Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Catholic Living in the Modern World => Topic started by: Matthew on March 22, 2013, 04:39:48 PM
-
Many courts have ruled that the ring is a "conditional gift" that must be returned to the person who bought it.
NEW YORK (CNNMoney)
While breaking off an engagement may help a couple dodge a messy divorce, it doesn't always keep them out of the courtroom.
More than $5,000 is spent on the average engagement ring. And deciding who gets to keep the ring when the big day gets called off is such a hotly-contested issue that most states have laws governing its ownership.
Some bitter lovers even take the case to court.
Colette DiPierro, 31, thought her broken engagement was behind her when she learned that her ex-fiancé Christopher Reinhold was suing, demanding the return of her $17,500 diamond engagement ring.
They had dated for almost two years when Reinhold proposed in May 2009. But the couple began to fight, often about money, and they split four months later, said DiPierro, a physician assistant in Staten Island, N.Y. The following spring, he filed a lawsuit. Reinhold and his attorney did not respond to requests for comment.
Poll: Who do you think should keep the ring?
According to DiPierro, she held onto the ring because he hadn't repaid her for his share of $40,000 worth of living expenses. Their deal: she had paid for rent, food, car payments and other bills while Reinhold saved for the ring.
"I helped him save so I felt that I was holding onto the ring for collateral," she said.
Laws vary by state, but many consider the ring a "conditional gift" until the couple says "I do," -- meaning that regardless of who gets cold feet, the ring must be returned to the person who bought it, said Alton Abramowitz, a New York-based attorney and president of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers.
But it's not always that simple.
A New York judge ruled in 2006 that a woman could keep her 3.4-carat diamond engagement ring because her ex had not yet been divorced from his previous wife when he proposed. The Montana Supreme Court, meanwhile, has shot down the conditional gift theory entirely, ruling that the ring is the rightful property of its recipient.
In certain states, determining who gets the ring rests on who called off the wedding. And, to complicate matters further, some states treat an engagement ring given on a holiday differently than one given on a non-holiday.
In DiPierro's case, because the ring was given to her on her birthday, she argued that it should be hers to keep.
Related: How to ask a friend to pay you back
New York State law was on her side, said George Muscato, a Lockport, N.Y.-based attorney who recently represented a female client in an engagement ring-related suit. He did not represent DiPierro.
"If you give her that ring on a holiday like Christmas or Valentine's Day or her birthday, then you are making a gift to her as a present [that is] unconditional," he said.
But as legal proceedings dragged on for more than a year, DiPierro said she ultimately agreed to a financial settlement with Reinhold.
While she's glad her time in court is behind her, DiPierro said it drastically changed her perspective on money and romantic relationships.
"I guess, in some cases, I was naive," she said. "Money became very complicated in every future relationship."
-
Go Hawkeyes • 10 hours ago
Are people really spending that much on a ring? That's just plain ridiculous. My wife's ring was $500. Mine was $200. And it's not like we're poor. We earn over $100k each. There's just no point in spending $5k on a ring. People are way to materialistic and diamond sellers are laughing all the way to the bank.
464 4 •Reply•Share ›
jpass101 Go Hawkeyes • 9 hours ago
The Diamond Ring Industry spends billions a year convincing people that love can only be measured by the size of a diamond ..... and here you go wanting to undo all that work.
306 1 •Reply•Share ›
DeltaFunk0 jpass101 • 8 hours ago
Hallmark and all those companies puffed up Valentines day into something that woman are justified in being dissatisfied with. $120 roses, $120 on dinner, and a gift on top of that is completely unreasonable. Marketing simply seems to work better on women.
My girlfriend is getting flowers that look nice, doesn't matter the price tag. And she expects me to simply cook AND wash the pots afterwards for dinner. That's all that's needed. I'll get a 12-pack of some German beer or something in return. Boom.
