What is the most important thing in a long term relationship / marriage?

[maxysu]

What would you say is the most important thing in a long term relationship / marriage?

Is it sex?, romance?, trust?, friendship?

[Tyler9000]

Is it sex?, romance?, trust?, friendship?

All of those are examples of emotional needs. The most important thing, IMHO, is to recognize that you and your partner likely prioritize those needs very differently. If you each strive to meet the other person's most important needs, your relationship will grow stronger. If you only look to meet your own, the relationship will struggle. If other people meet your (or your partner's) neglected important needs, that a recipe for extramarital affairs.

http://tinyurl.com/krv75e6

[Dragline]

Yeah, "mutual acceptance" probably wins here.

But I always tell people that they shouldn't marry someone unless they'd be willing to form a business with them. There's got to be some sort of common goal, even if its skewed towards one or the other at times.

[TopHatFox]

Probably effective communication, like N.V.C. In fact, through active listening--another example of effective communication--one can very easily find out whether it's even possible to form a long term relationship with a person to begin with, let alone continue one!

[Did]

I disagree with the business reference. I can't speak with authority on long term relationships - my longest is about 5 years. But currently married and happy. I would say that, as long as you're getting enough sex (important), the main thing is that you enjoy each other's company (as in can live together all the time for years) and have similar values.

[saving-10-years]

I get what @Dragline means about the business reference. Its not just about 'Wow this is great' in the here and now (important though that is) but about having something together that will (like a viable business) grow stronger and weather challenges in the long term. It takes a lot of skill and commitment to keep either going. Initially those things won't perhaps be what make you want to get into a relationship but they will be what makes it work out (through thick/thin, smooth/lumpy). Married now for 23 years and living together for 33. If you are having children together they are a definite 'common goal' to absorb decades of working as a team.

I can still call on those people that I had long term relationships with decades ago for help and advice now and know they would help/advise and be 'good guys'. There is a huge amount of trust and learning which you both invest into a relationship. Even if this turns out not to be _the_ relationship I have never really understood why someone would spend a long time getting close to another and then not want to ever talk to them if they decided to split. Maybe its temperament, but perhaps there is a clue there. If you would not consider a relationship with that person outside or beyond 'the' relationship think about what that means.

[7Wannabe5]

One theory is that in the moment that you enter into sexual relationship with another human being you are peers in power. So, for instance, if you never would have had sex with that person if you weren't drunk that evening then the relationship will only be stable for maybe 12 hours or will only intermittently recur on occasions when you are again reduced in power because drunk. Studies show that marriages in which one partner wins the lottery or becomes blind are very and equally likely to soon fail.

Therefore, it seems to me that what makes a relationship last is maintenance of near equivalent levels of power and whether or not a relationship is happy or successful has to do with the method by which near equivalent power levels are maintained. Any method that tends towards resulting in least common denominator will obviously not lead to greatest success or happiness. However, methods that tend towards rigid upward movement will more likely fail with break. Simplistic example being couple who were previously moderately happy with their relationship spending their evenings cuddling together on the sofa eating their favorite junk food and watching their favorite television programs. One of these individuals catches a glimpse of self in mirror one morning and resolutely carries out program of self-improvement. Now they are in disagreement about how to spend their evenings. By what method should this disagreement be resolved?

[GandK]

Selflessness is probably most important. I can't think of a single divorce I've seen (and I live with a divorce attorney) that wasn't caused by one or both partners being more concerned with themselves and their own wants/needs than with their spouse and the state of their marriage. It's the same immediate gratification thing we talk about with money... people in general are occupied with getting their emotional/sexual fix rather than putting in the ground work for long-term sustainable relationships. The very idea of sacrifice, even for a spouse, rubs many people the wrong way in our "you deserve the best, and anyone who doesn't give you that is at best a bad match, and at worst is abusing you" culture.

