Someone in my team just got engaged!!! Man I'm jealous!

Torry_Quine

jackieblack wrote: »

And totally avoidable if you've had the discussion before getting engaged.

Some compromise is essential, of course, although I'd imagine everyone has things that are so fundamentally important to them that compromise wouldn't be possible (and if the other person really loved them, they wouldn't expect them to compromise on)

I can see that but just can't get my read round the idea of discussing for example whether to have children with someone that you haven't yet decided to marry. Sorry if that comes across as harsh.

Of course you could say that if you love someone then you would be willing to compromise for them. It's something that needs the wisdom of Solomon.

jackieblack

Torry_Quine wrote: »

I can see that but just can't get my read round the idea of discussing for example whether to have children with someone that you haven't yet decided to marry. Sorry if that comes across as harsh.

But you would know whether you wanted to have children, or not, and so would they. If, for example, you knew that you definitely wanted children but the other person felt strongly that they did not want children, you would have to decide if it was something you were prepared to compromise on before making that commitment to marry them, surely?

I suppose what I mean is, how do you decide if you want to marry someone (because just being in love is NOT enough, whatever the lovesongs say) until you know whether you want the same things in life?

Torry_Quine wrote: »

Of course you could say that if you love someone then you would be willing to compromise for them. It's something that needs the wisdom of Solomon.

However much I love my DH, there are just a few things that I could not have compromised on. The misery and resentment would have destroyed the relationship.

Luckily we both felt the same way about most things and the other things weren't important enough to either of us that we couldn't compromise on them

lostinrates

Torry_Quine wrote: »

Definitely agree about being on the same page as to your future plans and to me that's what an engagement is for, working together to decide your priorities.

I don't think things always break down so simply. Engagement might be if for a could who have down up always knowing each other, whose families at friends fir example, to people who met, dated, fell in love and got engaged in a religious frame work.

Most of us fall somewhere in the middle. We have learned general preferences, maybe more, during getting to know each other through friendship or dating before living together. And the living together might be art of an I or,also subconscious framework to see if other ideas coincide.

Other people genuinely are more flexible. I've seen people bend so fr I have thought they were boomerangs for their partners and still seem happy.

Dh and I lived together very early on. We had different reasons why. It's worked for us so far.

fluffnutter

Torry_Quine wrote: »

We never discussed marriage at all before he proposed. Is that the norm now that you talk about it first?

You make it sound like some wacky modern fad! Back in the day when women weren't allowed to have opinions or lives, perhaps they did just sit around looking pretty waiting for some fella to propose but nowadays things tend to be a little more balanced and the decision to marry a joint one that's planned and discussed. Rightly so IMO.

fluffnutter

Torry_Quine wrote: »

I can see that but just can't get my read round the idea of discussing for example whether to have children with someone that you haven't yet decided to marry.

Quite simply because you'd be saving two people untold misery if you sort it out before you marry. Imagine waking up the blushing bride on the first day of the rest of your life with your brand new husband beside you, wanting to entice him into a bit of honeymoon-baby-making only for him to say 'by the way, love, I don't want children, never have, never will so you're not having them either'.

Torry_Quine

jackieblack wrote: »

But you would know whether you wanted to have children, or not, and so would they. If, for example, you knew that you definitely wanted children but the other person felt strongly that they did not want children, you would have to decide if it was something you were prepared to compromise on before making that commitment to marry them, surely?

I suppose what I mean is, how do you decide if you want to marry someone (because just being in love is NOT enough, whatever the lovesongs say) until you know whether you want the same things in life?


However much I love my DH, there are just a few things that I could not have compromised on. The misery and resentment would have destroyed the relationship.

Luckily we both felt the same way about most things and the other things weren't important enough to either of us that we couldn't compromise on them

We all have things which for some reason we feel unable to compromise on and it's important to be clear about that before making the commitment of marriage.

fluffnutter wrote: »

You make it sound like some wacky modern fad! Back in the day when women weren't allowed to have opinions or lives, perhaps they did just sit around looking pretty waiting for some fella to propose but nowadays things tend to be a little more balanced and the decision to marry a joint one that's planned and discussed. Rightly so IMO.

:rotfl::rotfl:No I don't think it's a wacky modern fad, I just wasn't aware that so much was decided at such an early stage in a relationship. It always was a joint decision to marry but it seems strange to me that a proposal is known about before the event.

fluffnutter wrote: »

Quite simply because you'd be saving two people untold misery if you sort it out before you marry. Imagine waking up the blushing bride on the first day of the rest of your life with your brand new husband beside you, wanting to entice him into a bit of honeymoon-baby-making only for him to say 'by the way, love, I don't want children, never have, never will so you're not having them either'.

That's not what I've said though. I said couples discuss this prior to marriage during the engagement stage. Sadly though some couples naively presume they 'know' what the other one wants.

Dovah_diva

sterl1ng wrote: »

HOnestly I'm not interested in a rock as quite frankly something so expensive on my finger would be dangerous, especially in London! Something simple really plus a very very low key wedding as I'm not into the big thing in all honesty!

Oh you liar. Your first post said it all.

Person_one

Torry_Quine wrote: »

:rotfl::rotfl:No I don't think it's a wacky modern fad, I just wasn't aware that so much was decided at such an early stage in a relationship. It always was a joint decision to marry but it seems strange to me that a proposal is known about before the event.

The idea of a proposal has always seemed bonkers to me. Getting married is a huge, life altering, legally binding commitment, the idea of one party breathlessly waiting in hope for the other party to decide that its time for them both to make that commitment doesn't really make any sense!

Can you imagine if people 'proposed' other huge life events rather than talking about them and coming to a joint decision?

thorsoak

You know, it's not often that I don't think that the young women of today have it better than we had it - but now - oh boy - I think we had it right!

Over 50 years ago we took things more slowly - remember the pill didn't come to the general market for women until mid-late 60s (as a married woman I was refused it until 1968 because I "had not already got a child") - and family planning clinics wanted to know a wedding date before issuing the wonderful "dutch caps". Therefore, we'd be very, very sure of our sexual partners - were they reliable enough to use condoms.

So we would do a lot of talking (and snogging) - we'd talk - about what we wanted in a relationship - careers - families - children - savings - holidays - everything. We'd know, before we hopped into bed, whether our lover liked his tea with or without sugar!

We would therefore know, before we committed ourselves to sharing a flat and bills with someone, whether or not we were in a long term relationship or not ...so we'd "get that ice or else no dice" - to quote Marilyn Monroe from Gentlemen Prefer Blondes!

littlerat

True, from what I gather now 50 years ago it was:
Date, become a couple, get engaged (possibly have sex, move in together), get married, have sex, move in together, have kids, live (happily?) ever after.

Now the norm seems to be to usually do the kids after moving in or engagement, and the moving in nearly always seems to be pre-engagement.


Of course, you could argue it's a pretty good idea to know you can live with somebody before you marry them. BUT woman waiting 5 or 10 years for a proposal because they've already moved in (and possibly had kids) seems like it was less common.