137 2 •Reply•Share ›
phearis DeltaFunk0 • 6 hours ago
I bought mine and my ex's rings off eBay. Then she cheated on me and I called it off and kicked her out. She was livid when she tried to pawn the ring and found out it was only worth about $50. hahahaha
84 •Reply•Share ›
Avatar phearis • 5 hours ago
impressive!!! anyway, she cheated on you and kept the ring, so bad of her
4 •Reply•Share ›
Julianna Andy Avatar • 2 hours ago
til I saw the draft four $6432, I accept that...my... brothers friend was realey erning money in their spare time from there computar.. there moms best friend had bean doing this 4 only about 16 months and recently cleared the depts on there apartment and got a brand new Fiat Panda. read more at, Mel7.com
1 2 •Reply•Share ›
ambralita DeltaFunk0 • 6 hours ago
I have to agree with you Delta. I am a woman and do not need fancy expensive gifts. BUT I do expect simple gestures which show you care (a simple card, offer to help with dishes, lots of TLC, etc.). Also, do not need crazy expensive Jєωelry. The value is in the love you share (roll your eyes but it's true).
33 •Reply•Share ›
Teamski ambralita • 5 hours ago
So true! We got my wife's engagement ring at Service Merchandise for $200 and 23 years later, we are happy as can be. People put more into the act of getting married than they do the marriage itself. Pretty pathetic. Save the money and take the time to learn about what love and friendship is really about.
34 •Reply•Share ›
groksmith DeltaFunk0 • 7 hours ago
Why are you expected to do anything? Why isn't she cooking you a dinner, taking you to a ballgame and getting you a new screwdriver?
55 2 •Reply•Share ›
ambralita groksmith • 5 hours ago
Groksmith, SomeDoo, let me guess, you are single. When you are in love or genuinely love someone, you genuinely want to give and do something nice for them. It's not about what you get. And women should reciprocate. Whatever happened to guys genuinely wanting to be romantic? Is this such a bad thing? Just goes to show you how many men view women these days.
12 1 •Reply•Share ›
Keyser Söze ambralita • 4 hours ago
LOL!!!
Of course the woman will always pull the, "romantic" card when an expensive ring becomes the topic of conversation.
All of this is just simple prostitution on the woman's part.
The ring is the, "payment" for sɛҳuąƖ services, and when the payment becomes contested, the woman quickly dismisses any illusion of, "romance" and will quickly look to the courts to champion her whoredom.
Wake up men, this is a rinsing and it has to stop. The institution of prostitution, I mean errrrm marriage has to come to an end if human beings in the modern world are to maintain any respect for each other.
10 1 •Reply•Share ›
Amanda Guyton DeltaFunk0 • 6 hours ago
Wow, really? For Valentine's, I make a card for my husband, and vice versa. It's a day to just do something extra nice for each other. No big pricetag needed.
24 •Reply•Share ›
Natasha Coe DeltaFunk0 • 5 hours ago
I wouldn't say that marketing works better on women so much as we're getting the better end of the deal so of course we're gonna want that stuff to happen. Marketing caters products to the wants of their consumers, for men and women. Either gender can easily fall prey.
5 •Reply•Share ›
Natasha Coe Natasha Coe • 5 hours ago
To note, though, I personally don't care about money and I made my husband take the diamond engagement ring he bought back, then we bought $30 bands from Sears to get married. Though, just recently I got a $60 ring for our wedding anniversary from Etsy. It's beautiful and made from my birthstone. <3
2 •Reply•Share ›
Fatmeh Kalouti DeltaFunk0 • 4 hours ago
I personally would rather have flowers and chocolate than a pair of diamond earrings.
When a girl wants diamonds, it's simply for showing off.
3 •Reply•Share ›
SomeDooD123 DeltaFunk0 • 6 hours ago
Women, amirite?
2 •Reply•Share ›
sonofsarai DeltaFunk0 • an hour ago
it's like any other biz, trying to get you to spend more than you need. excess is the only way capitalism is propped up. Whole industries are made of things you don't need like deodorant or antibacterial soap. The list goes on and on. Both the ones I mentioned can be replaced with regular soap and water.
