Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Relationships  > Engagement rings necessary in the 21st century?      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 daynadaze
Joined: 2/11/2008
Msg: 76
view profile
History
Engagement rings necessary in the 21st century?Page 4 of 9    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9)
Well now I'm curious, seems all of us women expect some monster ring to show up our *friend's* monster ring. Show of hands, how many women have great big ole diamond engagement rings that they made some poor pitiful guy sell his soul to buy? How many guys have had to go into hock for a ring they resented having to buy for some gold digger? What is this thing that forces anyone to buy anything they don't want to, just to get someone to marry them?


Don't date or marry someone you don't like, that pretty much frees you from all this horrible abuse you must surely be suffering in the world of being taken. Who in the world would be with someone who so abuses them?
 VolkanoKing
Joined: 8/1/2014
Msg: 77
Engagement rings necessary in the 21st century?
Posted: 3/23/2015 11:14:40 AM
Maybe women could offer men a big screen TV, new iPhone, a load of nice gifts as a marriage proposal. There are countries where women come with dowries. We do it the opposite, the guy has to shell out thousands, get down on his knee and propose.

Why? Don't women want marriage as much as men do..if not more? She can't make her litter of kids without him, so maybe she could come offering some bait to entice him?

I personally dont see the point in men blowing that sort of cash on a tiny thing that sits on a finger. Better yet, dont buy each other ANYTHING, save all that money and put a down payment on a home.
 pd481
Joined: 4/15/2010
Msg: 78
view profile
History
Engagement rings necessary in the 21st century?
Posted: 3/23/2015 11:15:31 AM
I recall 20 years ago reading about a study. It looked at whether women who got tiny engagement rings when young traded the ring in for a significantly bigger stone when the couple became more financially successful versus keeping the little ring because of its sentimental value. The study conclusion was that the divorce rate of those who chose to get rid of the sentimental ring for a bigger stone were much much more likely to get divorced as compared to those who kept the little stone.
 carolann0308
Joined: 12/9/2006
Msg: 79
view profile
History
Engagement rings necessary in the 21st century?
Posted: 3/23/2015 11:24:02 AM
I love the idea of exchanging rings when marrying, I think it is very traditional. But I do not think a person should have to sell their left kidney in order to do it. A simple gold band is more than enough.
 adventurejoe70
Joined: 3/1/2013
Msg: 80
view profile
History
Engagement rings necessary in the 21st century?
Posted: 3/23/2015 11:34:59 AM

Maybe women could offer men a big screen TV, new iPhone, a load of nice gifts as a marriage proposal. There are countries where women come with dowries.


That is the truth. I am holding out for an I phone 7 though..just say-in. Oh yeah they need to throw in a LED 60 inch smart tv as well. And

But I gotta say in my short time as a Diamond banker(yes there is such a job title when one works with the 42nd st Israeli diamond traders) is that when you buy a rock you lose money and when you sell it you lose money. One of the worst investments. Even the so called appraisals are scams and you will get much lower when you sell them. Might as well fold up a stock certificate and make ring out of that!
 474rusty
Joined: 3/16/2015
Msg: 81
Engagement rings necessary in the 21st century?
Posted: 3/23/2015 11:59:51 AM
I am equal, I was an equal in my past relationship. I am an equal to all that post on here, both genders. I am equal to the people I passed on the way to lunch today. Equal. And I want equality in my work place, my personal life and my relationships as partners or even friends. Equal. Its not too much to ask and I need no reference to the US Constitution or Canadian Constitution.

If a big azz diamond ring (or small diamond ring) is symbolic and shows how much he loves, cares for, adores, etc. a woman and shows the world that she now belongs to him and he is honored by her presence....what exactly does she do to display to the world her love for her man? She accepts a ring. But she gives him ..... nothing. So he gives her all his love AND a big azz diamond and she gives him her love.

