Has anyone "settled" and it's all turned out ok?

[diorama]

And also, how do you know if you "settled" rather than being madly in love with your spouse?

I don't want to come across as whiny and spoilt, as I have a lovely DH, 2 dcs and a good life. But I can't seem to get rid of ths nagging feeling that my DH and I just kind of drifted into marriage. I've never felt the heart-stopping being in love thing with him. I do love him as in I care deeply about him, I find him physically attractive and I think he's a generally great person. He pisses me off at times too obviously but I know objectively that I'm lucky to have him, when I read on here so many stories of relationship problems. But there's a part of me wondering if I got married too young and if I'm storing up problems for the future.

So is that being in love then? And if not, is it good enough in the long-term? Has anyone married someone they were perhaps not head over heels in love with and stayed together happily for a long time? And one last question, how many people are really in love when they marry?

Hmm. Well I have never done it, because I think what is really important is to be aware that some people simply don't want to be in a long term heteromonogamous relationship but are not strong enough to resist the pressure to do so. Obviously, longterm monogamy makes some people happy, nothing wrong with that etc.
But, generally, if 'settling' means deciding to marry/move in with/have DC with someone who is attractive, kind, solvent, sane and equally attracted to you, because you have realised once and for all that Brad Pitt or whoever is not actually going to appear on the horizon screaming 'Why didn't you wait for meeeeeee?' then that's fair enough.
However, if 'settling' means finding the nearest person who is kind, solvent (or willing and able to earn a living), free from addiction, non-violent, and who is or appears to be attracted to you, on the grounds that being single is shameful and awful, then this may well go horribly wrong.

What I would say about all the swooning hysteria/shagging like rabbits ROMANCE type of lurrve is that it's all very well and can be great fun, but that its a bad idea to act on it to the extent of moving in/getting PG until you have given yourselves a few months to calm down at least partially and see if you like each other, too.

Interesting. I think I really wanted to settle down, now I wonder what the rush was. Wonderful thing about hindsight etc. I didn't think there was anything wrong with being single, but I didn't want to be. I also think I was quite late to mature, and as I met DH very young it seemed the natural thing to do to get married after a few years.

WhatsThatDuck - and then some of them have affairs.

Obviously, the non-sex angle was from my experience and lack of it made me feel that I wasn't very close to my first H.

whatsthatduck says wise things.

You know, you can never know if you settled, since you never know how it would have turned out with Mr. Firework.

In my case, I may well have settled. But f*ck it, Mr. Right left me, married someone else and moved to New Zealand. It is so true that people who have this romantic notion about being in lurve often never meet than special someone. I'm more pragmatic than that.

The fireworks are fun, but they either fizzle out, or are too intense to maintain in the long term (without going crazy). But, some people like the ongoing drama. I'm one for the quiet life - my OH suits me. There is genuine love and warm fondness between us, but we've never done the romance thing - it always seemed contrived. I don't feel like I've 'settled' - I feel very lucky and happy.

Very true Alfreda. I guess I just need a big dose of realism. You make your decisions and then get one with it etc...

I am quite fond of my romantic side though, just need to keep it in check....

Justthisone - would you consider that you love your H?

I think 'settle' refers more to settling for someone you do not really think meets all your needs or you think you could have done better (found someone better). There is, of course, settline down - with someone with similar goals, beliefs, morals, kind, supportive person.

Of course, the romantic 'high' of being in love decreases - apparently after about two years I have read, or maybe sooner.

My experience is negative regarding 'settling' as it has been with an H who literally tried to 'settle' for me, even though he did not really rate me.

Justthisone - It is nice to hear how others appreciate a good thing when they have it. I think it is easy for people to sometimes take these things for granted and take their partners for granted. I think you can be more aware of this if you have experienced a different partnership.

I am probably wary (refuse to be cynical) as being 'in love' from my experience has generally equated to grief and suffering on my part. And this isn't what love is about at all in a healthy relationship.

Settling down with a kind, caring, respectful partner is, in my opinion, the ideal.

Perfectly. I too grew up with that idea of falling for 'the one'. But, in my case, it has been taken too far with trying endlessly in unhealthy relationships. I also did have experience of a healthy relationship (by the way).

But it is lovely to hear what you say.

