Post # 1
SO was in theory supposed to have the e-ring paid off so that we could get engaged in June. But the house we’re buying has a stupid amount of hidden fees, so we’re having to pour every penny into that and push back our engagement. It will probably be Octoberish time now for us getting engaged (unless he manages to find money somewhere, lol).
I know living together is more important, and I know it’s the only sensible decision which is why I agreed to it, but it still makes me sad as we were both so excited about it. I’d been so excited to announce it in our new house (we were going to throw a party) and dive into planning as we wanted an 18-month engagement. Looks more likely to be two years plus now, which is not what we wanted as SO wants to start having kids within three to four years and I don’t want them immediately after marriage. Nothing will really change this, but I just needed to sadvent… 🙁
Post # 3
@TopazTurtle: Oh no, sad! 🙁 Big hugs!
Post # 4
@TopazTurtle: Oh, I’m sorry you’re dealing with this 🙁 I’m sure it’s disappointing.
Everyone’s different, so this might not work for you, but do you have to have the ring to be engaged? Or even to start planning? If you’re both sure it’s going to happen, you could still plan to have the wedding when you were originally going to and just wait for the ring. Again, not for everyone, but a possibility.
Post # 5
You guys can still be engaged and consider yourself engaged without a ring, unless it really important to you or you don’t feel that way. Fi and I were engaged and got aring three months later.
Post # 6
But why do you need a ring to be engaged? I didn’t get a ring until several months later.
Post # 7
Unfortunately SO is determined to get down on one knee before we make it official, and he won’t do that without the ring. It wouldn’t bother me so much but he’s very traditional in that way.