No, I'm not "bitter, misogynistic/misandrist". The last time I checked I didn't have testicles or a penis. I'm just wondering why a grown woman that has been married a time or two or three and is quite capable in all ways would still require an engagement ring. I'm a woman, I like jewelry, I have lots of jewelry including a big ass diamond ring (I have two in fact) and I just don't have a need or a requirement for a big azz ring. I want the relationship and the commitment. Am I adamant? No, just an opinion and a question as I know each of us will do what works for us. I do find it odd.

I also like the idea of wedding bands. Its not necessary but its nice.
 Silverhawk_tkn
Joined: 12/3/2010
Msg: 82
view profile
History
Engagement rings necessary in the 21st century?
Posted: 3/23/2015 12:04:00 PM

Yes, I think they should. I think the diamonds should be bigger and be accompanied by an all expenses paid for party, an exotic holiday and sometimes a house as well. I think she should have all of this without the ag of being stuck with a man forever, in fact be good if she didnt even know him or have to have anything to do with him.


LOL.......while I know you (Vicki) were joking about this, it reminded me of a show that my GF and her daughter were watching this weekend. "Say yes to the Dress". Its a show about some fancy wedding dress shop on TLC. What I took note of was how these ladies on the show were getting swooned on and fitted with a wedding dress with their friends and family and how the whole process was really about (just) the bride and the whole process of the wedding - the groom/male is so insignificant in the scheme of things, especially when it comes to things like rings, dresses, cakes, etc. It really is just a fairy tale for the bride - the groom has nothing to do with it......he just has to pay for it all. Most likely twice!! Once for the wedding, and again for the divorce that seems almost inevitable these days!!

Equally interesting were my GF and daughter - both of whom really didn't care who or where the groom was.

Princess mentality? Hell ya..........most definitely alive and well into the 21st century!!
 Ouija2025
Joined: 6/11/2014
Msg: 83
Engagement rings necessary in the 21st century?
Posted: 3/23/2015 12:07:45 PM
Dayna
I have a show of hand for having a big azz diamond engagement ring - we traded in over the years and he worked hard to gift me with it - He wasn't forced to and I never pressured.
To kinda quote Elizabeth Taylor when someone commented on her diamond ring
" it is only vulgar til it is on YOUR finger"
and I do not brag about it, flash it or put down any others rings :)
 2ufo
Joined: 2/28/2015
Msg: 84
Engagement rings necessary in the 21st century?
Posted: 3/23/2015 12:10:38 PM

I wouldn't mind a zirconia ...


Before we got married, my husband asked what I wanted in an engagement ring. I told him I didn't want a ring, but would like earrings (since I worked with my hands and a ring would get damaged or lost) and I told him not to pay more than $100. He got a confused look and said the couldn't buy anything but cubic zirconium for that amount. I told him to make it a very nice CZ set.

My co-workers were astounded at my 1-caret 'diamond' earrings. They never asked if they were real and the few times anyone asked what they cost, I simply demurred and said I wasn't sure but my boyfriend had gotten a very good deal. Because the engagement earrings were followed by a wedding - everyone assumed they were real. And no one really cared that much since I was perfectly happy with them.
 SunshineGirl__
Joined: 10/7/2014
Msg: 85
Engagement rings necessary in the 21st century?
Posted: 3/23/2015 12:11:20 PM
Only petty little girls flash jewelry, especially her engagement ring, to make other petty little girls “jealous.” That’s just pathetic.


What if #4 asks how much I've spent on the others?


Why would you answer such an invasive, rude question? How about telling her it’s none of her business? You seem to have major boundary issues.

Uh…maybe this is one reason why you’re on number four. I only say this because you’ve made it very clear for a very long time in the forums that you are….maybe it’s because you’re choosing girls who would ask you how much you spent on your previous three engagement rings. Maybe consider not marrying that vulgar type of woman.


I recall 20 years ago reading about a study. It looked at whether women who got tiny engagement rings when young traded the ring in for a significantly bigger stone when the couple became more financially successful versus keeping the little ring because of its sentimental value. The study conclusion was that the divorce rate of those who chose to get rid of the sentimental ring for a bigger stone were much much more likely to get divorced as compared to those who kept the little stone.


