shinythings
Shiny_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2005
- Messages
- 215
NY Times article about ladies in waiting!
- Thread starter shinythings
- Start date
- Status
InLuvWithMrH
Shiny_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2005
- Messages
- 296
firebirdgold
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2005
- Messages
- 2,216
Talk about the difference between Men and Women!
We read that and think "what a foot-dragging schmuck", "why do they torture us like this?". But I''m pretty sure that a Man would read that and think... well, less than flattering things about the women in the article.
Probably the words bullying, hounding, aggressive, hysterical, pushy, chasing the guy away, over-emotional, etc... would come to their mind. I''m not a guy, so I don''t for certain what words might spring to mind, but I can assure you that most generally would not be sympathizing with the women.
We read that and think "what a foot-dragging schmuck", "why do they torture us like this?". But I''m pretty sure that a Man would read that and think... well, less than flattering things about the women in the article.
MissAva
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2005
- Messages
- 8,230
Blenheim
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2006
- Messages
- 3,136
It''s kind of sad that getting engaged "took a lot of conversations that were kind of hideous and difficult."
I think that the author painted everybody in a pretty bad light. The women were getting mad, giving multiple ultimatums, stuffing ring ads in their wallets after being told that their boyfriends didn''t believe in marriage. They "hound" their boyfriends. They burst into tears, forcing their boyfriends to profess their everlasting love and unwaivering commitment. And then the men look like they had gotten punched in the face when presented with the idea of marriage. They are the reason that their girlfriends burst into tears. Perhaps the author is overwriting it?
Thanks for posting, though, shinythings. It''s interesting to see what outsiders think about our predicaments and (some might say) psychotic behavior.
I think that the author painted everybody in a pretty bad light. The women were getting mad, giving multiple ultimatums, stuffing ring ads in their wallets after being told that their boyfriends didn''t believe in marriage. They "hound" their boyfriends. They burst into tears, forcing their boyfriends to profess their everlasting love and unwaivering commitment. And then the men look like they had gotten punched in the face when presented with the idea of marriage. They are the reason that their girlfriends burst into tears. Perhaps the author is overwriting it?
Thanks for posting, though, shinythings. It''s interesting to see what outsiders think about our predicaments and (some might say) psychotic behavior.
rainbowtrout
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2005
- Messages
- 2,105
do you ever think that if men don''t propose when there are obviously no real reasons why not, that maybe they just aren''t that into marrying *us* or just not into marrying in general? I''d always had it drilled into me by my dad that when a guy wants to marry you he''s getting the ring, he''s moving it forward, etc...it shouldn''t be "hideous and difficult"
anchor31
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2005
- Messages
- 7,074
I agree with the responses. J and I had discussions about going forward when he asked me to move in with him, and we had a discussions about the timeframe and ring, but it never was "hideous and difficult"...
I also agree the guy was a bit of a jerk to wait until the very last minute! J is also the kind of guy who doesn''t like to rush things, but he''s 24 and I still have to finish school, so I don''t consider our 3 years of dating and 2-3 years engagement as dragging our feet, but that guy? I think at 32 it''s high time he got his act together and kicked himself in the pants.
That article doesn''t put us LIWs in a very good light, does it? J was taken aback when I told him I don''t intend moving in with a man before being engaged and he admitted that he hadn''t been thinking about this yet at all, but I never pressured him, just laid my cards on the table and told him about my convictions and values. In fact I never expected him to propose in 2006, I thought it would be 2007! And I would have been fine with that.
Oh well. Whatever.
I also agree the guy was a bit of a jerk to wait until the very last minute! J is also the kind of guy who doesn''t like to rush things, but he''s 24 and I still have to finish school, so I don''t consider our 3 years of dating and 2-3 years engagement as dragging our feet, but that guy? I think at 32 it''s high time he got his act together and kicked himself in the pants.
That article doesn''t put us LIWs in a very good light, does it? J was taken aback when I told him I don''t intend moving in with a man before being engaged and he admitted that he hadn''t been thinking about this yet at all, but I never pressured him, just laid my cards on the table and told him about my convictions and values. In fact I never expected him to propose in 2006, I thought it would be 2007! And I would have been fine with that.
Oh well. Whatever.
Cailet
Shiny_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2005
- Messages
- 419
i think the biggest problem with the LIWs they picked to highlight was that it seemed(at least from what they printed) that none of those ladies were doing things correctly---
The only lady "didn''t want to lay all her cards on the table" and yet expected her guy to immeadiately know what she wanted, when she wanted it? If you are wanting to marry someone isn''t it all about wanting to share "all your cards" with that person?? Not to say I haven''t held back some stuff from my bf (the extent of my PS addiction for one) but as far as where I want our relationship to go and what I am hoping for from him -- those things I pretty much put out there no hiding.
The other lady only started thinking about getting married when her friends were bugging / teasing her about not being engaged.
The guys didn''t sound great either -- but much more typical of guys (boy soon vs girl soon).
Did bring up some interesting points though - girls automatically shifting to a "we" mode of thinking and boys being stuck in a "you and me" way of thinking. I''ll have to bring it up for discussion and see what the bf thinks about that....
