More frequent or longer in duration?

[lucybelle]

???

12x2 = 24

2x14= 28
The second option is 4 days more?
It depends on how you count weekends or weeks. But technically speaking the weekend is Saturday and Sunday, which is two days and there's twelve months.

Haha yeeah, I was counting weekends as 3 days. So it'd be 36 days v. 28 in my book. But whatevs

[Madge]

Hmm I was thinking about it more and in aspect to our circumstances it would be option 2 however if we were living in the same country I would pick option 1. There would be a time limit though because Nick and I did do option one for the first 3 months of our relationship (I was in Iowa he was in Wisconsin) and I really didn't like it that much. I prefer longer periods of time with my SO

[Dziubka]

lucybelle, I figured that. Hence "It depends on how you count weekends".
I guess that anyone who lives far enough to only be able to travel one weekend a month would be trying to make it a three day weekend. Spending only one night together is realy short. But sometimes you don't have much influence on your work/class schedule.

Anyway, I'd rather not have any distance at all.

[dub329]

Unless the spans are more than a few months, option 2 seems better. Not only is it more feasible (less effort booking flights, taking time from school and/or work, dealing with any unsupportive people) but you'd be surprised at the level of non-physical intimacy you can cultivate in the interim. Option 1, in contrast, requires more logistics and diplomacy, and you might be a bit rushed.

Beyond a certain span, however, option 1 might be superior. As one person pointed out, memories covering a longer visit still fade even if they are filled with many experiences. But this is mitigated by communication!

[Sierra]

For my boyfriend and I, the only way we would consider a long distance relationship is if we could manage seeing each other every other month or 8 weeks at the most in between visits. We are both working adults and we don't have the ability to have long trips together.

I commend many of you for going a long time between seeing your SO, but this is something that would not be right for me. My boyfriend and I are working towards marriage and neither of us want to drag out us being apart.

[lucybelle]

Anyway, I'd rather not have any distance at all.

TRUE! PS- I love your new avatar. Cute!

[Lissy]

My SO and I can manage a bit of a balance between the two options. We both attend uni, so our holidays frequently match up well enough that we can get a good visit in. This past summer, I stayed with her for about 3 months, and winter holiday is a month long for each of us, so we'll have time then. We also spent two weeks together last year during our Spring Breaks, hers being a week after mine. However, we're trying to squeeze in one visit a month, now. It gets hard to find time, and it's a little expensive, but we've been making it work. But we're planning to close the distance next Fall, and then we won't have to worry about this stuff anymore. ^^;

I don't really know that I could pick one option over the other; it's pretty much an "I'll take what I can get" mentality. There are benefits to both - frequent visits have the benefit of something to always look forward to (that doesn't seem lightyears away), but longer visits cut down the time of worrying about when it'll end, and are good for testing living compatibility and such. I feel like I can relax and enjoy myself more when the visits are longer.

[garnet]

We never could have afforded option one, and that was okay. I don't think it's feasible for many international LDR folk to see each other monthly. The cost would likely seriously delay any distance closing plans, unless you were just rolling in money. :P Which we weren't. But I liked our rare, but longer trips. I'd stick with #2.

[Dziubka]

I just want to add one thing to garnet's post, because I've noticed it a few times on the forums. And maybe because we see each other monthly and neither my boyfriend nor I are rolling in money (I wish!)
Just for the record:
It might be a north American pov and that's ok, but generally international does not necessarily = far(ther than national).

[snow_girl]

It might be a north American pov and that's ok, but generally international does not necessarily = far(ther than national).

Very true, you can fit all of europe in Canada

Me and my SO have never had conventional visits. I was away for a month then we lived CD for three months then were LD for 3 months and CD for 5. The last LD was 6 months before closing the distance. I guess if we had normal visits it would have to be the longer option, it isn't really realistic to fly to see each other for anything less then two weeks.

[ioanna]

interesting question

one of the things i miss the most about us being LD is our regular day to day life. i'd rather be able to spend large amounts of time together. we currently get to spend 4 weeks together every 6 months.

option 1 would require a time machine or teleportation

[heylittlekrissy]

I think that I'd prefer option two: my reasoning being that since we started out LD and haven't met in person yet, being together for longer periods at one time would give us a better indication of how compatible we are in person, and I think that's absolutely essential.

But I'm stuck with option two anyways lol neither of us can really afford the trips right now, it's still something we're working on.

[13000km]

When we were LD I sued to wish all the time that I'd get option 1. Monthly visits would have been amazing, since it's so easy to get into those "all I need is a hug" moods. However, our financial situation only allowed for one option 2 visit a year into the relationship. Stupid too-expensive international air tickets. >:/

[Lumos]

I almost picked option #1 because it's been a few months since we last saw each other (and we've got a few more to go), but I think I may actually prefer things the way they are now. We're both in college, so we get to see each other during summer and winter breaks for a few weeks at a time. I don't think I'd ever have enough time to do all the stuff I want to do with him if we only saw each other for a few days at a time.

There's no way we could afford to visit more often than that anyway.

[Sora1101]

Honestly I wait a year between visits and only get a weekend so I'd LOVE option 2, just to be able to have him longer than the blink of an eye....oh lord that sounds so nice to me right now, especially since I already wait longer than a couple months for my weekend visits anyway. But coming from experience only having 2 or even 3 days just isn't enough he's there and then he's ripped away in what seems like a second, but two weeks I'd actually be able to do something with him :'D our weekend visits are usually full of sleep because he's jet lagged and I hadn't slept days prior due to excitement. ^^;