Is marriage within a year too quick
>>32628758After a year i would think moving in together. Absolutely way too fucking soon for me. But I’m not a christcuck that is going to have 6 kids with my ex wife so I see things differently
>>32628758usually yes. at the year point you are still in the phase of thinking you two are the best fucking couple thats ever existed. I would never marry someone without seeing how they react to a legitimately stressful situation. Example: losing a job, moving, buying house, a coworker makes a play at your woman, loyalty in general (women have a huge problem with this before marriage, men the opposite)
marriage is a bad idea regardless of engagement length
Those of us from yore and yonder will marry before anything even happens but of course the west is a degenerate neo liberal feminist shit hole so YMMV
>>32629190> degenerate neo liberal feminist shit hole Better that than marrying off children to perverted creeps or arranging cousin marriages together
>>32629204hmmmI'm not so sureSounds like you are brainwashed or something by the exact degenerate neo liberal feminist shit hole I am talking about
>>32628758my gf and i have been dating for 11 months. once she moves in with me (likely at the end of the year) im going to ask her to marry me, so about 1.5-2 years of dating. weve already discussed marriage and i think were both ready for it>>32628868marriage is the best. solidify your commitment to one another
>>32628758>Is marriage within a year too quickMarriage is a badly structured tax break. If you don't have kids, don't bother.
>>32629217>I'm not so sureNot sure if retarded or trolling.
>>32628758Statistically, you're increasing your odds of divorce.2-3 years is best. Earlier than that (especially within a year), and divorce risk goes up significantly. Later than that, and there's negligible benefit for ever-larger portions of your youth spent in limbo on a single relationship.There are two exceptions:1. If you knew each other very well (not just acquaintances or colleagues) before starting to date, then marrying sooner probably won't be so big a risk. Within a year is still pretty fast, but it won't be as bad.2. If either one of you is very young, then waiting past college age to make sure you don't drastically change is a reasonable thing.>>32628777Look up "cohabitation effect". At best, there's no inherent benefit of living together before marriage. At worst, it's consistently associated with worse marital outcomes.
>>32629256>marriage is the best. solidify your commitment to one anotherlifelong unmarried monogamy is the most difficult and virtuous partnership. keeping love alive and meaningful commitment is a more dedicated, meaningful life. every single legally married couple knows divorce is a weapon because it is so annoying. real love is actually caring for someone, nothing about that human bonding is made better by letting the state know you'll give away half of your money forever when you don't like each other anymore
>>32629527monogamy isnt difficult? lmao cheating is easy not to do
>>32629481> cohabitation effectNot convincing to me. There are studies that indicate it is correlation and not causation. How many of these cohabitants lived together out of necessity rather than desire? There is also the simple fact that people willing to move in together are likely less religious meaning they are more likely to get divorced if they are unhappy. Which is good in my view. 2 years of unhappy marriage is better than 30 years of unhappy marriage
