Former Community – We Moved

🆕 Coached community here, for posts & feedback public community here.

ForumPublic Forum: DatingRelationshipsRelationships are good for health …

Please or Register to create posts and topics.

Relationships are good for health and longevity, but they have a price. How can you estimate it?

#1 · August 22, 2022, 9:56 am

Quote from leaderoffun on August 22, 2022, 9:56 am
Good connections and social support can improve health and increase longevity.
I know some people with massive families and/or massive social circles that look very happy. But having lots of deep relationships has a price: you have to invest in those relationships.
There's no relationship without a price. Estimating it is a key skill for a social connector. Price example: You may need to pay for a country club to have access to some people. Or you may need to get a degree from an ivy league school to 'have access' (monetary, the least concerning of the prices)
How can you measure that price? Should you be strategic about it (like any other investment)? Or should you be free flowing, without any power accounting whatsoever like Lucio recommends for romantic relationships?
My suggestion is that we list a few relationships and how we went about estimating their price
Shallow relationships
Social circle relationships
If you live in a big city, people come and go so your social circle is a leaky bucket and you have to keep replacing high quality people into your circle. Not to mention that you yourself may change location and start from scratch. I read here that at least John, possible many others, are investing quite a bit in building a nice social circle.
In my case, I organize a dinner with friends that would otherwise not see. That takes a slot on my calendar and some chasing and coordination. Minimal investment, but still something.
Dealing with 'drama' in the group is also a cost; a couple split up and I was in between, managing the relationships of people as they were asked to 'take sides'. We have seen many examples here of the difficulty of having a whatsapp group with 'friends' (it can be just social circle, not deep friends).
cost: 5 out of 10
Business relationships
A strong business relationship that is old and deep is worth a lot to me. Keeping in touch with people you did business with (including mentors) is quite a cost, more so if you are not even in the same continent. Often these relationships 'cost' in favors, where you do free consulting or advising. Other times you need to show up for events that your contacts organize so that you don't disappear from their radar. Other times you need to do 'stunts' so that they see you and congratulate you. And sometimes you have to go out of your way to create the relationship (not only maintaining it). Traveling a lot produces lots of these relationships if you are lucky.
If you stay in one city and are active networking, it could be you enter 'the socialites' circle, and then you definitely have to show up for key events (being invited to start with is an art), and often they are costly (in time and money).
You can also add to costs:
- having coffee/lunch with people who you get through 'high powered intro' (you cannot say no)
- Show up at meetups where someone you want to keep warm is
- Run events yourself
- Read books that connections recommend and comment on them
cost: 7 out of 10
Romantic/fling relationships
Oh God, the hours I have sank into getting a pipeline in place (when I was dating). Sometimes a woman you are interested in shows up on your chat and you drop everything you are doing to come back with a good reply.
This extreme interruption/time cost makes me very happy I'm not in dating mode anymore. Since these are superficial relationships, they shouldn't take that much of your time and attention... but they do! Plus this stage is where everyone (more so the man) is playing with fire and a misstep will cost you the budding relationship.
cost: 8 out of 10 because of the high stakes (sex) and the excitement of the game, should be a 1 as they don't really add much to your life

Deep relationships
To start with, these are the relationships I want to invest in. And I think everyone agrees that on paper these are the ones to go for! Surprisingly, in Western society people have few, and often low-quality, deep relationships. Everyone suffers from that, yet we act as if they didn't deserve the investment.
Why? Because they have a giant cost. Anyone here can hurt you deeply. Each of these relationships may need hours per week to maintain, and you may be reading books about how to 'do a good job' on your part (partent, significant other etc)
Children
Children are a big opportunity to have a deep relationship. On most cultures, this relationship is for life, and it guarantees that you will not spend key dates (Xmas, vacations, your b-day) completely alone.
The cost of this potentially deep relationship for life is massive. I say this as a father of two. You can forget about most activities you find pleasant for the rest of your life if you have children and are the primary caretaker. They absorb all your time (not to talk about money). Very hard to have hobbies before children become teens and somehow independent.
They also usually break havoc on your other relationships (including your life partner). Many relationships get stressed to the point of breaking down because of children. Women fell regret about becoming mothers at alarming rates (depending on culture of course; I'm in Germany).
Cost: 11 out of 10
Life partner
When someone asked me "Who do you know who has a happy relationship?" I had to think for a while, and I think I could come out with 2 couples (out of hundreds that I must have known in a lifetime).
Managing your 'life partner' relationship is a skill like any other; but most of us really suck at it and books I've read/services I've bought tell me nobody has this all figured out.
There are no rules, no patterns. Since you only control 50% of the equation, it's nearly impossible to have full responsibility for the happiness/sadness the relationship will produce.
Cost: 11 out of 10
Business partner
Particularly if you have an even split (50%-50%), these relationships are deep, and hard to manage. The stakes are high, and it's a pressure cooker. Anyone who has done startups with cofounders knows this. It's the main reason startups fail: the relationship between cofounders sours.
Cost: 11 out of 10
A totally valid option is to decide not to have deep relationships (because of the cost!) Or at least have the base minimum. But people who choose this don't strike me as particularly happy.
What do you think?
How did you decide to start a deep relationship (example: have children)? Did you know the cost, and went ahead anyway? I didn't :)

