Question:
What do you consider to be a 'long' engagement?
SunnySideOfTheStreet
2011-06-15 22:42:22 UTC
In your opinion, how long does the engagement need to be to be considered a 'long' engagement? Also, what do you think of long engagements?
Seventeen answers:
Lizzie_bee
2011-06-15 22:52:19 UTC
I think a "long" engagement is two or more years. But that isn't a bad thing.



I got engaged a week ago, and because of our work situations we will most likely wait until next spring or summer to get married.

People ask when my date is and when I respond, they act shocked. I live in Utah, where you date for six months, get engaged, and are married within three months of the engagement.



I'm getting frustrated with people acting like I'm strange, so I'm just going to get people off my back by saying "hey, we're already having sex, so we don't see any reason to rush"





personally I think long engagements are a good idea. Not only does it give you that extra time to settle into a relationship, but you also get more time to save up and plan.

Also, there's a few huge moments in your life that will leave you in a "honeymoon" state.

When you realize you're in love, when you get engaged, when you get married, have a baby etc etc.

You should enjoy each stage of as long as possible, I don't see the point in cramming a lifetime of moments in a few short years.
2011-06-16 01:34:29 UTC
I think it depends on where you are living as well. I live in England and we got engaged Oct 10 we are getting married June 12. We started by looking for a venue but even with that time frame we found some places were already fully booked, places kept saying well there is always the Friday but for us that was not a possibility. Trying to find somewhere which would fit our small wedding in the limited time frame that we had available has been difficult. Then you go onto dresses some shops haven't taken me seriously because for them it is quite short notice, when you're told that they are already taking orders for the following summer!! In our case I'm a slightly older bride at 42 and it is a second wedding and we have teenage children with 18th birthdays and exams and school (hence friday not being an option, can't get married in the evening in the UK)



Even with the nearly 2 years we have had it's been demoralizing when places and people treat you as if it must be a spur of the moment thing and not serious because it's not further in advance. Chances are here that it'd be 4-5 years before it would be considered a long engagement.
?
2011-06-16 15:34:34 UTC
My engagement is going to end up being 18 months. I actually would prefer another few months to save up and take my time. I am just the type who prefers not to rush things. I do think 2 1/2 years is probably the limit for me. We had a date set within a week of our engagement. Have booked a venue, I've been trying on dresses and actively planning. I think more than exact time limits it's more important that a couple is actually going forward and actively planning a wedding.
La Vie Boheme
2011-06-16 12:59:36 UTC
Anything over 2 years. I don;t see the point of a long engagement at all. The point of being engaged is being ready to marry and ready to plan a wedding in the NEAR future.
truefirstedition
2011-06-16 09:07:35 UTC
Where I live, a 1- to 2-year engagement is normal (I'm in a big city where it can be hard to book a venue/caterer/etc less than a year in advance). Anything longer than 2 years is, to me, a long engagement, and not something that I'm interested in. I need to be engaged only for as long as it takes to plan the wedding, then I'm ready to be married - that's the ultimate goal!
Nox
2011-06-16 06:53:14 UTC
Anything over two years.



Personally I don't consider a couple engaged unless they have a date set (at least a few months after the proposal) and are starting to budget and plan. Couples that have been "engaged" for 5+ years without dates in sight aren't engaged, the guy just proposed to shut the woman up.
?
2011-06-15 23:07:07 UTC
More than 2 years. Especially if you have been engaged longer than you dated, meaning you got engaged 2 or 3 years into the reltationship but you have been "engaged" for 5 years after that.



Unless there is a date set and you're actively planning a wedding or working on wedding plans, I don't think you're engaged.



Having a ring with no intentions of future marriage is not engaged. If you're not ready for the commitment of marriage, there's no reason to be "engaged".



When my fiance and I got engaged we were both ready for the commitment of marriage, if I didn't think we were ready for marriage, I would have said no. If he didn't think we were ready for marriage he would not have proposed.



The phrase is "engaged to be married", not "engaged to be engaged".



When my fiance and I got engaged we almost immediately picked a date and started the planning. Within a couple weeks we had our date set in stone (pretty much) and had our church and reception venue booked. We are getting married August 6th, and our engagement has been a year and a half. We could have been married by now, but we set a date out further so we could plan and mostly pay for everything and not be rushed. Our wedding is paid for in full and we're not in panic mode trying to figure out how to pay for things.



We also as far as planning had to work around his work schedule. My schedule is pretty flexible that its not hard for me to get time off. I always wanted a fall wedding because I like the fall colors and think they look great in pictures. But, my fiance is a teacher so in the fall school is just getting started, he also coaches football and football is in full swing then too. While he'd really be okay missing work and taking vacation, he'd be miserable missing football. I've come to terms with I can compete with school, but I can't with football, lol. Plus there would have been the same issues every year if we wanted to do something on our anniversary or go away for a few days. So a summer wedding it had to be, we're getting married August 6th.
Lydia
2011-06-16 01:45:55 UTC
A year and a half or longer.

An engagement should be only as long as it takes to plan the wedding. Depending upon where someone lives, you may have to book things a year in advance, for example.
Madoka
2011-06-15 22:45:19 UTC
If a date is not set for sometime in the next 2 (2 years absolute maximum) years after the engagement, I don't consider it an engagement at all. And that date needs to be set within a few weeks after the engagement. If you're not planning, you're not engaged, period.
2011-06-15 23:03:10 UTC
Over 18 months is a long engagement. Over 2 years is getting to be a ridiculously long engagement. I get weddings take time to plan and you want to enjoy the engagement and wedding planning so I agree with giving yourself time. But this time is not to be used for feeling things out still, you should be committed to being married at the time you get engaged, from there it's just about planning a wedding and preparing for your lifetime together.
CC 9/24/11 Bride
2011-06-16 04:15:49 UTC
24 months is long..too long. Getting engaged, in my opinion, means you're ready to start planning now. It doesn't take 2 years to plan a wedding.



At first our engagement would have been 22 months..I wasn't too happy about that. After a few months we realized (or HE realized because I already knew it) that 22 months is too long..we shortened it to 15 months..perfect. We have 3 more months to go..and I wish it would just hurry up already. lol
2011-06-15 22:44:54 UTC
More than 2 years. I think long engagements are good. Would you want a ling engagement or a short wedding? I think engagements are a good time to move in, get to know weird quirks, see how living together goes, etc. :)
2011-06-15 22:45:40 UTC
There is no specific amount of time. Marriage does not need to be rushed and engagement should be as long as it needs to be for the couple to be fully prepared. For some it could take months, some have taken years. But to answer your question, I think over a year is a bit long (:
Paula
2011-06-15 23:16:40 UTC
I think anything over a year is long. I realise there are often good reasons for a long engagement (e.g. waiting to finish University), but I don't think "I need 2 years to plan the perfect wedding" is one of them.
Kimbo
2011-06-16 09:33:56 UTC
i think anything over 18 months is long. Seems like people like having the 'fiance' title, but don't even plan on getting married anytime soon.
Weinerdogs!
2011-06-15 23:47:21 UTC
We have "brides" making appointments to try on gowns for 2015-2018 weddings. Those weddings most likely wont happen. They need to graduate middle school first!
diamondcollector
2011-06-16 06:01:19 UTC
anything more than a year is excessive. (edit: in the US, i used to live in the UK and i know how long things can take there)



engagement means you are actively planning a wedding. arranging venues, counseling with the priest, going for dress fittings, tuxes, etc.



it is not "advanced going steady".


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...