President Monson's conference talk RE marriage

[Col. Flagg]

Does this mean I can get back up on my high horse? :p

Nope!

[iamse7en]

Great commentary tmac! I agree with you. The true, enduring, and eternal love we seek can't even be developed in a couple years of courtship. It's decades of experience, communication, compromise, hardship, and joy. The choices each spouse makes along the way will ultimately determine whether there is lasting, enduring love. Choose your love, then love your choice!

[ChemtrailWatcher]

Nope!

Hey, no fair! How come you get to and I don't?

[Col. Flagg]

Nope!

Hey, no fair! How come you get to and I don't?

Because you're only Captain of 100 - gotta be Captain of 1,000 to get off.

[HeirofNumenor]

Thank you tmac!

I would like to add that the circumstances, attitudes, choices, values, and maturity at the start of any dating interaction will have tremendous bearing on whether or not a marriage can succeed - definitely on how hard it will be.

[linj2fly]

wow, tmac---I cannot thank you enough for Pres. Hinckley's quote....I'm gonna have to look up that talk now and read it.

Also--thank you to whoever (can't remember now) posted the documentary, "arranged"--that was very good!

I think this has been a good discussion...as far as pointing to what makes a successful marriage. I don't think the Brethren are rushing our members into marriage, however.

I had a sort of lightbulb moment the other day while I was watching a documentary about policy-making regarding our diets. I hope you'll forgive me because I'm still kind of processing these thoughts. I've been thinking alot about the idea of programs, institutions, etc that we rely on for success in life or to change behavior. It's the outside-in approach that Pres. Benson referred to as opposed to the way Christ changes us--from the inside out. In our country, vast amounts of money are spent via legislation to change behavior and the conditions is which people live--whether it be through education, removing choices, adding choices or redistributing money. We rely on these programs to save our people. When these programs fail to produce the desired results, rather than discontinuing the project we throw more money at it.

I think it happens in our wards sometimes, too. When the rubber meets the road we often rely on programs to save us. We think that YM/YW's or scouting or primary will save our children. We think if we choose this school or that or if we homeschool or whatever, we will get the desired result--as if there's magic in the institution itself.

The same could be said of marriage as well. The institution of marriage, ordained as it is, will not save us. It's not the end of the story like I somehow gleaned in YWs (Remain virtuous, marry an RM in the temple and live happily ever after--somehow I got the idea that if I did all these 'prerequistes' the hard work would be over. I know. silly me.) It's a start, though

Anyway, my final thought in all this was Elder Bednar's frequent reminder that we are to act and not merely be acted upon. It is a wonderful distinction, and, I think, the key to any success. If we rely on programs or institutions (marriage) to merely act on us, we will fail. But if we act or choose, as so many have stated, to come unto Christ with a broken heart and partake of His atonement, He will make the necessary changes in us so that we can create/cultivate happy marriages.

(If you're bored by now don't worry about reading the rest...it's just another tangent...)

I think I've mentioned before I am an RN in the ER. At least 50% (if not more) of our patient population is on welfare. As I have observed how we take care of our poor in this country, I have come to the conclusion that we isolate our poor (and have largely removed accountability as a result). Instead of personally ministering to the poor, we now have a middle man: the county DHS. Except for in my own ward, I do not interact with any individuals like I treat in my ER. I often think of Pres. Hinkcley's mandate that every new member needs a friend, a job and the good word of the gospel, and how he asked us to personally do this ministry. I've often thought that this would be a good model for privately taking care of our poor as well. In this way we could get nearer to lifting the poor and humbling the rich. But because we are isolated from eachother, we, the rich in spirit/money, do not get the growth that comes from personally ministering in this way, and they miss out on the exalting benefits of personal relationships like this.

Perhaps when the 'programs' and 'institutions' we rely on in the church aren't producing the desired results, it's because we are not ministering as we should. Ministering to those under our stewardship, be it our primary class, elder's quorom, or more importantly, our children or our spouse.

