Is It A Proposal If There Isn’t A Ring?

shoeluvher
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 10:09 am: [report]

I need a ring. That’s the way its always been and that’s they way I want it to be for me if I ever get married. Depending on who I marry and his means I don’t want him to go into debt, cause then that would be my debt when we got married. But I do expect something nice when the time comes.

Rose
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 10:10 am: [report]

My husband proposed without a ring and we designed and had made an inexpensive one with a semi-precious stone.  I’ve never seen a ring I like anywhere near as well.  And a friend of mine gave his wife an engagement canoe.

jojo32
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 10:21 am: [report]

I gotta say, when my (now) ex husband proposed I fully expected, and got, a diamond ring.  I’m so non-materialistic it’s insane, but I love the hell outta that ring, even to this day.  Awhile back I was going to sell it, and then I realized I wont even get 1/2 of what its worth.  So now it sits, in my jewelry box, collecting dust.  I dont really want to make it into other jewelry, mostly because I never wear jewelry.  It does seem like a pretty sad waste of money now. 

Last week (or so) someone mentioned something about the new-ish idea of ‘man made’ diamonds.  I looked into that a little bit.  They look beautiful and cost sooooo much less.  I might go for that, if anything, if I ever do lose my mind and decide to get married again.  I just like the look of it, to show that I’m committed to someone.  Altho I realize the ring doesnt mean anything if I’m not truly committed already.  I’m kinda torn…

CheeeeEEEEse
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 10:22 am: [report]

@Rose: An engagement canoe is classic.

My dad gave my mom a CZ ring with the option to upgrade later. She did, of course.

GreenAura
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 10:26 am: [report]

My husband proposed without a ring too (at first).  Then we went and picked out rings together.  But being 18 when we got married, the rings we were able to afford weren’t worth 3 months salary, more like 2 weeks salary   Then he proposed “for real” on one knee with the ring.  But let me tell ya, even if I never got a ring, I would have married him in a heartbeat.  I didn’t marry his bank account afterall!!!

joyy
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 10:27 am: [report]

While I love that it’s more mainstream to view general financial health/responsibility as much more important than the price/worth of a ring itself ... I’m appaled by the second comment.  That isn’t the Annika who writes for the Frisky, is it?  The girl who wrote about not being able to move out of her mother’s house because renting is so expensive in nyc, saying that she wouldn’t want to marry a man unless he’s already a homeowner?  Srsly - what if a guy didn’t want to propose to you because you were still renting, let alone still living at home?  What a double standard.

EastCoastMale
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 10:39 am: [report]

I do not think a ring should be necessary. If you love each other and feel the same then the need for a ring should not be a primary concern.

I am also a very strong proponent of laws where if someone proposes and the relationship ends that the man is entitled to get the ring back. I do not consider engagement rings gifts just for the sake of giving, but rather meant for a specific purpose. Several states have these laws and I am all for them. For those who are against such an idea then I say when a man gives a ring worth however much, let the woman buy him a Movado worth just as much as a sign of her love and see if both people just consider them gifts when they break up.

joyy
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 10:42 am: [report]

@ECM - I always liked the idea that whoever calls off the engagement loses the right to the ring.  I also have to wonder about what kind of woman would keep an engagement ring after a wedding is called off though ... *shrug*

joyy
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 10:46 am: [report]

or rather, whoever is the reason it’s called off ... ie one cheats, the other finds out and calls it off, the cheater doesn’t get the ring.

jojo32
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 10:47 am: [report]

@ joyy & ECM…this is just an FYI, or maybe just to give you a different viewpoint on things.  I was married, so no engagement was called off.  The ring became just another item on a list of things called “divorce settlement agreement” that I got posession of.  I mostly wanted it because he refused to pay his portion of our credit card debt.  So yeah, I kept the ring.  He kept the house, furniture, appliances, etc.  I still pretty much feel like I got the short end of that stick.  What ya gonna do, right?  Keep on keepin on…

joyy
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 10:53 am: [report]

@jojo - my thought on that doesn’t extend to divorce, but rather calling off the wedding before it even happened.  Keeping a ring after actually marrying someone, to me, is different (and totally normal).

resullins
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 10:54 am: [report]

I may sound a little materialistic here, but I hope when my boyfriend proposes, he does it with a ring. The only reason he hasn’t proposed yet is because he wants to get me one, and I want to be able to look down forever and remember that he cared enough to go out of his way to make me feel special.

