Post # 17
We did a 15 month engagement. I wanted to complete my fellowship before getting married, so we decided to wait until I’m done. I’ve enjoyed having lots of time to plan. The major disadvantage is that my eggs (should I ever choose to use them) aren’t getting any younger 😉
Post # 18
It’s going to be VERY hard to wait but I have 2.5 years left in a 3 year long engagement. Ugh! I am going to change my mind a million times between now and then but maybe it’s a good thing! i am going to start making wedding purchases, maybe something every month just to keep myself from going crazy from waiting! Ultimately, it is a good thing because we will be able to afford to do more than if we were to be married this coming summer.
Post # 19
The biggest disadvantage in my mind is how others will percieve this. To most people, it is pretty silly to get engaged knowing you are waiting years to get married. It makes more sense to just wait a few years, get engaged, and then get married within 3 months-1 year. Depending what sort of wedding you want to have, it can take up to a year to plan and book.
If you are paying for it yourself you have to think about when money will be due. Lets say you want it in a a really nice chuch that charges $2500, they book up 1 year in advance, and you have to provide a 50% downpayment… you need to have the money for the wedding at least a year before your date.
If you want a small wedding you only need a couple of months to get ready for it.
If it is 2011 and I ask someone “when’s the big day” and they say “2013” I don’t even consider them really engaged. It doesn’t make any sense and being “engaged” has no legal standing so you shouldnt get engaged before you are financially and situationally ready to take the plunge.
Post # 20
We are getting married in 2013 at the earliest, and since we have family all over the world and will likely be getting married in a city/country we are unfamiliar with, we want the extra time to plan. Plane tickets for his family will cost at least $1300 USD per person, so we would like to give people plenty of time to save that money since it isn’t like they’re loaded or anything. Then add on top of that the cost of clothes, lodging, and time spent (its 24 hours and 3 planes one way from India to the east coast of the US). So while a short engagement might be ideal for you and your situation, it won’t work for everyone. I actually want people to show up at my wedding, so they need plenty of time to save money. And since we’re both students, we need plenty of time to plan so our studies don’t suffer. Every situation is different, and if someone looked at me like I wasn’t “really” engaged because my wedding is a few years out, then I guess that’s one less person to invite to my fabulous day.
Post # 21
- Wedding: August 2013 - An amazing non-profit retreat
I think it’s quite cruel to say someone isn’t engaged if they’re having a longer engagement. Fiance and I planned to get engaged this summer, and that’s what we did. In the meantime, we also go screwed over financially, things are supertight, and there’s no way we’ll have extra funds until 2013. So it’s circumstance, and everyone has a different schedule. It doesn’t make an engagement invalid just because it’s not within that 6 mo-1 year timeframe.
Post # 22
Ahh obviously anyone who thinks it’s not a ‘real engagement’ unless you are married in 6 months to a year is clearly more interested in the actual material aspect (the wedding) over the purpose and idea of the engagement. An engagement is about the commitment between two people, whether the actual wedding be planned to happen in one year, 2 years or 5 years. Every couple is different; there is nothing wrong with a long engagement. Personally, the more time to plan the better; you can guarantee your day goes off exactly how you want it too as opposed to rushing it into only a few months of planning. Just my opinion though. Either way; it’s inappropriate to say people aren’t actually engaged unless they are getting married ASAP.