Letterman's Cold Feet Finally Thaw

David Letterman stunned the world -- and perhaps stunned his longtime girlfriend even more -- when he tied the knot to Regina Lasko after a 23-year "whirlwind" courtship.

I wish I could say that this gallant gesture should give the rest of us hope that our boyfriends will "eventually come around," but indeed this is a cautionary tale to the scores of trusting women who pin false hopes on their lollygagging longtime boyfriends.

If your ultimate goal is in fact marriage, then standing by a man who protests and mocks the institution to a national audience on a regular basis probably isn't your express ticket to the altar.

For any woman facing "The Panic Years," staying in a protracted romance -- even if it is to the world's toothiest talk show sensation -- is a risky move if she wants nuptial validation. Every assertive woman who's grappling with "The Panic Years" should make her man put his matrimony where is mouth is -- not wait for years on end for a wedding that might or might not happen.

But of course Lasko's risky calculation was one that ultimately paid off. If you consider toiling away with a child at home for years with a reluctant baby daddy to be a payoff.

So are the couples who stretch out their courtship for years on end actually missing the boat on marriage and that elusive concept of happily-ever-after?

Not according to Jenny McCarthy, who gushed about her ever-hot romance with Jim Carrey last week on Oprah. McCarthy said she and Carrey are blissfully unwed -- and they wouldn't have it any other way, going so far as to say that that piece of paper can oftentimes sour a soaring romance. (Oprah, of course, needed no convincing on that front.)

Ultimately, there is no right or wrong approach with regard to marriage. As long as both people are on board with their arrangement, there's no issue.

But you should be mindful of what the "right" timeline is for you and your relationship if crossing that nuptial finish line actually means something to you.

Follow Doree Lewak on Twitter: www.twitter.com/DoreeLewak

Comments

[Bethab]

Wow...was this article written 30 years ago??

[Doree Lewak - Huffpost Blogger]

Acknowledging reality and creating your own reality are two different things. Just because one may want to think that the goal post has moved -- that women no longer long for marriage in their lives -- doesn't mean that this mirrors reality. Yes, many young women still seek marriage; which isn't to say this "goal" supplants other goals, but it exists.

[h0tr0d]

Marriage is a financial trap for men. Until laws are modified that currently incent women to divorce I think you will continue to see a drop in marriage. I mean why would anyone want to pay to ensure their ex-wife maintains a standard of living she is use to ? And given statistics on child custody, well that explains why women file 70 % of divorces.

[Doree Lewak - Huffpost Blogger]

I think the majority of people here clearly question the relevance of marriage in today's society. They think that we've entered a post-nuptial era in which the traditional model of marriage just doesn't hold up anymore. But seeing the values of the general population should quickly disovow you of that notion. Marriage is still that one ideal that I don't think is disappearing from women's wish-lists. No matter how many cultural and political hurdles women might have cleared in this post-feminist frontier, if you're an unmarried woman in America, you're largely considered a failure. Blame the mixed message society still sends women: If you're "of a certain age" and unmarried, you're pitiable. But if you're a strong-willed, successful, self-sufficient woman who years for marriage, larger society wants you to feel ashamed that deep down you still need that.

[RobinSeattle]

Why is making the state a partner in your relationship, and marriage does that, so important to you? You can do anything without it that you can with it. Is it a status thing between women, who are competitive with other women?

All marriage does is guarantee that if your relationship breaks up you will have to do it through a court room with lots of expensive acrimony that benefits lawyers. That seems ridiculous to me.

Frankly, the state has no business in favoring any type of relationship nor does it have any business intervening in people's intimate lives at all. The state needs to wash its hands of marriage since that meddling serves no real purpose. Matters such as child support in the event of a break up can be handled as contract law and negotiations can be required to be concluded before the child is born. Property matters would be handled like any property deal between partners on a contractual basis, too. This would clear up a lot of overcrowded dockets as well.

[JonShank]

Monogamy is an unnatural relationship state made up by celibates in the church and women, which are both basically the same thing.

Say no to marriage and yes to a happy life.

[afrayedknot]

I'm having a hard time with this. Anyone who sticks around for years not getting something that she says is important to her has been getting something else that's more valuable (if less fulfiling) to her -- the challenge, the drama, victimhood, a good story, a nice lifestyle.

As for roping the man into it. Yeah, I want my guy to tell people he's marrying me because I've been a nag and a bully for a long time, but I'm a good enough [fill in the blank] that he's willing to accept my terms. Nothing makes my heart sing like knowing he caved.

[Elizabeth Hill]

"if crossing that nuptial finish line actually means something to you"

This is an example of an immature and misinformed attitude that helps put people into bad marriages.

Being married is a process--getting married is only the beginning.

You make it seem as if a woman being able to 'get the guy to the altar' is akin to an angler landing a big fish and mounting it on the wall.

[PatA]

Come on........­.you are talking about something that you really know nothing about when it comes to Mr. Letterman's feelings. He IS a comedian after all. Can you imagine if comedians could only speak truthfully about their personal lives? It ain't happening.

[Citizen54]

So get a new boyfriend.
There are lots of available men who are willing to be married and can't even get a date. (Perhaps they lack the attraction of elusive men.)

[carrieanna]

Saying Regina Lasko's risk "paid off" is really vulgar. That puts her in the same arena as a prostitute who is paid for services at the end of the act.

Plus, you're supposing that it was Letterman who didn't want to contratually seal their relationship. It's so insulting when women cheerlead others to be victims...­saying that we are "waiting" for men to marry us. Maybe we would have fewer divorces if both genders treated marriage as a longtime commitment that needs consistent work. Marriage isn't some kind of prize. Some people like to get married right away. Some people want long engagements. Every person is unique. It takes a lot of guts to buck the societal "norm" that we should all follow a particular course in our life.

[Doree Lewak - Huffpost Blogger]

Hi Carrieanna,

I fully understand why you might go on the defensive as a woman who's sick of other women exacerbating the notion that we're always pinning men down to marry.

It sounds backwards and degrading.

BUT, it's also unfortunately true. The concept of "altar-allergic" men is such a well-worn cliche -- but not without merit.

And that cliche certainly applies to the David Letterman-Regina Lasko relationship. He has stated on numerous occasions that he is the one in the relationship who's averse to marriage -- not Lasko.

He's all but said that he was worn down -- and became an almost conscript groom.

Now it's up to us: Do we really want to a bridegroom who's essentially being bullied into marriage? Well, if a woman wants to get married badly enough, the answer is yes.