It's official: Gen Z are not delaying marriage til 30s anymore, young weddings are cool again

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about the other trend of not marrying at all?

I have coworkers with babies who are not married.

This is the actual trend. But it doesn't fit in with the current narrative being pushed

UMC/rich kids seem to be getting married younger. These kids likely have the support of the rich parents.

Poor and MC young adults may not have the money for a wedding or to buy a house. Our kids will have college, grad school, wedding and at least down payment from the parents. I would rather my kids marry relatively young in their twenties and have kids young.

I come from humble beginnings and traveled a ton in my twenties after I started working. My kids have been traveling internationally since they were young. My kids are still minors and been to Europe and Asia several times and the US/Caribbean countless times. It isn’t like they need to spend their twenties traveling and enjoying life. They have been doing this since being born.

Traveling with mama is not what people mean when they say "travel and see the world." That you would unironically write that tells me so much about you.

DP.

What does “travel and see the world” mean if not travel and see the world, which one can do with their friends, their parents, or even by themselves!

Do you mean getting drunk, high, and having sex with random strangers? That’s the only scenario in which you’re right and one would not get that experience traveling with mama…

No they mean exploring the world on your own without your parents paying for everything and holding your hand the entire time. Navigating a foreign transportation system or a language you don't speak on your own without well-traveled parents who can always step in to explain or guide.

I traveled a ton between birth and age 12 because my dad worked for a huge international company and we lived all over the world as he helped set up offices and factories for them. And then even after we settled in the US so I could have a "normal" high school experience we still traveled abroad a lot. So I was a "well-traveled" kid. But when I traveled in my 20s on my own I learned different things about myself. It was a totally different experience. Independence is a really powerful thing to explore and I do think I would have missed out on something if I'd married straight out of college even though obviously I wasn't lacking in opportunities to travel.

I never did the drinking and drugging and casual sex type of travel btw. I did meet lots of interesting people but I have always known to be cautious when traveling abroad.

You’re speaking from an upper middle class / wealthy bubble. The vast majority of American kids, teens, and young adults will NEVER “see the world”. For the average American family a trip to a single European country for a week is literally a once-in-lifetime event.

So you can continue to split hairs about whether seeing the world as a kid “counts” or not, but just understand that it’s irrelevant.

DP. Isn’t that the topic of this thread?

Anyway, the point was that most young adults would benefit from getting TF out of their hometown. “Seeing the world” doesn’t just mean visiting some tourist trap in Europe.

So wait, are you talking about upper middle class young people who have almost certainly been out of their hometown? Or are you talking about lower class young people who not only have likely not gotten out of their hometown, but will never do so regardless of their age at marriage?

Most young adults should become independent and ideally live somewhere else before settling down.

Why?

DP. If you go directly from being dependent on your parents to being committed to another person, you don’t get many opportunities to make decisions that are purely in your own self-interest, for better or for worse. Regardless of what age one gets married—if they get married—once they start checking the boxes of the traditional nuclear family, they might start to keenly feel the possibilities of how their life might turn out getting narrower and narrower. Which is normal and fine, but there’s that sweet spot right after college where there are just so many possibilities! What a wonderful thing and a great time to take chances, make mistakes with minimal consequences. Figure out what’s really important to
you. The more people you have hitched to you, the harder those risks are to take.

You can of course do that, but it is neither ideal nor necessary. It is merely one way to live your life.

I also can’t help but wonder how many folks on this thread are crowing about the supposed importance of living independently (particularly from their parents) while simultaneously receiving handouts. This area is rife with trust fund babies and people who had their entire undergraduate and graduate educations fully financed by mom and dad. Weddings paid for! Down payment assistance! College savings for the grandkids! And so on.

Some of us had to learn to be independent much earlier than many of the rich kids turned rich adults posting here…

You sound angry and like you have a chip on your shoulder. I'm sorry you didn't have successful parents, but there's nothing wrong with paying for your kid's education, engagement ring, wedding, honeymoon, and helping with a down payment on a first house. There is nothing to romanticize about starting adulthood in some student loan and rental apartment usury trap.

By extension...there's then nothing wrong with subsidizing every expense of your child for life. Of course that happens quite often with massive Trusts for kids.

I don't care one way or the other, but why stop at the things you list?

You're suggesting privileged kids are lazy layabouts, when they're anything but. They're wealthy Type A overachievers. They're going to selective colleges, getting great grades, and they're mindful about finding a spouse. Who you marry is the most important decision of your life. Not seriously looking for a spouse in your prime, when you're surrounded by 10,000-50,000 ambitious peers, is foolish. These kids have it all and they're quickly checking off status and milestone boxes. BA, check. Fiancé or fiancée, check. Grad school, check. Wedding, check. First house, check. Career in a premier city, check. Baby, check.

I’m fascinated that you think a checklist approach to life is desirable or to be emulated. It sounds incredibly depressing to me.

How else can you live? I mean you may not find the right person and that is fine but do you live without a plan and just go as the wind blows you? That is not how high achieving people think. Your plan may not work if you do not find the right person and could be delayed by decades even but your life has to have some structure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I got married at 23 and had my first at 26, in law school. People acted like I was a teen mom. It was ridiculous. I’ve been married for 17 years and I’m really happy with my choices. I have health problems now that could have kept me from having kids in my 30s. So I’m really glad I got that done in my 20s and I would recommend for my children to do the same.

At the same time, I was fairly mature at 23 and knew what I wanted. I knew DH was a good partner.

I wish I could have had children younger. I don't see what the big deal is. Think of how young you'll be when the nest empties!

I’ll be 46 and an empty nester MUAHAHAHA.

My 20s were hard but I’m happy DH was with me. He is the one who put me through law school. We had marriage, law school, babies overlapping and it was super hard but by my mid 30s life was so pleasant. Now nearing 40 my kids are older and I am really enjoying my life. I didn’t travel or date a lot but DH and I have had some fun trips while my parents stay with the kids.

It always stands out to me that young parents seem thrilled to be empty nesters and “enjoying my life.” There is this mindset that you’re happy the phase of having kids is over with.

Did you not enjoy having kids?
Perhaps you had to give up so much in your 20s and you feel like your time is finally your own? I can imagine you had virtually no time to yourself and had to struggle through lawschool if you had young babies at the same time.

I can’t imagine viewing having a family the way you do. I loved my time in my 20s and it’s now great to have a young family in my 40s.

+1! I read that and thought that sounds sad to be so giddy about your kids being gone. I was married young (23) but waited until 30s for kids. I’m glad we still have a way to go with them under my roof. In my 40s now.

