I completely support the idea of meeting men in normal group settings, and seeing them through normal interactions, before jumping into "romance". Sounds like a good plan.

And I take no offense at your plan to not date in the "traditional" or "romantic" way. However, I do question these points:

Quote
I don't want to spend romantic, dating-type time alone with a variety of men... only with my husband or a man I'm engaged to.

Quote
It's not that I am opposed to romance, dating, honeymooning once a committment is made.

Quote
Many people I know completely understand it is not only possible but preferable to avoid the whole dating before engagement scene.

Quote
I've even gotten to know several of them well enough for them to express a desire to get married.

I don't quite understand how someone can make a commitment without some one-on-one interactions, and, yes, some romance? For instance, what if you take the plunge only to find that your new beau has no interest in affection (assuming it's important to you)?

See, I think that the problem with marriages ending in diovorce is not that people "date", but that they don't really understand ENs and compatibility, and don't ponder whether they can mutually meet ENs and are compatible. They get married, only to find major incompatibilities later on. And I think the idea of postponing romance until after the engagement creates the same risk - what if you are not compatible romantically? That is one of the biggest compatibility dimensions, IMO.

Anyway, just trying to offer some food for thought, not to imply that I have "the answer" <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />.

AGG