What do you consider a LDR?

[Rugger]

I don't really see anything under a sort of 6 hour drive as LDR. Because you could still see each other weekly with that kind of time. It'd be exhausting, but yeah. If I was to use time to describe it, it would be anyone who has to wait more than one month to see them, though be it for short periods. I agree with Eclaire though. Some of the people that have in country relationships do not face the same sort of hardships as international. Both are equally hard and painful, but closing the distance becomes a lot harder when you have to move to a different country.

I'm odd. I don't really consider a relationship between the bay area and, say, LA area (8-9 hours drive) long-distance. I consider long-distance anything where you're not living in the same state or country as your partner. However, that's me. I would overall agree with the general consensus that it's not being able to see your partner whenever you want that it constitutes as LD, even if it is "only" 8-9 hours. :P

i'm going to disagree with both these ( sorry guys!).

I've been in the same state with my SO the entire length of our LDR. When he was in Rochester, he was 6.5 hours away and now that he's in ALbany, he's 2.5 hours away. He's still not here, with me. I saw him every month, and now I see him twice a month. It's not really fair to define LDR by the hardships faced, because every relationship is different. Some people could have very easy international LDRs (lots of disposable income to see each other, etc), while some people could have a very hard 5-6 hour distance LDR ( health issues, no money etc). Just because it's a closer distance doesn't make being apart from the person you love any easier.

I think that and LDR is defined by not being with your partner on the regular basis and you don't live in the same general area. It could be two hours or it could be days, they are still not with you.

[Sunbeam]

Both my relationships have been international, so I understand. It's not that I feel superior to people in a next-city-over relationship or that I feel my relationship is any more difficult than theirs, I simply don't see them facing the same hardships that I do in my LDR because he's in Dublin and I'm in California. It's possible, though, that that's because I'd have the means of travelling 45min-1hr away whereas it's harder to find the time, ability, and finances to cover a 14-18 hour transatlantic trip?

I feel the exact same way. Like my friend at school, she considers her relationship LD because (obviously) school comes first and she doesn't see him every weekend. And I know I should be understanding, but she could drive to him or he could drive here, and then sometimes she says "Well, we see each other as much as you and Mark do." and that's when I have to really resist pulling the "my relationship is more difficult than you seem to think" because I personally do not just have thousands to drop on gas money, plane tickets, train tickets, etc... because if I don't meet my SO somewhere in England, my cheapest route to get to him in Wales involves 2 planes, 2 trains, and a car ride to his house lol. It's hard. and if he just lived 1 hour away from me, I'd have the means to make the trip more than once a year... ya know?

---------- Post added at 08:23 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:22 AM ----------

Both my relationships have been international, so I understand. It's not that I feel superior to people in a next-city-over relationship or that I feel my relationship is any more difficult than theirs, I simply don't see them facing the same hardships that I do in my LDR because he's in Dublin and I'm in California. It's possible, though, that that's because I'd have the means of travelling 45min-1hr away whereas it's harder to find the time, ability, and finances to cover a 14-18 hour transatlantic trip?

I feel the exact same way. Like my friend at school, she considers her relationship LD because (obviously) school comes first and she doesn't see him every weekend. And I know I should be understanding, but she could drive to him or he could drive here, and then sometimes she says "Well, we see each other as much as you and Mark do." and that's when I have to really resist pulling the "my relationship is more difficult than you seem to think" because I personally do not just have thousands to drop on gas money, plane tickets, train tickets, etc... because if I don't meet my SO somewhere in England, my cheapest route to get to him in Wales involves 2 planes, 2 trains, and a car ride to his house lol. It's hard. and if he just lived 1 hour away from me, I'd have the means to make the trip more than once a year... ya know?

[Dziubka]

i'm going to disagree with both these ( sorry guys!).

I've been in the same state with my SO the entire length of our LDR. When he was in Rochester, he was 6.5 hours away and now that he's in ALbany, he's 2.5 hours away. He's still not here, with me. I saw him every month, and now I see him twice a month. It's not really fair to define LDR by the hardships faced, because every relationship is different. Some people could have very easy international LDRs (lots of disposable income to see each other, etc), while some people could have a very hard 5-6 hour distance LDR ( health issues, no money etc). Just because it's a closer distance doesn't make being apart from the person you love any easier.

I think that and LDR is defined by not being with your partner on the regular basis and you don't live in the same general area. It could be two hours or it could be days, they are still not with you.

I agree with this.
How often you're able to see each other shouldn't really be a criteria, because well if we had enough money, we could see each other ever weekend. It's only a 1,5-2hour flight. So if we had more money and could afford that every weekend, we wouldn't be in an LDR anymore?
Same with living in the same country or state. Theoretically my boyfriend and I could both live in my country and still have a bigger distance. Borders are more or less random and you can live near or far from them, so that's really not a good measurement either.

