We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
There is plenty of motherly and grandmotherly wisdom in that book. Men used to talk about "settling down." Women need to learn how to make that happen unless their desire is to live forever like Hollywood starlets.
Here's a quote from the Amazon comments:
"Getting to I Do" catalogued various relationship scenarios, where the authors pointed out what worked and what didn't. I have to be honest, being a self-supportive "modern woman", I at first thought that the simplistic illustrations of male/female dynamics were really old-fashioned and that I might as well just talk it out with my grandmother. But, the book went way beyond just designating roles. For me it helped me to embrace the woman I was and to understand the relationship dynamic I wanted to have.
The book is terrific. I read it and applied it to my next relationship-someone I fell in love with and wanted to marry. I went through the "phases" as stated in the book and when it got down to the "negotiation" phase, my boyfriend wanted to move to France, with me. Great! But, not with an engagement. Turns out he was not ready to be married. It was a very painful to think about being without him. To have my dreams of being married to him dissolve. Fortunaltely, I had learned that I would be putting myself through so much more pain and anguish if I had up-rooted my life without any commitment other than being a great boyfriend. So, I let him go.
Hmmm, Instapundit's semi-obsession with "relationships" seems to be contagious in the Blogosphere. Julias all: the modern woman, so strong and determined to have it all, yet so vulnerable and dependent. And yes, my dear, that burqa does make you look fat.
Hah! Reminds me of Dr Laura many years ago on radio who, when the callers said "I'm engaged..." would interrupt, asking "Do you have a ring and a date?" - Dr Laura's criteria for serious engagement was very clear!
Back in the '50s we just rambled through the brambles of courtship and marriage. Of course back then, the marriage rate was horrendously low, and the divorce rate was horrendously high. Not idyllic like it is today.
"One of the best insights in the book for me was that rejecting someone can be an act of love. The author advocates either accepting or rejecting someone, both are acts of love. What is not an act of love is to tolerate someone."
Wow, that's quite a statement. Would love to hear that in the mainstream.
My answer as a 69 year old man is not much different today then it was when I was 21. The only difference is then I knew no other answer and now I know the other answers are wrong. Marry when you fall deep in love if she will have you. Will it last forever and be a fairy tale marriage? Bwahahaha! Not unless you are very lucky but it will be a marriage based on love which will be, for as long as it lasts, a happy marriage. Well doesn't everyone marry for love, you ask? If they did we wouldn't be having this conversation or a million books on how to meet and marry someone. How do you know when you are deep in love, you ask? If you have to ask I am so sorry for you. But if you are still young and have to ask then I can only say; you will know. The problem then will be is it mutual and are you smart enough to not let it slip away...