Women are contributing to their engagement ring.

[lizzie]

Based upon those factors, and the complexion of the skin, I'd be inclined to agree. However, the flatness of the chest, the square jaw, and the unusually broad nature of the head in general kind of make me have to second guess myself a bit. :lol:

I call it the soy effect. :lol:

 

[CLAX1911]

God, I hate the preening hippie douchebag in that picture. Has anyone ever been able to definitely figure out whether it's a guy or a girl? :lol:

So much hate. Anyway, i think it's a women, no make features, she is wearing a female undershirt, no facial hair.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

ROFL

It's that dingdong that plays Harry Potter.

 

[Gathomas88]

ROFL

It's that dingdong that plays Harry Potter.

Exactly what I was thinking.

It looks like Daniel Radcliffe in a wig. :lamo

 

[CLAX1911]

ROFL

It's that dingdong that plays Harry Potter.

I guess it could be, i thought he had a more pronounced Adams apple and more stubble

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

Women Now Paying for Their Own Engagement Rings - The Cut

I thought this was an interesting social enigma. Traditionally men would purchase an engagement ring with three months of their income. It's really interesting to me that women have taken to picking out helping purchase and even purchasing their own engagement ring. But then again I have seen people pay more for a ring than they do for a brand new car.

What do you think?

Sounds good to me. I have been around men who are basically eating rice while trying to pull together the money for these over-priced circles of metal and rock, and let me tell you, if it makes them more pleasant to be around, I'm all for it.

Although, as I'm sure will surprise no one, I don't even understand the point of it. It seems like a second dowry paid to the would-be wife, to me. People attach so much of a man's worth to how much money he blows on a ring.

If a woman wants a 5 grand ring in the year 2013 when she probably works herself, I don't think it's unfair to ask her to pony up. She's the one who wants it.

 

[CLAX1911]

I agree smokey, i have two friends that both married wonderful women, i asked them about it. They said that it was a gift. Both cases the guys made less money than their wives. But out was really the gesture. They didn't spend thousands on them, but they weren't cheap. i bought my husband a silver band the inscription was more than the ring. But it was worth it. I didn't expect one in return, not much of a jewelry guy. but it does say to the ladies that I am taken.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

I agree smokey, i have two friends that both married wonderful women, i asked them about it. They said that it was a gift. Both cases the guys made less money than their wives. But out was really the gesture. They didn't spend thousands on them, but they weren't cheap. i bought my husband a silver band the inscription was more than the ring. But it was worth it. I didn't expect one in return, not much of a jewelry guy. but it does say to the ladies that I am taken.

See, I totally get the symbolic jewelry thing. I myself am kind of an accidental collector with rings. I just seem to wind up with them.

I have a few that are always with me. One is a plain silver band that was hand-made by a friend. One is steel, that my high school sweetheart gave me. One is a silver custom ring. One is gold, taken from the hand of a dead Nazi soldier and, he assured me, cleared of negative energy by some kind of woo worker.

I never take any of them off. They're kind of like a story. I could easily fill 30 pages telling the full account of where they came from and how they wound up with me.

But none of them could have cost more than $50, and at least 2 of them were basically free. And they wouldn't mean any more or less if they had cost more.

The importance some people attach to the price is what really doesn't make any sense to me. The expectation also doesn't make a ton of sense to me, especially when you factor in the price.

 

[CLAX1911]

See, I totally get the symbolic jewelry thing. I myself am kind of an accidental collector with rings. I just seem to wind up with them.

I have a few that are always with me. One is a plain silver band that was hand-made by a friend. One is steel, that my high school sweetheart gave me. One is a silver custom ring. One is gold, taken from the hand of a dead Nazi soldier and, he assured me, cleared of negative energy by some kind of woo worker.

I never take any of them off. They're kind of like a story. I could easily fill 30 pages telling the full account of where they came from and how they wound up with me.

But none of them could have cost more than $50, and at least 2 of them were basically free. And they wouldn't mean any more or less if they had cost more.

The importance some people attach to the price is what really doesn't make any sense to me. The expectation also doesn't make a ton of sense to me, especially when you factor in the price.

I don't understand the need for something to be expensive. It seems to be needless.

 

[Rainman05]

How are you going to surprise her? Honey, would you mind lending me 2 months worth of your paycheck? I need it for... things...