The only lady "didn''t want to lay all her cards on the table" and yet expected her guy to immeadiately know what she wanted, when she wanted it? If you are wanting to marry someone isn''t it all about wanting to share "all your cards" with that person?? Not to say I haven''t held back some stuff from my bf (the extent of my PS addiction for one) but as far as where I want our relationship to go and what I am hoping for from him -- those things I pretty much put out there no hiding.
The other lady only started thinking about getting married when her friends were bugging / teasing her about not being engaged.
The guys didn''t sound great either -- but much more typical of guys (boy soon vs girl soon).
Did bring up some interesting points though - girls automatically shifting to a "we" mode of thinking and boys being stuck in a "you and me" way of thinking. I''ll have to bring it up for discussion and see what the bf thinks about that....
aljdewey
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2002
- Messages
- 9,170
Hmm. I think that the this article shows that a lot of the romance of engagement is missing for a lot of couples, which I think is true. My guess is that it has always been like this, to a degree.
I don''t know....I always grew up hearing those tales like, "A man who won''t propose doesn''t mean that he is afraid of marriage, it means he doesn''t want to marry you." or "If you live with a man before you marry, he''ll never marry you." In many cases, I bet this is true. But then there are books like The Rules, telling you that you have to act a certain way to get a guy to love you, i.e., don''t call, play hard to get, etc.
But the thing I generally dislike about tales like that is that it sort of gives women the idea that we almost have to trick men into wanting to marry us. That we can''t just be ourselves, or else we''ll never get married. Instead, we have to play all these games that make us more desirable to men.
I just think that sending messages like that to women just kind of sucks, you know?
I don''t know....I always grew up hearing those tales like, "A man who won''t propose doesn''t mean that he is afraid of marriage, it means he doesn''t want to marry you." or "If you live with a man before you marry, he''ll never marry you." In many cases, I bet this is true. But then there are books like The Rules, telling you that you have to act a certain way to get a guy to love you, i.e., don''t call, play hard to get, etc.
But the thing I generally dislike about tales like that is that it sort of gives women the idea that we almost have to trick men into wanting to marry us. That we can''t just be ourselves, or else we''ll never get married. Instead, we have to play all these games that make us more desirable to men.
I just think that sending messages like that to women just kind of sucks, you know?
JenStone
Shiny_Rock
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2006
- Messages
- 490
I''m only 25 so I''ll need everyone else''s input here....but has it always been like this? Say, back in the 70s - did women need to "chase" after proposals back then? Or is this phenomenon a result of changing culture (more couples living together before marriage, more couples getting married later in life, etc)?
I know plenty of guys who are financially stable and mature enough to get married. They have girlfriends waiting years for them to pop the question, but they don''t because they don''t think guys need to settle down before the age of 40. Last year a friend of mine who is 26 popped the question to his now-wife, and all his (guy) friends told him he was crazy for settling down so early. His response was that he found the woman of his dreams and he couldn''t wait to share the rest of their lives together.
So I know there are guys out there who dream of getting married, settling down, having kids, etc as soon as they are ready to. But then there are those who are pressured to think otherwise. Just look at Hollywood with all the older men who get married to women 20 years their junior. Men know that they have an advantage in this age game.
Sorry if that was a bit off topic, but this is what I thought of when I read the article.
I know plenty of guys who are financially stable and mature enough to get married. They have girlfriends waiting years for them to pop the question, but they don''t because they don''t think guys need to settle down before the age of 40. Last year a friend of mine who is 26 popped the question to his now-wife, and all his (guy) friends told him he was crazy for settling down so early. His response was that he found the woman of his dreams and he couldn''t wait to share the rest of their lives together.
So I know there are guys out there who dream of getting married, settling down, having kids, etc as soon as they are ready to. But then there are those who are pressured to think otherwise. Just look at Hollywood with all the older men who get married to women 20 years their junior. Men know that they have an advantage in this age game.
Sorry if that was a bit off topic, but this is what I thought of when I read the article.
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2005
- Messages
- 13,375
JenStone, I think women did not have to hound men as much as they do now. Two reasons:
1) Average marriage age has gone up, along with "having to" finish school, which for women now takes longer than it used to, women now just have to wait longer to be married. Some other reasons all having to do with increase in marriage age could probably be made. Ex from the past: if a woman was in college and HE was also in college, they'd get married and she may drop out of school and work to support his education. (It makes perfect sense, since he would be able to earn more than her in the future, even if the had the exact same jobs)
2) People used to date more. Now they have relationships, have sex, shack up. The latter puts pressure on women to get married, while the former doesn't. That was very cursory, but I think we get the picture.
3)I also think men used to honor their words...their word meant something. Now, we meet men anywhere...it's healthy to be a little suspicious of their honor and intentions.
I once heard that a proper woman rejects a marriage proposal 3 times before she should accept (playing hard to get) so OBVIOUSLY, women did not hound men. I guess the only time a woman asked a man to marry her was if she was pregnant?