[arrrrgon]

Selflessness is probably most important. I can't think of a single divorce I've seen (and I live with a divorce attorney) that wasn't caused by one or both partners being more concerned with themselves and their own wants/needs than with their spouse and the state of their marriage. It's the same immediate gratification thing we talk about with money... people in general are occupied with getting their emotional/sexual fix rather than putting in the ground work for long-term sustainable relationships. The very idea of sacrifice, even for a spouse, rubs many people the wrong way in our "you deserve the best, and anyone who doesn't give you that is at best a bad match, and at worst is abusing you" culture.

Great post GandK. Trust would be on an equal level. Both partners should be able to trust each other completely. Without that trust your marriage cannot last.

[Felix]

Based on my experience a good relationship rests on the two pillars of mutual trust and epic sex.

[workathome]

GanK is right, some degree of selflessness is the most important long-term. Same with children.

[7Wannabe5]

I think self-aware, self-care is more important in life and relationship than selflessness. I mean, it's very well to set high standards for oneself for practicing something like selflessness, but put the shoe on the other foot and imagine stating it as a primary expectation for your SO or even wanting it from a SO. It would be like wanting mercy sex. Blech. Give me the guy who is fully aware that he is seriously acting in accordance with self-interest by choosing to be in relationship with me and I might even be so selfish as to go totally greedy guts for him.

Of course, whole different can of worms if there are children involved in the relationship. I don't regret the years of selflessness I put into the "happy home" mission statement when my kids were kids. Just not so inspired to do it again for some grumpy old man.

[jacob]

The ability to withstand adversity and resolve disagreements should make for something very stable/long term.

Choosing someone one'd start a business with is good ... but maybe choosing someone you'd go to war with is better?

[7Wannabe5]

I think choosing the person you would most prefer as companion if you were stuck in an airport overnight would be most analogous to adversity faced in marriage. Would you prefer to be with the type of person who will not tolerate that sort of thing and will see to it that if anybody gets a seat on the next plane out it will be the two of you or the sort of person who will fret a bit but see to your comfort first in a gallant manner by giving you their coat for a pillow and fetching beverage or the sort of person who will say "Well, I guess this is our opportunity to cross off Missouri on our "states we have not yet had sex in" list. Give me the all clear signal as soon as that restroom is empty." or....?

[Jean]

The ability to withstand adversity and resolve disagreements should make for something very stable/long term.

Choosing someone one'd start a business with is good ... but maybe choosing someone you'd go to war with is better?

Are you advocating gay mariage?

[jennypenny]

Women have been serving and fighting a long time, Jean.

I like the war standard for partners. It implies someone you trust, someone who'd have your back, and someone with whom you're confident you could work through big challenges. It also can't hurt if you're equally proficient at firearms -- kind of a mutually assured destruction thing.

[Jean]

I was joking.
But if in addition to the fact that many women end up sharing a few men, the woman you intend to mary need to be suited for war, as a man, you don't have many eligible partner left for a marriage.

[7Wannabe5]

Of course, the other downside to choosing somebody you respect enough that you would go to war with them is that, in the event of a divorce, you may end up at war with them. Also, "common enemy" can be problematic. I mean, "you and me against the world, babe" does not convey a very positive perspective on "the world" outside of the mating tent. Top three things couples fight about being money, sex and other people." My people are your people" or "My ideals are your ideals." does not always hold true by a long shot.

OTOH, I briefly dated a man whose wife had left him to become a Buddhist nun... so choosing a peaceable type may also result in fail.

[Hoosier Daddy]

[Edit:]

[jacob]

Apparently the war analogy did not successfully convey what I meant. I didn't mean someone who can shoot guns and likes to fight but an asset who doesn't become a liability (lose their head or focus) in a crisis situation. It also implies taking one for the team (a team player) when required compared to the arm's-length business transaction. And it implies not surrendering for mere convenience or because a more profitable opportunity came along.

I'm not talking undying loyalty for a hopeless cause but something less mercenary than a business relation.