Getty ImagesNate Bagley says he was sick of hearing love stories that fell into one of two categories — scandal and divorce, and unrealistic fairytale.
So he started a Kickstarter and used his life savings to tour the country and interview couples in happy, long-term relationships.
He then took to Reddit’s /r/IAmA to share what he learned (just in time for Valentine’s Day), and to post podcasts of the couples’ journeys and advice.
“I’ve interviewed gay couples, straight couples, rich couples, poor couples, religious couples, atheist couples, couples who have been together for a short time, and couples who have been together for over 70 years,” he said in his Ask Me Anything. “I’ve even interviewed couples in arranged marriages and polygamous couples.”
He now hopes to make a documentary from the interviews, and has many of them already uploaded on his website, The Loveumentary. This is some of the best advice that he shared with Reddit:
On the key things that make a relationship successful:
“This was actually one of the most surprising things I learned on the journey.
Self Love: The happiest couples always consisted of two (sometimes more) emotionally healthy and independently happy individuals. These people practiced self-love. They treated themselves with the same type of care that they treated their partner… or at least they tried to.
Emotionally healthy people know how to forgive, they are able to acknowledge their part in any disagreement or conflict and take responsibility for it. They are self-aware enough to be assertive, to pull their weight, and to give love when it’s most difficult.
Commitment: After that emotional health came an unquestioning level of commitment. The happiest couples knew that if shit got real, their significant other wasn’t going to walk out on them. They knew that even if things got hard – no, especially if things got hard — they were better off together. The sum of the parts is greater than the whole.
Trust: Happy couples trust each other… and they have earned each others’ trust. They don’t worry about the other person trying to undermine them or sabotage them, because they’ve proven over and over again that they are each other’s biggest advocate. That trust is built through actions, not words. It’s day after day after day of fidelity, service, emotional security, reliability.
Establish that foundation, and you’re in good shape.
Intentionality: This is the icing on the cake. There’s a difference between the couple who drives through the rainstorm and the couple who pulls their car to the side of the road to make out in the rain. (Yes, that’s a true story.) There’s a difference between the couple who kisses for 10 seconds or longer when they say goodbye to each other rather than just giving each other a peck… or nothing at all. There’s a difference between the couples who encourage each other to pursue their personal goals at the expense of their own discomfort or inconvenience… even if it means their partner has to stage kiss another woman.
The couples who try on a daily basis to experience some sort of meaningful connection, or create a fun memory are the couples who shattered my perception of what was possible in a loving relationship.”
On the best advice he was given:
“One woman in Georgia gave some pretty amazing advice. She and and her husband have been married for over 60 years, and after being asked what her best relationship advice would be, she paused and said…
‘Don’t be afraid to be the one who loves the most.’”
On the best way to solve disagreements:
“Resolving disagreements was one of the topics that came up the most.
Here’s what I learned:
Don’t Fight To Win: A huge number of couples talked about how they didn’t fight against each other. I mean, if you’re in love, you should be playing for the same team. Your goal should be to resolve the issue, not to emerge victorious over the love of your life… and let’s be honest, you just feel guilty when you win anyway.
Seek to Understand: If you’re having a hard time playing on the same team, stop fighting and instead try to understand why your partner is upset. Typically what’s being talked about isn’t the real issue. People are inherently bad at being vulnerable, especially in threatening situations. Be willing to ask sincere questions. Let the answers sink in. If she is complaining that you’re spending too much time at work, maybe the real issue is that she misses you, and wants to feel connected with you. Rather than arguing about how you’re providing for the family, and she needs to respect how hard you work, try to listen to what she’s really saying. Then hold her. Come home early one day, and surprise her with a date, or some special one-on-one time. Reassure her that she, and your relationship, are a priority for you. If you don’t want that same issue to arise again, keep investing in the solution.
Just Be Nice To Each Other Seriously. Don’t be a jerk. Don’t call names. Don’t take jabs. Don’t try to hurt the other person. Argue naked if it helps… but just be kind and civil ad respectful. It will prevent so many bad things from happening.”
And his favourite quote from all the interviews:
“At the end of Ty’s life, I want him to be able to say, ‘Terri was the greatest earthly blessing in my life — the best thing that ever happened to me — and that I’m a better man because of how she loved me.’ And that’s the goal that I live with every day. That’s how I want to love this man.”
Read the entire Reddit AMA here.
Follow Business Insider Australia on Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn
All of that storie means nothing.Love is what you make it or make of it.There are several formats of love.1-Love of family.2-Love of friends.3-Love of Enviroment.4Love of romance.ETC.