I do think that women should chip in at things. For instance, girls should not expect their boyfriends to buy them drinks at the party. They shouldn't expect them to pay for dinner/lunch/w.e. or buy them shoes or ****.

I make it perfectly clear with all the women I went out with, unless I say otherwise, don't expect me to foot the bill for anything(and yes, this rule generally applies to first dates too). And especially, don't expect me to foot the bill for your desires. You want us to go ice-skating? Don't expect me to buy your rentals and your ticket. You want us to go to the movies? don't expect me to buy your ticket or your popcorn or w/e. etc. Don't like these terms? fine, leave and find yourself a jackass. I am not here to be your donkey.

Of course.. if I take her to the opera because I like the opera... yes, ofc I will buy the tickets for the opera and not expect her to pay me back for it. It's my treat, my wish to pay for the tickets so we can have the opera experience together.

Anyway. Point is... for things like an engagement ring, I don't think it's proper to have her pick up her share of the expense. It seems kind of stupid... It's not a gender equality thing or a not-being-taken-for-a-fool thing. An engagement ring changes the game, it's a precursor to marriage... and that makes things very different. Dating is one thing, and the rules mentioned above apply fully, but marriage is a different one. At least from where i'm standing.

 

[molten_dragon]

With most women working and earning as much as men do, I don't see any reason why the woman shouldn't help contribute to the cost of the ring. Or at least buy the guy an equivalent gift to celebrate their engagement. It's unfair to expect him to spend three months salary (and when did it become three, it used to be two) on a ring for her and then still pay for half the wedding.

 

[Jerry]

Women Now Paying for Their Own Engagement Rings - The Cut

I thought this was an interesting social enigma. Traditionally men would purchase an engagement ring with three months of their income. It's really interesting to me that women have taken to picking out helping purchase and even purchasing their own engagement ring. But then again I have seen people pay more for a ring than they do for a brand new car.

What do you think?

I'm not going to buy an engagment ring she helps pay for. That's dumb.

 

[CLAX1911]

I'm not going to buy an engagment ring she helps pay for. That's dumb.

To each their own. I wouldn't post more than about five hundred dollars for shiny pebbles.

 

[americanwoman]

I'm a woman and I don't care. I am married and don't even wear a ring. I used to have one but we had to sell it during some hard times and just haven't gotten around to buying a nice replacement. I dont know the whole ring thing is kinda like whatever to me.

 

[Helix]

i'd prefer to pay for it all myself, and would be uncomfortable doing otherwise. the only scenario i see in which she would chip in would be if she absolutely insists because of her strong personal beliefs or something. even then, i wouldn't be thrilled, but i wouldn't pick that hill to die on.

 

[roguenuke]

There really wasn't a proposal done by either of us. I guess some might think I kinda did but only because I brought up the subject with him. He said he was planning to ask but was trying to make the arrangements. I got to then pick out the ring. It was really affordable (I prefer sapphires to diamonds). I would never have been happy with a ring that cost 3 months' pay. That would just make me feel like he wasted money. I understand sentiments, but that is just a bit much. That money is much better spent on something more practical or saved for their other future expenses.

I have no issue with women paying for their rings but it seems a bit odd. I would say that sharing the cost might be a bit more practical, depending on how they have already started arranging their finances together, if at all.

 

[rathi]

The diamond engagement ring is a pathetic "tradition" invented in the 1930's by a De Beers marketing campaign. Its embarrassing how easily our society embraces disgusting consumerism in what is supposed to be such a "special" event.

 

[clownboy]

The diamond engagement ring is a pathetic "tradition" invented in the 1930's by a De Beers marketing campaign. Its embarrassing how easily our society embraces disgusting consumerism in what is supposed to be such a "special" event.

And they invented that BS to cover the fact that diamonds are plentiful and worth near nothing. That's also why they bought up the then newly discovered aussie pipe mines and kept the diamonds off the market.

 

[Goshin]

I think men should still be expected pay for the ring under normal circumstances, and I would probably insist on doing so if I had the money to spend. However, I don't see any particular problem with a woman chipping in if she wants or if the man proposing happens to be too poor to afford an engagement ring on his own and the couple decides that they simply have to have one anyway regardless of the expense.

It's sort of a silly tradition in the first place, honestly. Diamond rings are freakishly expensive in today's economy, and serve next to no practical purpose whatsoever.