[iamse7en]

This should spark some new conversation:

Salt Lake Tribune: Why young LDS men are pushing back marriage

[HeirofNumenor]

This should spark some new conversation:

Salt Lake Tribune: Why young LDS men are pushing back marriage

interesting article....
It appears from the section called "Unintended Consequences", that the writer is blaming the Church's stance on no steady dating during high school/prior to boy's mission on why the RM's aren't asking girls out. Likewise the fact that women are getting educated, becoming successful in careers and money - and can't find a man who is the same. In February 1996, Pres. Hinckley began pushing for girls to get their education and be able to take care of themselves (in divorce, widowhood, spinsterhood) - and they DID, and ARE. The guys however, if they are not playing video games, then they are either stuck in school trying to get a high-paying job to match the financial expectations of the girls around them, or got married young: and are either still married, or now divorced. If divorced, the questions arise: "What's wrong with them? What did they do to blow their marriage?"

And so they women have a harder time finding someone on THEIR higher level.

[linj2fly]

This one, too:
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/51628 ... e.html.csp

The LDS Church is doing away with congregations exclusively for students and replacing them with "young single adult" wards throughout Utah, a Mormon general authority said Thursday.

[loquaciousmomma]

The writer was incorrect, youth are to group date at 16, double date at 17 and single date at 18. I find it interesting that this was even mentioned, as my kids tell me that there is no such thing as dating going on in their school. Either you are a couple or you aren't. They have told me it would be considered weird to just ask someone on a date. They would think you were going steady if you did.

So this isn't the fault of the dating policy of the church, it is because of a loss of courtship altogether in our society. Kids pair off earlier each year and end up acting like they are married in all ways but cohabitation.

The idea of courting a future spouse has been completely lost in our society.

[ChelC]

Thank heavens homeschooled kids are so weird. There are lots who are still learning the proper way to date from what I've seen.

I hope my eight year old stays naive for a lot longer!

[loquaciousmomma]

Thank heavens homeschooled kids are so weird. There are lots who are still learning the proper way to date from what I've seen.

I hope my eight year old stays naive for a lot longer!

:ymapplause:

[Fiannan]

I believe one big problem in Church is the segregation of people who are single based on age. In the real world people date others based on shared interests -- often meeting people in work or social settings regardless of age. So maybe this is why it is far more common for a 40 year old guy to be dating a 23 year old gal who are not Mormons since in church we make an artificial cut-off at 30. So females who go for grad degrees and are unmarried at 26 are often left with no options in a singles or student ward as the guys their age are aiming at the 19 year olds. And if a guy is single and older than 30 it is nearly impossible for him to meet the mid-20 somethings. So many (maybe most) of these "older" 20-somethings just go ahead and date non-members and the 30 plus guy who is a convert or divorced but wants to marry and have a family will just have to date non-members if he wants that goal.

Shy not lump all singles together???????

[mattctr]

Shy not lump all singles together???????

I think the division is to avoid situations where a 50 year old single man is asking out an 18 year old fresh-out-of-high-school girl. I'm just above the 31 year old cut-off in my stake singles ward, but they bend the rules a little bit and let some of us 31-34 year old men stay. Once in a while, the bishop has asked people to move on, but I make it a point to not be "creepy" or do anything that would give pause or concern to parents of the younger members of our ward. There are plenty of interesting sisters who are enough older that dating them would not be an issue. The geography (not near BYU or UVU) makes it an older ward on average. That said, I try to be kind and friendly toward everyone, regardless of age.