1) Average marriage age has gone up, along with "having to" finish school, which for women now takes longer than it used to, women now just have to wait longer to be married. Some other reasons all having to do with increase in marriage age could probably be made. Ex from the past: if a woman was in college and HE was also in college, they'd get married and she may drop out of school and work to support his education. (It makes perfect sense, since he would be able to earn more than her in the future, even if the had the exact same jobs)
2) People used to date more. Now they have relationships, have sex, shack up. The latter puts pressure on women to get married, while the former doesn't. That was very cursory, but I think we get the picture.
3)I also think men used to honor their words...their word meant something. Now, we meet men anywhere...it's healthy to be a little suspicious of their honor and intentions.
I once heard that a proper woman rejects a marriage proposal 3 times before she should accept (playing hard to get) so OBVIOUSLY, women did not hound men. I guess the only time a woman asked a man to marry her was if she was pregnant?
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2003
- Messages
- 1,948
One common denominator in the article is that all the couples lived together. I also notice this a lot on this forum; that couples live together -- sometimes for quite a while -- before getting engaged. Is this standard now? Do most couples today feel they must live together before they''d even consider getting engaged?
I''m 44 and twenty years ago most couples (that I knew) did not move in together before marriage. Those that did tended to be well into the wedding planning process (and certainly engaged) and usually moved in together for reasons of housing convenience, i.e, they bought a house and wanted to move into it immediately after marriage. Now that''s not to say there wasn''t a lot of "almost living together" where the individuals had their own places (with or without roommates) but spent a ton of time at their boyfriend''s/girlfriend''s place. But that''s not really the same thing.
I''m 44 and twenty years ago most couples (that I knew) did not move in together before marriage. Those that did tended to be well into the wedding planning process (and certainly engaged) and usually moved in together for reasons of housing convenience, i.e, they bought a house and wanted to move into it immediately after marriage. Now that''s not to say there wasn''t a lot of "almost living together" where the individuals had their own places (with or without roommates) but spent a ton of time at their boyfriend''s/girlfriend''s place. But that''s not really the same thing.
ilovesparkles
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2006
- Messages
- 2,389
A crappy article I am in total agreeance! It did totally seem like these women had to convince their SO that they wanted to be with them and that is not how it should be! So many people here before me have said what came to mind in much more eloquent words so I''ll just say yeah I totally agree! Hehehe
On another note that was brought up, I actually remember when my BF starting using "we", it was totally out of the blue and such a joyous feeling! He was buying a new bed and said "this should do for us I don''t think we need anything bigger/better" I was like whoa - you said we that is so exhilirating, he just laughed!
On another note that was brought up, I actually remember when my BF starting using "we", it was totally out of the blue and such a joyous feeling! He was buying a new bed and said "this should do for us I don''t think we need anything bigger/better" I was like whoa - you said we that is so exhilirating, he just laughed!
sumbride
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2006
- Messages
- 3,867
Maria -
I wonder if the divorce rate will drop because most couples move in together before marriage and it is more socially acceptable now... I know that it USED to be higher, but that had a lot to do with it being an "unusual" thing, thus making the union weaker. As the people getting married now move forward, will they have stronger unions because they actually got to know each other better before saying I Do? I highly belive that it will. It''s not something that could be discovered for another 20 or 30 years, but it''s possible.
My BF and I would never have agreed to get engaged before living together. We felt it was crucial, and I think it''s brought us a lot closer together, and it''s erased any possible doubts either of us might have had beforehand. I know there are a lot of reasons why people don''t do it, but for us, it was the logical next step. For one thing, we now know he can live with my cats... he was allergic but has built up a tolerance. If we''d waited until we were married, he would have spent the first year of our marriage ill and that would have put lots of undue stress on the relationship.
Sumbride
I wonder if the divorce rate will drop because most couples move in together before marriage and it is more socially acceptable now... I know that it USED to be higher, but that had a lot to do with it being an "unusual" thing, thus making the union weaker. As the people getting married now move forward, will they have stronger unions because they actually got to know each other better before saying I Do? I highly belive that it will. It''s not something that could be discovered for another 20 or 30 years, but it''s possible.
My BF and I would never have agreed to get engaged before living together. We felt it was crucial, and I think it''s brought us a lot closer together, and it''s erased any possible doubts either of us might have had beforehand. I know there are a lot of reasons why people don''t do it, but for us, it was the logical next step. For one thing, we now know he can live with my cats... he was allergic but has built up a tolerance. If we''d waited until we were married, he would have spent the first year of our marriage ill and that would have put lots of undue stress on the relationship.
Sumbride
KittenKat
Shiny_Rock
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2004
- Messages
- 461
firebirdgold
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2005
- Messages
- 2,216
It seems to me that it''s more standard to live together before getting engaged than not. It''s almost like the only people who don''t have very strongly held convictions about the matter, like religious reasons.
We won''t because we both strongly believe that for us, living together before hand is almost an admission of being unsure about the other person. Besides, we''re not willing to chance the statistics, even if they are old!
We won''t because we both strongly believe that for us, living together before hand is almost an admission of being unsure about the other person. Besides, we''re not willing to chance the statistics, even if they are old!
- Status
300x240.png)