To ask what you think of a proposal after 1.5 years aged 35+?

If you are in your mid to late 30s, have never had children, and want to have children, time matters. People that age should have enough life experience to be able to be clear about what they need and want out of a relationship. If they aren’t capable of having those conversations, they aren’t ready to get married. If they can sit down and hash out the life plan and talk about the boring parts like money and legal issues, then proceeding after 18 months at that age is not crazy.

if they already have children, the clock isn’t ticking and combining lives is much more complicated so things should instead slow down to a glacial pace.

I don’t think it’s necessarily too soon but I do think it’s important to have gone through enough life events / situations together to know what sort of person they really are when the going gets rough.

I was incredibly naive in my 20s. I married someone I didn’t feel that strongly about and who is very different to me as I stupidly thought that all couples have their differences and if I already knew what annoyed me about him none of it would come as a surprise down the line. Of course all that has happened is that the issues I knew about were the tip of the iceberg.

Right.

It should be the opposite if anything.

Far too many women rush into marriage etc because they are desperate for DC.

Oh and my parents who were both over 30 when they met were married 18 months later. My dad died six months short of their 65th anniversary.

It would be too fast for me, I wouldn’t even want to live with them that quick but what works for you works for you.

Together and married with 2 years..31/35 at the time.
Our core values and directions were aligned.. we went through some crap in those 2 years so knew we had each others back..

We had vaguely met at a party 4 yrs before..and had a close mutual friend..

We'd both been in long term relationships and also significant time single.. and very independent so it was a positive choice...
Were pretty much living together after 2 months

Been married 25yrs now.. I think quite quick and focused as we were very clear about our standards...and had seen a bit of life!

I wouldn’t see anything wrong with it especially at that age.

we were engaged after 2.5 years and then got a house. Wedding was 18 months later. I was only 23 when we got married and with hind sight i was too young & hope my daughter waits but i’d already graduated and been working full time for a few years & didn’t feel young. He’s a few years older.

i’m now 41 & still married & kids are 15 & 11 🤷‍♀️

my sister on the other hand didn’t get engaged for 7 years (moved in together after 3 years) & then had a 4 year engagement. She’s 35 with kids & been married nearly a year. Each made our own choices

Took my ex about three years to get around to strangling me for the first time.

We married 22 months after we met. Both over 40, second marriage for both of us. We knew very quickly it was right. 27 years later we haven’t changed our minds.

Many women on here are having babies with men they’ve know for less time than that so I say go ahead.

Huh…..so you are saying that if she is not planning on having kids she should be more fussy and wait longer to make a decision to be sure

I think if you're both over 35 then you probably both have a good idea about what you want in a relationship and whether your current relationship works or not.

Do you want children? There's no ignoring that if you want children then it would be advisable to start trying for a baby sooner rather than later and therefore moving forward with marriage sooner rather than later also makes sense.

I think a lot of people know they don't know and do it anyway.

Because "no relationship is perfect".
Because the think marriage will fix the existing problems in the relationship.
Because time is ticking and they feel like they are getting left behind.
Because they really like the idea of a wedding and being a special prince/princess for the day.
Because they are under pressure from family and/or friends to settle down.
Because of the sunk costs fallacy and the fear of having wasted 5-10 years of their lives on the wrong partner already, so marriage validates the relationship.

I think if every marriage happened only because the people getting married knew that they wanted to build a life together built on solid foundations of love, trust, shared values and goals- which doesn't take much time at all to work out imo- we'd have a lot less divorces.

It's the couples who are together for years and years and then get married for the above reasons when they clearly didn't really want that that end up divorced. There's not many other areas in which avoiding something for years is seen as a sign of really wanting it...

Absolutely fine, you probably won’t get married for at least a year anyway so that gives you more time to get to know them and also engagements can be called off, they are not set in stone…good luck

Normal if you want kids.

Too early if you don't.

There's literally no need to rush to bet half your assets if someone isn't taking time out of work to raise children.

1.5 years is plenty of time. We lived together after 6 months and engaged after about 1.5 years, and we were only late 20s!

If you know, you know

If that was the case, we wouldnt have divorces eh?

It you're 35 and want dc I'd go for it. If you were much younger, I'd wait for two years. Why? Because controlling, bullying types tend to hide it and the clues come out in time.

Who is the people saying it's too early? Maybe they know something you don't know about your fiancé and are hoping you'll find out? Or one of you have a lot to lose financially with a marriage and they're worried? Or they may have another reason?

Because if everything is fine, 1.5 years is plenty of time. If after that time you're not sure, then that's a no.

Divorce is probably one of the most expensive things you can do so it’s important to be sure.

I agree. DH and I got engaged after 6 months and married a year later. We both knew the difference between what we'd had before and what we had together. And we both knew what we wanted. Of course we have learned things about each other since. But 1.5 years is certainly long enough.

Well I was engaged after six weeks, so no 18 months seems reasonable.

I read that as 15 years and was very confused! Yes 1.5 years at 35 I think is enough. I was with DH 7ish years before getting engaged but we met in our early 20s. At this age I would think if I met someone and was looking for children and marriage I would know after 1.5years if they were the right person.

Getting engaged is fine, it's a plan rather than a legal commitment.

I'd never marry anyone without living with them for at least 9-12 months. How people actually live can be very different to how they say they live, and how they actually live once the best behaviour honeymoon period ends.

A friend of mine discovered her husband was actually as grim as fuck hygiene wise when they lived together full time and he stopped feeling the need to be on his best behaviour.

I knew really quickly, within days or weeks. He was a one night stand who never quite made it back to his flat. We were talking about marriage within about six weeks, and got married that year. 18 years so far and touch wood it has been pretty blissful.

I don't think waiting around is any predictor or happiness. Past a certain point, I'd say incompatibility was likely. When it's right, it's right.