That being said, I’m all for the man made diamonds, or buying second-hand, or whatever. The diamond market is almost as over-inflated as housing in NY, and falsely so.

And I also agree with the “whoever calls off the engagement loses the ring” idea. If someone breaks my heart or cheats on me or whatever, I’m melting that sucker into an awesome necklace!

tabby
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 10:55 am: [report]

As silly as it may seem, I am waiting for my ring. It has been picked out and everything. The reason that I am waiting for it as opposed to just telling everyone that we are going to get married (and most everyone we know assumes we will be getting married) is because I one that one traditional moment. I don’t care if we elope or get married at city hall, but I want to have that one cheesy or romantic moment for when I write my memoirs.

Jessica Wakeman
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 11:06 am: [report]

I don’t NEED a ring, but I WANT a ring.

I like the symbolism of it—the price or size really don’t matter to me. In fact, I’d rather not know about the price or size, because I think it’s tacky when people talk about that. I agree with Kate that an engagement is more about celebrating the commitment than it is about celebrating the piece of jewelry.

The only exception to this? If the guy had a history of being non-committal and I sensed the “no ring” thing was a way for him to do an easy exit. But then again, I wouldn’t marry that guy anyway.

LadyAlys
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 11:10 am: [report]

My husband asked me out of nowhere one night when we were at a bar to marry him (I of course said yes).  Obviously he didn’t have a ring.  We ended up getting married faster than planned because he was overseas and we wanted to be together. He got to visit me for two weeks to get married then get me started on moving to be with him.  The first day he arrived he went with his sister and picked out a whole set for like 500$ so we would have something for the wedding (which was at the court house). They didn’t even fit, got that fixed later. Seven wonderful years later, he got me a “real” ring, and I only wear it sometimes.  The ring doesn’t love me, my husband does. My special moments and memories have collected over the years.  It doesn’t all hinge on one moment and one item. He’s bought me many wonderful things over the years and done many things for me to show me his love, just as I have for him.

Diana
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 11:11 am: [report]

I’m voting for no ring for 2 reasons:

1. I want to pick my ring..
2. I know my love can’t afford a ring anytime soon, and I don’t want that to stop him from wanting to propose.

resullins
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 11:14 am: [report]

@Diana: I agree with #2 up there… I’m in the same boat. I also found a really good article about the fake diamond idea (http://ezinearticles.com/?Man-Made-Diamonds;-A-Buyers-Guide&id=82480)... now how should I tell Q that he should just buy me a fake? That’s a weird hint to drop…

fallonthecity
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 11:18 am: [report]

I like the tradition of engagement rings.  I hope that if anyone ever proposes to me, he’ll do it with a ring.  That said, I would never wear or keep a ring that cost anyone three months’ salary.  The man-made diamonds resullins is talking about are an awesome idea.

bogart4017
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 11:31 am: [report]

Its trad dad! And it doesnt have to take two months salary either. But at least have something for when you do propose.

Annika Harris
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 11:38 am: [report]

@joyy I didn’t say he should be finished paying for the house. I said that if he wasn’t spending the money on the ring, then it should be used as a downpayment for a house or other dwelling. I’m perfectly willing to help pay my share of the mortgage after the proposal.

Anniekins
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 11:43 am: [report]

when my husband proposed, it was spur of the moment, so there was no ring.  He ran into a store and bought an inexpensive “temporary” engagement ring because he wanted something to give me.
My parents go to jewelry wholesale shows, so we were able to go, too.  We picked a stone and a setting separately and made a unique ring.  I’m kinda glad he didn’t have some random ring in his pocket when he proposed.  I LOVE my ring.

sarahprotzman
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 11:58 am: [report]

It’s a symbol not only of his love and the patience it takes to save money for something like that, but it’s also a symbol he can provide for the woman. Not that she couldn’t provide for herself, but I think to most women it’s a comfort knowing he can as well. Not to mention, the man likes to feel like the man!

sadie
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 12:03 pm: [report]

I don’t like jewelry and I didn’t want a diamond ring. I also don’t like the gender inequality of engagement rings. Why should it be only his prerogative to ask? Why should I be publicly on “lay away” while his finger is bare (symbolizing he is still free).

When I got engaged I told my hubby I wanted plain matching bands for each of us and that is what we got. No money wasted on something neither of us would enjoy and a public symbol that we are both taken. We upgraded to nicer rings for wedding bands, but not diamonds. We picked rings from that were still wedding bandish but a little less traditional.