Diamond prices are kept artificially high, by consensus (conspiracy?) among the limited number of diamond miners/suppliers in the world. If they released all the diamonds available without restraint, the price of diamonds would drop dramatically.

So I refuse to pay ridiculous, hugely-inflated prices for what amounts to a shiny rock. I can find one of those in the creek-bed.

 

[Superfly]

This is how I look at it, and I might be considered an "old fogey" or "too old fashioned." Whatever.

The engagement ring is not a piece of jewelry. It's a promise. A symbol of his love for her. It shouldn't matter how big it is, and I think it's materialistic for a woman to demand such a large ring that it automatically puts them in a financial bind, just to have bling. He should be able to buy her what he can afford, and if she doesn't like it, he should rethink the whole engagement. That type of behavior by her is setting a path for this relationship that says that nothing he ever does will be good enough. The house will be too small, the car will be too old, etc.

As far as her paying for half, that, too, tells me that she sees the ring as more of a flashy piece of jewelry that she can show off to her friends, than the promise of a life together.

Just my two cents. When my husband and I first got together, we didn't have a lot of money, but he bought me the best he could afford. He can afford a bigger ring now, and even said the other day that he wanted to buy me a bigger ring for Christmas. I told him if he wanted to buy me a ruby, or an emerald ring for my right hand, I'd be OK with it, but he'll take my smaller wedding ring when he pulls it from my cold, dead hand. He bought that for me as a sign of how much he loved me, and there's no way it's coming off.

 

[CLAX1911]

I make no judgments, I simply find it interesting. All the different opinions about it is pretty interesting the different takes on it. I have never bought an engagement ring and i never will.

 

[Gathomas88]

This is how I look at it, and I might be considered an "old fogey" or "too old fashioned." Whatever.

The engagement ring is not a piece of jewelry. It's a promise. A symbol of his love for her. It shouldn't matter how big it is, and I think it's materialistic for a woman to demand such a large ring that it automatically puts them in a financial bind, just to have bling. He should be able to buy her what he can afford, and if she doesn't like it, he should rethink the whole engagement. That type of behavior by her is setting a path for this relationship that says that nothing he ever does will be good enough. The house will be too small, the car will be too old, etc.

As far as her paying for half, that, too, tells me that she sees the ring as more of a flashy piece of jewelry that she can show off to her friends, than the promise of a life together.

Just my two cents. When my husband and I first got together, we didn't have a lot of money, but he bought me the best he could afford. He can afford a bigger ring now, and even said the other day that he wanted to buy me a bigger ring for Christmas. I told him if he wanted to buy me a ruby, or an emerald ring for my right hand, I'd be OK with it, but he'll take my smaller wedding ring when he pulls it from my cold, dead hand. He bought that for me as a sign of how much he loved me, and there's no way it's coming off.

Exactly. It should be about the person, not the size of the rock you can afford to put around their finger.

 

[Hard Truth]

It would be nice if this trend reflects women's increased autonomy and better wages, but probably it is more due to the trend towards turning marriage ceremonies into opportunities for women to play queen-for-a-day so they can show off their ability to spend large sums of money (often other people's) on useless luxuries to impress others. In other words, it is probably just another triumph for consumerism. (the new religion; to buy is to pray)

 

[Aunt Spiker]

This is how I look at it, and I might be considered an "old fogey" or "too old fashioned." Whatever.

The engagement ring is not a piece of jewelry. It's a promise. A symbol of his love for her. It shouldn't matter how big it is, and I think it's materialistic for a woman to demand such a large ring that it automatically puts them in a financial bind, just to have bling. He should be able to buy her what he can afford, and if she doesn't like it, he should rethink the whole engagement. That type of behavior by her is setting a path for this relationship that says that nothing he ever does will be good enough. The house will be too small, the car will be too old, etc.

As far as her paying for half, that, too, tells me that she sees the ring as more of a flashy piece of jewelry that she can show off to her friends, than the promise of a life together.

Just my two cents. When my husband and I first got together, we didn't have a lot of money, but he bought me the best he could afford. He can afford a bigger ring now, and even said the other day that he wanted to buy me a bigger ring for Christmas. I told him if he wanted to buy me a ruby, or an emerald ring for my right hand, I'd be OK with it, but he'll take my smaller wedding ring when he pulls it from my cold, dead hand. He bought that for me as a sign of how much he loved me, and there's no way it's coming off.

