Re: Can George Clooney and Stacy Keibler keep up a relationship if they don't see each other often?

by blubelle Thu 28 Feb 2013, 16:03

I guess I'm a romantic but if I were in a relationship I would want more time with my guy. She hadn't seen him in a while. He comes back for the Oscars and then leaves the day after for Germany. It's got to be hard on a relationship. Can you really remain "together" during these long absences?

by Dior Thu 28 Feb 2013, 16:15

No way.

Not, if you have FEELINGS.

by Joanna Thu 28 Feb 2013, 16:19

blubelle wrote:I guess I'm a romantic but if I were in a relationship I would want more time with my guy. She hadn't seen him in a while. He comes back for the Oscars and then leaves the day after for Germany. It's got to be hard on a relationship. Can you really remain "together" during these long absences?

The service men and women do it all the time...just a thought.

by Lighterside Thu 28 Feb 2013, 16:20

and/or...sometimes absence makes the heart grow fonder!

by Katiedot Thu 28 Feb 2013, 16:22

Yes, there are millions of couples who for work or other reasons have to be separate for long periods of time. Whether it works or not depends on the couple's willingness to make it work.

And thanks, Bluebelle, for the excellent question. I've made it a new thread because we were going off topic a bit.

by Dior Thu 28 Feb 2013, 16:36

Well, if my boyfriend would be absent for about 2 month, then came back for an event and disappeared again, I wouldn't take him for too serious and I wouldn't call this a relationship, but a joke.

Note: We are talking about the boyfriend who is supposed for leaving me alone on my birthday, at Christmas and on Valentine's Day.

I think, I would just tell him to go to hell.

by Bidbod Thu 28 Feb 2013, 16:46

I don't think you could keep up a relationship when he is away working long periods and she is in LA available to travel to see him and she doesn't and we all know that this is his choice. And that's how it appears to me. Different from armed forces serving abroad.

by cindigirl Thu 28 Feb 2013, 16:47

At the risk of sounding too simplistic I would say this is not a real relationship or romance but an arrangement for PR purposes.

You have to be a certain type of person to tolerate this. I don't think there are any real feelings or expectations other than friendship between the two of them, but simply a business arrangement that seems to be working out just fine.

by party animal - not! Thu 28 Feb 2013, 16:53

Hang on, folks. Is this George Clooney we're talking about? The man who can jump into a private plane, or helicopter from anywhere in the world and fly under the radar?

If he wants to meet his girlfriend at any time at any place he can. We have no idea how often they meet, or where. And that's just the way they want it

by Bidbod Thu 28 Feb 2013, 16:57

[quote="Bidbod"]I don't think you could keep up a relationship when he is away working long periods and she is in LA available to travel to see him and she doesn't and we all know that this is his choice. And that's how it appears to me. Different from armed forces serving abroad.[/quote]

Unless of course, she is happy with the red carpet and holiday arrangement which is emotionally unsatisfactory but is rewarding in tabloid coverage.

by Bidbod Thu 28 Feb 2013, 17:06

True, PAN and of course none of us know anything about their private relationship. Just conjecture Very Happy

by Katiedot Thu 28 Feb 2013, 17:15

party animal - not! wrote:If he wants to meet his girlfriend at any time at any place he can. We have no idea how often they meet, or where. And that's just the way they want it

Very true.

I remember it was the same at the end of George and Elisabetta's relationship too. They weren't seen out in public together for about the last six months. George was busy directing Ides (or was it Leatherheads? Can't remember) around the US and she was here, there and everywhere but often nowhere in particular.

We heard rumours she was around with him (remember 'golden shoe-gate'?!) but no pictures. The IMDb nutjob claimed that they'd split up because of the lack of sightings together.

So, what I'm burbling on about is that it's really hard to determine how often he sees his girlfriend because sometimes the best we get is rumours that so-and-so was spotted somewhere.

by Bidbod Thu 28 Feb 2013, 17:23

well, if he is flying her around the place in private jets for romantic hook ups and stolen moments whilst he works , it sounds wonderful.

by cindigirl Thu 28 Feb 2013, 17:26

Katiedot wrote:I remember it was the same at the end of George and Elisabetta's relationship too. They weren't seen out in public together for about the last six months. George was busy directing Ides (or was it Leatherheads? Can't remember) around the US and she was here, there and everywhere but often nowhere in particular.