That sounds scientific and legit. What if they bought a significantly bigger stone AND kept the sentimental first ring? Where did they find women to study who fit this weird criteria? How does buying a bigger ring make a marriage fail? Who conducted this study, and why? And who paid for it?

I know you’re trying to make it look like those dirty rotten gold diggers cared more about the ring than the guy, but it’s really not flying.
 Dee4166
Joined: 6/16/2007
Msg: 86
view profile
History
Engagement rings necessary in the 21st century?
Posted: 3/23/2015 12:13:52 PM

there's pressure on women as well. her fellow females want to see a big ass diamond, but maybe not as big as the one she herself is wearing. catty! *meow*


Disagree with this...have never experienced a mature adult who behaves this way female or male....

If you're foolish enough to believe that the size of the diamond is relative to the depth of feeling...that's just delusional.
Same as all those men driving the Mercedes with various numbers and letters on the back, which tells them how they feel about THEMSELVES....

Heaven forbid that another Mercedes pulls up next to them at a stop sign that has greater numbers or more letters,...I mean, how will they feel about themselves then?!?!?!?!

LOL
What a bunch of nonsense....
As others have said "equal" is NOT the "same as"...men and women are different and bring different skills and expertise to the relationship....Different strengths and weaknesses depending on the PEOPLE involved....
I don't need a constitution to tell me that....no skill set is more or less valuable than the other.

Equal rights refers to opportunities for education and jobs and equal pay for equal work as well as equality under the law where things such as property and basic human rights are concerned.
 CTRLvector
Joined: 9/21/2014
Msg: 87
Engagement rings necessary in the 21st century?
Posted: 3/23/2015 12:15:17 PM
quote] I dont know if I always read your posts accurately, I dont know why so Im sorry if I take it off on a tangent. But, I know. I felt the same when I was told I couldnt have children. My worth as a woman vanished. He chose to stay, Im not sure that was the right choice. It was in many ways but I always felt guilty that he didnt have blood children because of me.

Not your fault, I didn't even reference the statement, which was off topic from the origin of ring vs necessity vs meaning. I was doing my regular spiel on the logical fallacy with regard to stereotypes being relevant a faith forecasting tool if you will. Making them illogical connections and applying them on a broad spectrum is the logical equivalent of justifying baggage for sake of removing self accountability.

The best applicable foresight to be based on behavior over time - vs gender association (for example.) Or as they relate to holding a vestige, and the principles of values therein in context to modifying behavior for sake of upholding those values.


Its my fight to end nonsense man/women hating. Im going to start a non-profit agency called baggage claim.
 BLonde^j^AngeL
Joined: 1/2/2015
Msg: 88
Engagement rings necessary in the 21st century?
Posted: 3/23/2015 12:30:39 PM

Equal rights refers to opportunities for education and jobs and equal pay for equal work as well as equality under the law where things such as property and basic human rights are concerned.


TY Dee.

Personally, when people use "equal rights" when discussing romance, it annoys me, like the founding fathers are in the bedroom...Ben Franklin steaming up his bifocals...George Washington wanting sleep THERE...
 474rusty
Joined: 3/16/2015
Msg: 89
Engagement rings necessary in the 21st century?
Posted: 3/23/2015 12:46:31 PM
Here is the offending post:

"And equal rights is not just about education and employment so wrap your head around that. It is about being equal in the relationship and all walks of life. I don't want a lord and master and neither should anyone else, either gender. "

Two words, equal rights. Neither of these words have any connotation to any founding fathers. But we can agree to disagree on these two words.