Agree with this. I'm happy for anyone who is happy with their life choices, but I'd rather have kids later and spend much of my middle age years with kids in the house because this is when I most want to be home and don't feel curtailed by kids. I went out and traveled a lot in my 20s and early 30s -- by the time I got pregnant that was no longer as appealing to me and I was very ready to stay in more and have a more family-centric life. And no I was not out drinking and doing drugs and sleeping around -- I was just going out to dinner with friends, traveling to fun places, dating (but not having a ton of sex actually), and trying new hobbies. And now I'm eating dinners with my family and helping with homework and sewing halloween costumes... and happily going to bed at 9:30pm on a Friday.

This. Can’t imagine wanting my life to be limited by kids in my 20s. Someone who thinks this is the best option simply missed out on their 20s and doesn’t know any better.

You may as well try to convince me that the best time to have kids is high school.

You are limited by kids later then. This is not better or worse just different. They get their freedom too just later.

So if you spend Saturday night at home and hit the playground in the afternoon - you’d rather do this at 26 as opposed to 42?

At 42 you think you’ll have the same desire to party, socialize and travel that you did at 26? Even if I didn’t have kids, I can’t handle alcohol like I did at 26 and have slowed down significantly. I prefer evenings at home and my large suburban house.

This is ignoring a woman’s career and earning potential is way more limited by having children young. When I was 26 I would have had less parental leave and less flexibility.

My guess is you missed out on your 20s so you don’t know any better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about the other trend of not marrying at all?

I have coworkers with babies who are not married.

This is the actual trend. But it doesn't fit in with the current narrative being pushed

UMC/rich kids seem to be getting married younger. These kids likely have the support of the rich parents.

Poor and MC young adults may not have the money for a wedding or to buy a house. Our kids will have college, grad school, wedding and at least down payment from the parents. I would rather my kids marry relatively young in their twenties and have kids young.

I come from humble beginnings and traveled a ton in my twenties after I started working. My kids have been traveling internationally since they were young. My kids are still minors and been to Europe and Asia several times and the US/Caribbean countless times. It isn’t like they need to spend their twenties traveling and enjoying life. They have been doing this since being born.

Traveling with mama is not what people mean when they say "travel and see the world." That you would unironically write that tells me so much about you.

DP.

What does “travel and see the world” mean if not travel and see the world, which one can do with their friends, their parents, or even by themselves!

Do you mean getting drunk, high, and having sex with random strangers? That’s the only scenario in which you’re right and one would not get that experience traveling with mama…

No they mean exploring the world on your own without your parents paying for everything and holding your hand the entire time. Navigating a foreign transportation system or a language you don't speak on your own without well-traveled parents who can always step in to explain or guide.

I traveled a ton between birth and age 12 because my dad worked for a huge international company and we lived all over the world as he helped set up offices and factories for them. And then even after we settled in the US so I could have a "normal" high school experience we still traveled abroad a lot. So I was a "well-traveled" kid. But when I traveled in my 20s on my own I learned different things about myself. It was a totally different experience. Independence is a really powerful thing to explore and I do think I would have missed out on something if I'd married straight out of college even though obviously I wasn't lacking in opportunities to travel.

I never did the drinking and drugging and casual sex type of travel btw. I did meet lots of interesting people but I have always known to be cautious when traveling abroad.

You’re speaking from an upper middle class / wealthy bubble. The vast majority of American kids, teens, and young adults will NEVER “see the world”. For the average American family a trip to a single European country for a week is literally a once-in-lifetime event.

So you can continue to split hairs about whether seeing the world as a kid “counts” or not, but just understand that it’s irrelevant.

DP. Isn’t that the topic of this thread?

Anyway, the point was that most young adults would benefit from getting TF out of their hometown. “Seeing the world” doesn’t just mean visiting some tourist trap in Europe.

So wait, are you talking about upper middle class young people who have almost certainly been out of their hometown? Or are you talking about lower class young people who not only have likely not gotten out of their hometown, but will never do so regardless of their age at marriage?

Most young adults should become independent and ideally live somewhere else before settling down.

Why?

DP. If you go directly from being dependent on your parents to being committed to another person, you don’t get many opportunities to make decisions that are purely in your own self-interest, for better or for worse. Regardless of what age one gets married—if they get married—once they start checking the boxes of the traditional nuclear family, they might start to keenly feel the possibilities of how their life might turn out getting narrower and narrower. Which is normal and fine, but there’s that sweet spot right after college where there are just so many possibilities! What a wonderful thing and a great time to take chances, make mistakes with minimal consequences. Figure out what’s really important to
you. The more people you have hitched to you, the harder those risks are to take.

You can of course do that, but it is neither ideal nor necessary. It is merely one way to live your life.

I also can’t help but wonder how many folks on this thread are crowing about the supposed importance of living independently (particularly from their parents) while simultaneously receiving handouts. This area is rife with trust fund babies and people who had their entire undergraduate and graduate educations fully financed by mom and dad. Weddings paid for! Down payment assistance! College savings for the grandkids! And so on.

Some of us had to learn to be independent much earlier than many of the rich kids turned rich adults posting here…

You sound angry and like you have a chip on your shoulder. I'm sorry you didn't have successful parents, but there's nothing wrong with paying for your kid's education, engagement ring, wedding, honeymoon, and helping with a down payment on a first house. There is nothing to romanticize about starting adulthood in some student loan and rental apartment usury trap.

By extension...there's then nothing wrong with subsidizing every expense of your child for life. Of course that happens quite often with massive Trusts for kids.

I don't care one way or the other, but why stop at the things you list?

You're suggesting privileged kids are lazy layabouts, when they're anything but. They're wealthy Type A overachievers. They're going to selective colleges, getting great grades, and they're mindful about finding a spouse. Who you marry is the most important decision of your life. Not seriously looking for a spouse in your prime, when you're surrounded by 10,000-50,000 ambitious peers, is foolish. These kids have it all and they're quickly checking off status and milestone boxes. BA, check. Fiancé or fiancée, check. Grad school, check. Wedding, check. First house, check. Career in a premier city, check. Baby, check.

I’m fascinated that you think a checklist approach to life is desirable or to be emulated. It sounds incredibly depressing to me.

How else can you live? I mean you may not find the right person and that is fine but do you live without a plan and just go as the wind blows you? That is not how high achieving people think. Your plan may not work if you do not find the right person and could be delayed by decades even but your life has to have some structure.

Living life fully dies not require a detailed checklist or even a checklist at all

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I got married at 23 and had my first at 26, in law school. People acted like I was a teen mom. It was ridiculous. I’ve been married for 17 years and I’m really happy with my choices. I have health problems now that could have kept me from having kids in my 30s. So I’m really glad I got that done in my 20s and I would recommend for my children to do the same.

At the same time, I was fairly mature at 23 and knew what I wanted. I knew DH was a good partner.