It was when he was directing Ides in Cincinnati. I remember pictures of her and him in a bakery with his parents and a picture of her standing in what looked like a college doorway.

by Way2Old4Dis Thu 28 Feb 2013, 18:33

Listen, this might be the ideal relationship. If I liked parties and dressing up (I don't like either), I wouldn't mind not having to do the cleaning and other scutwork that comes with having a man around full time, while guaranteeing that whenever we did get together, it would be some fun event in some fabulous place at little or no expense to me. My bathroom would always be clean and I wouldn't have to pretend fart jokes are funny.

'Quality time' with most men is overrated. Even, I'd bet, with George.

by fava Thu 28 Feb 2013, 19:37

party animal - not! wrote:Hang on, folks. Is this George Clooney we're talking about? The man who can jump into a private plane, or helicopter from anywhere in the world and fly under the radar?

If he wants to meet his girlfriend at any time at any place he can. We have no idea how often they meet, or where. And that's just the way they want it

I don't think this is entirely true when he is starring and directing a movie. Usually the time and budgets are tight and I think George takes pride in not exceeding both. We all here about movie budgets being overrun because of illness, weather etc. I think a film like this will take up 18-20 hours a day for weeks, even months. And I agree we have no idea how often he meets the girlfriends. My money is on Stacy getting photographed and tweeting if/when she visits Germany, however.

He could certainly bring her there or take breaks if there are breaks in the schedule.

by it's me Thu 28 Feb 2013, 19:51

Dior wrote:

Note: We are talking about the boyfriend who is supposed for leaving me alone on my birthday, at Christmas and on Valentine's Day.

I think, I would just tell him to go to hell.

yes

by MM Thu 28 Feb 2013, 20:16

Hi IM. Come stai? Hello!

by madsky Thu 28 Feb 2013, 21:00

Dior wrote:Well, if my boyfriend would be absent for about 2 month, then came back for an event and disappeared again, I wouldn't take him for too serious and I wouldn't call this a relationship, but a joke.

Note: We are talking about the boyfriend who is supposed for leaving me alone on my birthday, at Christmas and on Valentine's Day.

I think, I would just tell him to go to hell.

Even if it was George Clooney and the event was the Golden Globes and Oscars? That is why I think the relationships don't last more that a few years. It is fun at the beginning, and then you think damn he's gorgeous, but I want a guy who'll be with me more.

I know there are a lot of people who have long distance relationships, but generally both people in the relationship work at it. I would think more of their relationship if George showed for her, and not just his events. Granted his events seem better, but still.

by Dior Thu 28 Feb 2013, 21:14

Yes, of course.

First of all, George Clooney is a human being and a man/boyfriend like all of us mortals and this is the way I would treat him, with all respect.
Probably he wouldn't like it.

Second, these events are related to his business, and within 2 months, I would like to have a date or two without any relation to his job but to him and me!

by lelacorb Thu 28 Feb 2013, 21:15

Katiedot wrote:
party animal - not! wrote:If he wants to meet his girlfriend at any time at any place he can. We have no idea how often they meet, or where. And that's just the way they want it
Very true.

I remember it was the same at the end of George and Elisabetta's relationship too. They weren't seen out in public together for about the last six months. George was busy directing Ides (or was it Leatherheads? Can't remember) around the US and she was here, there and everywhere but often nowhere in particular.

We heard rumours she was around with him (remember 'golden shoe-gate'?!) but no pictures. The IMDb nutjob claimed that they'd split up because of the lack of sightings together.

I'm not 100% agree with you, when George turned Americano in Sulmona she was there with him, when George was in Hawaii she was with him, when George was in Cincinnati she was with him and there are pictures, maybe has not been as long as he stayed but he reached London when he turned Gravity has taken her to ride a horse in London and there are items if there are no pictures but also when not working Stacy has never been where he worked, you know you explain why? Not even two months in Como were together in two months she was in New York, in Soagna and Greece while he went to London and in Corsica! Can you explain this?

