posted
Recently, two well-loved Hatrackers announced that they're getting married in a matter of days. This is not the first such announcement we've seen -- and, on the same thread, many other currently-married Hatrackers revealed that they married their spouses within weeks or months of meeting them for the first time. In my anecdotal experience, this is fairly unusual -- at least in the frequency we see on this board.
So why is it so common on Hatrack? Is it our comfort level with long-distance and/or 'Net relationships? Are we just more -- or less -- perceptive people? And since a fair number of those marriages have lasted longer than one might normally expect, are we just that much more committed to making marriages "work?"
It's one of those sociological puzzles that always fascinates me about this forum.
posted
Dunno. I only know that I've always been odd, and my entire life has always been odd, so it wasn't a big surprise to me that my marriage would be odd.
I can say, though, that as far as me goes, I've always been unusually self-aware. Add to that my faith in God and faith in receiving answers to prayers. So when it all happened to me and Fahim, and we were both fasting and praying about getting married, we both received the same answer, and once the answer was received, neither of us saw any point in delaying things.
Does that tell you anything?
Posts: 8355 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hm. Here in France we always take our time to wed, but that's because most people live together before they marry. I went to live at Vinnie's place about five days after our first kiss, we were already talking about marriage and babies, and I was (and still am ! ) sure he was the man of my life. When I went to his place with my toothbrush and my pajamas, he hadn't met anyone from my family, and my father was the only one knowing we were in love. I was 19. EDIT : I realized that my post implied more than what really happenned... I went to live with Vinnie, we slept in the same bed but we didn't make anything really... Hum... Before a few time. I was a virgin and these things are better done when not in a hurry. (do I make myself clear ?)
[ January 02, 2005, 05:53 PM: Message edited by: Anna ]
Posts: 3526 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
Anna, you are so sweet. I am so coming to visit you one of these days.
[/random Anna worship]
Maybe that is also something to do with the religous aspect - people who are less likely to live with each other before marriage are more likely to marry sooner?
I've been living with Tony for 2 years now. I'm not sure if I would have married him 2 years ago, but certainly if that was the only way I could have lived with him it would have been a very tempting prospect.
Posts: 4393 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
When it goes against a person's religious beliefs to have sex outside the bounds of marriage, then yes, of course they're more likely to marry earlier and quicker. What else to do when the hormones are screaming?
Posts: 8355 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I guess we would have married in this case, Quid. Only neither of us is that attached to religion (I am persuaded that God knew we weren't just having fun together but took a big commitment) and I wanted to be done with my studies before I get married.
Posts: 3526 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
Personally, Tom -- I think it is because the IQ level of the average Hatracker is higher than the normal population. That said, these people have a pretty clear idea of their goals, and go into it with a more of an 'eyes wide open' approach, and a more philosophical viewpoint, than perhaps the average Joe Blow.
my two cents, Farmgirl
Posts: 9538 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
That is true, as far as it goes, Farmgirl, but there is a problem with uit. Some of the most miserable marriages I have seen ahve been between two very inteligent people, so intelligence isn't always something that makes a marriage work smoothly.
Of course it IS to be preferred to it's opposite, utter stupidity.
posted
I think the concept of a guy who doesn't really want to get married and only gets trapped by a clever woman (that we see in American movies) doesn't apply as much to the Hatrack population. Though my husband isn't on Hatrack. He took a dip one time and ran directly into John.
I just wasn't concerned with the rules of thumb, like that an engagement should be at least four months but no more than six (this six month max is an LDS tradition due to the screaming hormones).
The rest of my family: Sister 1- one engagement cut from 5 months to 3- effectively choosing to get married suddenly. That marriage didn't last. The man involved, while intelligent and an OSC fan, had organic impulsivity problems. He was actually the reason I was leary of OSC fans for a while. Her second courtship was 8 months total.
Brother 2- engaged but married on notice of a week due to fiancee's housing arrangement. I suspect this is often a factor, at least it has been in my family. It played a role in Sister 1's first marriage.
Sister 3- first marriage of the sort I outline above. The reluctant groom. They were both plenty intelligent. But both very neurotic. Marriage 2 was a classic elope in Vegas after knowing each other 10 days. I think for this sister, going with the gut worked better.
I'll pause here to note that maybe for a very intelligent person, when your gut does speak, you listen?
