In a current Boundless discussion thread, Amir Larijani talks about how he and a bunch of other guys from his church staged an intervention with a peer, basically forcing him to propose to his girlfriend of nine years after she finally gave him an ultimatum. I think we’re supposed to cheer that the men strongarmed this guy into fessing up to his commitment fears and volunteering for lifelong financial servitude becoming the man God wants him to be, but the girlfriend is totally off the hook for sticking with a guy for NINE YEARS when he clearly had no intentions of proposing? Did she think she had NO OTHER OPTIONS? Was he THAT much better than everybody else? (Or were they having sex the entire time and so she had hamstered herself into thinking he was ~the one~? Because if they weren’t having sex, a nine-year celibate romantic relationship is just weird.)
No dating relationship should last nine years, unless you’re both widowed senior citizens who need someone to go to dinner at 4:30 with. Especially for Christians, it sounds completely unhealthy. Either you’re having sex, which is sinning, or you’re having almost-not-quite-sort-of sex, which is also sinning, or you’re not having sex at all, which is highly unnatural in the long term for two people who presumably are looking to have a future together where they WILL be having sex. I can see a Christian couple putting off sex for a year or two – but nine years?
I think I’m just having a knee-jerk reaction of mortification at the thought of marrying someone who more or less had to be pinned down and forced to say “uncle.” Sure, the woman in this sort of situation will always get cast as the angel who believed in his true, hidden self and showed biblical perseverance, faith, and loyalty in helping the man get past his fears, but….ugh.
Basically, I’m just here to reiterate my opinion that people should only date when they are prepared to enter into a marriage, and that the dating period and engagement should be short.
Haley's Halo 
Ah Boundless. Its churchian dating practices and advice never ceasehad to make me cringe.
Yeah that’s a totally weird story. Christianity and marriage go hand in hand. If you’re with someone, it makes no sense not to marry them. The only reason you wouldn’t get married is because you couldn’t find someone… but that’s clearly not the case here.
“No dating relationship should last nine years, unless you’re both widowed senior citizens who need someone to go to dinner at 4:30 with.”
This is so funny. I can’t stop laughing!
I thought this post was about Prince William when I first saw the title…
It is interesting that she would stay with him for so long. Even more interesting that she was able to conjure that many Beta orbiters to get them to do the dirty, difficult work for her. It is somewhat surprising that none of these men tried to break her off of him years ago if she was such a catch, but then again it isn’t (a girl who has been in a relationship that long won’t be ready for another one any time soon after it ends).
With regards to the actual article, I would really like to see a Boundless article titled “Who Needs Women?” The sad thing is that it would be unbelievably pedestalizing by the end of it, rather than take really take women to task. Their conclusion would be “All men need women, it isn’t good for them to be alone.”
The proper conclusion would be that of the Bible: “Better to live on a corner of the roof than share a house with a quarrelsome wife” but that would never be printed. And you would never see them conclude that a man only needs a wife if she will be submissive and obedient according to Scripture.
Incredible story. I couldn’t agree more with Haley. White knights are the worst.
I think I’m just having a knee-jerk reaction of mortification at the thought of marrying someone who more or less had to be pinned down and forced to say “uncle.”
No worry. Once the girl has her “princess for a day” experience and her kids, there is this thing called “divorce” that Christian people “only” practice 38% of the time.
a girl who has been in a relationship that long won’t be ready for another one any time soon after it ends.
Don’t be so sure. Girls are able to change boyfriends very easily and they never look back. If a good candidate came to her and was commitment-minded, you will see how quickly this nine-year relationship would became history.
“Don’t be so sure. Girls are able to change boyfriends very easily and they never look back. If a good candidate came to her and was commitment-minded, you will see how quickly this nine-year relationship would became history.”
Good point. I reflexed back to Blue-Pill thinking for a second there. It would really all depend on hung-up she was with this guy and what was keeping her loyal for 9 years.
I’ve noticed this creeping cultural tendency to equate long-term relationships with marriage. Marriage supporters need to fight this.