You really couldn't figure out he was talking about romance? It's story*. Jack ass.
Thanks for your worthless input there Ed, go back to your college philosophy class and don't come back til you are ready to post like a grown up that thinks what they're going to say through first, then posts.
Worthless? Hmmmmmm, you need help
I hope you do realize that Ed is not the guy who interviewed the couples. Ed is the guy who commented this: "All of that storie means nothing.Love is what you make it or make of it.There are several formats of love.1-Love of family.2-Love of friends.3-Love of Enviroment.4Love of romance.ETC." Which was kinda worthless...
Eddie nice input there bud.
I thought his name was Nate. That what the reporter said at the beginning of the article...
Congratulations Eddie on an honest, conscious and very much needed topic in todays world. I've taught youga for 20 years and this is the message we share. To the poor guy who dosn't agree, i think you should have interviewed him about his relationship qualities. I don't think there would be any surprises ;) Look fwd to the documentary.
Again... just to be clear, MEGAN is the writer of the article, and NATE BAGLEY is the person who took the year to interview couples. EDDIE is the "poor guy who doesn't agree" :)
Eddie is some guy who clearly went way above and beyond to hyper analyze the story and completely miss the point. Love isn't a philosophical thing. The different "types" of love are irrelevant in regard to the point of the story and coming documentary. I really wish ppl like Eddie would actually elaborate on their dismissive comments and make clear what it is exactly that they are disagreeing with, rather than poo-pooing things in such a way that is appears he doesn't even recognize that his comment as it is is completely unrelated to the topic at hand. So there are several formats of love. What in God's name does that have to do with advice for healthy relationships? Oh, were to wrapped up being Nancy negative that you missed that Ed? Eh, goes with the personality type, I 'spose.
If you do actually have a relevant point you were trying to make, by all means, elaborate.
(this was directed at Ed aside from just trying to make clear who "Eddie" was... as clearly several commenters get the impression he was something other than a negative poster in the comment section. His opinions are perfectly fine... my issue isn't with stopping him from speaking his mind, its with asking why the opinions he is expressing here and now have nothing to do with the article.
We get who Eddie is thanks for reiterating twice boy you are sure smarter than all of us
Obviously not everyone understands that
Evidently Elizabeth doesnt get who Eddie is thats why Boots commented. *facepalm
Is that sarcasm?
FYI Eddie is the guy bad talking the article. You praised and ridiculed him at the same time.
Hey Fox, don't hate on philosophy class just because Eddie is an idiot. Some of the most well-intentioned, well-thought-out people I know are philosophers.
Woah everyone! Some harsh things are being said to Eddie. Let's remember the article,
On the best way to solve disagreements:
---Just Be Nice To Each Other Seriously, Don’t Fight To Win, and Seek to Understand ...
(If you’re having a hard time playing on the same team, stop fighting and instead try to understand why your [Eddie] is upset. Typically what’s being talked about isn’t the real issue. [Eddies] are inherently bad at being vulnerable, especially in threatening situations. Be willing to ask sincere questions. Let the answers sink in. If [Eddie] is complaining that you’re spending too much time at work, maybe the real issue is that [Eddie] misses you, and wants to feel connected with you. Rather than arguing about how you’re providing for the family, and [Eddie] needs to respect how hard you work, try to listen to what [Eddie] really saying. Then hold [Eddie]. Come home early one day, and surprise [Eddie] with a date, or some special one-on-one time. Reassure [Eddie] that [Eddie], and your relationship, are a priority for you. If you don’t want that same issue to arise again, keep investing in the solution.)
"Don’t be afraid to be the one who loves the most."
But I this goes both ways Eddie, I think we can objectively state that your comment was worthless. To say all of Nate Bagley's work 'means nothing'. Are you serious? Do you not have any ability to conceptualize things? Like, where in the world does your "several formats of love" come in to play with anything talked about in the article. It's a relevant to the topic as me discussing my favorite Pokémon. And to cite my favorite Pokémon as to being the reason why several Nate's work 'means nothing'??? [I have the tendency to use argument ad absurdum]
Try to engage next time Eddie. Your points are completely off-topic, and in no way makes any argument that counters any point in the article. Wake up.
~I did think what F0x Guest said was funny about College Philosophy students, it's hella true~
Nice AutomatonX, nice! :)
Eddie said it better.
@automatonXthe best comment I have read here……I just don 't understand why people put comments up that are so out of line with what the author states.
it discourages me from even commenting because it turns into discourse, verbal garbage, people wanting to give lessons to others who make mistakes in spelling, or disagree and must do so with really nasty comments.