0 •Reply•Share ›
realist512 jpass101 • 9 hours ago
great post
30 1 •Reply•Share ›
noclist jpass101 • 2 hours ago
Personally, I'd give a Rochefoucauld, the thinnest water-resistant watch in the world. Singularly unique, sculptured in design, hand-crafted in Switzerland and water-resistant to three atmospheres. It tells time simultaneously in Monte Carlo, Beverly Hills, London, Paris, Rome and Gstaad.
3 •Reply•Share ›
Erzhik jpass101 • 4 hours ago
Holy s**t.. First ever post without a single down vote. Holy monkey balls.
0 •Reply•Share ›
Robert Glidewell Go Hawkeyes • 8 hours ago
I couldnt agree more. My wife found a VERY unique and elegant vintage ring that is one of a kind for $400. I do not care about my ring, I purchased a titanium ring for under $75. That sure beat the $15,000+ ring that looks like everybody elses and is probably gaudy as all heck. We also had our wedding at a State Park overlooking the Mississippi River.It was a better wedding than any I have ever been to and we spent under $1000 on the entire event (that was with dress, flower, food etc,). The entire wedding industry is a high pressure sales joke. Its all based on "prove how much you love someone with your money." People assume that if they don't spend a bunch of money on their wedding, then something is wrong with them. In reality, nothing was wrong with us, we now have our mortgage paid off...
162 •Reply•Share ›
Diane Wagner Turner Robert Glidewell • 7 hours ago
That sounds lovely! I would have felt very honored to have been invited to such a unique celebration.
32 •Reply•Share ›
IdaBlankenship Robert Glidewell • 7 hours ago
And it's pressure on the guests what kind of monetary gift to give.
Out here in NJ, the "going rate" for a couple attending a wedding is a $200 gift --- more if you are close to the couple and/or a friend or relative.
These dumb wedding halls start at $150 per plate for a wedding reception. Such a laugh....most of the wedding factories are owned by one person and you get the same crappy menus, the same crappy everything, as every other wedding reception site.
9 •Reply•Share ›
This comment was deleted.
Robert Glidewell hazze • 7 hours ago
We catered it ourselves. We had cheesburgers and brats and all of the summer picnic salads and sides. Everyone had a great time, and it gave some of the guys a fun activity to do (grilling). And it was 5 years ago, not 50. But you are right about the catering business being another rip off if you let them be.
57 •Reply•Share ›
Dancehall General Robert Glidewell • 5 hours ago
Good for you!!! This is what I've been hoping mine would be like...
5 •Reply•Share ›
us_sixtycents Robert Glidewell • 4 hours ago
Precioussssssssssssss!
4 •Reply•Share ›
Jay Schuls Go Hawkeyes • 7 hours ago
JOP marriage 10.00
Rings total 550.00
After party bar tab 200.00
No honeymoon
No expensive gifts
Married 23 years
112 •Reply•Share ›
conic123 Jay Schuls • 6 hours ago
JOP marriage - $20.00
Matching wedding bands - $100
No diamond ring (until 10th wedding anniversary, then a small one that she picked and really loved) - $125.00
No honeymoon
No expensive gifts
Married 22 years, mortgage paid off, no debt, in love and happy!
It's not about material possessions, folks.
Jay, it sounds like you and I both married very sensible ladies. Congrats!
57 •Reply•Share ›
David159 conic123 • 5 hours ago
I'll see your 22 and raise it to 36 years. And the ring was $250 in 1976 and she still wears it every day. It is not about the ring....it's about making the right choice for life. Congratulations Jay, comic123 and anyone else that can say they married their best friend, forever....
10 •Reply•Share ›
SomeDooD123 Jay Schuls • 6 hours ago
You lucky man!
17 •Reply•Share ›
Vserp Go Hawkeyes • 8 hours ago
A lot of poor people are very materialistic and insecure. Both sexes but it usually exhibits more in women because they're more likely to be vocal about the wedding ring, since society usually endorses it.
A woman that demands a high cost ring and then also refuses to return it is probably one most people should avoid.