I want an equal partnership which to me means "we" give and receive love and respect a full commitment to each other. One is not better than the other, we honor our sameness and our uniqueness and tend to all aspects of a fruitful blending of two lives. I don't and won't take anything I'm not prepared give which also includes an engagement ring. As well, in order for me to give love and to respect our commitment, I don't require a church wedding or any wedding for that matter. Maybe I'm just low maintenance in this area or I know what is important and what isn't. And yes, to some a big azz ring is important. Its just not my thing.
 CTRLvector
Joined: 9/21/2014
Msg: 90
Engagement rings necessary in the 21st century?
Posted: 3/23/2015 1:00:37 PM

Haha I always enjoy your posts. But see, I have no idea what your saying here


Its probably me ive been up for 30+ hours now, couldn't sleep last-night so my composure becomes abstract and the message isn't clear.

What I mean to say is that individual experiences in dating, cannot logically be applied to gender or stereotype. And if it is applied, it does damage - as it avoids the notion of personal accountability.

To say that all men or women are the same, based on a subjective experience, is to ignore the concept of individuality. And I think its little more than convenient, if I blamed the next girl I dated for the last girl I dated. For fact that she opted novelty over decency and respect. Choosing to cheat - if I say all women will cheat, and I believe it - I will forever stab myself in the back. Making justification, in place of accountability, and delusion in place of actuality.

I would effectively compromise every relationship thereafter, based on the premise that the next women will do it - because the last one did. When I should understand that the next one may be accountable for action, and loyal in nature.

The original intention was to explain that a vestige isn't a replacement for the true stress test. That test is far removed from symbolic vow - symbolic vow, and the promise of vow. Means nothing if the question of personal capability isn't at the very least considered. I would never think myself capable of marriage, in terms of effort required under extreme stress. Everyone has a breaking point - everyone is capable of falling to fatigue, everyone is capable of raising that white flag.

Its like blaming humanity for trashing the planet, whilst avoiding the annoyance of sorting personal recyclables. It removes personal accountability - and allows for delusional thinking. And humanity loves its convenience, hates personal accountability. I hold myself accountable for the state of the country - for fact that I basically do nothing in protest. Hell Fox News doesn't even try anymore, going head to head with Bill O yields a shouting match - followed by hypocracy, then bigotry, then petty name calling.
 mike11091
Joined: 8/25/2013
Msg: 91
Engagement rings necessary in the 21st century?
Posted: 3/23/2015 1:32:28 PM

I personally dont see the point in men blowing that sort of cash on a tiny thing that sits on a finger. Better yet, dont buy each other ANYTHING, save all that money and put a down payment on a home.


I agree.

Too much "proof of value" when, at least in America, you shouldn't be asking unless you've already proven your value to each other.

Think it sets a terrible precedent, teaching our children that the guy who buys the biggest ring should get the girl. Even if that's not the case, then what's the message? A guy only cares about a girl if he buys the biggest possible ring he can? With that logic, what a conundrum that must be for homosexual couples


I happen to have an old old ring, my grandmother's (my actual grandmother's). IF/WHEN I get married, it will be with that ring and I will have paid nothing for it.

Call me cheap.

It wouldn't matter if it was just a gold band. I would still only give THAT ring because sentimental value is far greater than anything with a price tag.

OT: I DO think the cultural relevance of such a thing is fading. Not the symbolism, but the cultural relevance. IDK, though, I've never been married, so it's hard to say with certainty.
 Maleman999
Joined: 2/14/2010
Msg: 92
Engagement rings necessary in the 21st century?
Posted: 3/23/2015 1:36:59 PM

What if #4 asks how much I've spent on the others?


Did you have the opportunity to buy back the ring you gave to one of the previous wives? Not many women would continue wearing an engagement ring from an ex, so you might have been able to get a good deal by buying it back-or an ex might even give it back to help her erase the memory of you. You can then take it to a jeweler, have them do a minor alteration to it, so that if you meet someone else, it's not technically an ex's ring if there's a change to it.
 CTRLvector
Joined: 9/21/2014
Msg: 93
Engagement rings necessary in the 21st century?
Posted: 3/23/2015 1:48:40 PM

THAT ring because sentimental value is far greater than anything with a price tag


The sum total of what you've done in life, is the value of the ring. Money isn't of relative value to character. Money can be simply relative to birthright, and little more. If the monetary value dictates the value of character. Then the one doing the evaluating, is baiting for personal interest, and probably void of decency.

