Why you shouldn't marry someone you've known less than a year

Last month, Kim Kardashian got engaged to her boyfriend, Kris Humphries. They'll supposedly wed in August, which is so fast it could make your head spin (while you're simultaneously contemplating whether or not she's possibly preggers). But the minuscule engagement time isn't what gets me. It's more the fact that these two barely know one another. They were dating for only six months before Kris popped the Q by spelling out "Will you marry me?" in rose petals (gag).

We all know Kim is in some kind of big damn rush to be a Mrs. (WHY, I don't know, given how "successful" other reality stars' marriages have been!) I just can't help but think that it's semi-delusional to tie the knot with someone you've known less than a year. Hey, people do it all the time. Even sis Khloe got hitched to hubs Lamar Odom just one month after they started dating. (Talk about delusional!)

More from The Stir: The Sexual Bucket List: 50 Things to Do Sexually Before You Die

All I know is this: My boyfriend and I went on vacation together in Mexico (for fun) and Canada (for my work) when we had only been dating three months. That at the time seemed like a big deal. At six months in, I think he was still refraining from farting in front of me. (Oh, those were the days!!!) At nine months was when we said "I love you," and we didn't officially move in together until we had been together a year and three months.

The case for living together before you get married is a whole different argument in itself, but let's just say I learned a lot more about my boyfriend once we shared a roof, moved together, split our rent, and learned to navigate one another's quirks and habits. 4.5 years later, I can finish his sentences and know his habits pretty well, and I'll admit I'm still learning about him. But I'm pretty sure I know what a life together would look like. At least I figure I have a far better idea now than I did six months in! Even a year or two in.

A relationship can evolve (or devolve) a lot over the course of a year ... two years ... three years. In fact, a recent study even found that three years in, people stop going out of their way to compliment their partners. We all know sex isn't the same after a year, and the study shows that's especially true after three. Not that you have to wait that long to make sure you want to get married, but it couldn't hurt to stay together a little longer to get a taste for what things will be like when they're not shiny and new.

More from The Stir: The Best & Worst Professions to Marry

And of course we have to grow and evolve with one another anyway, but marrying someone before you get to know them just seems like it would make that growing and evolving part even more difficult. You gotta have a solid foundation.

I'm sure there are probably some "love at first sight/first six month" fairy tales that result in a long and happy marriage. And yay for those few, brave souls! But for the rest of us -- I think we'd be crazy to follow in Kim Kardashian's rushed footsteps.

What do you consider the right amount of time to be with someone before getting married?

Source Maressa Brown
Image via CNDY/Flickr

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in commitment , dating , gay and lesbian marriage , kardashians , love , marriage , weddings

Brazil's top court recognizes same-sex civil unions

SAO PAULO — Brazil's high court ruled that same-sex civil unions must be recognized, a decision welcomed as a watershed by gay activists who also hope it will cool rising violence against homosexuals in Latin America's most populous nation.

The ruling, however, stopped short of legalizing gay marriage in Brazil, which has more Roman Catholics than any other country. The Catholic Church foughtt the measure. In a vote late Thursday, all but one of the 11 Supreme Court justices backed civil union rights for same-sex couple. One justice abstained. The court ruled that gay couples deserve the same legal rights as heterosexual pairs when it comes to alimony, retirement benefits of a partner who dies and inheritances, among other issues.

In Latin America, gay marriage is legal only in Argentina and Mexico City. Same-sex civil unions granting some rights to homosexual couples are legal in Uruguay and in some states of Mexico outside the capital. Colombia's Constitutional Court has granted same-sex couples inheritance rights and allowed them to add their partners to health insurance plans.

Brazil's ruling sets a judicial precedent that must be honored by all public institutions, including notary publics where civil unions must be registered. "This is a historic moment for all Brazilians, not just homosexuals. This judgment will change everything for us in society — and for the better," said Marcelo Cerqueira with the gay rights group Grupo Gay da Bahia. "Gays, lesbians and transsexuals will be recognized as being more human. We'll be more accepted by having our rights honored." Grupo Gay da Bahia said in a recent report that 260 gays were murdered in 2010 in Brazil, up 113 percent from five years ago, including recent high-profile cases that made headlines. On April 5, the body of 16-year-old girl was found in a remote area of Brazil's Goias state. The father and brother of her teenage girlfriend were arrested. Less than two weeks later, security cameras captured the beating death of a 24-year-old transvestite in northeastern Paraiba state. Gay activist Cerqueira said he hoped the ruling would be the start of an end to such violence.

"This ruling will help. The violence comes about because of impunity for those who commit it," Cerqueira said. "When a country judges a case like this in favor of us, it will have an impact across the judicial and law enforcement sectors." The request for the Supreme Court to recognize civil unions came two years ago from the Brazilian attorney general's office, largely because legislation that would give same-sex couples the rights enjoyed by married heterosexual couples has been stalled in Congress for more than a decade. Brazil's constitution defines a "family entity" as "a stable union between a man and a woman." But the attorney general's office argued the clause is only a definition and not a limitation, and thus the charter does not say a stable union can "only" be between a man and a woman. The attorney general also argued that the constitution does not specifically forbid a civil union between people of the same sex — and that failing to recognize same-sex unions violates the charter's defenses of human dignity and equality. The attorney general also argued that the constitution does not specifically forbid a civil union between people of the same sex — and that failing to recognize same-sex unions violates the charter's defenses of human dignity and equality.

Oliveira said the document's lack of an explicit statement that a family partnership is limited to those between a man and a woman did not mean that "every type of union has to be considered." Ralph Lichota, a lawyer representing religious groups, told the court the legal recognition of same-sex couples should be left in the hands citizens. "Power emanates from the people, and the Brazilian people are Christian," he said. "God created marriage when he created Adam and Eve. Just like the Brazilian people aren't ready to legalize marijuana, like they're aren't prepared to have abortion, we're not ready for homosexual marriage." Luis Roberto Barroso, a law professor at Rio de Janeiro State University, argued in a friend-of-the-court appearance before the justices that allowing same-sex civil unions would mean "overcoming historical discrimination." Luis Roberto Barroso, a law professor at Rio de Janeiro State University, argued in a friend-of-the-court appearance before the justices that allowing same-sex civil unions would mean "overcoming historical discrimination."

Source .ctv.ca

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in brazil same sex , Gay and Lesbian , gay and lesbian marriage , J Sisters the Brazilian Bikini Wax