I wish I could have had children younger. I don't see what the big deal is. Think of how young you'll be when the nest empties!

I’ll be 46 and an empty nester MUAHAHAHA.

My 20s were hard but I’m happy DH was with me. He is the one who put me through law school. We had marriage, law school, babies overlapping and it was super hard but by my mid 30s life was so pleasant. Now nearing 40 my kids are older and I am really enjoying my life. I didn’t travel or date a lot but DH and I have had some fun trips while my parents stay with the kids.

It always stands out to me that young parents seem thrilled to be empty nesters and “enjoying my life.” There is this mindset that you’re happy the phase of having kids is over with.

Did you not enjoy having kids?
Perhaps you had to give up so much in your 20s and you feel like your time is finally your own? I can imagine you had virtually no time to yourself and had to struggle through lawschool if you had young babies at the same time.

I can’t imagine viewing having a family the way you do. I loved my time in my 20s and it’s now great to have a young family in my 40s.

+1! I read that and thought that sounds sad to be so giddy about your kids being gone. I was married young (23) but waited until 30s for kids. I’m glad we still have a way to go with them under my roof. In my 40s now.

Agree with this. I'm happy for anyone who is happy with their life choices, but I'd rather have kids later and spend much of my middle age years with kids in the house because this is when I most want to be home and don't feel curtailed by kids. I went out and traveled a lot in my 20s and early 30s -- by the time I got pregnant that was no longer as appealing to me and I was very ready to stay in more and have a more family-centric life. And no I was not out drinking and doing drugs and sleeping around -- I was just going out to dinner with friends, traveling to fun places, dating (but not having a ton of sex actually), and trying new hobbies. And now I'm eating dinners with my family and helping with homework and sewing halloween costumes... and happily going to bed at 9:30pm on a Friday.

This. Can’t imagine wanting my life to be limited by kids in my 20s. Someone who thinks this is the best option simply missed out on their 20s and doesn’t know any better.

You may as well try to convince me that the best time to have kids is high school.

You are limited by kids later then. This is not better or worse just different. They get their freedom too just later.

So if you spend Saturday night at home and hit the playground in the afternoon - you’d rather do this at 26 as opposed to 42?

At 42 you think you’ll have the same desire to party, socialize and travel that you did at 26? Even if I didn’t have kids, I can’t handle alcohol like I did at 26 and have slowed down significantly. I prefer evenings at home and my large suburban house.

This is ignoring a woman’s career and earning potential is way more limited by having children young. When I was 26 I would have had less parental leave and less flexibility.

My guess is you missed out on your 20s so you don’t know any better.

I had kids in my 20s. I would not say I have slowed down significantly. Do you know why? Because I am no longer dealing with little kids! Because I was pregnant over a decade ago and my body has fully recovered! So I have the time, energy, and space to do things I couldn’t do as much when my kids were little. I did not binge drink in my 20s but I am ok with making that trade.

[Anonymous]

Lots of cope in this thread by people with IVF babies. People who will have to keep working until their 60s and 70s to cover college tuition, etc. while their peers have retired. And you will likely croak before you see a grandchild.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:20-yo Millie Bobby Brown and 22-yo husband (Bon Jovi's model son) just revealed their gorgeous wedding photos on social media to her 65 million followers. MBB is a trend setter. This follows influencer Sofia Richie getting married and quickly pregnant last year when she was just 24-yo. Pendulum has swung, gen Z'ers consider it is un-cool and weird to wait until late 20s or 30s to settle down.

Kids are pushing back against catastrophic mistakes of modern liberalism, the sexual revolution, and new age feminism. Millions of western women were duped into essentially deleted themselves from the gene pool chasing that Sex and the City independent girl boss nonsense into their 30s and 40s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Let’s revisit all these couples in 15 years. If they’re still together, great, but I suspect many will not be. These are starter marriages, people, not happily ever afters. We’ve got some real starry-eyed romantics in the crowd, it would appear.

You’re a miserable cynic. Quit projecting your bitterness onto others.

Not bitter, just realistic. To me you are like a child, still believing in fairy tales.

The data doesn’t support your view. Marriages for those 25-29 are more likely to last than those for older cohorts.

Cite your sources or GTFO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now that it's hard to afford a house, and careers aren't stable at all, why wait?

It's actually the opposite of this. Trend is young marriages for rich kids -- who have no student loans, get parent help including with house. Biglaw partner here and I have seen other partners kids getting engaged and married at college (quite often elite) or right after.

Yep. Rich kids are pairing during college and marrying soon after undergrad (and buying a nice house and will pop out easy kids). Not being married or at least engaged by mid to late 20s is going to be a prole tell for Gen Z’ers. Weird lower rung leftovers still using dating apps while their rich peers have kids and a big house.

Many, many people don’t think like this. It honestly seems a very Southern, conformist outlook on life.

Not southern. Rich or well to do. Actually conformist would be to wait until late 30s.

No, the way you describe is following the Life Script. Some of us opt out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about the other trend of not marrying at all?

I have coworkers with babies who are not married.

This is the actual trend. But it doesn't fit in with the current narrative being pushed

UMC/rich kids seem to be getting married younger. These kids likely have the support of the rich parents.

Poor and MC young adults may not have the money for a wedding or to buy a house. Our kids will have college, grad school, wedding and at least down payment from the parents. I would rather my kids marry relatively young in their twenties and have kids young.

I come from humble beginnings and traveled a ton in my twenties after I started working. My kids have been traveling internationally since they were young. My kids are still minors and been to Europe and Asia several times and the US/Caribbean countless times. It isn’t like they need to spend their twenties traveling and enjoying life. They have been doing this since being born.

Traveling with mama is not what people mean when they say "travel and see the world." That you would unironically write that tells me so much about you.

DP.

What does “travel and see the world” mean if not travel and see the world, which one can do with their friends, their parents, or even by themselves!

Do you mean getting drunk, high, and having sex with random strangers? That’s the only scenario in which you’re right and one would not get that experience traveling with mama…

No they mean exploring the world on your own without your parents paying for everything and holding your hand the entire time. Navigating a foreign transportation system or a language you don't speak on your own without well-traveled parents who can always step in to explain or guide.

I traveled a ton between birth and age 12 because my dad worked for a huge international company and we lived all over the world as he helped set up offices and factories for them. And then even after we settled in the US so I could have a "normal" high school experience we still traveled abroad a lot. So I was a "well-traveled" kid. But when I traveled in my 20s on my own I learned different things about myself. It was a totally different experience. Independence is a really powerful thing to explore and I do think I would have missed out on something if I'd married straight out of college even though obviously I wasn't lacking in opportunities to travel.

I never did the drinking and drugging and casual sex type of travel btw. I did meet lots of interesting people but I have always known to be cautious when traveling abroad.