This brings us to me. One month of "relationship" and 8 days of engagement. I've realized just this week that I felt about my husband a way I've never felt about anyone. It's always been there, I just never appreciated it until now. I'm glad I trusted that feeling when we got married, because I have a lot of addictive tendencies and I could have wound up with someone bad for me, like most of the women in my family.
Next brother is Wraithsword, and he's still single, ladies!
Sister 6 just married with a weeks notice. I guess they were discretely engaged for four months prior.
Sister 7 wanted to marry suddenly, but was prevailed upon to wait two more months mainly by her fiance's parents. Are fiancee and fiance different?
Sister 8 had the longest engagement, but because it was long distance they probably only spent an average amount of time together before getting married.
Baby brother hasn't gotten married either. But he did join the Army kind of suddenly. He went enlisted despite everyone trying to persuade him to learn more about being an officer. I think it's probably a similar thing to elopement, born from a similar ideal impulse. And the wiser/betters say "It's not what you're doing that scares me, it's how you're going about it."
Posts: 666 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
People get married quicker because they are smarter. Yeah, I don't know.
I think there are other variables. If we generated a list of all of the hatrackers who married either through the net or through weeks long engagements, I think we'd find other similar variables.
posted
I think it depends on both the people and oftentimes the amount of time involved. The longer you know someone, the more you know them in my opinion. And sometimes, if you don't know someone long enough, you don't find out their "quirks" till after you're heavily involved.
My sister did this. She met a guy and married him within a few months. His "quirk" was beating her up. Turned out he had a terrible temper.
That's not to say short engagements are bad or anything. Just an extreme example of why sometimes it's nice to know someone for a bit longer.
posted
I think it's a phenomenon of confession. We're talking about having short engagements, so everyone with a story of having been engaged a short period of time comes out of the woodwork. Those of us with longer engagements (and yet, I say without any humility whatsoever, endowed with fairly high IQ's) stay out of the discussion because it isn't relevent.
Posts: 5948 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The hypothesis about not having sex outside of marriage for religious reasons speeding things up is pretty persuasive.
Posts: 7600 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wonder if it works in reverse. I never tried, when I was single, to get someone into bed by saying, "Look, if you don't sleep with me now, I'm going to have to marry you. And we both know how that would work out." Anyone who wants to steal that line can, provided they let me know how it worked for 'em. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
It does seem to be a religious thing, don't it? I mean, both the overwhelming desire to finally shag and the fact that, without fail, the couple is confident that this is God's will. Or that God is Ok with it, or something like that. Does anyone know atheists or agnostics who have engagements that last only a matter of weeks? I can't think of any off hand in my limited circle of friends.
Posts: 3243 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Shortest engagement I know of: 2 days, my great grandparents. He was a Civil War veteran and he married his best friend's sister. They stayed married, though it was also a different culture and time.
Posts: 11265 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
I'm afraid I can't do much better than this, myself.
For what it's worth, neither of us is particularly religious, so that wasn't our motivating factor.
We did feel like we crammed as much interaction in a few months as most people do in a longer period of time, because we worked together and thus saw each other every day (another relationship "rule" we broke), but maybe that was just the self-delusion of the infatuated--everybody probably feels that the intensity or the frequency or quality or whatever of their interaction with their beloved is greater than that experienced by "normal" people.
Posts: 1001 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, I guess I have to argue against my own previous post above.
I consider myself smart for choosing to NOT get married Been there, done that, failed. Have no desire to do the 24/7 thing again...
jeniwren is the one right-on. The seeming "rash" short engagements is because that was the topic of conversation. If we had started a thread about long engagements/relationships, we would probably have an equal number there...
posted
My wife and I are both religious and we waited for 4 years before we got married. She went to school 700 miles away. We figured if we could survive the seperation, we were destined to be married. We were also both virgins when we got married.
We will be at 17 years this year. 2 kids. If it is true love it will wait. I hate to hear a girl/woman say "If I don't do it now I might loose him." If that is your thought you are not ready to get married.
quote:"If I don't do it now I might loose him." If that is your thought you are not ready to get married.
You're absolutely right. Msquared, I hope you didn't think that was what I meant by the hormones raging comment. It isn't.
When people fall in love, it's only natural that there's a desire to do more than just kiss and hold hands. And the longer you're around each other, the stronger it tends to get. And when you know you want to marry each other, it tends to get stronger still.
