Living Apart Together - A look at Unconventional Relationhips

[fluffybiscuits]

Not all relationships are conventional (indeed conventional seems to be a case of following the crowd, do what you are told etc) so with this in mind, do couples who live apart succeed? A sociological study in 2010 collated a lot of information to address why couples should not live together. Some of the reasons given were.

-Those who live together before marriage have unhappier marriages.
-Those who are sexually active before marriage are much more likely to divorce.
-Those who live together have no lasting commitments or responsibilities.


http://www.leaderu.com/critical/cohabitation-socio.html

While living together may suit most people, there are a lot of people whom are quite happy to live apart. Such is the high percentage of couples whom are not living together but apart that it has acquired its own name Live Apart Together or LAT. Wikipedia carries carries a topic on the article which breaks it down in laymans terms. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_apart_together)

Peoples thoughts on this?

[Andrew49]

Those who live together have no lasting commitments or responsibilities.

Cohabitation involves "no public commitment, no pledge for the future, no official pronouncement of love and responsibility. Theirs is essentially a private arrangement based on an emotional bond. The 'commitment' of living together is simply a month-to-month rental agreement. "As long as you behave yourself and keep me happy, I'll stick around."

Huh?

Why should there be a 'public commitment'? - I presume the writer means some kind of All Are Welcome ceremony - Every relationship is built personally by each partner to the relationship and does not require public approval (or disapproval).

There seems to be a strong religious bent in the writer with many quotes from 'Scriptures'. Needless to say these 'Scriptures' are themselves mostly taken from common folk practices - and regarded as common law rules, so any breakdown of a relationship will mean certain rules coming into the new equation ... mostly to do with the sharing of properties and certainly to do with protections of offspring.

[fluffybiscuits]

Those who live together have no lasting commitments or responsibilities.


Huh?

Why should there be a 'public commitment'? - I presume the writer means some kind of All Are Welcome ceremony - Every relationship is built personally by each partner to the relationship and does not require public approval (or disapproval).

There seems to be a strong religious bent in the writer with many quotes from 'Scriptures'. Needless to say these 'Scriptures' are themselves mostly taken from common folk practices - and regarded as common law rules, so any breakdown of a relationship will mean certain rules coming into the new equation ... mostly to do with the sharing of properties and certainly to do with protections of offspring.

Actually you are right, I thought it was a sociological study in itself but the lead website shows

http://www.leaderu.com/index.html

Oops ! Sorry all!

[Captain Con O'Sullivan]

Most content couple I've ever known of are a couple of writers who live in separate houses in London and although married decided to keep their own places. They take turns to cycle over to each other's places for tea. Never a cross word, apparently.

[Ephilant]

Most content couple I've ever known of are a couple of writers who live in separate houses in London and although married decided to keep their own places. They take turns to cycle over to each other's places for tea. Never a cross word, apparently.

So they miss all the fun of making up...

[Captain Con O'Sullivan]

Yes but they have the delighful romantic tension of waiting for a 'phone call to tell them that their spouse has been ketchupped by a Number 29 bus. Its just like Close Encounters only with carbon monoxide instead of steam.

[Ephilant]

Yes but they have the delighful romantic tension of waiting for a 'phone call to tell them that their spouse has been ketchupped by a Number 29 bus. Its just like Close Encounters only with carbon monoxide instead of steam.

I think I would take steam any time...

[fluffybiscuits]

Most content couple I've ever known of are a couple of writers who live in separate houses in London and although married decided to keep their own places. They take turns to cycle over to each other's places for tea. Never a cross word, apparently.

It works , I know two couples who do it and they have their own places and are happy as a pig in ***** They see one and other five nights a week and do their own thing two nights a week and have their own friends. Its workable.

[Andrew49]

Joseph & Mary had a .. ahem ... unconventional relationship.

What Mary saw in Joseph is beyond me. For a start he never booked in advance for the census. He had at least 9 months warning of the arrival of Mary and one other's baby and the census was set for the Christmas/New Year period and he should have known that Bethlehem would have been booked out ....

[Baron von Biffo]

Joseph & Mary had a .. ahem ... unconventional relationship.

What Mary saw in Joseph is beyond me. For a start he never booked in advance for the census. He had at least 9 months warning of the arrival of Mary and one other's baby and the census was set for the Christmas/New Year period and he should have known that Bethlehem would have been booked out ....

Mary got herself knocked up out of wedlock - Not a good thing for a nice Jewish girl back then. She needed a gull to make her legit and Joe was hanging around swooning over her brother. They helped each other out.

That's what an angel told me anyway.

[bernadette]

Children tend to put a severe dent in unconventional relationships. I think separate but together can work very well but not if it were to include infidelity.

[fluffybiscuits]

Joseph & Mary had a .. ahem ... unconventional relationship.

What Mary saw in Joseph is beyond me. For a start he never booked in advance for the census. He had at least 9 months warning of the arrival of Mary and one other's baby and the census was set for the Christmas/New Year period and he should have known that Bethlehem would have been booked out ....

He was a carpenter, the size of his wood perhaps?

[Captain Con O'Sullivan]

Apart from the fact that Joseph being jewish wouldn't have had to to fill out the census in the first place as the proposed taxes behind it referred only to citizens of Rome from which jews were exempt- and the fact that the jesus figure we speak of today wasn't born in Bethlehem- that was made up in the bible because the early judaic-christian scribes wanted to associate jesus with the birthplace of the legendary David (bethlehem apparently) ... and of course it was fashionable back then for god-groomers among the scribes to make the godlet have a god as a father and a virgin as a mother (Dionysius for one, Apollo I think)...

Other than that I'd say 'tis all as true as god

[bernadette]

It does have drawbacks: Spontaneous is just a phone call away.....