Mapping Love’s Migration: Survey Reveals Popular & Unpopular Cities

You’re head-over-heels in love, and the thrill of a long-distance romance has been both sweet and exhilarating. But as time goes by, the prospect of uniting with your beloved in the same ZIP code becomes not just a dream, but a necessity. However, does the allure of your significant other‘s city sway your decision in making the leap? What if love calls from the sun-kissed beaches of Miami or the bustling streets of New York City? Would the affection be as strong to draw you to McDowell County, West Virginia, a place fighting valiantly against economic setbacks, or to Gary, Indiana, a city trying to rise again from its industrial past?

Through a comprehensive survey of 3,000 people in long-distance relationships, our team wanted to find out whether the city in which their partner resides is a factor when deciding whether to move.

We created a ranking of cities considered the most and least appealing if moving for love, with some very interesting results.

Created by DatingAdvice.com • Viewlarger version

On the flip side, for every city that stirs the heart, there are those that, despite their charm, don’t quite capture the imagination of lovers. These cities, though brimming with their own unique allure, seem to lack the romantic luster that compels a leap of love. The five least appealing to move for love are:

#246 Lancaster, California

Lancaster might present a challenging proposition for those contemplating a move for love. Known for its desert climate and sparse landscape, it’s a city that often appeals to those with a taste for solitude and the stark beauty of the Mojave Desert. The wide-open spaces might make for an introspective solo journey, but as a backdrop for romance? Lancaster’s narrative is more about soul-searching solitude than the intertwining of hearts.

#247 Oxnard, California

Oxnard’s coastal location might suggest a seaside paradise, but its industrial character often overshadows the beachy appeal. With a working harbor and stretches of agricultural fields, it may not offer the quintessential Californian “beach town” vibe that lovebirds might crave. For those daydreaming of California love, Oxnard’s pragmatic pulse might just miss a beat.

#248 Palmdale, California

Situated in the Antelope Valley, Palmdale is a city with a small-town feel and a slow pace of life. This might not resonate with those used to the energy of a metropolis. It’s a slice of Americana that offers clear skies and clearer minds, albeit a tad too tranquil for the amorous adventurer. For the lovers seeking a life punctuated by art galleries, late-night eateries, and spontaneous socializing, Palmdale’s peaceful pace might not quite sync up with the rhythm of romance.

#249 Roseville, California

Roseville’s charm is undeniable. Its tree-lined streets tell tales of quiet lives and neighborly bonds. But through the lens of love? It’s a place where passion might pivot more toward picket fences than pulsating nightclubs. The suburbia’s siren song beckons those ready to settle rather than those looking to be swept off their feet by urban excitement and the lure of a 24/7 lifestyle.

#250 St. Paul, Minnesota

There’s a stoic grace to St. Paul with its storied buildings and the gentle flow of the Mississippi. While it’s a haven for history buffs and those who find love in hushed, snowy evenings, St. Paul’s chilly embrace and leisurely tempo aren’t for everyone. If your love story craves chapters filled with energy and warmth, you might just find St. Paul’s cool demeanor a bit too literal.

Let’s delve deeper into people’s opinions on moving for love. 

The survey queried respondents who had moved to be with their partners and probed into the significant concessions they made. A striking 57% identified parting with family as the most substantial sacrifice, while 18% pointed to a shift in lifestyle as a primary concern. This encompasses forging new friendships, seeking new gyms to join, and discovering new favorite drinking hangouts. An additional 15% of respondents felt that leaving behind friends was the hardest part, and 10% cited the job hunt as a formidable challenge.

Regarding couples who closed the gap from long-distance to cohabitation, about 23% conceded that there were heated arguments over who should relocate. Nonetheless, most couples reported that the move fortified their bond, though 16% admitted it introduced new hurdles. Eleven percent observed that their relationships terminated post-relocation.

Finally, we must recognize that long-distance relationships cannot be sustained indefinitely and must eventually transition to being close-distance to survive. Respondents were quizzed about the duration they believe a long-distance relationship can endure before the couple must choose to cohabitate or end the relationship. The collective average from the responses indicated that the maximum sustainable period for a long-distance relationship is one year and 11 months.

Our survey aimed to uncover the practical considerations people make when deciding to move for love. The results show that while some cities have a strong romantic appeal, factors like cost of living, job opportunities, and quality of life are also significant. No matter how much one may love their partner, the decision to relocate involves a complex evaluation of the partner’s city and what it has to offer.