76 1 •Reply•Share ›
inyourhead00 Vserp • 7 hours ago
You are absolutely correct. A woman who truly loves her man would be happy with whatever he can afford.
64 •Reply•Share ›
veggiegrrrl inyourhead00 • 7 hours ago
including a sterling silver band for $22.00
30 •Reply•Share ›
LovelyLinda veggiegrrrl • 6 hours ago
I got one from a gum ball machine...my man take good care of me.
5 •Reply•Share ›
Merrimon inyourhead00 • 5 hours ago
*for his love, not what he can afford.
1 •Reply•Share ›
Merrimon inyourhead00 • 5 hours ago
(and not necessarily up to that affordability lol)
0 •Reply•Share ›
jcns Vserp • 5 hours ago
yes and no.
Insecure men like to buy big expensive toys. I am sure you have seen men in cars they should not be buying.
2 2 •Reply•Share ›
dragonfire77 jcns • 4 hours ago
It goes both ways. A man who has way too many highly expensive toys is one to avoid just as a woman who has way too much Jєωelry. They're both compensating for something.
2 1 •Reply•Share ›
Vserp jcns • 3 hours ago
I know you were in too big of a rush to read my comment before posting yours, but I included both sexes. I agree with your example, I just would have preferred it if you had the civility to couch it as an addition or clarification rather than showing it as a disagreement. But probably you are female and that's all you know how to do, eh?
2 2 •Reply•Share ›
Diva85212 jcns • an hour ago
this usually happens when men get old... mid life crisis anyone?? :) i know this.. because my daddy did it.. LOL! I think it is cute that they do that.
0 •Reply•Share ›
dragonfire77 Vserp • 4 hours ago
A-freaking-men!
0 •Reply•Share ›
Zooompilot Go Hawkeyes • 8 hours ago
Try $15,000 on a platinum Tiffany setting, 1.85 carat cushion cut (VVS) pink diamond (her favorite color), another one carats of diamonds surrounding the center stone. 3 years later we're getting divorced. The difference betwen Go Hawkeyes and me is that I'm a stark raving idiot and he obviously is not.
69 1 •Reply•Share ›
veggiegrrrl Zooompilot • 7 hours ago
that's sad to hear. also, the resell value of former engagement Jєωelry is really bad. you might get 5k on craigslist or ebay. or less. sorry.
14 •Reply•Share ›
smackrock55 veggiegrrrl • 5 hours ago
No way. A 1.85 carat VVS diamond would fetch at least 5K itself, probably closer to 8K. Cushion cut doesn't help, but still that size diamond with VVS inclusions is good quality.
3 •Reply•Share ›
jps05 veggiegrrrl • 7 hours ago
He can probably get a little more than that for it...if he gets it back. Better off trying to get half of the appraised value in the divorce. I had a failed engagement, I got $4k off craigslist for a custom made ring that cost $9k.
1 •Reply•Share ›
TRex Zooompilot • 7 hours ago
Well at least in a divorce you ought to get about half of that back? Beats "quitter takes all". Hope that was 3 years of really good "whatever" you got out of the deal...
6 •Reply•Share ›
dragonfire77 Zooompilot • 3 hours ago
Heard at a wedding once: "When you figure how much a wedding goes for and how long a marriage lasts, I figure my last son-in-law cost me about 12 bucks an hour...."
1 •Reply•Share ›
LovelyLinda Zooompilot • 5 hours ago
Thank you for admitting that! She married you for the ring obviously!
Love is blind for all we know...for all we know our love will grow, that's what the man said!
Your love didn't grow!
1 •Reply•Share ›
DeltaFunk0 Go Hawkeyes • 8 hours ago −
I'm too young to want to be married any time soon. But I won't marry a woman who doesn't know marriage s a 2-way street. If I'm dropping a few grand on a ring, I would like something in return, like a motorcycle, or a Gibson Les Paul.
-
Conditional gift? As in Indian giver?
I think if she breaks it off she should give it back, if he breaks it off he should not expect it to be returned.