My perspective is a little different as I come from India where arranged marriages are still very much the norm. I had what they call a "love marriage" in that I met my DH on my own and fell in love (and lust!) with him before we got married, however many of my cousins and aunts\uncles are in arranged marriages and the love grew slowly and (in 99.9% of the cases:) surely. Love and lust can grow at any rate: slowly or fast and all the rates in between :-)

It's the idea that you have to commit to couplehood at some point that is responsible for a lot of human misery. That's the reason why a lot of people move in with or marry people that they don't love or even like that much, because being single is seen as shameful, so if there's someone available and not disgusting, you're told you would be foolish or wilful not to 'settle' with the person.
Of course, the flip side of this is that plenty of perfectly good fun flings get spoiled by one person either pestering for more commitment than is on offer (unless you are having a biological clock crisis, what's the rush?) or putting a stop to something that's fun because it's not 'going anywhere' ie the other person has no interest in commitment or parenthood, or is unsuited to them. What's wrong with appreciating the different things different people have to offer? You can have loads of fun shagging and socialising with someone who is sexy but utterly irresponsible WRT money, for instance, just don't tie yourself to the person financially.

I think I used to confuse thinking someone was a "better catch" with them making me feel like a worse one and perhaps, to my younger self, the relationship I have with DH would have looked like settling (I always expected to put more work in). Being with DH always felt kind of like coming home, when I had expected love to feel like an adventure - if that makes sense. I don't think I settled, not at all, I think my needs changed and I changed. I feel lucky to have met him, but also (this was the difference) think he is lucky to have met me - the whole "can do better" thing has changed from the childish idea that we have some intrinsic level of worth to how we treat people and are treated.

Curiously some of my friends think I'm not totally happy because I have no doubt I would be okay if we split up. I don't think I would be as happy if I had too much of myself relying on someone else, that doesn't make my relationship worse, not to me anyway. I don't like the term "other half" or the phrase "two become one," we're two people.

Coming to an earlier point, I don't actually think arranged marriages are happier - I just think there is more pride about not admitting you're unhappy and shame around divorce. One of my closest friends is in an arranged marriage and will go on about how happy she is, but it is like watching a bad actress and I wouldn't want her life for anything. I have spent considerable time with her and her relatives and the lack of laughter just makes me sad for her. Just anecdotal, but I know she would tick "very happy" on a questionnaire and that makes me doubt all these surveys.

How sad that people think the in love feeling doesn't last. DH and I have been together a long time and are still very much in love with each other.

The crazy, passionate relationships where you feel consumed by love often end up being the most painful and destructive.
The calmer ones built on a relationship based on trust, friendship and shared values (And love, still saying that's v important) seem to stand the test of time better.

I've seen it happen throughout my life, and I'm watching it again in my children and their friends. Obviously there will be exceptions and I'm not sure if that's what is really meant by settling as I do feel love is needed. But I think a good relationship can be very simple and without the fireworks of being-head-over-heels-in-love

It's not sad, phipps. I think possibly you're getting hung up on the semantics of love/in love.

For eg. my grandparents were together 53 years, did everything together, loved each other to bits, were rock solid, big on valentines and anniversaries, lovey dovey etc... but I don't think they were still getting heart-in-mouth butterflies when they phoned each other, or when one came home to the other after going to the shops.

And actually, I think it has been found to be scientifically proven that the cocktail of chemicals/hormones does wear off within a specific timescale, basically long enough biologically/historically to ensure that we reproduce - enough time for the woman to get pregnant and have the man stick around to ensure his genes have been passed on.

Personally I think it's more romantic that people stick together when the heady days are over, because that is true love - sharing your daily life with the one you love with all its ups and downs.

Interesting thread. I started one for similar reasons.
I think another interesting point to make is that in today's society we expect people to 'choose coupledom' (nice term!) and then stick to it forever. Usually after a big wedding.

But I think that relationships can be fluid, composite and time-limited. I mean, people don't 'have' to stay together do they? They can if they choose to, but what's wrong with getting a certain point, shaking hands and moving on with life apart?

I agree with the long-term, sticking together through good and bag thing once heady feelings fade, but what if those feelings were never really there in the first place? Surely everything is different then?

I didn't settle. I find "alpha males" deeply unattractive, so I've never been competing for their attention.

I was "friends" with DH before I fell in love with him. And when I realised I loved him it was the rightest thing in the world.

I am completely crazy about him, I still have all those feelings, just enhanced by 10 years of being together, 3 years of marriage, and 2 small DDs.

He's the most wonderful person I know. I'm so lucky to share my life with him.