I don't envy those relationships that thrive due to capitalism - its cheap - its unsustainable - but it works for the big dogs. I say let them enjoy the novelty, for past that - its nothing but two parasites, one feeds on the idea of lost time regained through sexual conquest, the other feeds on blood of those who take up that conquest... anyone who envies that, envies power and control over genuine decency and true freedom.
 Fire_and_Ice4_You
Joined: 10/28/2014
Msg: 94
Engagement rings necessary in the 21st century?
Posted: 3/23/2015 2:36:29 PM
Well....I don't care if I get another ring bought by another at this point but if I did get one....I'd much appreciate it.
Truth be told....I like the new designs, if I wanted one....I'd buy my own.
I had 2 engagement rings bought for me....the first set my daughter has and I still have my second one.
No, they weren't huge or worth 2 months pay....but valuable to me because it meant something.
What does it matter....things that seemed important to me when I was young....rings, engagement, marriage....no longer are the important things to me.
Kind of like the "hot sports car" for men.....When you mature...most of our priorities change....imo.
 Eternityboreme
Joined: 3/18/2015
Msg: 95
Engagement rings necessary in the 21st century?
Posted: 3/23/2015 3:10:49 PM

I want an equal partnership which to me means "we" give and receive love and respect a full commitment to each other. One is not better than the other, we honor our sameness and our uniqueness and tend to all aspects of a fruitful blending of two lives. I don't and won't take anything I'm not prepared give which also includes an engagement ring.


My ring wasn't a diamond, either (though there were diamonds encrusted in it). My then fiance (later husband) could afford it and after everything I left in America at the time, it was his way of showing me that he was also invested in this. I gave him marriage; I gave him a son I spent nine months of terrible sickness gestating him; and I gave his son US citizenship and him legal passage to the United States. Those were among the few gifts I _afforded_ him.

Additionally, I stayed home; I cooked for him; did his washing and ironing; looked pretty for him; I made love to him when _he_ wanted; I cared for his baby (until the baby was old enough to go to a nanny part-time and then I worked with him); I cooked for him; did his washing; and I saved him money on hiring a full-time servant (we had one who came once a week when I started to work again). He worked all day and so it was my responsibility to take care of the home and the children until our son was old enough to spend time away from us during the day on a part time basis, and even then I cared for the home so meticulously and religiously. (Is it so terrible to expect an engagement ring of USD2,000 when my domestic and reproductive worthwas worth so much more, LOL?)

He did afford me flowers regularly, money, chocolates; specialized foods and coffee; holidays; jewelry; clothes and all the little comforts I had I appreciated. I also had a home, nice furniture, and medical insurance with the best medical care in the country, even USA.

Again, we brought together our unique talents and gifts (whether it was his humor and income and my domestic talents) and exchanged them; and that's what you do when you're in an relationship, even if it isn't the SAME thing you're giving (and receiving), as B.A. eloquently and succinctly outlined more than once. (Though, again, I think my former got the better end of the deal.)

I don't think it's appropriate to expect people to follow a certain ideology that might work for you and not them. As I'm not a selfish twat, I am also high maintenance; I expect more because my caliber of giving is also high. I refuse to be a ****ing human doormat and obliging host for middle-aged train-wreck couch surfers.
 CTRLvector
Joined: 9/21/2014
Msg: 96
Engagement rings necessary in the 21st century?
Posted: 3/23/2015 4:00:41 PM

don't think it's appropriate to expect people to follow a certain ideology that might work for you and not them. As I'm not a selfish twat, I am also high maintenance; I expect more because my caliber of giving is also high


Nobody is saying you have to resort to excluding material convenience. Whats the point? You end up with the dude who flips out because he can't reason why his thermostat is adjusted to "high desert, at high noon, in july," because 70 degrees is freezing in the winter according to laws that govern female comfort. Personally I think that is a gross misrepresentation of the word. I've been freezing, and that ain't it.

