Share this article:

if you're in your thirties, and you "need more time", you don't want to be with that person. No shame, just let it go.

What is up with these marriage guidelines/deadlines- did Hooksexup flip back to 1940 when i wasn't looking? Are people reading 'The Rules' again? Whatever works for two adults to be happy and comfortable in their relationship, if they choose to marry or not, be monogamous or not, etc. is up to them and we should stfu about the choices they make. That's the beauty about living in this time period, folks, take advantage of it.

I think Kristin is in some sort of denial or is pretending to be naive. I say this because If one wants to have a family AND one believes in marriage, then the other chick is right. If kids are not desired/envisioned, then getting married is of little consequence, except for maybe professional/social status. But if the two involved envisions a family, then ALR and the other woman is entirely correct. @AJ: Times haven't changed that much. Ask a kid of divorced parents how great it was. Without kids, marriage is just another flavor.

My best friend (female) and I (male) have this argument too often. She thinks if you don't know anlfter a month, you should break up. Her reasoning is never as clear as this, even, but the pro-time limit view still hasn't really articulated a reason being married within three years makes more sense. Would her argument change if the couple started dating in high school? First year of college? She said it was embarrassing to not be engaged at three years - that sounds to mr like the perceptions of others matter more than her own feelings about the relationship. Also, I can't help but get the vibe that she believes all three year relationships are interchangeable as far as her own joy goes. If being married automatically makes whatever relationship you're in the right one, then the time limit makes sense. Otherwise, the quality of your time together has nothing to do with compatibility.

Why does marriage have to be the end game?

Um, it should occur that perhaps the point of The Hooksexup Debate is as a form of point/counterpoint, not figuring out a right/wrong?

@LEB: It does not have to be. The question has been posited as such, however. That is not the debate. @CW: I agree. But this is american youth. You cannot deny us our god-given right to moralize.

These two women seem to be operating on different ideas of what dating is: Jessica - dating is way of auditioning potential life partners, to achieve the goal of marriage & babies. Kristen - dating is about spending time with people - maybe you end up w/ them maybe you don't - but the time spent is valid.....And the first one is pretty regressive, no?

BWR - You're right about Jessica. You may be right about Kristen too. If she wants kids she's in deep doo doo though. Either that or she's 19 years old. (She looks older.) The minute you start to seriously think about having children, you realize that it is an audition. Not just the person and your compatibility, but its also about their reliability, their family, etc.

Of cows and free milk, that shit is true.

Three years is plenty of time. Get on with it. Some folks will NEVER do anything if not forced to choose.

This is assuming that everyone who is in a relationship wants to get married. There's more than a few people out there who don't want to get married for one reason or another and that's perfectly fine with me. People shouldn't get married just because society thinks they should. They should really believe in marriage first and foremost.

commitment is a state of mind. either you feel it, or you don't, and that feeling can fluctuate over time, and that feeling is not necessarily dictated or restrained by marriage. (PLENTY of people who are married cheat on their partners, and 1 in 2 marriages end in divorce!) so marriage isn't a guarantee of anything, it just makes the punishment higher for failure. And that "higher" punishment doesn't seem to stop most people from "failing", so I don't really see what these "pro timeline" arguments are based on. The only thing that seems reasonable to me is, if you and your partner strongly disagree on some major life issue (be it marriage, children, what city to live in, etc.) then it's best to break up. But if both parties are happily cohabitating without a marriage, wtf is the problem?

I remember hearing this debate when I was in my twenties and I thought it was so old fashion to put a timeline on any relationship. I was in a series of 3+ year monogamous relationships. The last one lasted well over 5 years as I slowly marched into my very late 20’s. I knew I wanted to be married one day and have kids but I rarely brought up the conversation because I wanted to give him time to “figure it out”. I was also afraid to pressure him because it seems so unfair to put a timeframe on love. He ended up breaking up with me anyway because he “wasn’t ready to commit”. I found out later, he was already dating an 18 year old on the side as we blew out the candles on my 30th birthday cake only weeks before. In hindsight, I regretted not setting a timeframe and being afraid to bring up the dreaded “M” word especially when I knew I wanted to start a family at some point. Having a time frame would have forced me to have a reality check on my relationship and figure out that it was not meant to be. Additionally, I don’t understand why Marriage has become such a dirty word for women to utter. I remember being made to feel ashamed of wanting to get married since I am supposed to be an independent, self supporting, progressive woman and wanting to get married is like… SO last century. Bottom line, if you want kids… you need a timeline. There is no shame in wanting to be married and you will only get what you want if you ask for it. By not asking, you are just cheating no one but yourself. It takes courage to be truthful.

