Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of couples have to have long engagements here in this area because venues book up about 18 months in advance. I only had an 11 month engagement and had to take a spot that got vacated by chance (their next spot wasn't available for 2 years). It's not always the couple's choice.

If they are engaged, but not actively booking wedding venues and caterers, I would think they don't plan on getting married.

But it is the couple’s choice. Guarantee they could find somewhere within a few months. I had a four month engagement in DC and had a beautiful church wedding and a reception at a fabulous venue.

+1

You can definitely find a place. It is the couple's choice to go all bridezilla/groomzilla and declare that only one venue works for their reception (which is why many of us see this this for what it is - as masking ambivalence about the overall relationship).

How is it bride/groomzilla to pick a specific venue and want it badly enough to wait? It’s not like they’re charging you by the day. Such judgement.

gotta lock that stuff down! 6 month engagement for me.

I don't think anything of it unless they were dating for like 10 years first, and then I just assume she got a "shut up for a while" ring. But even that is just a passing thought, I really don't care.

I think you ought to have better things to ponder.

But longer engagements are a relatively new thing. I'm thinking of acquaintances and coworkers for whom " getting engaged " doesn't mean getting married or even planning a wedding. It's a chance to formalize their relationship and use fiancé/fiancée. There may or may not be any wedding planning.

We were engaged 2 years after dating for 3 years. Together 5 years total before we married. I think it’s much stranger to be married wishing 2 years of your first date as opposed to being engaged for 2 years after dating a while. I wanted to really know him and be sure we were compatible, live together a little while, be on the same page about things like kids and money.

But then I remember that everyone is different and what worked for us definitely doesn’t work for everyone. As long as they’re happy I don’t care how long they’re engaged. I’ll be at the wedding celebrating with them whether it took 5 months or 5 years for them to get there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of couples have to have long engagements here in this area because venues book up about 18 months in advance. I only had an 11 month engagement and had to take a spot that got vacated by chance (their next spot wasn't available for 2 years). It's not always the couple's choice.

If they are engaged, but not actively booking wedding venues and caterers, I would think they don't plan on getting married.

But it is the couple’s choice. Guarantee they could find somewhere within a few months. I had a four month engagement in DC and had a beautiful church wedding and a reception at a fabulous venue.

+1

You can definitely find a place. It is the couple's choice to go all bridezilla/groomzilla and declare that only one venue works for their reception (which is why many of us see this this for what it is - as masking ambivalence about the overall relationship).

Anonymous wrote:A lot of couples have to have long engagements here in this area because venues book up about 18 months in advance. I only had an 11 month engagement and had to take a spot that got vacated by chance (their next spot wasn't available for 2 years). It's not always the couple's choice.

If they are engaged, but not actively booking wedding venues and caterers, I would think they don't plan on getting married.

But it is the couple’s choice. Guarantee they could find somewhere within a few months. I had a four month engagement in DC and had a beautiful church wedding and a reception at a fabulous venue.

Anonymous wrote:A lot of couples have to have long engagements here in this area because venues book up about 18 months in advance. I only had an 11 month engagement and had to take a spot that got vacated by chance (their next spot wasn't available for 2 years). It's not always the couple's choice.

If they are engaged, but not actively booking wedding venues and caterers, I would think they don't plan on getting married.

This. A few couples I know who had an official engagement that lasted less than a year, followed by a Saturday night wedding at a top location actually had their venue booked BEFORE the proposal. So, I think up to like an 18 month engagement or so is normal, but 2 years or more is definitely not normal.

Generally, I think long engagements = ambivalence. I'd never say this to someone in person, but on an anonymous message board...yeah.

A lot of couples have to have long engagements here in this area because venues book up about 18 months in advance. I only had an 11 month engagement and had to take a spot that got vacated by chance (their next spot wasn't available for 2 years). It's not always the couple's choice.

If they are engaged, but not actively booking wedding venues and caterers, I would think they don't plan on getting married.

I'd rather they have a long engagement with a fabulous wedding than someone who clearly woke up in May and decided - let's get married in July! Yes, that is happening to me.

I think 18 months is extremely normal. If it’s more than 3 years, you might wonder why, but I doubt anyone actually cares.

Not my thing. Just get married already.

Don't care. Let people do what works for them. I've seen it happen for various reasons.

What are you thoughts on couples who get engaged and stay engaged for several years (18 mos. or longer post engagement) "planning" the wedding? Does it come across as having apprehensions about getting married to take 3 years to plan a wedding, or to schedule a wedding 5 years out from the engagement?