An LDR for me begins at a distance, where it's not possible to just see each other for an evening/afternoon, even if you had a car or really good public transport.

[thatgirllit]

i'm going to disagree with both these ( sorry guys!).

I've been in the same state with my SO the entire length of our LDR. When he was in Rochester, he was 6.5 hours away and now that he's in ALbany, he's 2.5 hours away. He's still not here, with me. I saw him every month, and now I see him twice a month. It's not really fair to define LDR by the hardships faced, because every relationship is different. Some people could have very easy international LDRs (lots of disposable income to see each other, etc), while some people could have a very hard 5-6 hour distance LDR ( health issues, no money etc). Just because it's a closer distance doesn't make being apart from the person you love any easier.

I think that and LDR is defined by not being with your partner on the regular basis and you don't live in the same general area. It could be two hours or it could be days, they are still not with you.

1. Hello fellow upstate New Yorker. *waves* I grew up in Rochester and went to school in Ithaca. I am currently living/working in China and two days ago I was craving a garbage plate.

2. I agree with you to a degree. I think a relationship between someone who lives in Rochester (truly upstate New York) and someone who lives in New York City would be much more difficult than someone who lives in NYC and is dating someone in Newark, even though they are different states. You have to drive (or take the bus) almost everywhere in upstate New York because public transportation is almost non-existent.

3. But I think that leads to the all to common problem of attempting to classify LDRs or anything at all. As a writer, one might not make very much money, but it might be easier for one to see his or her significant other because his or her work time/space is more flexible than say an attorney with a larger income and resources, but who has a very restrictive work schedule. I think that a lot of "challenge" of long distance relationships is the "challenges" that couples face in attempting to be with one another.

[Malaga]

When I was 17 I was with a boy who lived in a town about 2 hours away. By my current standards, that's CD as I could drive up to him almost daily if I wanted to. But I didn't have the means back then that I do now (neither did he), and we'd see each other about once a month, and only for a day as we didn't have a place to sleep over - staying with each other's parents was inappropriate and we certainly couldn't afford a hotel.

So there is no universal answer I think. If you have time and money, 6 or 8 hours difference can be nothing. If you're broke and/or underage, an hour or two are a problem.

[lucybelle]

Yeah I'm going to disagree with the time limit things. Eclaire mentioned that if your SO is in a different state, then it's an LDR. But that 6-8 hours drive isn't. Well if I were still living in the states, and I drove 6-8 hours in any direction, I'd be in a different state. And if you're on a continent with small countries, 6-8 hours could put you in another country. I guess I'm just not understanding the logic behind these statements.

I'd define an LDR as not living in the same town. Even 45 min away could be an LDR. I feel like if you can't call up your SO and ask them to come over whenever you want, then it's an LDR.

[books]

I really don't believe there is a uniform answer as this is such a subjective question. I will say that just skimming through the thread, there seems to be the assumption that driving times would be one way to determine if it's an LD or not. Well, what's the case then for people who live in cities dominated by public transportation and therefore do not own cars? When I started dating my ex, we both lived in NYC...but it took an hour and a half and two subway transfers to reach him from where I was at. This meant that lots of the time, it just wasn't possible for me to go see him when I got off of work and then try to return home. So, if I just wanted a hug, I couldn't just go see him when I felt like it (due to travel time involved) even though we were living in the same city. Also, making a broad generalization such as "if you're in the same state, it's not LD" is not too logical as another poster mentioned, from NYC it is quite time-consuming and expensive to travel to upstate NY meanwhile I can be in New Jersey (another state) in a short amount of time. For me it comes down to- travel time involved with consideration to your resources (ie. if it's a 3-hour flight but you don't have the money to travel often and lack a car as an option).

[SDPersona]

Actually, I just wanted to reply with my own opinion, but before I do this I just want to show you guys something. Engel shared a blog with us in another thread and this one has a very interesting "article" related to this topic and it goes like this:

Long Distance Girl here!

Today I thought I’d like to discuss the different types of long distance relationships out there. The term long distance relationship is actually rather hard to pin down. I searched through several different reference texts including Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary and a World Book Encyclopedia, and none of them actually had an entry for it, which surprised me because there are entries for such literary gems like “pimp juice” and “blog”.

I finally went to the last source of information I try, Wikipedia.com, and found that they simply describe it as a romantic relationship where the two parties involved are seperated by a long distance. While there was considerably more to the article, that was enough for me to use to write this article with. To me, a long distance relationship has many forms, and can’t be pinned down by one statement or another. There are different categories, and different levels of long distance. One person who thinks their boyfriend or girlfriend living in a nearby suburb is considered a long distance relationship, while another may not consider a relationship “long distance” until there is at least 500 miles between the two lovers.