So, what I'm burbling on about is that it's really hard to determine how often he sees his girlfriend because sometimes the best we get is rumours that so-and-so was spotted somewhere.

by The next mrs clooney Thu 28 Feb 2013, 21:30

There's a difference between having to be apart like with service mean and women and choosing to be apart. George and Stacy have the luxury of money and if they want to spend time together they can but they choose not to. A relationship where you choose not to spend a great deal if any time together is not really a relationship in the true sense. George chose to fly to LA for the weekend because of the oscars and not because of Stacy. I doubt he'll be jumping on any planes to see her anytime soon.

by ktsue2002 Thu 28 Feb 2013, 21:41

I would argue this is none of my business, but I think it all comes down to economics. George Clooney is rich, much richer than his girlfriends. If she were so wealthy, she could probably afford to go aroand and be with him more. I know I couldn't afford constantly going all the time, and Mr. Clooney probably doesn't say this in so many words, but he probably feels sorta used if he is paying the tab all the time. Of course, if he really did love her, they could make it work out, but I could see SK getting board really fast with him constantly being away. Also, have you noticed he never brings the girlfriend when he is being honored for his humanitarian work nor has a girl been with him to Sudan. I say the girlfriend who goes to Sudan with him WILL be the keeper. Maybe it will be SK.

by lelacorb Thu 28 Feb 2013, 21:42

[quote="The next mrs clooney"]There's a difference between having to be apart like with service mean and women and choosing to be apart. George and Stacy have the luxury of money and if they want to spend time together they can but they choose not to. A relationship where you choose not to spend a great deal if any time together is not really a relationship in the true sense. George chose to fly to LA for the weekend because of the oscars and not because of Stacy. I doubt he'll be jumping on any planes to see her anytime soon.
[/quote
She is not flying to London for him even if she wasn't still working, I think he did not want to, otherwise she would fly to London with the wax wings like Icarus!

by Joanna Thu 28 Feb 2013, 21:47

I don't think George would take any lady friend to Sudan as he'd consider it far too dangerous a place. There would be no point to it.
He goes there with his United Nations Peacekeeping hat on.

by madsky Thu 28 Feb 2013, 21:49

The next mrs clooney wrote:There's a difference between having to be apart like with service mean and women and choosing to be apart. George and Stacy have the luxury of money and if they want to spend time together they can but they choose not to. A relationship where you choose not to spend a great deal if any time together is not really a relationship in the true sense. George chose to fly to LA for the weekend because of the oscars and not because of Stacy. I doubt he'll be jumping on any planes to see her anytime soon.

Good point!!! It is so easy to just compare their lives to my normal life, but alas it is not.

Whether you have the resources or not you still have to put effort into keeping a relationship work long distance, and George really doesn't look like he is putting too much into it. I know we don't see everything he does, but I am with you doubt we will see him jump a plane for her anytime soon.

by theminis Thu 28 Feb 2013, 21:57

I think that George is excellent at compartmentalising, there is work time, and there is play time. Perhaps he gets so absorbed in the project he is doing that he wishes to concentrate everything on that, until he has a long enough break to catch up with her and others he hasn't seen. All speculation I know. The trick is to be with someone who is equally busy, equally invested elsewhere so that there is not someone sitting at home pining for their partner. Perhaps this works for them both as she has plenty of other interests to occupy her when he is away and vice/versa.

by madsky Thu 28 Feb 2013, 21:57

Dior wrote:Yes, of course.

First of all, George Clooney is a human being and a man/boyfriend like all of us mortals and this is the way I would treat him, with all respect.
Probably he wouldn't like it.

Second, these events are related to his business, and within 2 months, I would like to have a date or two without any relation to his job but to him and me!