If those people do not want to break the laws of chastity, they either need to get married, or have very strong will power. Evidently, you and your wife had very strong will power. Good for you. Not everyone is made that way, and isn't it better to recognize that and avoid chastity problems?
Posts: 8355 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
No becuase sex in marriage has commitment problems. What if one person is gone for weeks or months at a time? What does the other do? What if one partner has an illness and can never have sex again? All of these things need to be thought through. I think we let people get away with not trying to have will power. We make it easy for them. We are not animals. We do not have to breed just because the odors are right and our bodies are telling us to go ahead. A dog in heat does that.
Too many people confuse love with lust. I do not believe in love at first site. I DO believe in lust at first site. I KNOW that happens. It has happened to me many a time. Still does. But I do not act on it.
I truly think that no one should get married or live together or have sex until they have been dating for at least a year. Too many women fall some guy, just to be close to someone, and he ends up beating her or whatever. By then she is too emotionally involved to do the smart thing and get out. You need to see someone in good moods and bad. Under stress, with their family, with their friends, at work. See how they treat a dog when they think no one is watching. See how they deal with kids. See how they deal with someone with disabilites. You can not do this with a 2 month engagement.
quote:If those people do not want to break the laws of chastity, they either need to get married, or have very strong will power.
I'm surprised you'd say this, actually. The young men and women I've met who succeeded at waiting until marriage attribute their success to drawing on God's strength. One of the coolest couples I've met were nearly 30 when they married, both of them virgins -- and both of them are good-looking, vivacious people, so it's not like they didn't have opportunity. They just both believed in reserving sex until marriage, and they didn't meet the "right one" until they were in their late 20's. They openly say it was not at all easy, and that they didn't have strength within themselves to do it, but believe that God helped them. Paul's "My strength is sufficient for thee." Posts: 5948 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
"They openly say it was not at all easy, and that they didn't have strength within themselves to do it, but believe that God helped them."
I think it's a shame that they sell themselves short in that way. I know many young people who devoted themselves to chastity and yet failed in that goal. I'd rather believe that they were simply not as strong-willed than believe that God just decided not to help them.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I knew that I was going to marry Andrew after our second date, but I didn't want to get married right away. We dated for a year and were engaged for a year. It was important to me to finish college before getting married.
Year-long engagements are very common where I grew up (rural Georgia). It takes a year to plan a wedding. Also, etiquette dictates that a year-long engagement is preferable if the bride and/or groom are under 25. The exceptions to this were the very short engagements when the bride was in a family way.
Posts: 3037 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tom, someone who believes that God gives them strength in difficult times will see any failure as their own, not God's. Personally, I'd ask those who failed if they stayed out of situations where failure was a distinct risk. I would call it mocking the strength of God to put myself into a difficult situation *on purpose* just to see if God would help me out of it.
Posts: 5948 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: I would call it mocking the strength of God to put myself into a difficult situation *on purpose* just to see if God would help me out of it.
I think it's safe to say that none of the good Christian girls I know who lost their virginity young did so because they wanted to test God. On the other hand, I sincerely doubt that any of them would say that God helped them lose their virginity, either.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm somewhat insulted by the idea that chaste people who get married quickly just want to get laid.
Having been in the religious, chaste before marriage dating scene, the deciding factor to get married (at least with me and those I knew) was hardly because we were so horny we couldn't stand it. I will admit to a relatively short courtship, being about 3 months, and the entire period between meeting and marriage being about 6 months.
I saw many characteristics that impressed me a great deal that had very little to do with how good he would be in bed. He was a very cautious man, and yet playful. He was responsible: he worked in a job that was somewhat flexible, yet never left it undone to come to me and never skipped work to be with me, though he easily could have done. But he also never kept himself at work overlong. He was intellegent. When he percieved something missing in his life, he changed himself. He grew up without religion, but knew the inspiration of God when it came on him. He took any promise or vow he made very seriously. These were all qualities I saw before I decided to marry him, and they told me he was good husband material.
All these observations have borne themselves out. He never quit a job even when it was horrible before he had another job, and he has gravitated towards a job without deadlines so that he can be home at regular hours. There have been a couple of jobs he wouldn't take because he knew how the people were worked there. He also eschews management because of a tendancy to more hours and being over people while not doing what he actually enjoys doing: programming. His family is most important to him, and his cautious nature has imbedded itself in his protectiveness of us. He is cautious with money, yet only as a means to living and enjoying life without the stress of poor finances.