Types of Long Distance Relationships

Long distance love is difficult, but it should be examined before being considered hopeless. In my opinion, there are many different types of long distance relationships, some of which are pretty impossible, and others that fall right out of a romance novel.

• Internet Relationship – Met In Person: This is my favorite kind of Internet relationship. It’s the type where two people meet online, get along, maybe even take years to get to know each other before taking the next step, which is meeting in person. This requires a lot of faith and a little cash on hand, but if there is chemistry there, then there is a good chance this long distance relationship will work.
• Internet Relationship – Strictly Online: This style of long distance relationship is a little less likely to work. I’ve been there, where the two of you meet online, chat, get along great, and always think about meeting in person, but never actually make the plans. This is a bad sign, it means one of you isn’t as into the other as you both think. If the long distance relationship is strictly online, then I suggest re-evaluating it.
• Military Relationship: I am soon to be in one of these myself, but we all know the story. The brave soldier (male or female) goes off to some foreign country for months at a time. Communication is important in this one, from telling each other about hopes, dreams, fears, and being honest about feelings and if they are changing or not.
• Employment Change: So your sweetie has been promoted but has to move across the country, or worse, across the world. While this is an exciting time, it is also a sad time, because you’re losing your love, as well as gaining the heartache that long distance relationships can certainly bring.

None of these types of long distance relationships are really all that doomed, except perhaps for the strictly online Internet relationship. Anyone who is willing to work to make a long distance relationship successful should not only keep in mind that it isn’t about how often you see each other, but how well you stay in touch.

While not going into the author's opinion of what works and what doesn't work, I do agree that the innate characteristics of an LDR are hard to pin down without honoring its many forms. For me, it's always has been the kind of an relationship where you have to jump onto a plane or get onto a really long train ride to spend some quality time with your loved one. Where you have to actually make plans to see them and are seperated over quite some time, no matter if it's once a month or once a year. And it's expensive too. I have to pay quite a bit if I want to see my boyfriend...

[squirrelz15]

I agree that it just kinda depends on the situation. I'm 7 hours away from my SO. We can't see each other very often. He's in school and therefore not working, so coming home very often isn't an option. He also lives on campus, so when I go to visit I will have to not only pay for gas but a hotel, so the distance limits us, as well as the financial situation. I think if you feel that it's long distance then it probably is. Sometimes I agree that a 45 minute drive isn't really, but if their situation is limited when they can see each other too it can be very similar.

[efish1042]

I think my opinion is that if you are unable to drop everything at any time and just go to your SO in an urgent situation, if it would be more practical to call their friends or family or 911, then it's probably long distance.
Generally, if you're within the 1-3 hour travel range, you can drop everything and go, but it is still more practical to call someone else if it's emergency yet you can still be there for them when you get there, but 4 or more and it's much harder to drop everything and go. If you need plane or bus tickets? You can probably forget it until the next day because there is no way.

[Andrea1978]

Not sure but it would definitely have to be some distance. I dont really consider an hour or even 3hrs long distance because you can still go there and back in a day if you wanted. I use to drive 9hrs once a month for a week to visit my bf years ago...Previous LDR not my current.


My fiancee lives over 5k miles from me and I only see him at max 3 times a year. He was just home for a month and it was great because we had my bday and Thanksgiving together. It will make having to spend Christmas and New Year's alone less depressing you could say. We knew getting into this he would be away most of the time and I am fine with it. I know it's his job and it's part of his life and our life right now so we will deal with it. He won't always be overseas so it's temp.

It's very much worth it to me and to him.

[Engel]

Hmm, for me, any distance moe than one hou drive o that needs a flight is Long Distance. but if it is one hour... it isnt. i take one hour to go to my german course everyday, and one hours to come back. daily. so I know it is possible to do it everyday in a distance like this if the peson wants.
My SO also drives one hour to work everyday, and one hour back. and it really isnt a big deal

[Alemap]

I would say an LDR is any relationship where you're not within easy driving distance (even if you don't drive) of each other, and that causes you difficulty in meeting each other at least weekly.
For example, Sydney is only a three hour drive from Canberra, but I would call any relationship between a Sydneysider and a Canberrite long-distance. Because it's far enough to be an obstacle.
Do I think my Australia to America LDR is any more "valid" and deserving of the title than one between, say, Phoenix and Salt Lake City? No, not at all. I do think the further the distance, the greater the hurdles, however, and that there should be some recognition for that.