Really only 2 months. You might be too high maintenance for the Cloonster. LOL I would give him at least a year!!!

by MM Thu 28 Feb 2013, 22:01

Being a Cloonette is a very demanding job. You need to be in the spotlight all the time, and watch what so say and do in public constantly.

by cindigirl Thu 28 Feb 2013, 22:07

theminis wrote:The trick is to be with someone who is equally busy, equally invested elsewhere so that there is not someone sitting at home pining for their partner. Perhaps this works for them both as she has plenty of other interests to occupy her when he is away and vice/versa.

Theminis - Totally agree - I think this is the primary reason he chose SK, because she does seem to keep herself busy with her own interests - Both Elisabetta and Sarah Larson seemed to depend on him a lot. Eli because of her emotions - I think she made the mistake of falling in love with him and needed his support. And Sarah, well, she seemed to stay home a lot and wait for him. Make no mistake, this Stacy is a tough chick!

by Dior Thu 28 Feb 2013, 22:12

And why do you need to be in the spotlight all the time?

Would he drag you along the red carpet??

I would suggest to all people, who need to watch what they do and say in public: Go and work at a Kindergarden for a month or two, there you can learn it:)

by lelacorb Thu 28 Feb 2013, 22:14

cindigirl wrote:
theminis wrote:The trick is to be with someone who is equally busy, equally invested elsewhere so that there is not someone sitting at home pining for their partner. Perhaps this works for them both as she has plenty of other interests to occupy her when he is away and vice/versa.

Theminis - Totally agree - I think this is the primary reason he chose SK, because she does seem to keep herself busy with her own interests - Both Elisabetta and Sarah Larson seemed to depend on him a lot. Eli because of her emotions - I think she made the mistake of falling in love with him and needed his support. And Sarah, well, she seemed to stay home a lot and wait for him. Make no mistake, this Stacy is a tough chick!

so what is the point of this relationship?

by LornaDoone Thu 28 Feb 2013, 22:21

My parents were together for 40 years (second marriage for both) and my dad traveled with his job where he was gone for months at at time - 6 months or more sometimes.

When they were apart my mom kept herself busy with her interests and my dad with his. But they wrote to each other almost daily.

When he came back it was like a great honeymoon for them and they'd go off on trips to be alone.

It all depends on the people and their personalities. I think they make it work and it won't be an issue. Stacy has her own interests and seems to be able to fend for herself.

She probably is the perfect gal for him - but I still don't see him marrying her. Again, because that's how he keeps control of the situation.

by Mazy Thu 28 Feb 2013, 22:39

I think keeping the relationship going depends on the depth of the caring on each person’s part. It would not be fun but I believe that if two people really are in a committed relationship they make it work because they choose to. The alterative of ending it not being what either wants. I am from the school that work comes first because that is your livelihood and your career. You do not jeopardize either because they go hand in hand.

by party animal - not! Thu 28 Feb 2013, 22:40

I think you're right, Theminis. I think she's very like him. Remember this is the girl who joked at PSFF that George locked her up and never let her out of the house, and he thought that was hilarious, and said she was absolutely right, he never did.

She also knows more than most girlfriends what the Hollywood deal is, and how he works. He likes talking to her at length and they've been around each other for a while. The fact they get on 'pretty well' (her red carpet words) must help, and this is the lady he wants with him when the President calls, plays basketball, and is in his advert.

Not by accident, I suspect. In a way, maybe Celine Balitran, Lisa Snowdon and Elisabetta Canalis were 'adventures' for him. Certainly not 'local' girls.

by it's me Thu 28 Feb 2013, 23:04

ciao MM
I'm fine
you?

now, about G

I hope he had and will again have experiences
about true love I love you

feelings
in his life

by blubelle Fri 01 Mar 2013, 00:52

I agree with all of you who said that a committed relationship is different from a casual one and can withstand time apart. I can also identify with feeling that a career and self actualization is worth pursuing. But I just don't understand how a romantic friendship can withstand long separations without there being some sort of understanding. For me romance is an emotional connection and has to be nurtured. I'm not necessarily talking about G and S - as many have pointed out we don't know what the reality is. I guess I'm just not "the girlfriend of" material.

by Katiedot Fri 01 Mar 2013, 03:47

I think it depends on what you mean by romance.

