In my view, the only viable relationship is a part-time, separate-houses relationship.

So a man starts a new relationship. They see each other (say) 2-3 times a week. The attraction is strong, arguments are non-existent, and sex is great, and then you leave until next time. Perfect. The problem comes when the man starts thinking about living together. The man thinks that the current attraction level will hold up (sex on tap!), and that will not happen. The attraction will lessen, the arguments will start, the sex will become routine and will lessen.

The only way to maintain the attraction is to make the time together a scarce commodity. Scarcity is an economic term and means that the scarcer a resource, the more valuable it is. But it's human nature to want more but, in relationships, less IS more. It's like drinking booze; you're feeling good so you drink more, feel great, drink some more because you want to feel even better and then you cross the line and go downhill.

My partner stays with me 2-3 days a week and wants to move in, and I was thinking about this point a couple of nights ago. We had very good sex and a really good night and I knew that this wouldn't happen if she moved in. It would slowly decay to the point where none of the attraction would be there and then bad shit will happen. So I have to always keep my partner on the edge, not knowing what is happening and unsure of the whole relationship with me. This is the only way that men can control the relationship. If the relationship goes full-time, then the woman will take control.

So my point is: things are only valuable if they are scarce.