You’re speaking from an upper middle class / wealthy bubble. The vast majority of American kids, teens, and young adults will NEVER “see the world”. For the average American family a trip to a single European country for a week is literally a once-in-lifetime event.

So you can continue to split hairs about whether seeing the world as a kid “counts” or not, but just understand that it’s irrelevant.

DP. Isn’t that the topic of this thread?

Anyway, the point was that most young adults would benefit from getting TF out of their hometown. “Seeing the world” doesn’t just mean visiting some tourist trap in Europe.

So wait, are you talking about upper middle class young people who have almost certainly been out of their hometown? Or are you talking about lower class young people who not only have likely not gotten out of their hometown, but will never do so regardless of their age at marriage?

Most young adults should become independent and ideally live somewhere else before settling down.

Why?

DP. If you go directly from being dependent on your parents to being committed to another person, you don’t get many opportunities to make decisions that are purely in your own self-interest, for better or for worse. Regardless of what age one gets married—if they get married—once they start checking the boxes of the traditional nuclear family, they might start to keenly feel the possibilities of how their life might turn out getting narrower and narrower. Which is normal and fine, but there’s that sweet spot right after college where there are just so many possibilities! What a wonderful thing and a great time to take chances, make mistakes with minimal consequences. Figure out what’s really important to
you. The more people you have hitched to you, the harder those risks are to take.

You can of course do that, but it is neither ideal nor necessary. It is merely one way to live your life.

I also can’t help but wonder how many folks on this thread are crowing about the supposed importance of living independently (particularly from their parents) while simultaneously receiving handouts. This area is rife with trust fund babies and people who had their entire undergraduate and graduate educations fully financed by mom and dad. Weddings paid for! Down payment assistance! College savings for the grandkids! And so on.

Some of us had to learn to be independent much earlier than many of the rich kids turned rich adults posting here…

You sound angry and like you have a chip on your shoulder. I'm sorry you didn't have successful parents, but there's nothing wrong with paying for your kid's education, engagement ring, wedding, honeymoon, and helping with a down payment on a first house. There is nothing to romanticize about starting adulthood in some student loan and rental apartment usury trap.

By extension...there's then nothing wrong with subsidizing every expense of your child for life. Of course that happens quite often with massive Trusts for kids.

I don't care one way or the other, but why stop at the things you list?

You're suggesting privileged kids are lazy layabouts, when they're anything but. They're wealthy Type A overachievers. They're going to selective colleges, getting great grades, and they're mindful about finding a spouse. Who you marry is the most important decision of your life. Not seriously looking for a spouse in your prime, when you're surrounded by 10,000-50,000 ambitious peers, is foolish. These kids have it all and they're quickly checking off status and milestone boxes. BA, check. Fiancé or fiancée, check. Grad school, check. Wedding, check. First house, check. Career in a premier city, check. Baby, check.

I’m fascinated that you think a checklist approach to life is desirable or to be emulated. It sounds incredibly depressing to me.

How else can you live? I mean you may not find the right person and that is fine but do you live without a plan and just go as the wind blows you? That is not how high achieving people think. Your plan may not work if you do not find the right person and could be delayed by decades even but your life has to have some structure.

Some of us just live without a checklist, yes. I didn’t seek marriage, I didn’t seek a beautiful apartment in NYC, I didn’t seek a good career. These things found me. All without a try-hard attitude to life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I got married at 23 and had my first at 26, in law school. People acted like I was a teen mom. It was ridiculous. I’ve been married for 17 years and I’m really happy with my choices. I have health problems now that could have kept me from having kids in my 30s. So I’m really glad I got that done in my 20s and I would recommend for my children to do the same.

At the same time, I was fairly mature at 23 and knew what I wanted. I knew DH was a good partner.

I wish I could have had children younger. I don't see what the big deal is. Think of how young you'll be when the nest empties!

I’ll be 46 and an empty nester MUAHAHAHA.

My 20s were hard but I’m happy DH was with me. He is the one who put me through law school. We had marriage, law school, babies overlapping and it was super hard but by my mid 30s life was so pleasant. Now nearing 40 my kids are older and I am really enjoying my life. I didn’t travel or date a lot but DH and I have had some fun trips while my parents stay with the kids.

It always stands out to me that young parents seem thrilled to be empty nesters and “enjoying my life.” There is this mindset that you’re happy the phase of having kids is over with.

Did you not enjoy having kids?
Perhaps you had to give up so much in your 20s and you feel like your time is finally your own? I can imagine you had virtually no time to yourself and had to struggle through lawschool if you had young babies at the same time.

I can’t imagine viewing having a family the way you do. I loved my time in my 20s and it’s now great to have a young family in my 40s.

+1! I read that and thought that sounds sad to be so giddy about your kids being gone. I was married young (23) but waited until 30s for kids. I’m glad we still have a way to go with them under my roof. In my 40s now.

Agree with this. I'm happy for anyone who is happy with their life choices, but I'd rather have kids later and spend much of my middle age years with kids in the house because this is when I most want to be home and don't feel curtailed by kids. I went out and traveled a lot in my 20s and early 30s -- by the time I got pregnant that was no longer as appealing to me and I was very ready to stay in more and have a more family-centric life. And no I was not out drinking and doing drugs and sleeping around -- I was just going out to dinner with friends, traveling to fun places, dating (but not having a ton of sex actually), and trying new hobbies. And now I'm eating dinners with my family and helping with homework and sewing halloween costumes... and happily going to bed at 9:30pm on a Friday.

This. Can’t imagine wanting my life to be limited by kids in my 20s. Someone who thinks this is the best option simply missed out on their 20s and doesn’t know any better.

You may as well try to convince me that the best time to have kids is high school.

You are limited by kids later then. This is not better or worse just different. They get their freedom too just later.

So if you spend Saturday night at home and hit the playground in the afternoon - you’d rather do this at 26 as opposed to 42?

At 42 you think you’ll have the same desire to party, socialize and travel that you did at 26? Even if I didn’t have kids, I can’t handle alcohol like I did at 26 and have slowed down significantly. I prefer evenings at home and my large suburban house.

This is ignoring a woman’s career and earning potential is way more limited by having children young. When I was 26 I would have had less parental leave and less flexibility.

My guess is you missed out on your 20s so you don’t know any better.

So if you’ve noticed how much easier drinking was on your body in your 20s, you can imagine how much easier something like pregnancy is in your 20s 😂

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about the other trend of not marrying at all?

I have coworkers with babies who are not married.

This is the actual trend. But it doesn't fit in with the current narrative being pushed

UMC/rich kids seem to be getting married younger. These kids likely have the support of the rich parents.

Poor and MC young adults may not have the money for a wedding or to buy a house. Our kids will have college, grad school, wedding and at least down payment from the parents. I would rather my kids marry relatively young in their twenties and have kids young.