Good connections and social support can improve health and increase longevity.

I know some people with massive families and/or massive social circles that look very happy. But having lots of deep relationships has a price: you have to invest in those relationships.

There's no relationship without a price. Estimating it is a key skill for a social connector. Price example: You may need to pay for a country club to have access to some people. Or you may need to get a degree from an ivy league school to 'have access' (monetary, the least concerning of the prices)

How can you measure that price? Should you be strategic about it (like any other investment)? Or should you be free flowing, without any power accounting whatsoever like Lucio recommends for romantic relationships?

My suggestion is that we list a few relationships and how we went about estimating their price

Shallow relationships

Social circle relationships

If you live in a big city, people come and go so your social circle is a leaky bucket and you have to keep replacing high quality people into your circle. Not to mention that you yourself may change location and start from scratch. I read here that at least John, possible many others, are investing quite a bit in building a nice social circle.

In my case, I organize a dinner with friends that would otherwise not see. That takes a slot on my calendar and some chasing and coordination. Minimal investment, but still something.

Dealing with 'drama' in the group is also a cost; a couple split up and I was in between, managing the relationships of people as they were asked to 'take sides'. We have seen many examples here of the difficulty of having a whatsapp group with 'friends' (it can be just social circle, not deep friends).

cost: 5 out of 10

Business relationships

A strong business relationship that is old and deep is worth a lot to me. Keeping in touch with people you did business with (including mentors) is quite a cost, more so if you are not even in the same continent. Often these relationships 'cost' in favors, where you do free consulting or advising. Other times you need to show up for events that your contacts organize so that you don't disappear from their radar. Other times you need to do 'stunts' so that they see you and congratulate you. And sometimes you have to go out of your way to create the relationship (not only maintaining it). Traveling a lot produces lots of these relationships if you are lucky.

If you stay in one city and are active networking, it could be you enter 'the socialites' circle, and then you definitely have to show up for key events (being invited to start with is an art), and often they are costly (in time and money).

You can also add to costs:
- having coffee/lunch with people who you get through 'high powered intro' (you cannot say no)
- Show up at meetups where someone you want to keep warm is
- Run events yourself
- Read books that connections recommend and comment on them

cost: 7 out of 10

Romantic/fling relationships

Oh God, the hours I have sank into getting a pipeline in place (when I was dating). Sometimes a woman you are interested in shows up on your chat and you drop everything you are doing to come back with a good reply.

This extreme interruption/time cost makes me very happy I'm not in dating mode anymore. Since these are superficial relationships, they shouldn't take that much of your time and attention... but they do! Plus this stage is where everyone (more so the man) is playing with fire and a misstep will cost you the budding relationship.

cost: 8 out of 10 because of the high stakes (sex) and the excitement of the game, should be a 1 as they don't really add much to your life

Deep relationships

To start with, these are the relationships I want to invest in. And I think everyone agrees that on paper these are the ones to go for! Surprisingly, in Western society people have few, and often low-quality, deep relationships. Everyone suffers from that, yet we act as if they didn't deserve the investment.

Why? Because they have a giant cost. Anyone here can hurt you deeply. Each of these relationships may need hours per week to maintain, and you may be reading books about how to 'do a good job' on your part (partent, significant other etc)

Children

Children are a big opportunity to have a deep relationship. On most cultures, this relationship is for life, and it guarantees that you will not spend key dates (Xmas, vacations, your b-day) completely alone.