What does a man do with a used engagement ring??? Save it for the next one? :fryingpan:
Marsha
-
Conditional gift? As in Indian giver?
Isn't the point that it's supposed to symbolize a reciprocal promise?
If a man breaks it off then yes I think it would be foolish to expect it back.
If a woman breaks it off at her own whim and keeps the ring, it is trashy and shameless.
I wouldn't buy a diamond ring. No way. Even if I were rich.
-
Women don't at all like the idea of a second-hand ring or a ring from a failed engagement. This is in marked contrast to the way in which they demand that they themselves be viewed.
-
phearis DeltaFunk0 • 6 hours ago
I bought mine and my ex's rings off eBay. Then she cheated on me and I called it off and kicked her out. She was livid when she tried to pawn the ring and found out it was only worth about $50. hahahaha
84 •Reply•Share ›
:roll-laugh1:
-
Any man who buys his betrothed-to-be a real diamond anymore is a fool.
At most a synthetic lab-formed carbon crystal is sufficient. They are actual
diamonds, but can be controlled so they are flawless or colorless or both.
Or get a cubic zirconia. They are practically FREE compared to diamonds,
and a JєωELER cannot tell them apart without a heat conductivity meter.
All you're doing is funding the RACKET.
Real gold or platinum in the rings and settings is fine, but that's not where
the big money is.
If a diamond is such a big deal, you can say, "We'll save up for one for our
tenth anniversary." Then it gives you something to shoot for. Plus, you're
going to need the cash for the family at the beginning.
A very expensive ring is a waste in too many ways, and this article is a
good example. The more money you spend on Jєωelry, the more you're
going to spend on insurance. And then just try to collect when the ring
is stolen or lost! That happened to me. The insurance company had
promised up and down that it would be a FULL REPLACEMENT VALUE
policy, and that is what the policy said, but when it came time to pay
the claim, they used EVERY EXCUSE IN THE BOOK to pay less or nothing.
We ended up with about HALF of what it would cost to replace the ring.
And that was AFTER all the money wasted on premiums. We would have
been better off without any insurance.
Anyone with a $40K ring is going to spend $10K on lawyers, insurance
and bookkeeping to be sure all their ducks are in a row. Is it worth that?
The more value you sink into Jєωelry, the more you are at risk to lose
when the house burns down or thieves break in to steal it. That's the
bottom line, folks. It happens!
-
The ring is a gift. Keep the gift in budget. If the gal calls it off and takes the ring consider yourself blessed. It shows who she really is. If she gives it back to you, at least she is good in that regards.
-
If the gal calls it off and takes the ring consider yourself blessed.
It may be a blessing to be able to patiently endure injustice but it does not cease to be injustice.
If women regard things like engagement rings as strictly being gratuitous gifts and imposing no reciprocal obligation of any kind when they receive them and wear them - then they shouldn't expect to get them.
-
I agree that lots of money shouldn't be spent on a diamond ring. Certainly not "1 months' salary" (or is it 2 months' salary? How much are they up to these days?)
That having been said...
I don't think it's necessary to break off with all convention and custom and eschew a diamond ring altogether. It's simply not necessary.
You can get a basic diamond ring (white gold, for example) for under $500. I think that's for the wedding ring as well as the engagement ring. That's not going to break any guy -- at least not any guy who is in a financial position to get married.
That's what, 1 weeks' salary for a man making $25,000 a year?
And such a ring will be plenty large without being gaudy. You won't need a magnifying glass to see the diamond. THAT kind of diamond you could get in a ring setting for probably $250.
But remember -- we're TRADITIONAL Catholics which means you only get one marriage. Don't you think a young virgin who pledges her life to you -- and whom you claim to love -- deserves 1 weeks' salary of a $25K annual income? Come on! Let's be real here.
You're saying you'll love and support her your whole life, and be there for her in every way, but you won't offer a physical sign of that pledge by "risking" $500? Give me a break.