I come from humble beginnings and traveled a ton in my twenties after I started working. My kids have been traveling internationally since they were young. My kids are still minors and been to Europe and Asia several times and the US/Caribbean countless times. It isn’t like they need to spend their twenties traveling and enjoying life. They have been doing this since being born.

Traveling with mama is not what people mean when they say "travel and see the world." That you would unironically write that tells me so much about you.

DP.

What does “travel and see the world” mean if not travel and see the world, which one can do with their friends, their parents, or even by themselves!

Do you mean getting drunk, high, and having sex with random strangers? That’s the only scenario in which you’re right and one would not get that experience traveling with mama…

No they mean exploring the world on your own without your parents paying for everything and holding your hand the entire time. Navigating a foreign transportation system or a language you don't speak on your own without well-traveled parents who can always step in to explain or guide.

I traveled a ton between birth and age 12 because my dad worked for a huge international company and we lived all over the world as he helped set up offices and factories for them. And then even after we settled in the US so I could have a "normal" high school experience we still traveled abroad a lot. So I was a "well-traveled" kid. But when I traveled in my 20s on my own I learned different things about myself. It was a totally different experience. Independence is a really powerful thing to explore and I do think I would have missed out on something if I'd married straight out of college even though obviously I wasn't lacking in opportunities to travel.

I never did the drinking and drugging and casual sex type of travel btw. I did meet lots of interesting people but I have always known to be cautious when traveling abroad.

You’re speaking from an upper middle class / wealthy bubble. The vast majority of American kids, teens, and young adults will NEVER “see the world”. For the average American family a trip to a single European country for a week is literally a once-in-lifetime event.

So you can continue to split hairs about whether seeing the world as a kid “counts” or not, but just understand that it’s irrelevant.

DP. Isn’t that the topic of this thread?

Anyway, the point was that most young adults would benefit from getting TF out of their hometown. “Seeing the world” doesn’t just mean visiting some tourist trap in Europe.

So wait, are you talking about upper middle class young people who have almost certainly been out of their hometown? Or are you talking about lower class young people who not only have likely not gotten out of their hometown, but will never do so regardless of their age at marriage?

Most young adults should become independent and ideally live somewhere else before settling down.

Why?

DP. If you go directly from being dependent on your parents to being committed to another person, you don’t get many opportunities to make decisions that are purely in your own self-interest, for better or for worse. Regardless of what age one gets married—if they get married—once they start checking the boxes of the traditional nuclear family, they might start to keenly feel the possibilities of how their life might turn out getting narrower and narrower. Which is normal and fine, but there’s that sweet spot right after college where there are just so many possibilities! What a wonderful thing and a great time to take chances, make mistakes with minimal consequences. Figure out what’s really important to
you. The more people you have hitched to you, the harder those risks are to take.

You can of course do that, but it is neither ideal nor necessary. It is merely one way to live your life.

I also can’t help but wonder how many folks on this thread are crowing about the supposed importance of living independently (particularly from their parents) while simultaneously receiving handouts. This area is rife with trust fund babies and people who had their entire undergraduate and graduate educations fully financed by mom and dad. Weddings paid for! Down payment assistance! College savings for the grandkids! And so on.

Some of us had to learn to be independent much earlier than many of the rich kids turned rich adults posting here…

You sound angry and like you have a chip on your shoulder. I'm sorry you didn't have successful parents, but there's nothing wrong with paying for your kid's education, engagement ring, wedding, honeymoon, and helping with a down payment on a first house. There is nothing to romanticize about starting adulthood in some student loan and rental apartment usury trap.

By extension...there's then nothing wrong with subsidizing every expense of your child for life. Of course that happens quite often with massive Trusts for kids.

I don't care one way or the other, but why stop at the things you list?

You're suggesting privileged kids are lazy layabouts, when they're anything but. They're wealthy Type A overachievers. They're going to selective colleges, getting great grades, and they're mindful about finding a spouse. Who you marry is the most important decision of your life. Not seriously looking for a spouse in your prime, when you're surrounded by 10,000-50,000 ambitious peers, is foolish. These kids have it all and they're quickly checking off status and milestone boxes. BA, check. Fiancé or fiancée, check. Grad school, check. Wedding, check. First house, check. Career in a premier city, check. Baby, check.

I’m fascinated that you think a checklist approach to life is desirable or to be emulated. It sounds incredibly depressing to me.

How else can you live? I mean you may not find the right person and that is fine but do you live without a plan and just go as the wind blows you? That is not how high achieving people think. Your plan may not work if you do not find the right person and could be delayed by decades even but your life has to have some structure.

Seems neurotic to think this way at 21. Also, short sighted. People should live their lives independently for a while after 18. Go travel. See the world. Sleep around a bit. Party. Obviously, they should go to college. And grad school is preferable. But to be so anxious and neurotic about locking down “the one” at 21 or 22 and married by like 23. Fking idiotic. The adult brain is only fully formed by mid 30’s based on the latest studies. Who you are at 21 will be vastly different at 41. You might even stunt your own growth getting married at 22. It’s just so fking boring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about the other trend of not marrying at all?

I have coworkers with babies who are not married.

This is the actual trend. But it doesn't fit in with the current narrative being pushed

UMC/rich kids seem to be getting married younger. These kids likely have the support of the rich parents.

Poor and MC young adults may not have the money for a wedding or to buy a house. Our kids will have college, grad school, wedding and at least down payment from the parents. I would rather my kids marry relatively young in their twenties and have kids young.

I come from humble beginnings and traveled a ton in my twenties after I started working. My kids have been traveling internationally since they were young. My kids are still minors and been to Europe and Asia several times and the US/Caribbean countless times. It isn’t like they need to spend their twenties traveling and enjoying life. They have been doing this since being born.

Traveling with mama is not what people mean when they say "travel and see the world." That you would unironically write that tells me so much about you.

DP.

What does “travel and see the world” mean if not travel and see the world, which one can do with their friends, their parents, or even by themselves!

Do you mean getting drunk, high, and having sex with random strangers? That’s the only scenario in which you’re right and one would not get that experience traveling with mama…

No they mean exploring the world on your own without your parents paying for everything and holding your hand the entire time. Navigating a foreign transportation system or a language you don't speak on your own without well-traveled parents who can always step in to explain or guide.

I traveled a ton between birth and age 12 because my dad worked for a huge international company and we lived all over the world as he helped set up offices and factories for them. And then even after we settled in the US so I could have a "normal" high school experience we still traveled abroad a lot. So I was a "well-traveled" kid. But when I traveled in my 20s on my own I learned different things about myself. It was a totally different experience. Independence is a really powerful thing to explore and I do think I would have missed out on something if I'd married straight out of college even though obviously I wasn't lacking in opportunities to travel.