I find it kind of disturbing how many people seem to be taking Jessie's side. She seems to care more about her three year time limit and her lifelong plan than she cares about her partners, to the point of sounding neurotic. All it sounds like Kristin is trying to do is allow for some sane flexibility and case-by-case evaluation of the situation, and Jessie's having none of it. Some people don't want kids, some people do, some people believe marriage is the right way to do things and some don't; hell, some people are refusing to get married at all until gay marriage is legalized nationwide. These are complicated, nuanced issues to be discussed and evaluated between partners; jumping through hoops and consulting rule books don't sound like the route to an individually and mutually satisfying solution. Also, @esa: "cheapening her relationship" by "acting like a wife"? Because Lord knows he can't possibly care about HER until she has a rock on her finger. "Might make him propose sooner"? "if the person is your soulmate, timing is irellevant"? What century is this? I suppose I might as well say that if the person is your soulmate, then marriage is irellevant. Yes, mystical gibberish will solve all our problems.

so to JB, I'm curious, you say you don't want a newborn until you're 40. I have the interesting view of being born to parents who were 31 and 32 at the time while my half-sister was born to parents who were 42 (stepmother) and 52. Obviously my dad is now raising a 5th-grader near his retirement but my step-mother is also older. I'm a little sad for my sister just because that set of parents isn't quite as active or adventurous anymore. And when she'll be going to college, they'll be well into retirement... and basically old (I'm thinking more in terms of throwing basketballs and that sort of thing, although in colorado it seems like people don't stop hiking 14ers until their early 80s). I understand life not coming together in terms of finding the right person and career. It just seems odd to wait that long when you don't have to do so. I only say this in anticipation of my sister having to deal with parents' health problems and retirement plans when she's a college freshman.

Re: huh. I don't think I said I didn't want a kid until I was 40...I believe I said that I can't imaging having any kids after 40 (basically, for all the reasons you cited in your post). That said, I may not have been clear, but who knows, because for some reason my comment was removed. I have no idea why.

A set time limit is a bad idea, but after a few years, you should know where you stand and be on the same page. I think it's fine, after 3 years, if you both know you want to get married, but are waiting until you're more financially stable or for some other reason. But if you know you want to get married and he "needs more time" to decide, then it's a problem. Some people live together their whole lives and never get married. That's fine if they both want that. But if one person really needs that commitment on paper & on his/her finger, and the other doesn't, you have a problem. That just breeds resentment which will eventually destroy the relationship. Also, I think you should wait a few years before making that decision. Even if you know he's "the one", life happens. It's good to see each other through a few years of seasons, through a few life-changes, especially when you're in your twenties. I know if my husband and I had gotten engaged or married sooner, we'd be on some shaky ground. We dated for almost 3 years until we got engaged, and lived together for another 2 before we got married. There were two big across state moves, grad school applications galore, and mini-life crises in between. I'm happy with our timeline :)

Kristin, are you really a writer? If so, for shame: "With one in ten marriages ending in divorce..." You should know that this is incredibly wrong. It's more like one in FIVE marriages that end in divorce (the 50% divorce rate which is pretty much common knowledge). Here are the stats from the CDC: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/divorce.htm

One in five is 20%. Just saying.

At what age does this three year rule become appropriate? Shouldn't a lot more people be marrying high school sweethearts and boys they meet the first day of freshman orientation if it makes sense?

marriage makes about as much sense as religion and a belief in "god." a good relationship isn't made better by marriage, and a bad relationship isn't somehow better because of it either. quit buying into other people's ideas of what makes something right or good. do what feels right. but, if marriage "feels right," remember that many marriages go bad and in the end all that the certificate has done to change things is to invite the state to regulate your emotional and financial relationship. if that's the protection or reassurance you need from marriage in the first place, please, spare your partner and don't marry him/her.

Half of all marriages end in divorce. That means the other half last a lifetime. If you don't like it, fine, but that doesn't mean it's universally unreasonable.

Jessie reminds me of the girl that plays george clooney's coworker on the movie "up in the air" and we know how that ends... i have to admit that I'm quite impressed with most of the comments here. It is unexpected from an online magazine based in NYC, especially for a foreigner