Yeah, but the moral code around pre-marital sex always seemed weird to me. You can have sex with as many you want before getting in a relationship, but then all of a sudden having sex with someone else while in the relationship becomes the WORST THING EVER.
I think that the concept of marriage has been muddied by the existence of Marriage 2.0, complete with its government-sanctioning and free goodies for women breaking the covenant.
While the submission of this guy calls into question his alpha status, I don’t see anything wrong with a long-term/perpetual relationship for a Christian that does not culminate in “marriage.”
I don’t see anything wrong with a long-term/perpetual relationship for a Christian that does not culminate in “marriage.”
Either the relationship will eventually get sexual, or it won’t.
If it gets sexual, outside marriage, it’s a sin. Period, end of story. You may advance the argument that getting married in the eyes of the State is becoming a bad idea, and that you should be married in the eyes of God and church only (relying on civil contracts to handle property, etc). There is much merit in this line of reasoning. But NOT marrying before the Lord, and yet having sex, simply cannot be justified.
If it doesn’t get sexual… then, something’s radically wrong. Romantic relationships are created by God for the purpose of getting sexual. If you’ll never get sexual with her, cut her loose and free both of you to find someone else.
Yeah, but the moral code around pre-marital sex always seemed weird to me. You can have sex with as many you want before getting in a relationship, but then all of a sudden having sex with someone else while in the relationship becomes the WORST THING EVER.
That represents the decayed wreckage of a formerly Christian cultural morality. They have jettisoned chastity, but still want to hold onto loyalty. Hence uncommitted fornication is fine in their eyes, but once you are “in a relationship” you’re expected to be “faithful” in an absurd parody of the marriage sacrament: fornicating only with your significant other, forsaking all others, so long as ye both feel like you’re still in love.
“Either the relationship will eventually get sexual, or it won’t.
If it gets sexual, outside marriage, it’s a sin. Period, end of story.
That sounds a lot like knee-jerk rhetoric. Care to support that statement with scripture?
Nine years is definitely shit or get off the pot time.
Unfortunately it sounds like he never gave any thought to it and was thus pressured into it.
He’ll likely regret it in the future since it wasn’t really his choice, so there may still be time to save him yet.
Haley:
You hit the nail on the head. It doesn’t take nine years to figure out whether the person you are dating is marriage material for you and to figure out basic marriage compatibility. It should not take anyone more than a couple of months to figure out if dating the person is going anywhere.
Hey, be a little open-minded. My parents dated ten years before they got married – and they’re not even religious.
Been a while since I was last here… Articles like this are what motivate me to come back. Nine years…of romance? As far as I’m concerned, if we are to assume that no fornication is taking place, this kind of delay can only begin to be plausible in a relationship where physical contact of any kind is scarce–say, when at least 100 miles separate the two parties–and even then it still sounds like a stretch. If they so much as live in the same metro area and spend nine years romantically involved with no sign of impending matrimony, you can bet your bottom dollar that they’re foolin’ around. There are no good guys in this kind of relationship. My prescription: the Eyeball for both parties and let them fight it out. Taking sides in this could only sully an otherwise innocent bystander.
asdf, can you tell us more? How did this come about? My parents dated for four and a half years before they got married, i.e., from fall of freshman year until the summer after my father’s first year of law school, but note that (i) they were young and (ii) they were certainly fooling around, in a way that Haley would probably disapprove of, though they didn’t go “all the way.”
Haley: No one strongarmed him into proposing to her. We pushed him to make a decision. “Crap or get off the pot” was said many times, by most of the guys.
Had he chose to let her go and move on, that would have been as valid as proposing marriage. He was under no compulsion to give her a ring, but merely to make a decision and move with it.
What came out in the discussion was that fear was keeping him back, and it wasn’t just about that relationship. He was allowing himself to be stigmatized–on so many fronts–by what a pastor said to him many years ago.
I submitted that this could be the time he had a goal-line stand and turned that tide.
Oh, and as for her, no one is denying that there were plenty of issues in play on her end as well. She should have dumped him–or otherwise forced the issue–a long time ago.
They will have their baggage to sort out as a result of their shortcomings; at the same time, they seem to be doing quite well so far.