I never did the drinking and drugging and casual sex type of travel btw. I did meet lots of interesting people but I have always known to be cautious when traveling abroad.

You’re speaking from an upper middle class / wealthy bubble. The vast majority of American kids, teens, and young adults will NEVER “see the world”. For the average American family a trip to a single European country for a week is literally a once-in-lifetime event.

So you can continue to split hairs about whether seeing the world as a kid “counts” or not, but just understand that it’s irrelevant.

DP. Isn’t that the topic of this thread?

Anyway, the point was that most young adults would benefit from getting TF out of their hometown. “Seeing the world” doesn’t just mean visiting some tourist trap in Europe.

So wait, are you talking about upper middle class young people who have almost certainly been out of their hometown? Or are you talking about lower class young people who not only have likely not gotten out of their hometown, but will never do so regardless of their age at marriage?

Most young adults should become independent and ideally live somewhere else before settling down.

Why?

DP. If you go directly from being dependent on your parents to being committed to another person, you don’t get many opportunities to make decisions that are purely in your own self-interest, for better or for worse. Regardless of what age one gets married—if they get married—once they start checking the boxes of the traditional nuclear family, they might start to keenly feel the possibilities of how their life might turn out getting narrower and narrower. Which is normal and fine, but there’s that sweet spot right after college where there are just so many possibilities! What a wonderful thing and a great time to take chances, make mistakes with minimal consequences. Figure out what’s really important to
you. The more people you have hitched to you, the harder those risks are to take.

You can of course do that, but it is neither ideal nor necessary. It is merely one way to live your life.

I also can’t help but wonder how many folks on this thread are crowing about the supposed importance of living independently (particularly from their parents) while simultaneously receiving handouts. This area is rife with trust fund babies and people who had their entire undergraduate and graduate educations fully financed by mom and dad. Weddings paid for! Down payment assistance! College savings for the grandkids! And so on.

Some of us had to learn to be independent much earlier than many of the rich kids turned rich adults posting here…

You sound angry and like you have a chip on your shoulder. I'm sorry you didn't have successful parents, but there's nothing wrong with paying for your kid's education, engagement ring, wedding, honeymoon, and helping with a down payment on a first house. There is nothing to romanticize about starting adulthood in some student loan and rental apartment usury trap.

By extension...there's then nothing wrong with subsidizing every expense of your child for life. Of course that happens quite often with massive Trusts for kids.

I don't care one way or the other, but why stop at the things you list?

You're suggesting privileged kids are lazy layabouts, when they're anything but. They're wealthy Type A overachievers. They're going to selective colleges, getting great grades, and they're mindful about finding a spouse. Who you marry is the most important decision of your life. Not seriously looking for a spouse in your prime, when you're surrounded by 10,000-50,000 ambitious peers, is foolish. These kids have it all and they're quickly checking off status and milestone boxes. BA, check. Fiancé or fiancée, check. Grad school, check. Wedding, check. First house, check. Career in a premier city, check. Baby, check.

I’m fascinated that you think a checklist approach to life is desirable or to be emulated. It sounds incredibly depressing to me.

How else can you live? I mean you may not find the right person and that is fine but do you live without a plan and just go as the wind blows you? That is not how high achieving people think. Your plan may not work if you do not find the right person and could be delayed by decades even but your life has to have some structure.

Some of us just live without a checklist, yes. I didn’t seek marriage, I didn’t seek a beautiful apartment in NYC, I didn’t seek a good career. These things found me. All without a try-hard attitude to life.

+1 No checklist here, either. Everything turned out great. I know several type-A checklist people, though, and they are super grating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about the other trend of not marrying at all?

I have coworkers with babies who are not married.

This is the actual trend. But it doesn't fit in with the current narrative being pushed

UMC/rich kids seem to be getting married younger. These kids likely have the support of the rich parents.

Poor and MC young adults may not have the money for a wedding or to buy a house. Our kids will have college, grad school, wedding and at least down payment from the parents. I would rather my kids marry relatively young in their twenties and have kids young.

I come from humble beginnings and traveled a ton in my twenties after I started working. My kids have been traveling internationally since they were young. My kids are still minors and been to Europe and Asia several times and the US/Caribbean countless times. It isn’t like they need to spend their twenties traveling and enjoying life. They have been doing this since being born.

Traveling with mama is not what people mean when they say "travel and see the world." That you would unironically write that tells me so much about you.

DP.

What does “travel and see the world” mean if not travel and see the world, which one can do with their friends, their parents, or even by themselves!

Do you mean getting drunk, high, and having sex with random strangers? That’s the only scenario in which you’re right and one would not get that experience traveling with mama…

No they mean exploring the world on your own without your parents paying for everything and holding your hand the entire time. Navigating a foreign transportation system or a language you don't speak on your own without well-traveled parents who can always step in to explain or guide.

I traveled a ton between birth and age 12 because my dad worked for a huge international company and we lived all over the world as he helped set up offices and factories for them. And then even after we settled in the US so I could have a "normal" high school experience we still traveled abroad a lot. So I was a "well-traveled" kid. But when I traveled in my 20s on my own I learned different things about myself. It was a totally different experience. Independence is a really powerful thing to explore and I do think I would have missed out on something if I'd married straight out of college even though obviously I wasn't lacking in opportunities to travel.

I never did the drinking and drugging and casual sex type of travel btw. I did meet lots of interesting people but I have always known to be cautious when traveling abroad.

You’re speaking from an upper middle class / wealthy bubble. The vast majority of American kids, teens, and young adults will NEVER “see the world”. For the average American family a trip to a single European country for a week is literally a once-in-lifetime event.

So you can continue to split hairs about whether seeing the world as a kid “counts” or not, but just understand that it’s irrelevant.

DP. Isn’t that the topic of this thread?

Anyway, the point was that most young adults would benefit from getting TF out of their hometown. “Seeing the world” doesn’t just mean visiting some tourist trap in Europe.

So wait, are you talking about upper middle class young people who have almost certainly been out of their hometown? Or are you talking about lower class young people who not only have likely not gotten out of their hometown, but will never do so regardless of their age at marriage?

Most young adults should become independent and ideally live somewhere else before settling down.

Why?

DP. If you go directly from being dependent on your parents to being committed to another person, you don’t get many opportunities to make decisions that are purely in your own self-interest, for better or for worse. Regardless of what age one gets married—if they get married—once they start checking the boxes of the traditional nuclear family, they might start to keenly feel the possibilities of how their life might turn out getting narrower and narrower. Which is normal and fine, but there’s that sweet spot right after college where there are just so many possibilities! What a wonderful thing and a great time to take chances, make mistakes with minimal consequences. Figure out what’s really important to
you. The more people you have hitched to you, the harder those risks are to take.