I don't follow.
Demanding a big ring is materialistic, even though appearance shouldn't matter.
If she pays or part of it - that means she sees the rings as a blingy tidbit.
If she doesn't like it - then it means the marriage might not be all that great or he's not good enough. (Did he stop to think about her likes and dislikes? If she doesn't LIKE it then obviously there's a communication issue. She has to wear it - she SHOULD like it.)

So - what does it mean if he believes the ring should be costly and she doesn't?
What does it mean if she offers to pay for part of it because he feels it should be worth a small fortune and she doesn't want him to go into debt?

If he believes in buying a big, expensive ring, then isn't he being materialistic? (this is my experience, btw. I am not materialistic and my husband is.)

Perhaps it's more often that the man feels this ring is a symbol of his ability to care for her - a show of masculinity or pride, perhaps? (I don't know, I don't grasp the costly ring appeal at all.)

I remember my ex picking me up from work and trying to take me ring shopping - that in itself was odd and at first I was peeved that he did it. Then, after seeing the rings he wanted to get, I was glad he did because they were atrocious. Like - huge stones and some weird carved/highly polished bezel thing that looked like it was from the 80's.

It represented "we're married" and "we have very different opinions on what looks nice." - I picked one I liked.

It would be nice if this trend reflects women's increased autonomy and better wages, but probably it is more due to the trend towards turning marriage ceremonies into opportunities for women to play queen-for-a-day so they can show off their ability to spend large sums of money (often other people's) on useless luxuries to impress others. In other words, it is probably just another triumph for consumerism. (the new religion; to buy is to pray)

Why doesn't it reflect that?
Do you think that such ceremonies have always been like that? These traditions are old (invite as many people as you can, have a huge wedding, have a huge reception, pay for liquor and food for everyone, the bride's family pays or it all). . . All of this is old.

Costly rings = old tradition.
Costly weddings = old tradition.

Perhaps, in our modern era of shared expenses and such, this represents our new values which err toward equality.

Being a jeweler in my free-time - I know that you can buy a beautiful ring to meet anyone's tastes without spending a small fortune. You don't need to spend tens of thousands. You don't need diamonds (if you think you do, ignore the commercials - aside that - diamonds aren't as valuable or rare as people claim) My husband had some notion that he needed to spend a year's worth of income on a ring. Do you have any idea how deplorable that was to me? It made me sick to think of wearing that much money on my finger when I was happy with the simpler ring he did get me. My aunt had a 1/2 million dollar ring and she LOST IT on a trip. . . good thing it was insured.

Insurance for a ring - yeesh - that's ridiculous.

You know what, their marriage is ****.

 

[Superfly]

I don't follow.
Demanding a big ring is materialistic, even though appearance shouldn't matter.
If she pays or part of it - that means she sees the rings as a blingy tidbit.
If she doesn't like it - then it means the marriage might not be all that great or he's not good enough. (Did he stop to think about her likes and dislikes? If she doesn't LIKE it then obviously there's a communication issue. She has to wear it - she SHOULD like it.)

So - what does it mean if he believes the ring should be costly and she doesn't?
What does it mean if she offers to pay for part of it because he feels it should be worth a small fortune and she doesn't want him to go into debt?

If he believes in buying a big, expensive ring, then isn't he being materialistic? (this is my experience, btw. I am not materialistic and my husband is.)

Perhaps it's more often that the man feels this ring is a symbol of his ability to care for her - a show of masculinity or pride, perhaps? (I don't know, I don't grasp the costly ring appeal at all.)

I remember my ex picking me up from work and trying to take me ring shopping - that in itself was odd and at first I was peeved that he did it. Then, after seeing the rings he wanted to get, I was glad he did because they were atrocious. Like - huge stones and some weird carved/highly polished bezel thing that looked like it was from the 80's.

It represented "we're married" and "we have very different opinions on what looks nice." - I picked one I liked.

If he wants to get her something big, and he can afford it, then so be it. But she shouldn't become some Bridezilla just because she wants 5 carats and he can only afford a half carat. The ring is a gift - a promise to the woman - to love her and take care of her and a promise to marry her. She shouldn't get to demand that the ring be a certain type/size/whatever.

Women do. Every day. And marriages fail. Every day. I just think that when a couple goes into a marriage like that, with her being pissed because she's not happy with the gift he bought her, the promise he made her - it's gonna have problems.