The other difficulty I have is the hot/cold paradox - because even if its 90 in the summer, it needs to be 70, because thats the natural order of women vs thermostat. It doesn't need to make sense, its just law of comfort. And I get it, totally cool with the whole thing.

But if a guy adjusts the thermostat at a women's house, because he's too cold - instant castration and banishment - instant. No judge, no jury, because there is no justification. Thats the rule, and we as men abide by it, begrudgingly for the most part.

Now you find yourself a guy who burns coal all day for a living... well not the guy burning the coal but the majority stock holder of a company burning the coal. The problem with these guys is that they don't need to marry any women. Maybe they do as a symbol of trophy, the socially acceptable one who is maybe 40 years younger... as opposed to the socially unacceptable train of women that aren't seen.

The thing is, the rich don't exist anymore, the mega wealthy do. What was rich in the 50s-07s, or comfortable is quickly becoming the last vestige of middle class. Times are changing drastically, its nice though... that in CA middle class lost 7.5 billion in household income, and the 1% gained 53 billion in profit. Totally worth it, because the digits in one mans bank accounts, are far more important than sustainable prosperity any day of the week.

Now that I think about it, why have a circulatory system, when you can just clog the arteries with big blobs of money. Its not like those big blobs of money could ever catastrophically rock the circulatory system. The 99% will not stroke out, so that extra value places be representative on paper for the 1%.

Like me personally, I wouldn't hold a women to her take home pay. I wouldn't hold a women to a standard like that, because I would lose the best women in the process. People who are born from nothing, who make something of themselves, be it capital gain - or personal sacrifice - those are the people you want in your corner. Capital means nothing in the end, outside of stipulation for those who make it one. If capital is desired, and threshold need be met, then I believe error is made in process.

And I will accept no excuse if threshold of capital be the only equivalent worthy the label "gift." My favorite gift was one I had to burn. I mean call me crazy, but a gift that could shame me to such a degree that I hold myself accountable. For failing to provide the love I promised, because at the time I could only deliver, and justify gift of monitory relevance. As the proof of my love to her, and she would get offended... and rightfully so.

Ultimately I look at it like this - and I do fairly well for myself - the money I have in my bank account, is nothing compared to the strength I gained in pursuit of that pride and capital gain. If I were asked to be relieved of either my experience in life, and how it meld me. In an exchange for any amount of wealth - I would take my experience above wealth, because I know the value of everything, and I don't need comfort and security. I need confidence, and reliance of self in uncertainty.
 474rusty
Joined: 3/16/2015
Msg: 97
Engagement rings necessary in the 21st century?
Posted: 3/23/2015 4:09:45 PM
Everyone thinks their " former got the better end of the deal". Everyone. I've not read anything on these forums or talked to a divorced person in real life who didn't think their "former" got the better end of the deal. Funny how that works. I'm thinking if we talked to this poster's hubby he would say "she got the better end of the deal". I never put a price tag on my reproductive capabilities either. Oh well, live and learn. If I'm ever reincarnated I will make a few changes.

I think many of us expect more because out caliber of giving is high, I know I do. And I don't consider myself high maintenance, never have been, never will be. I won't go listing the multitude of things I did previously as there is no need nor will I list what I now being to the table as there is no need. I just expect that "we" give and receive the same.

I don't think any of us want to be a human doormat for anyone, either gender nor do we want a doormat. If you are or were a door mat, that is/was your problem as you allowed it.
 chameleonf
Joined: 12/22/2008
Msg: 98
Engagement rings necessary in the 21st century?
Posted: 3/23/2015 4:16:46 PM
Back in the day (way back), I was given the traditional little engagement ring and wedding ring and I bought his wedding band with 3 little diamonds. That's when I very young and was taught that was tradition. Over the years, I find I'm not traditional in very many ways. First of all, I don't wear a bunch of jewellery, even the stuff I've bought myself on a whim. Secondly, I no longer believe in the whole proof of commitment by marriage thingy and it follows that something sparkly on my finger wouldn't mean I was (or he was) any more committed to the relationship as would be by not having a ring. I'm not materialistic when it comes to keeping up with or exceeding the Joneses. If I like something, I buy it for me and have no expectations that somebody else should.

