What counts as a 'long-term' relationship?

[Littlebitpsycho]

Just curious really.

I've been with my boyfriend for 18 months, recently moved in together.

His longest ever relationship prior to me was just over a year, so to him our relationship is 'long-term'

My SHORTEST relationship was 3.5 years, and the longest 10 years, so to me we're early days still.

(I'm late 30s, he's late 40s if that's relevant at all)

I think people are mixing things up here.

You can have a long term relationship that's not serious, or a serious relationship which is still quite new.

I think age does also factor into it, so a long-term relationship might mean less time when you're 18 than when you're 40. And also life experiences, as the op and her boyfriend illustrate perfectly. If you've had 3 x 10 year relationships, the first year or two will seem like early days, compared with if it's your longest relationship.

I’m 30s and never had a serious romantic relationship either.

I enjoyed dating in my twenties as I wasn’t in the right place geographically (if that’s a thing) to want to be in a relationship, plus busy with work and work exams. Then late twenties/early thirties had a lot of sad family things, depression/anxiety. And now I’m just not interested.

I’ve been friends with my 3 best friends for 22, 17 and 10 years so I clearly am capable of long term relationships! I don’t see it as a red flag myself but I worry others probably would do. It is what it is I think.

(Sorry to derail thread!!)

I’m with you, @Callmeback

I had one 2 year relationship in my 20s, then nothing longer than 10 months until I was 49.

I had major health issues that meant I spent a lot of time in hospital. Two men dumped me because of that.

And I can’t tell you how many men I dated who WERE walking red flags. Men with commitment issues, men who used drugs, men with kids they didn’t have relationships with, abusive men…the list goes on.

Most of the time, women are choosing to be single because the pool of men is woeful.

When I met my partner at 49, it was serious quite quickly. We’ve been together nearly three years and I know I want a future with him. So this feels long term and intentional.

Exactly

I agree with PP. Anyone can be in a long term relationship if they’re willing to put up with BS or someone they’re not that keen on. Let’s face it many people have only had long term relationships because they settled for someone they didn’t really like that much or even someone who treated them poorly.

I had a childhood friend who described her brother as being “unable to keep a woman”. I wondered how she viewed me, but then I decided I don’t care because look at her - she’s had two long term relationships.

The first was a violent man who nearly killed her, the second is the man she’s with now. Not violent but smokes weed all the time, hardly contributes to their household and children and has 6 other kids from 3 different women.

So many people who are still single by a certain age it’s because they’ve not met someone they really like romantically who feels the same way about them. And decided they’d rather be alone that put up with poor treatment or force it with someone that doesn’t interest them.

40 years-but he’s still on probation🤣🤣🤣

Maybe 2 years ? There is something abput rhe homey moon hormornes wearing off after 18 months or so.....

Only if you DO want children!

Not on it's own, but I think this is a slightly glib explanation of why all his relationships lasted less than 2 years and doesn't really hold water either in his late teens/20's or in his 40's.

I think people see longevity as the sign of a successful relationship and nothing else. I consider whether the people were happy, did they make good memories. Did they realise that the relationship had run its course or that their long term goals no longer matched and went their separate ways. This sounds much more successful to me than staying together just to avoid separating/ being single.

DH and I knew we were serious about each other on our second date. From being serious, the relationship became long term although I don't think I ever thought of ot in those terms. We have been together for 37.5 years.

When DS brought dil home, I knew it was serious, and the same with dd and future son in law. I have never thought of the children's relationships as long term, they have had casual and more serious relationships.

Agree with this….

I'm with you that 18nonths is early days but there's no defining LTR and people always get offended if you act like a relationship of a few years isn't long term. It's possible to be serious and committed when in the early days of a relationship but the fact remains that people change and events come into play that effect you and LTR has to weather these!

Interesting that the armed forces have 12 months as LTR -as others have said -can easily be short and serious or long and casual.
A friend recently married a man she had met three months earlier. By most people’s standards that was a short relationship. They are both in their fifties, never been married before and my friends longest relationship has been for three years. So they have now been b together six months, married three, without ever having gone through a summer together.

Wow - I hope it works out for them!

Well yes we all do but I’m afraid everyone really thinks it is plain mad 😂

I would say 3+ years. 2 years is still really in the getting to know you, thinking about maybe moving in together stage. That said, I was married to Dh at 3 years.

Coming up to 2 years with DP, I've described it as LTR for about 6 months. Especially given it's fairly serious, and he is like a stepdad to my kids.

I'm mid 40s and never had a relationship longer than three years (and that one should have ended sooner tbh!) I just haven't met someone it's been really right with, and I don't need a relationship to be happy. Some might see that as a red flag about me, but personally I think it's more concerning when people have long term relationships with people who aren't really right for them.

I agree with PPs that if you are living together the intention is long term and it's probably more about that than actually length right now?

My parents got married in a similar time frame and they have been together 50 years now, so you never know!

All my relationships have failed because I want to commit and they don’t. Not one man I’ve ever met (even the one I’m with now) has wanted what I wanted. I want kids, they never do. I want to travel, they never do. They always end up leaving or cheating. So this isn’t fair at all. I always always want to settle down so who is the one not able to make a proper commitment here?

Yeah don’t worry about it. I feel
people who make automatic negative assumptions about those long term single are usually very limited in their thinking and lack imagination .

They can’t grasp that some people may have just had a series of unsuitable partners and/or they’re not willing to settle down with someone they don’t like that much just to tick a “commitment” box that society tells them is important.

I’ve had the wrong men want to commit to me and have no regrets about not committing to them. The one I did want to commit with didn’t want to commit to me - such is life.

It’s actually to be applauded when people acknowledge and realise incompatibility and don’t go along with it out of desperation - unlike many of the people who were “able to make a proper commitment”

I’d say 3+ years.
I’d had two relationships of over 3 years before I met DH who I’ve been with for 16 years now.
My high school relationship was 2+ years and I wouldn’t describe that as a LTR but I guess each is different depending on where you are in your life and how you feel?

I'm another red flag!

Depends. Was he up front and open right at the start with these women that children was jot an option?