Now, with the changes (singles wards forming singles stakes), I've heard rumor that membership records will be tightened up, and the 30 year old age cut-off will likely be enforced more strictly. This means I, at 31, will likely be required to attend the family ward where I reside. I live in a VERY interesting boundary, so I think I'd enjoy the family ward, too. However, I would need to find other activities or social circles where I can meet women of a datable age (24ish-33ish--not a strict requirement for me, just a general rule of thumb). I trust that Lord will "prepare a way" for me and others like me; I know lots of older singles are using online dating as their only outlet for dating. I haven't tried it, as I prefer to meet people in the daily course of living life and being involved in my own interests (community service, theater, politics, etc.).

In my previous ward, a BYU ward where a lot of older singles (24-35) had purchased or rented homes after being kicked out of other wards, those of us above the cut-off age were asked to attend a special meeting with ward and stake leaders to discuss how they could best meet our needs. It was determined that our BYU ward had naturally attracted an older crowd that included many non-students, so they just asked bishops of other BYU wards in that stake to invite their older or non-student members to attend our ward. It worked extremely well to have one "collect all" ward to include singles who were no longer part of the "student ward" scene.

With this latest announcement, I trust the church leadership is making a good organizational change. I've also heard worry and concern about the fate of those just beyond the age cut-off. Perhaps, the church has written off the hope of making any real impact with my age group and wants to circle the wagons around and improve the situation for this current and future groups of 18-30 year old singles; it makes sense to me that they would learn from the past and improve the structure for future generations to avoid the attrition. Those who find themselves cut off will be tested... do they get offended, give, up and go to hell, or do they continue to trust that the Lord will still prepare a way for them. Regardless, I applaud the change, and I know many of the younger singles in my ward are looking forward to belonging to a singles stake, where they can meet and interact with other singles wards.

Worse comes to worse, I can move out to some far-flung village in a 3rd world country, where single sisters don't have many single priesthood holders to choose from--not to mention a shorter list of "requirements" for whom they will and won't date. Maybe the church could send older single men on marriage missions, where they serve the growth of the church in remote areas until they find a spouse... ) )

[jray0024]

who is the moderator on this site, why are you deleting my comments??

[mattctr]

who is the moderator on this site, why are you deleting my comments??

Owner and moderators are here: http://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/memberli ... de=leaders

[paper face]

I think the new YSA wards/stakes will be better than the program from before, but I think it's a mistake to continue separating singles from what should be the rest of their religious culture (i.e. married couples, children, the elderly, Etc.).

Read 1 Corinthians 12 and explain to me why there needs to be YSA wards at all.

[Fiannan]

I think the division is to avoid situations where a 50 year old single man is asking out an 18 year old fresh-out-of-high-school girl.

Yeah, that would be a bit creepy -- oh wait, how old was Brigham Young as opposed to some of his wives? How old was Joseph as opposed to Mary? How old was Isaac...hope I made my point. If some 18 year old does not want to date an older guy she can just say no. And if a 20-something wants to date an older guy then why not?

Just to make another point -- in the real world those younger women are going to be exposed to older males and those males might not be LDS. So what is better, young LDS women winding up falling in love with men they meet in activities or at work who are older and non-LDS or meeting older LDS males in a church-oriented setting? Oh, and then there are plenty of LDS young women who will go on to never marry and I think much is due to the way we get all creeped out if something is a bit unusual for 1950s suburbia taste.

[tsc]

If I may I'd like to make a suggestion.

Now, first I will say that I am probably guilty of this myself, but I believe the comments on this post are a perfect example of what the Prophet's concern was in making this address - that being that we, members of the LDS faith, many times will speculate, rationalize, justify, or make any excuse possible, to do what WE want.

First, here is one of his comments, and it sets a great backdrop for the real purpose for his message - "We have come to the earth in troubled times. The moral compass of the masses has gradually shifted to an “almost anything goes” position. I’ve lived long enough to have witnessed much of the metamorphosis of society’s morals. Where once the standards of the Church and the standards of society were mostly compatible, now there is a wide chasm between us, and it’s growing ever wider."