-
Here's a .77 carat solitaire engagement ring for $300
14K yellow gold
http://www.ebay.com/itm/77ct-Round-Brilliant-Cut-Diamond-Solitaire-Engagement-Ring-/130871172601?pt=Diamond_Solitaire_Rings&hash=item1e78879df9
You could easily go up from there and still not spend a fortune.
-
Let no one be confused:
Bashing the modern world's idea of "bridezilla" and "princess for a day" is one thing.
Bashing the modern world's tendency to spend WAY too much on wedding receptions is fine.
But a decent Catholic girl can and should expect a token diamond ring from her future husband. ESPECIALLY (but not exclusively limited to) those girls who saved themselves for their future husbands.
If her husband can't scrape together $300 for a ring, they might want to re-think their readiness for marriage. An apartment costs much more than $300 for one month.
Sorry to be harsh, but it's the truth.
-
I'm going to read up on the history of engagement rings.
Believing your daughter deserves an engagement ring - in particular a dimaond engagement ring (when Jєωs have a monopoly on diamonds) - is just nonsense.
This has nothing to do with money or the lack of money.
If young women think that engagement rings are just freely given gifts that they can keep as though they weren't wearing it on condition of a promise they made, they shouldn't expect one.
-
If her husband can't scrape together $300 for a ring, they might want to re-think their readiness for marriage. An apartment costs much more than $300 for one month.
Sorry to be harsh, but it's the truth.
Only a fool would buy a worthless $300 dimaond ring, for any reason.
-
If a man breaks it off then yes I think it would be foolish to expect it back.
If a woman breaks it off at her own whim and keeps the ring, it is trashy and shameless.
I agree with this.
-
An engagement ring is not a gratuitous gift.
A woman who receives an engagement ring is making a promise.
Those who consider them to be gratuitous gifts shouldn't get them.
Recovery of engagement ring, Michigan Law review 1919 (http://books.google.com/books?id=gGwqAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA132&dq=engagement+ring&hl=en&sa=X&ei=72pPUf7fIInA4AOlwIGQDA&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=engagement%20ring&f=false)
-
Essentially, those who say Catholic men must buy diamond rings are trying to force Catholic men to be conned by Jєωs for the vanity of women:
The major investors in the diamond mines realized that they had no alternative but to merge their interests into a single entity that would be powerful enough to control production and perpetuate the illusion of scarcity of diamonds. The instrument they created, in 1888, was called De Beers Consolidated Mines, Ltd., incorporated in South Africa. As De Beers took control of all aspects of the world diamond trade, it assumed many forms. In London, it operated under the innocuous name of the Diamond Trading Company. In Israel, it was known as "The Syndicate." In Europe, it was called the "C.S.O." -- initials referring to the Central Selling Organization, which was an arm of the Diamond Trading Company. And in black Africa, it disguised its South African origins under subsidiaries with names like Diamond Development Corporation and Mining Services, Inc. At its height -- for most of this century -- it not only either directly owned or controlled all the diamond mines in southern Africa but also owned diamond trading companies in England, Portugal, Israel, Belgium, Holland, and Switzerland.
De Beers proved to be the most successful cartel arrangement in the annals of modern commerce. While other commodities, such as gold, silver, copper, rubber, and grains, fluctuated wildly in response to economic conditions, diamonds have continued, with few exceptions, to advance upward in price every year since the Depression. Indeed, the cartel seemed so superbly in control of prices -- and unassailable -- that, in the late 1970s, even speculators began buying diamonds as a guard against the vagaries of inflation and recession.
The diamond invention is far more than a monopoly for fixing diamond prices; it is a mechanism for converting tiny crystals of carbon into universally recognized tokens of wealth, power, and romance. To achieve this goal, De Beers had to control demand as well as supply. Both women and men had to be made to perceive diamonds not as marketable precious stones but as an inseparable part of courtship and married life. To stabilize the market, De Beers had to endow these stones with a sentiment that would inhibit the public from ever reselling them. The illusion had to be created that diamonds were forever -- "forever" in the sense that they should never be resold.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/02/have-you-ever-tried-to-sell-a-diamond/304575/
-
Engagement rings were commonly simple gold bands (http://books.google.com/books?id=VKECAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA646&dq=engagement+ring&hl=en&sa=X&ei=72pPUf7fIInA4AOlwIGQDA&ved=0CFoQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=engagement%20ring&f=false)
-
A smart girl would skip the engagement ring and have her fiance buy her a $5000 wedding ring.
