To wonder why living together has become the benchmark for others to recognise you’re in a serious relationship?

[AllHeart1]

I’ve read on here on numerous occasions that “if you’re not living together then he’s not your partner, he’s your boyfriend.” “If you don’t live together then it’s not a serious relationship,” and most recently “we didn’t invite anyone who wasn’t living together to our wedding.” And no this is not a TAAT, it’s a lot more common on here than that example.

Thing is, it wasn’t that long ago that people didn’t live together until they were married. yet they were engaged, planning a wedding, finding a house, wedding gifts were generally things they’d need in their new home.

And yet some people would think now that because they’re not living together, the relationship can’t possibly be serious? When actually couples move in together after five minutes of starting a relationship and their relationship is seemingly more real than that of the couple planning to move in together after the wedding.

There are all sorts of reasons why couples can’t live together such as geographical location/not wanting to blend families while children are small/both being used to their own space now., But that surely doesn’t mean that that relationship can’t be a serious one and that that person is just a boyfriend?

@NameChangeNugget me too! I love DH, but if we split or he passed away, I don’t want to live with anyone else

I'd agree that it's not generally a serious ltr if you don't live together, unless there are really very compelling practical reasons why you currently can't. Your situation would obviously fall into that category, OP.

No one is saying your relationship is “invalid”.

But you don’t have shared finances, housing or DC. So in practical terms you’re not tied and could easily walk away.

Situations where someone works away a lot are different, if finances, property and/or DC are shared.

I've been with DP for 16 years, we moved in together August last year. He wanted to do it sooner but I like my own space. The only reason he moved in was because he lost his license due to medical reasons and could no longer travel to see me. I didn't want to give up the home I've lived in for 20 years just in case things didn't work out and I'd be left with nowhere to go.

@MintyMabel 30 years ago really does not seem long ago to me.

I have no trouble understanding why some people do not want to live with anyone. That is a totally valid choice.
But that is not what is being discussed on this thread.

Another golden maxim on MN is that if a couple don’t have sex then they’re just room mates

I do think a couple need to have a sex life at some point. I know most couples if they live long enough will stop having a sex life due to age, disability or chronic illness. But I do think a couple have to have had a sex life.

So asexual people who marry aren't a couple, karen?

But why? What if they are absolute perfect companions with shared interests and sense of humour and outlook on life, they just don't see that side of things as important. So long as they are both on the same page, why does ANYTHING have to be a part of a relationship to qualify it as such other than to the people involved?

I agree @karencantobe

Patellar Presumably I wouldn't actually know if a couple have sex or not so I would just seem them as a couple. But if you don't want sex, then I think you are very good friends. I think the reason asexual a couples exist is because good friendship is seriously undervalued in western culture.

@HugeAckmansWife Because a couple is a sexual relationship. That is its definition. Why should close friends who have committed to share their life together be seen as lesser?

Not living together defines your relationship as not committed or serious enough to overcome those obstacles.

Engaged for 5 years, then loudly screams a lack of any serious intent, you get engaged to be married and soon after set a date (usually within a year or so), not engaged to be engaged.

No one doubts you care/love each other, support each other as physically and financially individual independent people, you just are not in a seriously committed partnership.

*Not living together defines your relationship as not committed or serious enough to overcome those obstacles.

Engaged for 5 years, then loudly screams a lack of any serious intent, you get engaged to be married and soon after set a date (usually within a year or so), not engaged to be engaged.*

Oh dear, so my 26 year marriage isn't a proper committed relationship because we were engaged (and living in different countries) for 6 years before that. And there I was thinking the longterm planning- making sure I got the training that would enable me to live in his country, him making sure he saved the money that would enable us to get a house together- was a sign of commitment. Oh well, never mind, might as well stay uncommittedly married now, seeing as it's got to be a bit of a habit.

But I do think a couple have to have had a sex life

Why? I know a couple that have been together for years, married, live together so tick all the MN boxes for a proper relationship- but they have not had sex with each other. They aren't asexual. They just have no desire to do it.

My partner was sexually abused. Sex is something he will always find difficult, so we haven't yet. We may, we may not. It's not the core of our relationship which is based on utter love and respect for each other.

So you are incredibly close committed friends. That is great.

Close friendships are definitely important, but there's a difference between a close friendship and a relationship. I love my friends, but it is my partner who I choose to expose myself to, who I love and, guess what fancy and he fancies me. Sex isn't important. Living together isn't important. Love and commitment to sharing each other's lives - that's important.

Maybe it's something that we only appreciate as we get older, second/third relationships. I don't know. I do know that 25 years ago when I met my first husband I thought that commitment was living together, marriage, babies and anything else was weird. I have to admit that if I hadn't lost said husband I probably would have continued in that thinking.

@karencantobe I'm going to be deleted for this, but I don't care. You've no idea so DFOD

Leigh why threaten me with violence? I am a stranger on the internet. What does it matter to you what I think?

Why might it not be possible to love someone, to be in love with someone, totally different relationship from sharing a house with a friend, yet for whatever reason (asexual, history of abuse) not to want to have sex? What is it to other people? Why should they get to decide?

Of course it is possible to love someone and be committed to them and to not want to have sex.

I don't even recognise living together as a benchmark for a serious relationship tbh but everyone has to row their own boat I guess and think what they like

I'm 52 and my partner of 6 years is 59. We don't live together, we both own our own homes and have no plans to move in together. We live 5 mins apart and are in a committed relationship. He's my partner, not my boyfriend.

DH and i didn't live together before we got married. We're Christians and personally do the whole no sex before marriage thing. Having said that we were engaged after 4 months and married 9 months after that so it's not that we were in a long term relationship before we got married. Each to their own I guess but I don't like the assumption of "if you don't live together then you aren't that serious" there's a whole host of reasons why people choose not to live together