Second, here is his opening statement to the men regarding marriage, "Now, I have thought a lot lately about you young men who are of an age to marry but who have not yet felt to do so. I see lovely young ladies who desire to be married and to raise families, and yet their opportunities are limited because so many young men are postponing marriage."

Brothers and Sisters, the message is very plain and very simple - "many young men are postponing marriage" - let's don't complicate it.

"Nephi, son of Lehi, told his brothers that the Lord sent the serpents among the people to soften their hearts and that the only “labor which they had to perform was to look” (1 Ne. 17:41).

The only thing they were asked to do was to look, a very simple task. Some did look, and they lived, but many others did not, because they did not have faith, and they died.

More great counsel:
"We show our desire to be healed by remembering “Do not let us be slothful because of the easiness of the way. … The way is prepared, and if we will look we may live forever” (Alma 37:46). Let us not let the simpleness of the path lead us to be slothful or slow to keep the commandments of God. The Savior’s invitation is, “Look unto me, and endure to the end, and ye shall live” (3 Ne. 15:9).Believe in Him always and obey His commandments. It was not the brazen serpent that brought healing; it was faith in Jehovah and obedience to His words."

[mattctr]

I think the division is to avoid situations where a 50 year old single man is asking out an 18 year old fresh-out-of-high-school girl.

Yeah, that would be a bit creepy -- oh wait, how old was Brigham Young as opposed to some of his wives? How old was Joseph as opposed to Mary? How old was Isaac...hope I made my point. If some 18 year old does not want to date an older guy she can just say no. And if a 20-something wants to date an older guy then why not?

Just to make another point -- in the real world those younger women are going to be exposed to older males and those males might not be LDS. So what is better, young LDS women winding up falling in love with men they meet in activities or at work who are older and non-LDS or meeting older LDS males in a church-oriented setting? Oh, and then there are plenty of LDS young women who will go on to never marry and I think much is due to the way we get all creeped out if something is a bit unusual for 1950s suburbia taste.

You're right, but society (in the church) has bought into the stigma that such a pairing is creepy. One of my grandpas was 45 when he married my grandma of 22, and while that was not the norm, it was still within the realm of normalcy back then. He wasn't considered a "sick old man" for marrying her.

Why the stigma in the church? I blame the YW leaders. :ymparty: Many of the women around my age are still holding out for the guy their YW leaders promised they would find; a romanticized version of the perfect model Mormon man. They've been taught they should never have to settle for a man who is not: smart, funny, kind, tall, dark, handsome, strong (like the Nephi posters), confident yet caring, like Presidents Hinckley and Monson all rolled up into one, a provider (of wants), worthy priesthood holder (aka hold "important" callings), an eagle scout, an RM (who was zone leader and had his mission extended twice), a creative mind, a musician, good at sports (but not watch them too much), is good with children, has an education (degree required), etc. Of course, this is just a generalized caricature of the expectations broken YW leaders have instilled in some women, though individual women can be much more sensible than this. :ymsmug:

P.S. - I appreciate that YW is not such a bad thing as my portrayal above would indicate.

[linj2fly]

mattctr said,
Why the stigma in the church? I blame the YW leaders. :ymparty: Many of the women around my age are still holding out for the guy their YW leaders promised they would find; a romanticized version of the perfect model Mormon man. They've been taught they should never have to settle for a man who is not: smart, funny, kind, tall, dark, handsome, strong (like the Nephi posters), confident yet caring, like Presidents Hinckley and Monson all rolled up into one, a provider (of wants), worthy priesthood holder (aka hold "important" callings), an eagle scout, an RM (who was zone leader and had his mission extended twice), a creative mind, a musician, good at sports (but not watch them too much), is good with children, has an education (degree required), etc. Of course, this is just a generalized caricature of the expectations broken YW leaders have instilled in some women, though individual women can be much more sensible than this

Matt, I appreciate you saying this. I am sure this has something to do with it, but I wonder if the family from which the girl comes is not more responsible for this. My oldest brother married when he was 34 to a great girl (ten years younger; she's a great! btw, my grandparents have a 10 year spread as well). He'd been in a couple of relationships prior to this which didn't 'materialize' because he essentially wasn't 'good enough' according to the father (and my brother was an RM with a bachelors degree...in the 90's).