You can of course do that, but it is neither ideal nor necessary. It is merely one way to live your life.

I also can’t help but wonder how many folks on this thread are crowing about the supposed importance of living independently (particularly from their parents) while simultaneously receiving handouts. This area is rife with trust fund babies and people who had their entire undergraduate and graduate educations fully financed by mom and dad. Weddings paid for! Down payment assistance! College savings for the grandkids! And so on.

Some of us had to learn to be independent much earlier than many of the rich kids turned rich adults posting here…

You sound angry and like you have a chip on your shoulder. I'm sorry you didn't have successful parents, but there's nothing wrong with paying for your kid's education, engagement ring, wedding, honeymoon, and helping with a down payment on a first house. There is nothing to romanticize about starting adulthood in some student loan and rental apartment usury trap.

By extension...there's then nothing wrong with subsidizing every expense of your child for life. Of course that happens quite often with massive Trusts for kids.

I don't care one way or the other, but why stop at the things you list?

You're suggesting privileged kids are lazy layabouts, when they're anything but. They're wealthy Type A overachievers. They're going to selective colleges, getting great grades, and they're mindful about finding a spouse. Who you marry is the most important decision of your life. Not seriously looking for a spouse in your prime, when you're surrounded by 10,000-50,000 ambitious peers, is foolish. These kids have it all and they're quickly checking off status and milestone boxes. BA, check. Fiancé or fiancée, check. Grad school, check. Wedding, check. First house, check. Career in a premier city, check. Baby, check.

I’m fascinated that you think a checklist approach to life is desirable or to be emulated. It sounds incredibly depressing to me.

How else can you live? I mean you may not find the right person and that is fine but do you live without a plan and just go as the wind blows you? That is not how high achieving people think. Your plan may not work if you do not find the right person and could be delayed by decades even but your life has to have some structure.

Some of us just live without a checklist, yes. I didn’t seek marriage, I didn’t seek a beautiful apartment in NYC, I didn’t seek a good career. These things found me. All without a try-hard attitude to life.

+1 No checklist here, either. Everything turned out great. I know several type-A checklist people, though, and they are super grating.

“People who live their lives differently from me annoy me even though my life is fine/awesome I swear”

DCUM in a nutshell

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about the other trend of not marrying at all?

I have coworkers with babies who are not married.

This is the actual trend. But it doesn't fit in with the current narrative being pushed

UMC/rich kids seem to be getting married younger. These kids likely have the support of the rich parents.

Poor and MC young adults may not have the money for a wedding or to buy a house. Our kids will have college, grad school, wedding and at least down payment from the parents. I would rather my kids marry relatively young in their twenties and have kids young.

I come from humble beginnings and traveled a ton in my twenties after I started working. My kids have been traveling internationally since they were young. My kids are still minors and been to Europe and Asia several times and the US/Caribbean countless times. It isn’t like they need to spend their twenties traveling and enjoying life. They have been doing this since being born.

Traveling with mama is not what people mean when they say "travel and see the world." That you would unironically write that tells me so much about you.

DP.

What does “travel and see the world” mean if not travel and see the world, which one can do with their friends, their parents, or even by themselves!

Do you mean getting drunk, high, and having sex with random strangers? That’s the only scenario in which you’re right and one would not get that experience traveling with mama…

No they mean exploring the world on your own without your parents paying for everything and holding your hand the entire time. Navigating a foreign transportation system or a language you don't speak on your own without well-traveled parents who can always step in to explain or guide.

I traveled a ton between birth and age 12 because my dad worked for a huge international company and we lived all over the world as he helped set up offices and factories for them. And then even after we settled in the US so I could have a "normal" high school experience we still traveled abroad a lot. So I was a "well-traveled" kid. But when I traveled in my 20s on my own I learned different things about myself. It was a totally different experience. Independence is a really powerful thing to explore and I do think I would have missed out on something if I'd married straight out of college even though obviously I wasn't lacking in opportunities to travel.

I never did the drinking and drugging and casual sex type of travel btw. I did meet lots of interesting people but I have always known to be cautious when traveling abroad.

You’re speaking from an upper middle class / wealthy bubble. The vast majority of American kids, teens, and young adults will NEVER “see the world”. For the average American family a trip to a single European country for a week is literally a once-in-lifetime event.

So you can continue to split hairs about whether seeing the world as a kid “counts” or not, but just understand that it’s irrelevant.

DP. Isn’t that the topic of this thread?

Anyway, the point was that most young adults would benefit from getting TF out of their hometown. “Seeing the world” doesn’t just mean visiting some tourist trap in Europe.

So wait, are you talking about upper middle class young people who have almost certainly been out of their hometown? Or are you talking about lower class young people who not only have likely not gotten out of their hometown, but will never do so regardless of their age at marriage?

Most young adults should become independent and ideally live somewhere else before settling down.

Why?

DP. If you go directly from being dependent on your parents to being committed to another person, you don’t get many opportunities to make decisions that are purely in your own self-interest, for better or for worse. Regardless of what age one gets married—if they get married—once they start checking the boxes of the traditional nuclear family, they might start to keenly feel the possibilities of how their life might turn out getting narrower and narrower. Which is normal and fine, but there’s that sweet spot right after college where there are just so many possibilities! What a wonderful thing and a great time to take chances, make mistakes with minimal consequences. Figure out what’s really important to
you. The more people you have hitched to you, the harder those risks are to take.

You can of course do that, but it is neither ideal nor necessary. It is merely one way to live your life.

I also can’t help but wonder how many folks on this thread are crowing about the supposed importance of living independently (particularly from their parents) while simultaneously receiving handouts. This area is rife with trust fund babies and people who had their entire undergraduate and graduate educations fully financed by mom and dad. Weddings paid for! Down payment assistance! College savings for the grandkids! And so on.

Some of us had to learn to be independent much earlier than many of the rich kids turned rich adults posting here…

F
You sound angry and like you have a chip on your shoulder. I'm sorry you didn't have successful parents, but there's nothing wrong with paying for your kid's education, engagement ring, wedding, honeymoon, and helping with a down payment on a first house. There is nothing to romanticize about starting adulthood in some student loan and rental apartment usury trap.

By extension...there's then nothing wrong with subsidizing every expense of your child for life. Of course that happens quite often with massive Trusts for kids.

I don't care one way or the other, but why at the things you list?

You're suggesting privileged kids are lazy layabouts, when they're anything but. They're wealthy Type A overachievers. They're going to selective colleges, getting great grades, and they're mindful about finding a spouse. Who you marry is the most important decision of your life. Not seriously looking for a spouse in your prime, when you're surrounded by 10,000-50,000 ambitious peers, is foolish. These kids have it all and they're quickly checking off status and milestone boxes. BA, check. Fiancé or fiancée, check. Grad school, check. Wedding, check. First house, check. Career in a premier city, check. Baby, check.

