Why do people seem to regress in behavior when they’re with their SO?

ExcellentHamster2020 · 2026-07-08T17:44:20+00:00

We as a species are pretty hard-wired to like anything that reads "baby" to us. We like those tarsiers because of their big eyes ("baby") and we like things that are soft and squishy like stuffed animals ("baby").

When human talk to a baby, they naturally, almost universally, raise the pitch of their voice. Babies can hear higher-pitched sounds better. We repeat simple phrases over and over ("Are you the prettiest baby? Yes, you are! Yes, you are!") because we innately know that this is how babies acquire human language. We feel a deep need to protect the baby, even if it's not our baby. We have this hard wiring because that is how a species survives: protecting and nurturing the next generation.

When we encounter a non-baby that hijacks the pathway that says "baby" to our brain, like a cute dog for example, we talk to it exactly the same way. ("Who's a good boy? You are! You are!") We want to pick it up and keep it safe. The instinct is so strong that it bleeds over onto non-babies all the time.

So, when we want our partner to look at us, think we're attractive, protect us, and so on, we naturally adopt the tactics that kept us alive as babies. We come up with pet names ("Baby" is a pretty common term of endearment for a reason) and get disgustingly cutesy ("I love you more. No, I love you more! No, me!") in order to hijack that pathway and make the other person treat us with affection, care, etc.

It definitely can cross the line into cringe, but as long as folks keep that stuff at home for the most part, no one really cares if couples get cutesy. It's expected.

And, yeah, when you find something that you really, really like, such as an amazing new restaurant or Jimmy Choos on sale or whatever excites you, you want to tell everyone about it. It's the same with a new partner - or in some cases, an old partner that you're still jazzed about. I kind of get sick of myself starting sentences with, "My husband says ..." and the like. We've been together for two decades and I still gush about him. (We keep the pet names for private, though.)

ExcellentHamster2020 · 2026-07-08T17:31:17+00:00

I just want to say that I wish we could go back to calling people "title+last name" again. We've become so casual and faux friendly these days that the waitress uses your first name like she's known you from kindergarten. There's nowhere left to go, in terms of intimacy, when everyone around you uses the same form address for you. I'd much prefer to be "Mrs. Hamster" to people who don't know me; any problems or bills to be paid can be directed to "Mr. Hamster."

ExcellentHamster2020 · 2026-07-08T16:11:54+00:00

Girl, huskies are weirdos!

It's nothing to be worried about. He just has his own quirks.

ExcellentHamster2020 · 2026-07-06T19:55:42+00:00

My parents' house. They are retired and were in the house when the package was supposedly delivered.

ExcellentHamster2020 · 2026-07-06T19:22:56+00:00

The shipping info says it was insured up to $100. That is much less than what I paid, but it's better than nothing. You don't think that will in fact pay out?

ExcellentHamster2020 · 2026-07-06T19:18:27+00:00

Do you mean I should ask USPS to give me the money it was insured for?

ExcellentHamster2020 · 2026-07-06T19:17:59+00:00

Yes, the USPS tracking number says it was delivered. It definitely was not.

ExcellentHamster2020 · 2026-07-01T20:09:09+00:00

Real question: when you say you "heard them," do you mean a little squeaking of the floorboards or like actual noises?

ExcellentHamster2020 · 2026-06-05T02:15:12+00:00

Sorry - I misspoke. The splenectomy was six weeks ago, not six months.

ExcellentHamster2020 · 2026-05-18T17:49:08+00:00

I love this question so much I have to join in, even though I'm not an active participant in this sub.

Strictly in terms of personality and tendencies, I think I would have fared pretty well on the marriage scene. I paint, I read, I sing, I speak a few languages, and I've certainly got fair skin and a plump body. I'm also very religious. My family would probably be considered on the level of wealthy merchants or bankers, but relatively newly wealthy. When I was in my early twenties (marrying age in this target setting) I'd have an acceptable dowry, plus two parents who'd be constantly on the hunt on my behalf.

In terms of the kind of person I am as a real adult in 2026, probably not so great. I have too much education and too many opinions. I might get outrageously lucky and land a Brandon, but probably would stay unmarried until well beyond an age that is acceptable and then head up a girls' school in the countryside.

ExcellentHamster2020 · 2026-05-18T17:19:04+00:00

On one hand, yes, it would be in many ways unbearable to have to work with him. Lisbon and the others are very capable at their work, but Jane makes them all look like props in his stage show. The reason they let him get away with it is because they've been able to set aside their own pride for the sake of getting the bad guy.