Yes, there is a romanticized version that is perpetuated in YW's, but I wonder how much of this is reinforced by family ideas and expectations.

[HeirofNumenor]

I think the division is to avoid situations where a 50 year old single man is asking out an 18 year old fresh-out-of-high-school girl.

Yeah, that would be a bit creepy -- oh wait, how old was Brigham Young as opposed to some of his wives? How old was Joseph as opposed to Mary? How old was Isaac...hope I made my point. If some 18 year old does not want to date an older guy she can just say no. And if a 20-something wants to date an older guy then why not?

Just to make another point -- in the real world those younger women are going to be exposed to older males and those males might not be LDS. So what is better, young LDS women winding up falling in love with men they meet in activities or at work who are older and non-LDS or meeting older LDS males in a church-oriented setting? Oh, and then there are plenty of LDS young women who will go on to never marry and I think much is due to the way we get all creeped out if something is a bit unusual for 1950s suburbia taste.

In 1996 I moved back to San Diego, CA and started attending the Pacific Beach Young Single Adult ward. At the time their membership range was 18-30, but a whole lot of singles up to age 45 attended. Soon, the stake created a student ward for nearby UCSD, so those 18-25ish went there. Once out of school, or in late 20's, then came to the PB ward.

In 2000, the Stake President spoke at ward conference. He spoke on testimony and obedience. he told of a great grandfather who joined the early church, only to keep losing everything and starting over as the Saints were kicked out of Missouri and Nauvoo, and when President Young asked him to go and settle San Bernadino, CA. He bore those challenges willingly. But when the US army was sent to Utah in 1857, Brigham Young called all those settlers to return and help defend Deseret. This time, the stake president's great-grandfather said "NO! I have given and given over again, and I am not starting over again!". He stayed, and all of his family - save a young polygamous wife who was pregnant with is child. She obeyed the prophet's call and returned with the rest of the Saints. The stake president came from her descendants. The great-grandfather and all the rest of his family and their descendants are all out of the church.

The stake president then changed the membership policy of the stake / ward. He "invited" all of those 36 years and older to be obedient and return to the family wards where they could integrate better. He explained that many of those older singles had been in the ward for 10-15 years, and that all of the leadership positions save Bishop and 1st counselor were filled by adults in their 40's. The younger singles never had leadership opportunities, and to them it appeared to be an "old man's(/womens) club". Those who were 36 and older were to transfer to family wards within the month. Those that later turned 36 were to transfer soon after their birthday.

Naturally the ONE THIRD of the ward that were older were all offended - men and women. (btw, we also had single mom's offended because we didn't have a primary, so they were to attend the family ward with their children and come to the PB ward on the weeks their ex's had custody, or to just come to the activities). These older singles felt like they were being cast off, unwanted, that they had no hope of finding anyone in a home ward. Several went inactive for several months. A couple we had to forcibly bar from the ward. Most eventually went to family wards. A few have actually married.

When I talked to my Bishop about the change, he told me another reason - one that they could not tell over the pulpit. Many of the guys in their 40's were hitting on the 25 year olds. You can say all you want that the girl should "just say no", but that doesn't eliminate the creepy feeling these guys gave off, instead of chasing the older women who were in their 40's also (and fat - many of the men were not in that great shape either).

Many of the local Bishops and Stake Presidents in the county wanted to send several young singles in late 20's to the ward, but the girls were scared to death of the older guys. Rather than "just suck it up" and "just say no", they chose to hide in their home ward, not date, not date LDS, or to go inactive. Once the change was made, every week for the next 6 months several bishops or stake presidents would call the bishop up and say "is it true? Are the older men gone? Wonderful! I have 2 sisters to send to you (or 4, or 5, etc). We got a fresh infusion of new blood (men and women) into what was a stagnating ward, which also made for better dating opportunities.

