Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think the natural life span of a relationship starts to shudder when the youngest children reach about 8-12 years old. In western society this seems to coincide with the parents reaching mid 40s. There must be a biological shifting point because I see so many marriages break up at this point.
I also see that many people enter into a another bonded relationship in the second half of life. It is a different type of relationship but still just as committed and passionate.
This is exactly how I feel, and like you, it's based on the timing. Of course, it's always possible that because a human's life span until the past several hundreds of years was only into one's 30s-40s on average (it varied by time period and included the possibility of disease or accident, in case anyone thinks that's quite low), biology didn't account for life just going on much longer than that.
Either way, no, I don't think it was ever intended that humans stay together in a committed romantic couple relationship for 40 or 50 years. I can happen, certainly, and it does, but natural, across the board for the majority of human beings? I don't believe so.
I mean even the relationship between a parent and a child is intended to cool off significantly, to the point of the child wanting to leave the home and the parent knowing it's time for the child to leave the home, after 18-ish years. We extend this longer, in some cases much longer, but I believe biologically, the teen years are *meant* to be next to impossible for many children as well as their parents so that there's a natural separation there.
I don't believe marriage as far as a romantic, sex-included association was ever meant to last 40, 50 or more years. I think it's only biologically and psychologically necessary for the term of raising any offspring that may have been produced.
I do root for marriages/relationships to last a lifetime, I just don't think it's ever the natural default.
By the way, I pretty much feel the same way about menopause. I don't believe menopause routinely used to exist among homo Sapiens. Women just didn't routinely live long enough to experience it. A few did and they were anomalies and their bodies shut down in various ways, as older bodies will. One of these was reproductively. But I don't think the human female body was originally built to last 30 years past reproductive age (any more than a man's was, though men generally remain fertile at least to an extent).
I don't think the kids' ages have anything to do with it. I think the restlessness comes up in the 40's because that's roughly when your life is half over. It's typical for people to start taking stock at that point, even just subconsciously, and start worrying over unfulfilled goals, dreams, etc. It's also typical for them to start thinking, "Is this all there is?! I've only got a good 25 years or so of good health and sound mind left, if I'm lucky, so I'd better get busy on all that stuff on my bucket list!"
Unfortunately, since marriage and family tend to be the dominant influences in the lives of married people who have children, it's very easy for the partner with itchy feet to start thinking that if only they were free of those fetters, they'd have a life filled with nothing but joy and adventure. As opposed to trying to seek out joy and adventure with their spouse. They want someone or something to pin all their dissatisfaction on, and the spouse and family are the biggest targets available.
Clearly, it's not natural for everyone given rampant infidelity. But, humans are pretty diverse. What works for some doesn't work for others. Western society appears to be developing in such a way where being single or married is accepted and a norm.
For me, I had a lot of boyfriends in my 20's. I traveled, got to know a lot of people, and just had a blast. I've settled down since then and the next chapter (hopefully children), which is preceded by a >decade long relationship with my dh. I don't have any urges to visit my rainbow of a past. Maybe things will change in 20 years when we're approaching 60, but I hope by then to be fully involved with my goals for 60.
I don't think the kids' ages have anything to do with it. I think the restlessness comes up in the 40's because that's roughly when your life is half over.
Sorta.
For most, who have been or traditionally are done having children early in life, the 40's represented a time when they were done with those direct responsibilities and were (again?) available to look over longer horizons and make other choices.
Later child bearing delays and complicates this developmental stage too...
and this applies to the fathers as much as it does to the mothers.
Sorta.
For most, who have been or traditionally are done having children early in life, the 40's represented a time when they were done with those direct responsibilities and were (again?) available to look over longer horizons and make other choices.
Later child bearing delays and complicates this developmental stage too...
and this applies to the fathers as much as it does to the mothers.
Delayed child bearing?
I don't see any evidence to support that conclusion.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