Also those who want to make sure that others understand just how wrong they are.
Totally agree with you ed .. I myself do not believe that love exists in our times .. Love of family maybe but not relationship wise
Love in a relationship creates family. You saying love in relationship doesn't exist goes along to say everyone's parents did not experience love, which is how family's should start. Love for one's significant other becomes so great, they want to expand their unconditional love into having children and harvesting a healthy loving family. Usually if someone doesn't believe in love in relationship, he or she probably did not watch their parents cultivate the love they had for each other into their own children. Which is a shame that one wouldn't want to seek true love and share it unconditionally with another best friend and lover.
Douche
I'm not sure you even read this article, because you most certainly didn't have the same takeaways as the rest of us.
Idk if you actually read the story but it's about love between couples...
I love you Eddie.
Eddie, I think you missed the entire point...It looks like you have broken down the types of love....Here they are talk in about the ability to communicate to bring the other into your frame of reference and the desire to work on it until each understands the other.
Real love isn't used as an adjective it is a verb. Love is a conscious choice you make and continue to make every day. Intimacy is the beautiful result of two people loving each other and building a life together. I just wish it were a little easier to learn and understand because it is something everyone should get a chance to experience. Love is what i live for.
1. You also used it as a noun, so it's not just a verb.
2. I've yet to see anybody use love as an adjective. If they had, they likely would have used the word 'Lovely' (unless they were talking about love songs or love stories)... Not 'Love'.
3. Love is what it is... Like you hinted at, love isn't really something you can learn or study. Love is incredible like that. My point is... Don't try and define what love is or should be - that goes for verbs or any other part of speech. Just let it be what it is! If you ever witness love, just let it be! Such should be the power of love!
4. (Just to one-up you...) You might live for love, but Love is my superpower!
That was almost a PERFECT little bullet list of rhetoric correction... but "lovely" is an adverb... [just sayin']
Lovely is an adjective. Adjective describes a person, place, or thing ie "that lovely girl" or "that girl was lovely" - in this case describing the girl (person)
Lovingly would be the adverb closest to the word above. Adverb describes an action ie "He looked at her lovingly" - in this case describing his looking (action).
Jussayin. Don't incorrectly correct people. <3 Much love. (noun)
i love that Grammarian... it was a lovely piece, i loved it lovingly...
Love as an adjective: love nest. Just sayin :)
In this case 'love' is still a a noun. Specifically, a noun adjunct, also known as an attributive noun. Yes, it is used adjectivally; still it is a noun.
Poor Eddie, you notice it's 6 am, probably just coming in from an all nighter, rejected, etc. totally clueless guy. So sad.
The only clueless thing here is your comment - with that kind of thinking you must be quite lonely
you meant to say "The whole is greater than the sum of its parts" on the "Commitment" Section.
Thats kinda important to get that right.
yes, but the expression is: "The whole is greater than the sum of it's parts"
great article.
Actually, the expression is, "[T]he whole is greater than the sum of its parts."
No, it is "its". ("it's" is the contraction for "it is", "its" is the possessive form of "It".
Incorrect. "It's" is the correct spelling for the possessive; 's is correct both as a contraction and in possessive pronouns. This is a common mistake, and I tire of seeing people berated for using the language correctly.
Actually, "its" (no apostrophe) is the possessive; "it's" is correct *only* as a contraction.
Incorrect, its is the possessive and it's is a contraction for "it is". They aren't interchangeable, for a reason.
I'm a student of English Philology, and let me tell you that what you say is not correct. The same way you say: His problem ( the problem of He ) or Her problem ( the problem of She ), you must say Its problem for the problem of It. "It's" is not a possessive pronoun, is a contraction for the verb to be. To add an " 's " does not work for pronouns.
You use an apostrophe to indicate possession ONLY with nouns and indefinite pronouns. For example, "the boy's bike is in the back yard", and "someone's stupidity is going to hurt everyone's chances for success". For personal, relative, or interrogative possessives, you do NOT use an apostrophe. For example, words like its, hers, his, ours, yours, theirs, and whose. Any other use of an 'apostrophe-s', is a contraction of the word, plus 'is' (Example: it's, which is the contraction 'it is', and 'she's', which is the contraction 'she is'). I hope that this clears up some of the confusion for all of you, especially Steven and Amberre.