I actually did wind up with a a diamond ring though, his grandma’s engagement ring. I think that is a nice way to go about it. It symbolizes becoming part of his family and it’s a family heirloom and it’s recycled, rather than giving money to an industry I don’t really care for.

CheeeeEEEEse
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 12:04 pm: [report]

@Sarahprotzman: Symbols mean different things to different people. Before the Nazi’s used the swastika it was written in Sanskrit and can be traced back to being used as far back as the Neolithic period, so obviously symbols change meanings. I think the ring is an outdated symbol and really needs a rehashing for today’s culture…to what I don’t know.

-my farthing

brackishfaun
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 12:05 pm: [report]

I’ve always wanted to get an engagement ring whenever someone proposes to me, but I also don’t want it to be expensive at all. I’m talking like under 50 bucks. I feel that there are so many other things that I’d want the money spent on, my dream being an engagement vacation. if a guy gave me a copper ring with a cheap crystal in it and then slapped down some plane tickets to Fiji or something I’d be in heaven. At least that way it something that me and my fiance could enjoy together. and if he didn’t have enough money for that I’d just want to start saving up for a sweet honeymoon. I obviously like going on vacations….

joyy
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 12:10 pm: [report]

@Annika - many people never own their homes outright/“finish” paying it off, so that’s not what I was referring to.  Even with clarification, your comments still send the message that you expect the man to provide a non-rented home for you that you will (apparently?) only be willing to assume any financial responsibility for after a proposal. 

Have you ever thought of buying your own place, and would you tolerate that attitude from a man?  Still looks like a double standard to me!  But hey, whatever floats your boat - good luck with that.

Queen Frostine
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 12:24 pm: [report]

My love (and commitment) cannot be bought.

I told my then-fiance-to-be (now husband) that I did NOT want OR need a ring. I told him my love and commitment comes free, no strings attached.

Someone above said, “I want to be able to look down forever and remember that he cared enough to go out of his way to make me feel special.” There are many ways to make a person feel special and loved, none of which should ever involve expecting or coercing someone to spend money on you.

When my husband proposed, he tied a ribbon on my finger, representing his promise and his commitment. It held the EXACT same symbolism as an engagement ring, but without the debt of a costly (and unnecessary) diamond.

bunnymatic
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 12:30 pm: [report]

Destiny had it that this article be posted for me. On Sunday, after a meeting with my parents and his parents, we actually pushed to finalize our wedding plans for next year rather than get engaged next year. After telling quite a few people about the good news, they were taken back by the fact that i accepted such a condition without a ring.

I never really took interest in the idea of a ring before this to be honest. I started to feel intense pressure and even broke on last night on the phone about not having a ring. Then again, I stepped back and looked at the situation. I’m having two weddings- a Hindu and Christian cceremony- very elaborate ceremonies at that. I’m getting a Pronovias gown. My reception will be at Oheka castle. Seriously. It’s all material. Above it all, I’m marrying the man I love and was lucky enough to have all of these amenities. So, why give a #&@$% about a ring? Sorry about the language. A Harry Winston (which are pretty ugly to be honest) won’t guarantee that a couple won’t break up a year later. It won’t guarantee that they’ll marry a year later as well. People need to stop judging, the ring thing is relative pre-marriage, it shouldn’t be a requirement.

EastCoastMale
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 12:34 pm: [report]

I have to say that maybe to some men, buying a ring for their partner makes them feel like more of a provider but I definitely do not share that same sentiment. Also, I cannot agree with the rule of whoever cheats loses the ring, yes the guy may have cheated but that does not necessarily equate to forfeiture of an item that was several thousand dollars most likely. I know it does seem harsh to many people but that is allowing emotions to rule your decision making in my mind.

Queen Frostine
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 12:48 pm: [report]

Maybe it’s me, but I feel that this isn’t victorian times and marriage should not revolve around a man being able to provide for a woman financially. I want the man I spend my life with to provide in more realistic ways, such as emotionally support me when I’m down and out. That goes a lot farther than his money, especially when years later, he gets laid off in a bad economy.

resullins
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 12:51 pm: [report]

@QueenFrostine - I told my boyfriend to go get a pebble from the road and a freaking bread tie… but he wants to get me something that I’ve always dreamed of. So if he’s going to get me something, shouldn’t it also be the man’s decision? I wouldn’t care if it was a bread tie… so don’t tell me that because I want a ring my love can be “bought” or “comes with strings attached”. You’re being closed-minded about people that you think are close-minded.

vaiaster
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 12:58 pm: [report]

I agree that a ring is needed. My first psuedo-fiance’ proposed without and it simply wasn’t the same as it was with my (now) husband. I agree it’s tradition and (to me) a sense of belonging to someone if you have a ring (with one simple diamond, please) attached to the infamous question of asking one to be your wife/spouse. And in the latter case with my husband, he didn’t spend three months salary on my rock; he received it from a family member and we simply purchased the mounting. There are always alternative methods, instead of spending several grand.