Right I moved away from San Diego in Oct 2003 (I had just turned 36 myself, and after 7 years in the singles ward it was time to move on), the stake made another change. The UCSD student ward became a branch just for young single students, a new YSA ward was formed for 25-30 (they had the numbers now), and the age limit of the PB ward was raised to 40. What has happened since, I do not know.

As I said, I know a FEW of these friends and former ward members have married. Most have not. Sadly, most do not consider the divorced & single parent population when it comes to dating.

I do know that many of my friends from back then are STILL single - though only SOME are not for trying. Some of the guys are in dead end-jobs, and don't make enough to support a family - and the women don't want them. Other guys are in their 40's and 50's and make good money, but are holding out for some 23-25 year old blonde babe to have children with (not going to happen). Some of the guys (and girls are just way to picky and either want perfect bodies, or perfect everything else (job, money, spiritual/church history/callings, etc). Some are simply out of shape, too short (men), or physically unappealing. Nearly all of the women are fat - but even the few I know of (my former lady friends) who are in great shape and beauty are still unmarried - either because they guys won't act and commit, or else the girls are too picky Many women both of college age and older are holding out for great looks AND a great income. A popular adage is "You marry a man, you marry a lifestyle."

It goes all around - both sexes have their share of responsibility and untenable expectations.

[HeirofNumenor]

When I moved to Utah in Oct 2003, I met my wife immediately. I had already been active on the LDS internet dating sites or a few years (which has its own share of problems - particularly creating a never-ending candy store mentality), so when I met her online just prior to moving, we had already hit it off. However, she was 10 years older than me, and had 7 kids - from 27-13 (now 34-19), along with 2 grandkids - now 13). That was quite a challenge for me. I had my doubts at the start (as did she). For a wide range of reasons, gaps in age and family experience among them - we dated for 4 1/2 years before we married. Had we not shared an office at work for 3 of those years, we would have broken up and stayed broken up.

Our marriage lasted for 3 years, and the divorced was finalized last week.

My wife (now "ex-wife" - it feels so weird to use that term)...she was very worried for me when I moved up here, that I would get eaten alive in the dating circles...with all the immorality that was prevalent even in Utah County (worse in Salt lake county) - by all the the "active & upstanding" LDS singles & divorced (both men & women). I definitely know now how NOT to date.

I recognize that everyone has things to work on and improve, and I am no different - working on myself. In a few months, after I heal I will attempt to have some social interaction again. This time, I have a better idea of what to look for. I will attend my parents' family ward as I have been for the last 6 months. My dating will then come either from personal references, work acquaintances, or back to the Internet. I will not attend the Singles ward for 30-45 (closest one I think is in Midvale). Eventually I may go to dances. It would be a major miracle to find someone to remarry period - let alone if it was by the end of this year (not a deadline, btw).

Right now I need to get my own car. Then improve my income and pay off debts. Eventually I have to afford both a wife and alimony.

[Fiannan]

HeirofNumenor, I appreciate your reply, but I must take exception. I knew a guy whose wife left him. He was in his mid 30s and he had a discussion with his stake patriarch on marriage. The advice he got was that he was not to be concerned with age since earthy age does not correspond with eternal age (a 20 year old may actually be thousands of years older than her 35 or 45 year husband, and that will become apparent in the next life). he, that's what he told him. His ex bishop suggested he take summer classes at BYU to meet some young 20 somethings and start a family while his bishop called him in and told him it was his duty as a father of several young boys, as well as a devout priesthood holder, to find a wife who would be a good example to his sons and also so he and this woman could have children together.

Thank goodness he followed their advice and met a non-conformistic devout LDS woman (yes, younger than him) and they had a bunch of kids together.