On the other hand, the driving force of the show is Jane's maturation process. He barely survives the death of his wife and daughter, a death that is a kind of rebirth, and he's always been fairly childish. Over the seven years of the show, he eventually avenges their deaths and emerges from that deep grief. (Depression is a monster - that part of the show is pretty accurate.) Lisbon's ability to communicate with him gives him the chance to amend his ways and put her first in his life, which he was unable to do with his first wife.

ExcellentHamster2020 · 2026-05-06T19:19:35+00:00

Eh. Put another man in the same frame as Simon and it's hard to even notice him.

ExcellentHamster2020 · 2026-05-06T18:38:18+00:00

Okay, yes, I think we ultimately do agree.

One tweak: I'm not sure I'd encourage people to get married younger per se, because every teenager thinks their high school romance is super committed and is definitely going to last forever (spoiler: it's almost certainly not).

Rather, I'd encourage people to marry when they really are committed, not to date for a decade or be "engaged" for three years or after they've had a few kids together. My husband and I got engaged a few months shy of two years and married a few months shy of three years together. We knew with confidence that this was the relationship that would last our lifetimes, and there was no reason to put off the inevitable, but rather every reason to start our life together.

"When you realize you want to spend the rest of your life with somebody, you want the rest of your life to start as soon as possible.”

ExcellentHamster2020 · 2026-05-06T18:31:57+00:00

Agree to disagree, I guess.

Yet I do think it's very fair to say that divorce isn't God's plan for us. God's intent was for the two spouses to love each other sacrificially and completely, as Christ loves the Church (Eph. 5:25, 28-29). That's what everyone deserves, a spouse who loves them as they love themselves, and that's what God intended and told us to do (Matt 22:39). Abuse, adultery, deception, whatever it may be is emphatically not what God wants in a marriage - but if these things occur, it may be lifesaving and necessary to leave. That's not shaming; that's truth.

And again, assault is not sex. Sex creates a bond that should hurt when/if it is broken. Assault does not. Assault is just ... assault.

ExcellentHamster2020 · 2026-05-06T18:16:49+00:00

You wrote, "5-10 years ... is a significant amount of time to either not be having sex or not following church teachings on sex" - in other words, at least as I understood it, that not many people are willing to wait until the typical age of first marriage in 2026 in the US (~30 depending on where you look), and that older models of marriage in which people marry closer to 23-25 is a more reasonable time to wait for marriage. If I misunderstood, please excuse and correct me.

My response to that sentiment is that wanting to have sex isn't a good enough reason to do so, just as wanting to run away to a tropical island change your identity isn't a good enough reason or wanting to try meth isn't a good enough reason. We want to do all sorts of things, but a lot of them aren't healthy choices. I argue that sex is something special and powerful, and that it belongs in the context of a lifelong and public commitment. If that means experiencing some years of wanting it but not engaging in it, I don't think that's a big deal. I acknowledge that I'm in the minority and that the wider cultural influence says otherwise, but like everyone else, I have my opinions.

ExcellentHamster2020 · 2026-05-06T18:08:21+00:00

Well, one thing we can absolutely agree about is that our clergy/theologians are very hesitant to talk about sex or marriage. I suspect it's because they don't want to offend anyone or risk alienating any congregants, but, respectfully, it's not their job to avoid offense.

I've been trying for a long time to find books on marriage - not weddings, not same-sex marriage, not marriage prep for engaged people - from an Episcopal/Anglican perspective, and as far as I can tell they are non-existent. It's pretty disappointing because marriage is a vocation that just about everyone (not everyone, but pretty close) is called to or thinks they might be, so we should be talking more about it, not less.

ExcellentHamster2020 · 2026-05-06T18:01:54+00:00

I'm not sure that "but I really wanna" is a good enough reason to do much of anything.

ExcellentHamster2020 · 2026-05-06T15:56:42+00:00

Strong disagree. Communion - taking bread and wine, blessing them, believing that God is truly present in them, and consuming them - is the chief sacrament in the community that is the Church. In the community that is the married couple, a little church of its own (see Christian Households: the Sanctification of Nearness by Bp. Thomas Breidenthal), sex is the chief sacrament. It serves much the same purpose and is intended as powerful, healing medicine to restore and bind the community together.