In agreeance with SaraF here is a poster for apostrophe use and an good portion dedicated to "it"... http://theoatmeal.com/comics/apostrophe
scandal and divorce and fairytale ... Are three categories not two. Just fyi.
Ah, punctuation. I think he meant "scandal and divorce" as one category, then fairytale being the other.
I thought this was just common sense but the fact that someone it took a year of their life and wasted their life savings completely blows my mind.
I don't think traveling the world, learning about different cultures and experiencing life is a waste of time? They lived life a lot more than most of us who sit at a desk all day, come home for 4 hours and then go to bed and do it all over again the next day.
If this was common sense our divorce rate would be almost non existent and my job, as a counsellor, would be redundant!!!
only if you measure your value in terms of material things rather than contribution to understanding. I get what ya mean, but there is a gulf between ppl who see the world in terms like you and ppl who see the world in terms less related to, "I have wealth therefore I am a valid human being". Nothing wrong with that attitude, just different things ppl value.
I think it was a very meaningful project; to want to know something better, to get the universal essence of something, and to go out into the world to find it. What is so wasteful about that? People spend a lot of money on things that are worth much less than trying to distill the essence of healthy love and relationships.
Was a great article, most of the comments are not so good. Usually comes from people who have something to learn and instead of listening they just blab blab blab. Oh whats that you said? Your divorced.....ahhhh I see. You clearly have great relationship advice to be handing out.
Love this, well done! You have to love a guy who took the time to understand what love is all about. Pity the people who wrote those negative comments, hope you someday find love!
Kay, you need to go back and read the comments again. The negative comments are NOT directed at Nate Bagley, but at Eddie who made the very first comment, which was completely irrelevant to the article. The people you insulted were, in fact, in support of the article.
^^Agreed. I love how this article is about love and a majority of you commenting above me are showing anything but.
We have been married 50 years and this article is right on. Congratulations.
I respect the people who post blogs in a meek attempt to boldly share the good news: how to love one another. Grievously, there is a growing trend of demeaning human decency. This a main reason why people are so quick to judge and degrade others, especially the ones who are spreading LOVE. Indecent human beings do not understand any of the imperative lessons of love described in this article; indecency is the reason why people are determined to share advice on how to treat people and the planet with care and respect. I think this article was an excellent summary of this man's adventures to understand love on a deeper level.
Thank you for sharing your years' worth of discovery!! This is an excellent article with great insight. I am thrilled to know that, second time around, I have set in place all of this great information and that, after 17 years in this relationship, it still feels new and wonderful, but long lasting and comfortably familiar!! I counsel couples with relationship issues and am intending to direct them to this site to read this information. I am also a marriage celebrant, and intend to direct my couples here as well to read your findings!
I have these things :-)
The only thing that bothers me here is that Kay seems to think that Eddie is the one who's behind the interviews...
Kay and Eddie are the same person. He/She is what you would call a "troll"
I'd have to say the best foundational advise I can give is first work on yourself. As you spiritually grow you will naturally attract the right people to you and hence both will be mature enough to make a life long loving relationship work. This could be classified under his self love portion. However it is a little more complex than this as our need to strive for personal growth is continual. This takes effort. It is all too easy to take one another for granted, to grow complacent in our routines. A good relationships takes sincerity and effort. If both individually never give up success will surely be found. This is why commitment needs to be taken so very seriously in order to for it to work. But with hard work comes the payoff. And the tradeoff is more than worth it as the deep joy one experiences from a loving life long relationship is non comparably immeasurable.
Don't think polygamous "couples" works as a concept.
This is all true and has experienced and presently doing all of it and even more..Love is compassion...it makes a better out of each other...Ilove this and it is true all of it because I am living it...Thank you so much
Starts off nicely, but then it falls into a huge and fundamental causal and narrative fallacy. You cannot deduce "the secrets for a successful relationship" or "how to become a millionnaire" by only looking for traits that bind all of those ongoing (and therefore at that time still successful) relationships. Imagine you have had 100 couples over the last three years in one village, all of which were committed and loyal all the way during their relationships, but of which 90 failed due to unknown circumstances. Going around and interviewing the 10 remaining couples and deducing that it's their commitment and loyalty to each other that is key to their success is a statistical fallacy that stems from our neglect for the failures in our population sample (the 90 failed couples that were just as much loyal and committed). One should not try to find reasons and causes for everything.
There is truth in the article. I belive that if youd dont strive to work had in love then you wont survive. Definitely it might mean to give up something for your loved one. It might not work out for everyone but I surely works for me and my love.
Lots of truth in the article. Thank you for sharing it so concisely and well.