-
Prolonged engagements are against Catholic teaching, but you'd never know going by the way a large section of so-called traditionalists talk.
I think we need less concern about feminine frippery, especially the chincy two-bit version of it, and more concern about morality.
And part of that would be the morality of expecting someone to buy you a worthless rock.
-
I've had this view ever since I accompanied a former friend of mine to sell his mother's engagement ring.
His mother had passed away several years before. His father had divorced his mother when he was 11.
The father was well-to-do, and had bought a fairly attractive diamond ring.
Retail such a diamond would have cost thousands.
The Jєωeler gave my friend a few hundred bucks.
-
Because of this thread, the add at the top of my page, which has remained unchanged for about 2 weeks, is now diamonds instead of coconut oil.
Phooey.
But on the subject...it would be terribly unclassy for a woman to keep the ring, especially if she was the one who broke it off.
-
I'm going to read up on the history of engagement rings.
Believing your daughter deserves an engagement ring - in particular a dimaond engagement ring (when Jєωs have a monopoly on diamonds) - is just nonsense.
This has nothing to do with money or the lack of money.
If young women think that engagement rings are just freely given gifts that they can keep as though they weren't wearing it on condition of a promise they made, they shouldn't expect one.
They're not freely given gifts. They're in expectation of getting married. Why else should a random guy spend $300 -$500 on a diamond ring for random woman? Because she's pretty and she deserves a weeks' worth of his income?
Of course not.
She would only get the ring as an expectation of a wedded life together. The diamond being a symbol of "forever" since nothing happens to a diamond.
The fact that Jєωs often deal in diamonds is irrelevant. A diamond is a rare or at least coveted commodity, and that is WHY the Jєωs get involved with their production, refinement, and sale. There is money to be made.
I think your first sentence said it best. Neither one of us is going to convince the other about this issue, so go ahead and do your research.
You need to find out if you have a leg to stand on here.
Because the burden of proof is on you.
Now I hate to jump the gun before you finish your research, but unless you uncover that diamonds are some kind of satanic symbol, you probably should plan on getting one for your future spouse. Because all women want a modest engagement/wedding ring. If they tell you otherwise, they're lying.
-
Because of this thread, the add at the top of my page, which has remained unchanged for about 2 weeks, is now diamonds instead of coconut oil.
Phooey.
Before this thread, I regularly saw an ad for some very pretty rings complete with blue accents -- very Marian :wink:. Now, that ad is still there, but there's another advertising the advantages of "lab created" diamonds. :cowboy:
-
I'm going to read up on the history of engagement rings.
Believing your daughter deserves an engagement ring - in particular a dimaond engagement ring (when Jєωs have a monopoly on diamonds) - is just nonsense.
This has nothing to do with money or the lack of money.
If young women think that engagement rings are just freely given gifts that they can keep as though they weren't wearing it on condition of a promise they made, they shouldn't expect one.
They're not freely given gifts. They're in expectation of getting married. Why else should a random guy spend $300 -$500 on a diamond ring for random woman? Because she's pretty and she deserves a weeks' worth of his income?
Of course not.
She would only get the ring as an expectation of a wedded life together. The diamond being a symbol of "forever" since nothing happens to a diamond.
The fact that Jєωs often deal in diamonds is irrelevant. A diamond is a rare or at least coveted commodity, and that is WHY the Jєωs get involved with their production, refinement, and sale. There is money to be made.
I think your first sentence said it best. Neither one of us is going to convince the other about this issue, so go ahead and do your research.
You need to find out if you have a leg to stand on here.
Because the burden of proof is on you.