The cost of this potentially deep relationship for life is massive. I say this as a father of two. You can forget about most activities you find pleasant for the rest of your life if you have children and are the primary caretaker. They absorb all your time (not to talk about money). Very hard to have hobbies before children become teens and somehow independent.

They also usually break havoc on your other relationships (including your life partner). Many relationships get stressed to the point of breaking down because of children. Women fell regret about becoming mothers at alarming rates (depending on culture of course; I'm in Germany).

Cost: 11 out of 10

Life partner

When someone asked me "Who do you know who has a happy relationship?" I had to think for a while, and I think I could come out with 2 couples (out of hundreds that I must have known in a lifetime).

Managing your 'life partner' relationship is a skill like any other; but most of us really suck at it and books I've read/services I've bought tell me nobody has this all figured out.

There are no rules, no patterns. Since you only control 50% of the equation, it's nearly impossible to have full responsibility for the happiness/sadness the relationship will produce.

Cost: 11 out of 10

Business partner

Particularly if you have an even split (50%-50%), these relationships are deep, and hard to manage. The stakes are high, and it's a pressure cooker. Anyone who has done startups with cofounders knows this. It's the main reason startups fail: the relationship between cofounders sours.

Cost: 11 out of 10

A totally valid option is to decide not to have deep relationships (because of the cost!) Or at least have the base minimum. But people who choose this don't strike me as particularly happy.

What do you think?

How did you decide to start a deep relationship (example: have children)? Did you know the cost, and went ahead anyway? I didn't :)

Lucio Buffalmano and Kavalier have reacted to this post.

#2 · August 22, 2022, 3:39 pm

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on August 22, 2022, 3:39 pm
Very interesting questions, LOF.
I personally think that good social skills (or maybe we should call them "good social strategies" since "social skills" is used for basic social literacy) help exactly for that basic equation:
Lowering the costs, increasing the pleasure and/or returns.
So there's also a second question: do you know the upsides?
I don't have very lengthy experiences with the "costlier" relationships you mention, but if I look at all the rest, I think it also depends a lot on your attitude, and how you set them up.
For example, most of my friends and family ties are super low maintenance.
Only recently I started writing down bdays to remember to wish happy birthday, but otherwise, no gifts, no check-ins -except when you truly feel like-, dinners and catch-ups only out of pleasure when we're in the same place -and I can recall few instances where I felt forced or obliged to see any one of them, compared to a lot of times when I was thrilled-.
There is only one single close friend that sometimes makes me think "he writes a bit too often", but it's still rare and, most of all, it's not just "this is costly", but more of a mix of "damn I need to reply, but it's good to hearing from him". Plus, he knows not to take it personally if I write back later.
It's certainly more challenging to make the closer ones "lower maintenance" and they most certainly most often have a higher "minimum bar". But, on the upside, it's also most certainly possible to make them either higher or lower maintenance, and make them either higher or lower pleasure/returns.
And that is, in good part, up to you -50% is where it starts, if you're the more influential one-.
So besides "knowing the costs" (and "knowing the upsides"), which are foundational questions indeed, I'd like to add a second:
Do you have any idea how to lower the costs and increase the pleasure/returns?
In the meanwhile, I will happily read what others have to say on this.

Very interesting questions, LOF.

I personally think that good social skills (or maybe we should call them "good social strategies" since "social skills" is used for basic social literacy) help exactly for that basic equation:

Lowering the costs, increasing the pleasure and/or returns.

So there's also a second question: do you know the upsides?

I don't have very lengthy experiences with the "costlier" relationships you mention, but if I look at all the rest, I think it also depends a lot on your attitude, and how you set them up.

For example, most of my friends and family ties are super low maintenance.
Only recently I started writing down bdays to remember to wish happy birthday, but otherwise, no gifts, no check-ins -except when you truly feel like-, dinners and catch-ups only out of pleasure when we're in the same place -and I can recall few instances where I felt forced or obliged to see any one of them, compared to a lot of times when I was thrilled-.
There is only one single close friend that sometimes makes me think "he writes a bit too often", but it's still rare and, most of all, it's not just "this is costly", but more of a mix of "damn I need to reply, but it's good to hearing from him". Plus, he knows not to take it personally if I write back later.

It's certainly more challenging to make the closer ones "lower maintenance" and they most certainly most often have a higher "minimum bar". But, on the upside, it's also most certainly possible to make them either higher or lower maintenance, and make them either higher or lower pleasure/returns.
And that is, in good part, up to you -50% is where it starts, if you're the more influential one-.