I know from my own life that it's possible to date a man who you like, get on well with, who makes you laugh, makes you happy but who you don't love, although you may be very fond of him. In short, a man who's good for you right now even though you know it won't be forever. And of course he feels the same way about you.

That's not a bad relationship, it's just not love.

That kind of relationship - which is as much friendship as anything else - can withstand long breaks.

by OofOof Fri 01 Mar 2013, 04:24

I think it's very possible to be in a "relationship" and be apart for lengthy periods. But it only works if both parties are committed, as many above have suggested. And, based on what I've seen thus far, she seems more committed than he is. She goes to all his events, work related and private. We've never seen him go to any of her red carpet events.

I wonder if it's lonely for Stacy, as many friends as she seems to have and as much as she seems able to entertain herself. If you look at photos of her with her previous boyfriend, he went to all the red carpet events she did. At all the more recent appearances, many of her friends--Jenna Dewan or the model who's involved with John Legend--are always with their significant others. And they seem to be moving forward with their lives while hers is pretty much the same. It makes me sad.

by very vera Fri 01 Mar 2013, 04:26

She is moving forward in a sense. she is moving forward with her career and maybe thats what she wants. maybe she would rather focus on work instead of kids.

Like me ...

by OofOof Fri 01 Mar 2013, 04:29

True. I wasn't talking about moving ahead as far as marriage or kids, I just mean that when I see her at the various clubs or red carpets she attends on her own and then you see photos of other women attending the same event, most with their significant others, I wonder if she feels a bit lonely.

by Dakota Bleu Fri 01 Mar 2013, 04:30

Stacy's wrestling past may actually help with the distance. When she was wrestling she was on the road between 200-250 days a year, so she is used to distance relationships. Plus in this day and age with skype and facetime anythings possible. If they are having fun, more power to them.

by OofOof Fri 01 Mar 2013, 04:31

Skyping or Facetiming George would most definitely not be as satisfying as having his face in yours for real!

by theminis Fri 01 Mar 2013, 04:35

Yep that's true, facetime/Skype not satisfying enough for me either, but then Ive always been an all or nothing girl -

by OofOof Fri 01 Mar 2013, 04:38

Me as well Minis! I have lots of friends I facetime or skype and it's definitely not the same as being with them. Maintaining a relationship via Skype would be almost more frustrating than just talking on the phone to him! You'd see him but couldn't touch the bugger!

by theminis Fri 01 Mar 2013, 06:42

Yep that's exactly right - way too frustrating not being able to touch him whenever I wanted too, which Im sure would be the majority of the time...

by Dior Fri 01 Mar 2013, 09:46

Actually this question is answering itself, because they do.

Since I had this internet friend on skype for a few years, I just hate skype.

by blubelle Fri 01 Mar 2013, 16:55

O.K.- what about the physical aspect. I know different rules apply for each relationship. For me, in a committed relationship I would not be able to tolerate cheating. If its a friendship with benefits then I guess it's open for discussion and time and distance aren't an issue. I am obviously more old fashioned. If it is romantic, for me that involves emotions and I'm not willing to share.

by OofOof Fri 01 Mar 2013, 18:03

I feel the same way you do Blu but I have a few girl friends who are more than happy with casual, friends with benefits relationships. They don't want the emotional aspect of a relationship--claim it's too messy in their experience. Stacy could very well be someone who likes sex for sex, doesn't need what we might consider a relationship and is fine hanging out with friends and then hooking up with George every mow and then. If that's the case, then it's likely they aren't exclusive. Not for me, but if both parties agree, more power to them!

by Katiedot Sat 02 Mar 2013, 03:07

I think that's something for the couple to decide.

I've no idea what agreement George and Stacy have come to (obviously!). My guess is that there's a certain amount of freedom allowed, as long as both are discreet.

I'm assuming the agreement cuts both ways because I'd hate to think of George as being the kind of man who thinks he can sleep around but his other half can't.

by Sponsored content