have difficulty because they idealize their parent, and no live person is going to match that ideal.

Much of what you said isn't interesting. — Hanover

Okay, no problem.

Your experience offers me nothing — Hanover

Sorry about that!

What I can say is that dating is a process where you learn about the other person over time, and over that time you often learn they're not the right match for you. — Hanover

That depends. Do you start dating a stranger? I wouldn't. First I would be very good friends with that person, spend a lot of time with them, etc. I should at least have some sort of idea who they are by the time I go out with them, wouldn't you say so? So in this case dating would be a process wherein I learn MORE about the other person and am more intimate with them, but whether or not they're the right match would already have been determined with a good degree of certainty beforehand.

If that weren't the case, everyone would marry their first girlfriend or boyfriend and live happily ever after. — Hanover

Well sure, and some people do.

Perhaps you could share just what those strategies are that can turn someone who hates your guts into somebody who realizes who you really are, and then in love falls deeply with you. — Bitter Crank

It depends from case to case. I can't specify "generally" what such strategies would be since they're always formed and applied in particular circumstances. Suffice to say that it involves making the other person want to change themselves rather than feeling they have to change because you tell them so.

If she had those qualities, how could you ever be sure she did not take you in out of pity? — Sir2u

Ahh but is it a problem if she took me in out of pity? After all, out of all men in the world, she took pity on me and on no other! That is great! :D

Some people are horrible. We don't tend to form relationships with others because they're good or bad though, but because your neighbors, work together, roomed together, are family, met through similar interests, and share constitutions, political and religious affiliations. That short of thing. What continues a relationships is maintenance and commitment, in my view. Though, I'm not super great at it, and am a loner.

Look up the statistics for first love marriages, and highschool sweethearts. People with the most endearing, long lasting marriages in fact often did marry the first one, and lived happily ever after.

I really do hold that what is significant, or important is the promise, the commitment. If it were about suitability of any kind, you would have to believe that you're the most suitable, otherwise someone more suitable could come along, and things would be reasonably, and acceptably over. It isn't though, because of the commitment, and not the suitability.

I really do hold that what is significant, or important is the promise, the commitment. — Wosret

This seems a bit tautological though. As a couple increases its level of commitment, the likelihood of divorce decreases, where "commitment" is defined as "refusal to divorce."

It may be. I just think that it's important to point out that the quality of the relationship, or the suitability may have absolutely nothing to do with its sustainability.

They have difficulty because they idealize their parent, and no live person is going to match that ideal. — Bitter Crank

How many people actually do this, though? I don't even idealize my mother, so it's hard to imagine there being swaths of infatuated kiddos...

Yes, but Freud said they do it, therefore they do do it! X-)

Jung said that if you had have seen Freud's mom, you'd want to have sex with her too.

Jung said that if you had have seen Freud's mom, you'd want to have sex with her too. — Wosret

Oh really? >:)

No, I made it up.

How many people actually do this, though? I don't even idealize my mother, so it's hard to imagine there being swaths of infatuated kiddos... — Buxtebuddha

I don't have a number, but it is likely a small minority who do this. It's a fraught practice that tends not to lead to success. Most people just don't look for a mate who resembles their idealized parent.

On the other hand, one's parents are the model of spouses that one knows the most about. So, the kind of parent one has are likely to influence one's spousal choices (and one's own spousal behavior) to some extent.

No, I made it up. — Wosret

Naturally. Other people make up their statistics, why shouldn't you? >:)

Some people are horrible. — Wosret

This is very true.

[quote="Wosret;100156"though, I'm not super great at it, and am a loner.[/quote]

I'm something of a loner too. Plus, I don't have a great understanding of how to deal with other people in the most effective manner, at least most of the time. Sometimes I think I'm a loner because people are avoiding me.

I'm a loner because I avoid them. I don't answer my phone, I rarely return texts. Only if they actually have a question, or substantial thing to tell me, otherwise I tend to just ignore it. I'm not very good at small talk, or just talking as a means of maintaining the relationship. I'm obviously some kind of retard.

Funny thing, is I figured that if I looked it up. conscientiousness would be the greatest trait indicator of successful longterm relationships, and it turned out that it, and agreeableness are. Neuroticism is the one most linked to relationship failure and dissatisfaction. Openness doesn't seem very important. When it comes to the traits, I'm like 98% openness, and like 58% neurotic. So even though I'll try anything, I'll find it all largely unsatisfying, lol.

No, I made it up. — Wosret

>:O LOL, good one!

I actually made up that I made it up. I heard someone quote it though, and don't know where it's from exactly.