MattCTR, you have a great point about the YW culture. I have also known women who were 30 somethings who had the opportunity to date guys 15 or more years older. Both refused and so one never married or had kids and is well past that age, while the other is no longer in the church now that she met a non-.member guy and married him. Ironically, he is the age now that those men she could have had were then. So what gain there?

As for young women feeling creeped out, well if some fat 50 year old hit on them then I can understand. However, what if some 50-ish star such as David Ducovney, Jonny Depp or Brad Pit hit on them (if they were not married of course), would they be creeped out? I doubt it. As for that concept I know an LDS professor who is in his 50s and gets flirted with/hit on by young women all the time by females as young as 18 (of course he is educated and looks 35). I also have had many a young woman hit on me -- once right in front of my wife (she was not all that happy). I think that young women who have not been contaminated by certain aspects of LDS culture (notice I say culture, not the Gospel) who are either esoteric LDS or non-members are quite open to relationships with older guys. As for LDS women who want to marry the "perfect" image that mattCTR describes there used to be a term for them in the church -- that being "special interest."

[HeirofNumenor]

mattctr said,
Why the stigma in the church? I blame the YW leaders. :ymparty: Many of the women around my age are still holding out for the guy their YW leaders promised they would find; a romanticized version of the perfect model Mormon man. They've been taught they should never have to settle for a man who is not: smart, funny, kind, tall, dark, handsome, strong (like the Nephi posters), confident yet caring, like Presidents Hinckley and Monson all rolled up into one, a provider (of wants), worthy priesthood holder (aka hold "important" callings), an eagle scout, an RM (who was zone leader and had his mission extended twice), a creative mind, a musician, good at sports (but not watch them too much), is good with children, has an education (degree required), etc. Of course, this is just a generalized caricature of the expectations broken YW leaders have instilled in some women, though individual women can be much more sensible than this

Matt, I appreciate you saying this. I am sure this has something to do with it, but I wonder if the family from which the girl comes is not more responsible for this. My oldest brother married when he was 34 to a great girl (ten years younger; she's a great! btw, my grandparents have a 10 year spread as well). He'd been in a couple of relationships prior to this which didn't 'materialize' because he essentially wasn't 'good enough' according to the father (and my brother was an RM with a bachelors degree...in the 90's).

Yes, there is a romanticized version that is perpetuated in YW's, but I wonder how much of this is reinforced by family ideas and expectations.

In the Church's institute textbook for the Achieving a Celestial Marriage classes (at least the one I bought in 1987) - many times it quotes apostles -notably Elder Boyd K. Packer - as telling the young women: "NOT to hold out for a young man who makes as much money as your dad, and has the nice house and car and luxuries that your family does. Your father had some 30 years to earn his way to that level, whereas your prospective husband is just starting out - where your parents were 30 years ago."

This last decade has seen such a rapid rise in standards of living (almost all due to consumer spending based on second mortgages, home-equity stripping, maxed-out credit cards, etc. (transfer of finances) - none due to actual real production) - that each teenager hits college age and thinks this is the norm - this appears magically. even those in 30's & 40's live high on the hog of debt.

I was told many times by girls through my 20's & 30's that I am perfect in every way - except I don't have a good job/career, and the girl wanted to stay home with the kids. One girl even told me (in 2000), "that there is no excuse why a 33 year old man should not be earning $100,000 - if he wants to be a fireman or a school teacher, than it is his own fault and he deserves to be poor." True - that girl was a former Hawaiian Tropic bikini model with fake boobs (her admission), but the one who told me in 1997 that she requires a man make $40,000 was not, neither was the girl who told me that "[when she marries, her] standard of living better not drop - you better be able to pay all my bills as well as your own"; neither were any of the other women who told me similar things.

The only one who didn't, was my (now ex-)wife. And that marriage had it's own set of problems (aside from the good).