Hot Thots. The “Romantic Companionship” By Dish Stanley

A periodic column where Dish lets off steam.

I came across this reel on the Glorious Broads Instagram this week. It’s an account that features women in their 70’s+ opining on all areas of their lives, frequently about love and sex. The ’glorious broads’ who are featured share a devil-may-care, happy to be at this stage attitude. This one, an exchange between the site’s creator, Maryjane Fahey, and “glorious broad” Nan, caught my attention.

Mary Jane: "So Nan, what's it like to date at this age?"

Nan: "I am 83 now, and now I'm going steady … I have an ankle bracelet to prove it. He gave me a white gold ankle bracelet because we are both that vintage and we laughed our heads off over it. And I see him two and a half days a week. That's our max. And he always tells everybody that the best day of his life is when he picks me up and the second best day is the day he drops me off.

It's just been terrific. No obligations. We don't have to be with each other's children unless we decide to. There's nothing compelling about attending events. If I don't want to go, I don't go. If he doesn't want to go, he doesn't go. It's very freeing. It's very FREE-ING."

Mary Jane: “So is that the difference between your dating as a young woman and your dating now?”

Nan: “There are no goals. The difference is there is no end game. The end game is to have a great weekend. So if there are no goals and no agenda and no concern about where it goes and what might be, it's quite wonderful."

First off, I’ll say I love the ankle bracelet as a sort of “going steady” gift! It’s fun and original and sweet, and what I love most about it is that it seems to perfectly capture Nan her romantic partner’s relationship, as well as their customized brand of going steady. Which, as a proxy, I am going to designate as a “Romantic Companionship.”

I’m calling it that because I’ve given some thought to that structure myself, having bumped into it a few times over the last decade. Either as an offer (or limit) on what a potential romantic partner wanted (or could provide), or with friends whose lives were structured this way, or in conversations with other friends who say this represents the perfect romantic structure for them.

At their core, as I have encountered them (anecdotally), the Romantic Companionship represents a committed, exclusive romantic partnership that stops short somewhere (depending on the couple) from fully intertwined lives. As with Nan and her romantic partner, they have an upfront, agreed-upon limit on their level of entanglement in each other’s lives: there is an agreed-upon limit on how much time they spend together, as well as their obligations to spend time with each other’s kids. (There may be more agreements, but with Nan and her love, that’s all we know about.) From what I’ve seen, Romantic Companionships tend to occur between people who have a high amount of self-awareness about both their needs and limits, as well as the confidence to share that with somebody they love (or could love), even in the face of potential rejection.

“Through trial and error,” one gentleman seeking a Romantic Companionship shared with me last fall “I now know what I can do. And what I can’t. And I don’t want to get into anything where I end up disappointing somebody I grow to love.”

In the instances where I have encountered them IRL, the people involved had full, highly structured lives that were robust with love, care and support from long-term friends and children and grandchildren. That was the case with Alexander, the potential romantic partner of mine that I quoted above. Picture somebody with an exciting career (at that point it was at a “semi-retired” stage), who lived near long-term friends (with whom there were regular poker or tennis (or golf) games) as well as children and grandchildren who he hosted often—for most summer week ends, as well as others and for nearly all holidays. Alexander’s life was chock full of meaningful relationships and endeavors. He needed intimacy and romance, but not a life entangled with somebody else’s. He didn’t want to take on all the responsibilities of another person’s life—involvement in that person’s kids’ lives, spending holidays anywhere but at his week end home with his own kids and grandkids. He felt, he said, that during these years after his high-charged career that involved global travel, he was enjoying all the relaxed time with his children. There’s more, but that’s the gist of things.

And—on the other end of the spectrum, I’ve encountered other ”Romantic Companionship” types in people who are truly wired to live solo. A close friend is like this. She gets energy from a life centered around being alone, controlling her living space (she always has music on and can’t stand listening to anyone else’s selections, for instance) and schedule 100% and choosing discrete periods of time to be around anyone, including a lover. Sharing space, having day-to-day (or hour-to-hour) responsibilities towards another makes her anxious.

In addition to the social and emotional independence that marks a Romantic Companionship, it goes without saying that those who are in these relationships, at least the ones I’ve encountered, are financially independent. They don’t need to live with anyone for financial reasons, and don’t see that the benefits of any kind shared division of labor around the operation of day-to-day life as compelling.

I think the greatest thing about being at this stage is that we are thinking and sharing honestly who we are and what works for us. I have not taken up a couple of offers for what I’m calling Romantic Companionships. Each was different, of course, and both came from very compelling men. In both cases, it was hard to walk away from these men (who I knew well and thought I could love), but I didn’t honestly believe that the structures offered were right for me. I’ve actually been working on an essay (or story, I haven’t decided which) on Romantic Companionships. Probably for our series TOPIX (more about that below). But then Nan came along in Glorious Broads, and she’s kind of fabulous and there was the ankle bracelet and everything and I wanted to share the joy of that with you right away.

TOPIX is a PrimeCrush series where we talk about what living and loving really looks like for grownups today—in our marriages, romances and friendships. When we’ve reached a stage where we realize that life is too short to worry about what other people think so we’re crafting lives that work for us. I recently wrote one On Separate Bedrooms, and how that configuration offered the perfect balance of romance and sleep for me and an ex.

The Crush Letter
The Crush Letter is a weekly newsletter from Dish Stanley curating articles & intelligence on everything love & connection - friendship, romance, self-love, sex. If you’d like to take a look at some of our best stories go to Read Us. Want the Dish?