We admitted our faults to each other. Infatuation blinded us, of course, to actually having to deal with them, but commitment and love have seen us through.
I hope that is how a lot of fast courtships have happened, and how the marriages have turned out.
I was involved in another fast courtship that failed because despite fantastic first impressions, faults came up in the man. My first reaction was to 'rescue' him for his good qualities. But within a few weeks it dawned on me that rather than me rescuing him, I would be always hurt and the possibility that he could cause harm to any children we had made this man a very poor choice in mate, and I quickly removed myself from the situation.
My point is that perhaps people are perceptive enough to see what they want. And then, why wait?
The party and hoopla around the wedding that requires so much planning is not as important as the marriage itself to many religious people. I am stunned when I hear of people spending ten thousand dollars on such an event. If the event itself is important to people, it takes a much longer time to plan and save for. To hold off marrying someone because the event isn't the fairytale or the social showing off they want seems to me to point to different priorities than actually having a good marriage. I admit, the two aren't mutually exclusive, but it sets off a bit of warning to me, at least.
That would make an interesting study, though. How does the amount of money and time spent on a wedding and reception affect the quality of the marriage?
Of course, there are also people who hold off on marriage until school is over, or until they have a better job, or in the case of long distance relationships, until they have lived near each other long enough to get to know one another better and see if what they percieved through writing and calls was who the person really was.
There are many ways to meet and court your spouse, and just because a courtship is fast doesn't mean it is based on infatuation and hormones.
Posts: 3495 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
In my opinion (and this is ONLY an opinion, I'm not even dating anyone, so I don't exactly have a lot of life experience here), the time to get to know someone is while you're dating them, not once your engaged to them. If you're engaged, it seems to me that you should already know them pretty well. In which case, why bother waiting to get married? Have enough time to plan a wedding suffienctly, and then do it. Why wait?
I had a roommate last year with quite the opposite view. She was engaged for over a year and once said that that way she had enough time to find out if there was anything 'wrong' with him. They seem to now be happily married, but living with her and her raging hormones (maybe not everyone has this problem, but these two sure did) was a total nightmare. She also turned into a huge flake as soon as she got engaged. Not good, not good.
Posts: 119 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lisha, I think it depends. I got engaged to my husband not knowing for sure that I wanted to marry him, but it was for a very specific purpose. We'd been dating for 9 weeks when I moved 1500 miles away to take my dream job. We'd only been dating 3 weeks when I was offered the job. A month after I moved, we got engaged -- this was, in large part to make it very clear between ourselves and everyone else that we were serious about our relationship, not to indicate that we were ready to step up to the altar. It was a good choice. My new female co-workers all started throwing their single male friends at me once I arrived, and wouldn't hear that I had a boyfriend until the ring was on my finger.
I think that interum-commitment was helpful for our circumstances. I would have broken the engagement if I thought marriage would have been a mistake.
Posts: 5948 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Too many people confuse love with lust. I do not believe in love at first site. I DO believe in lust at first site. I KNOW that happens. It has happened to me many a time. Still does. But I do not act on it.
I think this is the most sensible sound bite of the entire thread. People really like to toss 'love' around, and I think it diminishes the power of the word. Say you meet someone and are attracted to them, you date for a while and you've definitely fallen for them... this does not mean you are in capital L-O-V-E love. But what happens sometimes, particularly when a religious upbringing is involved, is that 'love' is the only socially correct label that can be applied to an attraction. And the socially correct response to falling in love is to get married. So they do.
There's lust, there's infatuation, and there are other kinds of attraction and closeness that are not the same thing as love but often get mislabeled as such. Before you start chucking the word 'love' around, spend some time thinking (not praying) about how you feel and whether or not any of the other possible descriptive terms fit your feelings better.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I guess that is a difference of how we view engagement, jeni. For me, engagement is a commitment to get married. It is such a commitment that it involves financial planning, child planning, and pretty much everything that is in a marriage but sharing a household and having sex. It is saying, not "I think I might like to marry you, lets see how this works out", but "I am going to marry you. What steps do we need to take to do this?"