Now I hate to jump the gun before you finish your research, but unless you uncover that diamonds are some kind of satanic symbol, you probably should plan on getting one for your future spouse. Because all women want a modest engagement/wedding ring. If they tell you otherwise, they're lying.
Let me tell you two my little story:
When my husband and I got engaged, he INSISTED on buying me a diamond ring. I wanted a cubic zirconia, for fear of losing something so valuable as a diamond.
My husband's wishes prevailed. However, I insisted on insuring the diamond. And, yes, I did wear it on festive occasions when we first got married (to please my husband).
Now, however, years later, it sits in its box, in a safe location, almost never worn. (I would feel so bad if I lost the stone. And Jєωelers have told me these rings need periodic checks to make sure the stones are not getting loose.). I haven't asked my husband if it hurts his feelings that I don't wear it. It probably does, and I probably SHOULD wear it, to please him.
:wink:
-
When my husband and I got engaged, he INSISTED on buying me a diamond ring. I wanted a cubic zirconia
What a sweet thing you must have been.
My mother doesn't wear an engagement ring either.
-
Women don't at all like the idea of a second-hand ring ...
Well, mine is second-hand, from an antiques shop, and I selected it as it was inexpensive and not at all ostentatious.
-
Tele is correct the natural diamond industry is a massive monopoly scam and has been for years. Natural Diamonds are nothing like as rare as most people believe. De Beers control the supply and by up huge stockpiles.
They scoop them out of the Orange River and various mines in Russia by the ton. If there was a free market in Diamonds they would cost a fraction of the price they cost retail today or, you would be able to sell a diamond for a cost not much smaller than the purchase price.
Try that and see what happens.
http://www.economist.com/node/2921462
-
I told my Russian wife about this discussion and explained the "American thing" that Americans have about engagement rings. She thought it totally stupid to spend so much on a ring, several months salary. "I'd rather have the money and spend it on something else".
In Russia, when chasing a lady, the man pays for everything, generally speaking, because the woman has spent her tiny income on looking a million dollars for each date and, believe me, they really go to town. But Russian women and most other nationalities really don't do crazy priced Jєωellery unless they are magpies. Nice car, nice home, nice furniture and especially nice clothes is what a Russian lady wants. If you're gonna blow 5000 bucks then get her front teeth veneered so she looks good in photographs.
My MO is to buy very high quality, second hand, where possible. So instead of spending 1000 dollars on a cheaply made leather sofa, new. I will buy one from some wealthy person who wants their 10,000 dollar Italian leather sofa gone and is happy to take 1200 for it. Often these things are in mint condition, because such people don't have m(any) children to wreck them and hardly sit in them because they are forever working or out of their posh homes. They decide to change the colour scheme and therefore sell off a sofa in near perfect condition. On eBay you have a massive choice if you're ready to drive 100 miles each way to collect it, or pay some men to do that for you.
Only exception to this is electricals. I tend to buy those new.
-
I personally wouldn't care if I got an engagement ring or not- assuming I was ever in a position to get engaged. Personally, I'd rather have a new shearing set or a pair of high quality rare-breed sheep or something else more practical. I would want a wedding band simply because nothing can replace the symbolism of the wedding band ("I am married- I am taken."). Nevertheless, if my fiance insisted, I'd be fine with an engagement ring, but could honestly care less how much he spent or how modest it was.
Rings are rather impractical during lambing/kidding/calving season and for all reproductive work on livestock. Too many farmers and vets have lost their rings inside cows and ewes. (I know of a vet who found the farmer's long-lost wedding band in a cow's uterus.)
I am probably the last person who should comment on this- I have plenty of faults, but vanity is not one of them. If I'm dressed modestly and comfortably, I can care less what I am wearing, and I never wear Jєωelry.
I do think most women expect an engagement ring. It's a symbol of a sacred promise and if the man cannot afford to purchase one- even a modest one- they probably are not in a position to get married anytime soon. I personally think that it is in poor taste for a woman to keep the ring if the engagement is broken- and almost criminal if she called it off. If he did, I think she might potentially keep it, but I certainly would not want to.