Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

To Stay in Love, Sign on the Dotted Line

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 94 posts

Re: To Stay in Love, Sign on the Dotted Line

#51

Post by samirillian »

I guess I wouldn't have a problem with drafting such a contract in concept, but I think it would be nice to have some slightly sappier stuff mixed in with it. Even with the touch about the dog, it comes off as super formal to me. Like, their sole goal is to make each other more ethical? I mean that's the definition of a platonic, not an erotic relationship. I have plenty of friends who I already relate to in that way.

What about, even, a word like "nurturing"? Much less "spending time lost in one another's eyes"?

Boundaries make a loving relationship _functional_ but they don't make a relationship loving.

Re: To Stay in Love, Sign on the Dotted Line

#52

Post by Mz »

throwanem wrote: post #39
taneq wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It took me nearly 10 years to understand the line "I believe that trust is more important than monogamy" in that old Savage Garden song. It took an ex who was (I think) physically faithful (at that point) while completely dismantling my faith in humanity to figure that one out.

I can second this. Infidelity was pretty much the last thing that happened, and by then I was already done.

Infidelity grows out of a shitty relationship, not the other way around.

Re: To Stay in Love, Sign on the Dotted Line

#53

Post by danieljohnson »

I wish that I had done this in my previous relationship. We were young, and we talked a lot, but I didn't realize what was really important to her (travelling, saving money). So when we'd talk about goals, I'd never realize how much things meant to her. A contract may have helped us define our goals, and what we wanted, and make things a little easier for dense ol' me.

Re: To Stay in Love, Sign on the Dotted Line

#55

Post by specialist »

rayiner wrote: post #17

I'm surprised there is so much resistance to this idea on this site of all places. The fact is that in real life (unlike in TV and movies) few people have the emotional intelligence to divine their partner's wants and needs from subtle cues. It may be somewhat unromantic (what does that even mean?) to sit down and write things out, but explicit communication about expectations, boundaries, and priorities can make a r…

It's relationship technology. It's one of the recent developments that has made me an optimist (recovering cynic).

An ex-gf and I did the gottman.com stuff. Read the books together, did a weekend workshop. It's brilliant. Our relationship was already all-but-over, but we both wanted to learn from the experience, hopefully do better with our future relationships. A post-mortem of sorts.

We compared notes a year later. My ex-gf said something remarkable, insightful. She consciously applied the gottman.com lessons, strategies to all her relationships, including her job. She said all those relationships got much better.

I've since (consciously) followed her example and have concluded that I agree. I'm now totally onboard with emotional intelligence themed stuff.

Re: To Stay in Love, Sign on the Dotted Line

#57

Post by maxander »

monksy wrote: post #19

I believe that this is a concerning side effect of the increasing inability for people to communicate and to trust others. A contract is just to re-enforce an insecurity on both parties in a relationship. I'm all for discussing things even in that great detail to avoid conflict before hand. But a contract seems excessive and will probably be thrown away anyways. [Soapbox] I'm convinced that most people are completely…

What exactly is the important difference between "discussing things in great detail to avoid conflict" and "having a contract"? When problems come up, is a contract more likely to be disregarded because it is written down? Is half an hour on a laptop an "excessive" cost? I don't understand your argument in the slightest.

It may, of course, be true that a contract is only a good idea due to insufficient communication and trust. But, for this to be an increasing problem presupposes that people were ever better communicators and trust-ers than we are today; I think it more likely that people of previous eras were simply better at doing without. Before a couple generations ago, romantic love was a radical idea and nearly all relationship decisions were resolved by deferring to the male's preference. Such simpler times certainly don't require complicated contracts, but these days we're likely to think that that kind of relationship is missing something important.

Re: To Stay in Love, Sign on the Dotted Line

#58

Post by creepydata »

pmarreck wrote: post #49
creepydata wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's a "domestic partnership?" Is it a legal term?

Yes. Ironically it was created as a "fallback position" to full-on marriage for non-straight people. For the sake of equality it had to apply to everyone of course, though. You get many of the rights of marriage such as mutual health coverage, visitation rights etc... But without all the cruft.

In what jurisdiction is this? How do you enter such a relationship? How does dissolution work in such a relationship? What sort of "cruft" does marriage have that a "domestic partnership" lack? Also does this "legal arrangement" carry over to other jurisdictions? And assuming we are talking about the US isn't "mutual health coverage" decided by the employer or plan administrator? I know Tricare does not allow sponsors to enroll non-married partners, for example.

Re: To Stay in Love, Sign on the Dotted Line

#60

Post by zzalpha »

You know, I went into this article skeptical, but I'm now a believer if it works for this couple.

Solid relationships are built on communication that enables conscious compromises and deliberate decisions to accommodate one another while ensuring one's own needs are met.

For this couple, putting those needs, compromises, and decisions in writing is what facilitates that communication. Pretty brilliant idea if you ask me!

That said: Speaking for myself, going into marriage I thought "How will this change anything?" But, for me, it changed a lot. It's not about the legal commitment... that's just a technicality. Rather, it's the conscious decision to truly commit before friends and family that changed the way I thought and felt about my wife... it's hard to put into words, but at least for me, it was absolutely different.

Post reply on HN