For me, this is why there was a commitment to exclusively date. The couple makes it clear to everyone that this is the only person they intend to date. That is a level below actual engagement. If one feels the need, there is also the 'promise ring' type of commitment in which you promise each other that when the time is right you'll get engaged.
posted
That's awesome Amka, My brother recently got married. It was rather fast too, but they genuinely fit together well. I am glad that people can find each other, and hopefully the find who they are really looking for is all I hope for people. I do not know how my brother and his wife are alone, but from what I see of them together, and how they relate to one another, I can see that there is love, that is deeper than what I normally see in people.
I cannot be sure of this. However I hope they can trust who they have chosen, and hope they can be happy.
For me, I have not yet began to understand myself nearly enough to know what I should be looking for, but what I look for now is if I can be comfortable being me around the woman. I have been through some things in my life that make it harder for me to trust anyone and I hope one of these days I can change that.
I am happy for those who do try.
Posts: 1132 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
It might be a message board thing. The other board I am a member of (Terry Goodkind's board) has had at least a half a dozen marriages between members since I started there (and one divorce). I think people just get to know eachother through the internet...and then once they meet they quickly decide to stay together.
Posts: 1901 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:The exceptions to this were the very short engagements when the bride was in a family way.
This was asked of me by my future mother in law. My reply was "Well, if I am pregnant, it's the right time of year for it."
Intended and soon to be father in law laughed uproariously.
...
Tom, I just wanted to say, the well-love comment made me all squishy inside.
...
And for us, it isn't being so horny we just can't stand it any longer. It's a...*thinks* so many different factors and plans and feelings that it just makes sense, to us, and to most of the people around us. Hell, MY family is being rational about it, a rarity. We aren't heading into this thinking it'll be all easy-peasy. We know crap will happen. We know we'll argue. We know I'll get into a mood, or he'll get into a mood (not THAT mood) and be grumpy and tired or what have you. We expect that. But we also expect the good stuff, too, and are willing to work our way through whatever happens to keep this relationship and this new life we're about to start.
This is the guy who locked us out of my car for two hours in podunk New Hampshire and made it out alive. We've definitely got that something.
Posts: 14745 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's not really the short engagements that worry me, it's the time spent with the person before the engagement. An engagement implies marriage, and marriage is (Well, to today's standards I suppose was) a life long commitment, some people who get engaged in about a month of knowing a person is just... odd to me... How do they know for sure on that person? Some might say a prime time to learn all of the other things about the person is during the engagement. My personal belief is to talk seriously about becoming engaged before you do it. I don't really understand all of those stories I see of people hoping thier love interest will... suddenly pop the question. It should be discussed throughly among the two before it actually happens. Ok, now I'd just start rambling if I don't stop, so onwards!
Perhaps someone can answer this, what's the point of kissing in general? I can understand wanting to be in a close proximity to someone you care for or love... but kissing specifically, what's the point? Posts: 1831 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: My point is that perhaps people are perceptive enough to see what they want. And then, why wait?
I think most people are completely fake when they are first dating another person. Putting the best foot forward and all that. So, I would seriously disagree that anyone can really see how a person generally 'is' after only knowing them by dating them for a combined total of some hours.
Also, I think most young people (I would say about 25 and below) don't know themselves ,really, because they don't know the general way they will change over time. They haven't yet understood the reality of who they are versus their idealized vision of themselves, much less come to accept themselves for who they *are* to be honest. So, they lie to themselves and others around them, not because the want to, but because they often aren't operating from who they really are.
I don't doubt that there are many marriages that work for people that don't really know each other before they got married. Obviously, from the responses on Nate 'n' Mack's thread and this thread, there are. However, it's also pretty clear that people who marry in haste are just begging to be miserable down the road. 'Your lover's hyena-like laugh does not get better over time.'
I would also like to point out that there is a significant cultural difference between people of the book and the rest of us poor, pathetic sinners who have to find our own way. So, while y'all can hook up with a guy at church and have a reasonable idea of his ideals and beliefs before you date him, the rest of us kind of have to muddle through it and actually get to know the person.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: Perhaps someone can answer this, what's the point of kissing in general? I can understand wanting to be in a close proximity to someone you care for or love... but kissing specifically, what's the point?
What do the people of your planet do to show affection?
Good grief. What a question.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: Also, I think most young people (I would say about 25 and below) don't know themselves ,really, because they don't know the general way they will change over time.
If the two are willing to make a reall commitment, then this becomes one of the best reasons to marry young, IMO.
Will you continue to change over time? Yes. If you are married, then the two of you can change together, and grow together and closer.