Funny story: My ex's girlfriend insisted on a flashy engagement ring even though he told her he would never marry her, or she'd hit the road. Her reason was to show everyone else that she was in a "committed" relationship. Personally, I believe it was to make her somehow seem "worthy" of being in or having a relationship to other people. I find it difficult to believe at her age she wanted one to keep from being hit on by throngs of men wherever she went! I also have to wonder, when her friends and relatives she flashes her ring to ask her when the big day is, how she responds. Probably just as negatively as the tone their whole relationship has been. Yup, the ol' ring was all about love and commitment, wasn't it? Too often the desire to have/give a ring, especially one that is prohibitive in cost, is for all the wrong reasons, just like a lot of marriages themselves are.
 LadyEssKay
Joined: 2/13/2015
Msg: 99
Engagement rings necessary in the 21st century?
Posted: 3/23/2015 6:22:48 PM

I don't and won't take anything I'm not prepared give which also includes an engagement ring.


I haven't met a man yet that wanted an engagement ring. If I happen to get engaged again, if he wants one, no problem! I will get him one! I have purchased plenty of things for the men that I have had relationships with (i.e., tools, golf stuff, tickets to special events, car things, watches, cufflinks, etc). All of it was stuff that was completely useless to me, but they liked it, and so off I went to get it for them. And I enjoyed giving it to them (although I will never see the happiness in getting a power tool).


As well, in order for me to give love and to respect our commitment, I don't require a church wedding or any wedding for that matter. Maybe I'm just low maintenance in this area or I know what is important and what isn't.


A church wedding is important to some people, not because they are "high maintenance" but because they practice the faith and want to participate in a wedding within their faith. To consider them high maintenance for wanting to do so is unfair.


And yes, to some a big azz ring is important. Its just not my thing.


Just because one likes the tradition and ritual associated with engagement rings, it doesn't mean they want or need a "big azz" ring. If I were to be asked of what I would like, I would tell them the style I like and the price would be left to them. I don't care how much they spend on it. When my parents were married, an engagement ring was not given. They were poor and could not afford one. They had a wonderful marriage, and were 2 peas in a pod. But my father, 25 years later, bought my mom an engagement ring for their 25th anniversary. My mother had never asked for one, nor had she indicated that she had any desire for one. But he bought it and surprised her with it, and was quite pleased with himself for doing so. It was more important for my father to give her one, than it was for my mother to receive one. There are some men that actually also like the tradition and ritual of the engagement ring. Incidentally, my mother ruled the roost in our household, and did until the day my father passed.

If you don't like the idea or the presentation of an engagement ring, great! Nobody has to have one that doesn't want one. But just because you don't care for the gesture, it isn't fair to assume that those that do like it are not as "evolved" as you for liking them, nor does it mean that we are less capable of being independent. I have a mortgage (that I got post-divorce, without a co-signer), a car (that I purchased without a co-signer), a job, have paid bills (which are all in my name), mowed the lawn, shovelled the snow, all without the assistance of a man. I am quite capable of running my own show. Having a ring on my finger that was given to me by a man doesn't change that.
 Walts
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 100
Engagement rings necessary in the 21st century?
Posted: 3/23/2015 6:31:47 PM
Just to add to the mix. Don't know if it matters or not to some but, maybe, just maybe, we should research at how and at what cost to whom those diamonds get to be on those rings. A little bit of research may just switch a couple of your minds when asking and/or receiving one.

Just sayin, or should I say, just suggesting.
Show ALL Forums  > Relationships  > Engagement rings necessary in the 21st century?