So besides "knowing the costs" (and "knowing the upsides"), which are foundational questions indeed, I'd like to add a second:

Do you have any idea how to lower the costs and increase the pleasure/returns?

In the meanwhile, I will happily read what others have to say on this.

John Freeman and Kavalier have reacted to this post.

Community, new content and Confidence University now available here.

#3 · August 24, 2022, 10:04 am

Quote from leaderoffun on August 24, 2022, 10:04 am
Do you have any idea how to lower the costs and increase the pleasure/returns?
That would make the optimizer in me happy.
I suspect for deep relationships anything that is a hack will backfire, and this makes me sad. PU also advises to just give and not keep any accounting, and not playing any power games. This makes a lot of sense to me. Optimizing ROI for your actions feels like entering 'playing games territory' (For example: I know she likes it when I take her to dance, so I'll use it as a reward instead of dispensing it willy nilly because I like it too; Note, women tend to do this with sex when they are trying to saddle the man lol.)
If you want to go full giver, is it normal to feel that you are giving more than the other person?
In my personal situation, my life partner is heading for a life altering event that would reduce her freedom, her happiness, and would make her more dependent on others. If what we are building together is really a life partnership, I would be affected by this too. I would have to support her and help her big time. The problem: I don't want to sacrifice my freedom, which I have worked hard to achieve, and buy into this arrangement (that benefits only her). If I accept her frame, I would not be happy and the relationship would go 'more domestic' (we would have to eventually live together). This is a tremendous ask, and her being emotionally intelligent, she understands that that implicit ask gets cemented the longer we stay together. I'm subcommunicating I'm not interested but she has a lot of firepower that she could deploy anytime (societal conventions, etc). The conversation has not happened, but will eventually. In her case, there's nothing she can provide that would compensate for this imbalance. To answer your question... I'm not sure I have any good ideas on how to lower the costs/increase returns.
This is a too sensitive topic to talk openly in a forum that is public. Maybe I can start a thread on a private section of the forum because I think this pretty representative situation is really a place where we all could exercise the social strategist/life strategist part of PU big time. What do you think?
EDIT: For 'the conversation', I don't want to frame it as 'you are not giving me enough' or 'I'm giving more' because this means this is a negotiation (very far from a personal life partner relationship; implies power accounting and that's off the table if you want to have a healthy relationship)

Do you have any idea how to lower the costs and increase the pleasure/returns?

That would make the optimizer in me happy.

I suspect for deep relationships anything that is a hack will backfire, and this makes me sad. PU also advises to just give and not keep any accounting, and not playing any power games. This makes a lot of sense to me. Optimizing ROI for your actions feels like entering 'playing games territory' (For example: I know she likes it when I take her to dance, so I'll use it as a reward instead of dispensing it willy nilly because I like it too; Note, women tend to do this with sex when they are trying to saddle the man lol.)

If you want to go full giver, is it normal to feel that you are giving more than the other person?

In my personal situation, my life partner is heading for a life altering event that would reduce her freedom, her happiness, and would make her more dependent on others. If what we are building together is really a life partnership, I would be affected by this too. I would have to support her and help her big time. The problem: I don't want to sacrifice my freedom, which I have worked hard to achieve, and buy into this arrangement (that benefits only her). If I accept her frame, I would not be happy and the relationship would go 'more domestic' (we would have to eventually live together). This is a tremendous ask, and her being emotionally intelligent, she understands that that implicit ask gets cemented the longer we stay together. I'm subcommunicating I'm not interested but she has a lot of firepower that she could deploy anytime (societal conventions, etc). The conversation has not happened, but will eventually. In her case, there's nothing she can provide that would compensate for this imbalance. To answer your question... I'm not sure I have any good ideas on how to lower the costs/increase returns.

This is a too sensitive topic to talk openly in a forum that is public. Maybe I can start a thread on a private section of the forum because I think this pretty representative situation is really a place where we all could exercise the social strategist/life strategist part of PU big time. What do you think?

EDIT: For 'the conversation', I don't want to frame it as 'you are not giving me enough' or 'I'm giving more' because this means this is a negotiation (very far from a personal life partner relationship; implies power accounting and that's off the table if you want to have a healthy relationship)

Kavalier has reacted to this post.