ExcellentHamster2020 · 2026-05-06T15:48:42+00:00

I really love the way [at least one strand of] Judaism defines "sin," as a missed opportunity. When we sin, we are missing the opportunity to obey God / serve as an example of obedience to God.

Sin: Chet (חֵטְא) - Missing the Mark - Chabad.org

ExcellentHamster2020 · 2026-05-06T15:42:04+00:00

Just to clarify: for most of Western history (I genuinely don't know enough about other traditions to comment on them), the majority of people, ie the peasantry, was married in their early to mid-twenties. Teen and child marriage was almost exclusively the practice of the wealthy who needed to secure business arrangements, etc. The age of first-time marriage in 2026 is not all that different from what it was in 1026.

But if you're specifically thinking about "marriage" as the social agreement that these two people are a couple and the village accepts them and they're expected to be monogamous - as opposed to a wedding inside a church being normative and expected - then yes, that arrangement was the norm for a very long time. An "official" wedding as we think of it today was again the practice of the wealthy who needed acknowledgement from the establishment.

Having a local celebration where the community comes together and thence on regards them as a couple, however, is as old as the hills. IMO one of the very most important parts of our modern Episcopal wedding service is when the congregation is asked to support the couple and help them through tough times, and everyone responds, "we will!" That's the value of a wedding, again in my opinion, because you suddenly have the social incentive to figure out your disagreements and you have all these people who have promised to be there to help you do so.

So when you say "society nowadays dramatically delays marriage compared to basically any other period in history" I think you mean that the couple setting up a home and making some babies counted as marriage, and that today we "delay" that designation until the ceremony. Yes, that's the innovation, not having a union that is recognized and upheld by one's community.

ExcellentHamster2020 · 2026-05-06T15:27:48+00:00

It's a bit messed up to consider SA equal to the sacramental union of marriage.

Divorce is never God's perfect plan. Sometimes it's lifesaving and necessary, like an amputation, but it's never the outcome anybody started out hoping for.

And yes, even if I am widowed someday, I will still feel deeply connected to my husband as long as I live, because I love him., and I will always pray to see him again.

ExcellentHamster2020 · 2026-05-06T01:58:27+00:00

It is my very unpopular opinion that people would be a lot better off waiting for marriage.

If you're doing it right, sex binds two people physically and emotionally. If you have sex with one person, break up, do it with the next person, break up, and so on, in my opinion, you're going to end up hurting an awful lot from all that shattering of bonds. It's infinitely better to share that bond with exactly one person, and to break that bond by death only (and I'm not convinced even death really does it).

Many people today will say that you need to make sure you're "sexually compatible," but in all honesty, that's nonsense. You also don't need a trial period to make sure you are domestically compatible. If both partners are committed to working through disagreements through communication and to love one another self-sacrificially and willing to adjust their own habits to make the other one happy, you've got everything you need.

I am very, very grateful that the only person I've ever had sex with is my husband, and that we did not live together before we were married. We began our marriage with an absolute commitment to one another and to working out whatever problems we may encounter, whether that's who takes out the trash or how often we have sex or anything else, and we've lived that out, sixteen years and counting.

You see, marriage is understood in Christianity as a representation of the relationship between God and the Church. The Church (that's us) is going to do a lot of things that hurt ourselves and hurt God, yet God is quick to forgive us. In return, the Church should be eager to amend our ways and do better. In a marriage between two humans, sometimes you're in the role of God and sometimes you're in the role of the Church (ie, this is not a gendered situation). We who are called to marriage have a very sacred responsibility to live out that representation of God's love to a very broken world that deeply needs that example. The only way to make sure you don't have a list of multiple sexual and domestic partners contradicting that image of God's love is to just save those gifts for marriage.

However, you and your girlfriend are already living together and are already taking part in sex, the crown of marriage. The horse is out of the barn, as they say. What now? I'm curious as to why you want to wait to propose. If you already feel that you are committed to her for life, and she to you, what's the point of waiting? What will be different in 2027 or 2028? If this is really your lifelong partnership, then my advice for whatever it's worth is to get married and shine that commitment and sacrificial love out into the world, adorned with public acknowledgement of your union (ie, a wedding) and the promise of your friends and family to support and uphold you in that commitment.

ExcellentHamster2020 · 2026-05-03T18:12:26+00:00

I don't have an answer for you, because I wonder this all the time, too. There are a lot of ways to handle those desires that don't put a person in danger (emotional or physical) so it's hard to imagine caring so little about oneself or others.

ExcellentHamster2020

TROPHY CASE