I’m fascinated that you think a checklist approach to life is desirable or to be emulated. It sounds incredibly depressing to me.

How else can you live? I mean you may not find the right person and that is fine but do you live without a plan and just go as the wind blows you? That is not how high achieving people think. Your plan may not work if you do not find the right person and could be delayed by decades even but your life has to have some structure.

Seems neurotic to think this way at 21. Also, short sighted. People should live their lives independently for a while after 18. Go travel. See the world. Sleep around a bit. Party. Obviously, they should go to college. And grad school is preferable. But to be so anxious and neurotic about locking down “the one” at 21 or 22 and married by like 23. Fking idiotic. The adult brain is only fully formed by mid 30’s based on the latest studies. Who you are at 21 will be vastly different at 41. You might even stunt your own growth getting married at 22. It’s just so fking boring.

I don’t think anyone said that you should be anxious and neurotic about it? That is your contribution.

I got married at 23. It definitely was not my goal or my parents’ goal for me to be married at that age but I had found the one, and I’m so happy I spent so much of my life with him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about the other trend of not marrying at all?

I have coworkers with babies who are not married.

This is the actual trend. But it doesn't fit in with the current narrative being pushed

UMC/rich kids seem to be getting married younger. These kids likely have the support of the rich parents.

Poor and MC young adults may not have the money for a wedding or to buy a house. Our kids will have college, grad school, wedding and at least down payment from the parents. I would rather my kids marry relatively young in their twenties and have kids young.

I come from humble beginnings and traveled a ton in my twenties after I started working. My kids have been traveling internationally since they were young. My kids are still minors and been to Europe and Asia several times and the US/Caribbean countless times. It isn’t like they need to spend their twenties traveling and enjoying life. They have been doing this since being born.

Traveling with mama is not what people mean when they say "travel and see the world." That you would unironically write that tells me so much about you.

DP.

What does “travel and see the world” mean if not travel and see the world, which one can do with their friends, their parents, or even by themselves!

Do you mean getting drunk, high, and having sex with random strangers? That’s the only scenario in which you’re right and one would not get that experience traveling with mama…

No they mean exploring the world on your own without your parents paying for everything and holding your hand the entire time. Navigating a foreign transportation system or a language you don't speak on your own without well-traveled parents who can always step in to explain or guide.

I traveled a ton between birth and age 12 because my dad worked for a huge international company and we lived all over the world as he helped set up offices and factories for them. And then even after we settled in the US so I could have a "normal" high school experience we still traveled abroad a lot. So I was a "well-traveled" kid. But when I traveled in my 20s on my own I learned different things about myself. It was a totally different experience. Independence is a really powerful thing to explore and I do think I would have missed out on something if I'd married straight out of college even though obviously I wasn't lacking in opportunities to travel.

I never did the drinking and drugging and casual sex type of travel btw. I did meet lots of interesting people but I have always known to be cautious when traveling abroad.

You’re speaking from an upper middle class / wealthy bubble. The vast majority of American kids, teens, and young adults will NEVER “see the world”. For the average American family a trip to a single European country for a week is literally a once-in-lifetime event.

So you can continue to split hairs about whether seeing the world as a kid “counts” or not, but just understand that it’s irrelevant.

DP. Isn’t that the topic of this thread?

Anyway, the point was that most young adults would benefit from getting TF out of their hometown. “Seeing the world” doesn’t just mean visiting some tourist trap in Europe.

So wait, are you talking about upper middle class young people who have almost certainly been out of their hometown? Or are you talking about lower class young people who not only have likely not gotten out of their hometown, but will never do so regardless of their age at marriage?

Most young adults should become independent and ideally live somewhere else before settling down.

Why?

DP. If you go directly from being dependent on your parents to being committed to another person, you don’t get many opportunities to make decisions that are purely in your own self-interest, for better or for worse. Regardless of what age one gets married—if they get married—once they start checking the boxes of the traditional nuclear family, they might start to keenly feel the possibilities of how their life might turn out getting narrower and narrower. Which is normal and fine, but there’s that sweet spot right after college where there are just so many possibilities! What a wonderful thing and a great time to take chances, make mistakes with minimal consequences. Figure out what’s really important to
you. The more people you have hitched to you, the harder those risks are to take.

You can of course do that, but it is neither ideal nor necessary. It is merely one way to live your life.

I also can’t help but wonder how many folks on this thread are crowing about the supposed importance of living independently (particularly from their parents) while simultaneously receiving handouts. This area is rife with trust fund babies and people who had their entire undergraduate and graduate educations fully financed by mom and dad. Weddings paid for! Down payment assistance! College savings for the grandkids! And so on.

Some of us had to learn to be independent much earlier than many of the rich kids turned rich adults posting here…

You sound angry and like you have a chip on your shoulder. I'm sorry you didn't have successful parents, but there's nothing wrong with paying for your kid's education, engagement ring, wedding, honeymoon, and helping with a down payment on a first house. There is nothing to romanticize about starting adulthood in some student loan and rental apartment usury trap.

By extension...there's then nothing wrong with subsidizing every expense of your child for life. Of course that happens quite often with massive Trusts for kids.

I don't care one way or the other, but why stop at the things you list?

You're suggesting privileged kids are lazy layabouts, when they're anything but. They're wealthy Type A overachievers. They're going to selective colleges, getting great grades, and they're mindful about finding a spouse. Who you marry is the most important decision of your life. Not seriously looking for a spouse in your prime, when you're surrounded by 10,000-50,000 ambitious peers, is foolish. These kids have it all and they're quickly checking off status and milestone boxes. BA, check. Fiancé or fiancée, check. Grad school, check. Wedding, check. First house, check. Career in a premier city, check. Baby, check.

I’m fascinated that you think a checklist approach to life is desirable or to be emulated. It sounds incredibly depressing to me.

How else can you live? I mean you may not find the right person and that is fine but do you live without a plan and just go as the wind blows you? That is not how high achieving people think. Your plan may not work if you do not find the right person and could be delayed by decades even but your life has to have some structure.

Some of us just live without a checklist, yes. I didn’t seek marriage, I didn’t seek a beautiful apartment in NYC, I didn’t seek a good career. These things found me. All without a try-hard attitude to life.

+1 No checklist here, either. Everything turned out great. I know several type-A checklist people, though, and they are super grating.

“People who live their lives differently from me annoy me even though my life is fine/awesome I swear”

DCUM in a nutshell

I mean, we’re not the ones accusing posters of being bitter femcel cat ladies. So who’s really annoyed by women making different decisions?