In many ways it would be harder for me to marry now than it was when I was 23. I "know" who I am too much, and am too set in those ways.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
When I was talking about screaming hormones, I did not in any way mean to imply that that is the ONLY reason people get married quickly, nor that it is necessarily a factor in all or many or most marriages. I do think it can be a factor. A factor. Not THE factor. If I wasn't clear enough earlier, then I apologize. I typed those posts at 2 or 4 or something in the morning, when I am not at my most clear or intelligent.
quote:I think most people are completely fake when they are first dating another person. Putting the best foot forward and all that. So, I would seriously disagree that anyone can really see how a person generally 'is' after only knowing them by dating them for a combined total of some hours.
That's . . . cynical.
quote: My point is that perhaps people are perceptive enough to see what they want. And then, why wait?
The party and hoopla around the wedding that requires so much planning is not as important as the marriage itself to many religious people. I am stunned when I hear of people spending ten thousand dollars on such an event. If the event itself is important to people, it takes a much longer time to plan and save for. To hold off marrying someone because the event isn't the fairytale or the social showing off they want seems to me to point to different priorities than actually having a good marriage. I admit, the two aren't mutually exclusive, but it sets off a bit of warning to me, at least.
That would make an interesting study, though. How does the amount of money and time spent on a wedding and reception affect the quality of the marriage?
Many good points here. I know that for me and Fahim, as well as for my sister and her husband (who married each other after having known each other for 5 months), cost of a wedding was a factor. I don't see the point in celebrating a wedding - especially expensively. Anyone can get married - that's no big accomplishment. I'd rather use the money to buy a house. Or build up savings. I'd rather celebrate when we've actually accomplished something - like staying happily together for 25 years.
The idea of spending hundreds or thousands on a wedding dress is repugnant to me, never mind that they don't suit my personality. I was content getting married in a $20 CDN dress I bought at Zellers, floral, thank you very much. That was very much more my taste and fit my idea of budget much more. Granted, I was willing to spend up to a hundred, but I really lucked out in finding that dress.
And I feel pretty much the same about engagement and wedding rings. Fahim and I still don't have wedding rings. They're not important to us.
And there was also the factor of, if not eloping, not inviting people who would think they had the right to be insulted if they were not, or having to spend that time with people I didn't really care about, or . . . well, honestly, why can't I and Fahim, or my sister and her husband, or any of these other people who get married in short order, get married whatever way suits us best? Does it always have to conform to everyone else's idea of suitable? I haven't seen any evidence that a long engagement or a long dating period equals a more successful marriage.
Maybe we should also criticize anyone who married someone more than ten years older, too. I mean, that's odd. Or criticize women for marrying men 5 or 8 years younger. Or criticize someone for marrying someone who'd been married one or more times, because they've got to be a huge risk. [/sarcasm]
So while some of you disdain us because we knew each other for less than a year before we got engaged or married, or whatever else you might want to condemn or criticize us for, we're simply going ahead being happily married. We're still compatible. We still get along. We're still best friends. We still support each other. We still love each other. We're still making our marriage work.
Put that in a pipe and smoke it. Posts: 8355 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
For what it's worth, my previous comment about the persuasiveness of the 'no sex before marriage' speeding marriage up theory was in no way intended to imply that people in this situation get married to get laid.
As I was in that camp, I know that I did not get married to get laid. However, being in a culture where sex before marriage is pretty much unacceptable I KNOW that we marry younger than most people do in this generation. It's not because you simply 'want to get laid', but it's because you see dating as serious and with the intent of finding a marriage mate. If you casually date for an extended period of time, your chances of becoming physically involved with someone you don't plan on marrying increase. Basically, your chances of 'getting in trouble' increase, and so serial casual dating is discouraged.
Plus, a serious-minded person who has no problem with sex before marriage will most likely take these steps: date, move in together, become engaged, marry. (Or, alternatively, become engaged, move in together, marry.) This tends to be a longer courtship than: date, become engaged, marry. Also, if you find that the person you fell in love with is difficult to live with, you are more likely to (emphasis on "more likely to" not "will inevitably") end the relationship if you are not married - and even more so if you aren't even engaged - and so the process starts over again. Date, move in together, move out, date, move in together, etc... This is time consuming, and people tend to get married later in life after these events have led them to the person they finally want to settle down with.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
Does that tell you anything?
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Kiss]](graemlins/kiss.gif)
FG.