EastCoastMale
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 01:00 pm: [report]

I agree with Queen in that a relationship or marriage should not revolve around money but I also see resullins point that by just accepting a ring that her man wanted to provide does not mean he or she has attached a value or a string to their relationship. Some people want/need a ring, some need only a small ring and some people need nothing at all. This is a very broad summarization but maybe we can all agree that it is different strokes for different folks.

Queen Frostine
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 01:00 pm: [report]

@ resullins: That seems contradictory to your prior post where you stated you wanted one. Now you’re saying you don’t, but yet you dream of one, so I’m confused. My opinion, it’s marriage, so a ring should be a mutual decision, symbolic of your future as a unified couple.

resullins
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 01:07 pm: [report]

@Queen: You’re correct… perhaps what I should have said earlier is that I don’t need one, and I would never ask him to get me one, as he’s a mechanic, and doesn’t make a lot of money. And yes, I did dream of one, I’ve never imagined a proposal without one (I’ll freely blame mass media for that one). I’d marry him if he wanted to run off to Vegas and do it with Elvis… but I would enjoy the proposal, the ring, the wedding, the event.

Arsenic
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 01:12 pm: [report]

I think rings are a great tradition.
That being said, I think BOTH parties should give engagement gifts- after all, you’re in this together, right?
Also, who says it has to be expensive? The original wedding bands were plain iron bands- the diamond ring is a fairly new development. Besides, I think having something that means something to the both of you is much more important.

Queen Frostine
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 01:12 pm: [report]

Ok, understood. Suppose to say that there is a line between desire / expectation and simply accepting an offered token of promise.

Additionally, it would make an interesting poll to see how many women would turn down a ring-less proposal from their partners.

jojo32
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 01:13 pm: [report]

@ ECM:  If we could all agree on that, this website probably wouldnt be quite so popular, would it?  LOL It’s differences that make our lives so interesting.  It does crack me up to see how aggravated people get when defending their opinions about certain subjects.

EastCoastMale
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 01:21 pm: [report]

This is true. I understand that a ring symbolizes different things to different people but some sound like they are ready to fist fight.

To those who say that whoever cheats forfeits the right to a ring, I propose this scenario. Say there is a couple with a joint bank account and they are saving up money for a wedding and the woman goes away on a girls weekend and comes back admitting she slept with whoever. The guy feels hurt and upset and they split but he says since she cheated he is entitled to the $3,000 that she put into the marriage fund because she made such a mistake. Both that money and a ring would be specifically aimed at the goal of getting married in my opinion, do you think the woman would simply give up the money to him and be fine with it?

Arsenic
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 01:21 pm: [report]

@Queen Frostine

I care about whether or not my partner can provide for me because if something untoward happened and I would need help supporting myself, I would like to know that it would be there- same as how I care about being able to provide *for* my partner as well.

EastCoastMale
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 01:25 pm: [report]

I personally don’t think that simply buying an engagement ring is a good indicator of a man being able to provide. What if he goes into debt to buy it and doesn’t tell you? or what if he does so just to meet an ideal and is not a motivated person in other areas of his life that would allow him to provide for someone. I think relationships should be about teamwork and compromise.

jojo32
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 01:30 pm: [report]

ECM-totally agree.  My ex was living at home with his parents (and I was living with mine) when he bought my ring.  Of course, then it was no problem to come up with the money to buy that ring.  At that point in my life I could not have cared less about what he could provide for me.  I was head over heels in love.  He also put a down payment on our house when we bought it, because he had money from a settlement.  Did this translate to living comfortably for the entirety of our marriage.  Um, no.  We were broke.  We were young and dumb. Sh*t happens.

joyy
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 01:35 pm: [report]

@ECM - having money saved to pay for a wedding and giving someone a ring are very different things.  I think it’s all bunk, personally, but a joint account is joint, and a gift is a gift.  In that scenario, the dude should totally get the ring back and get his money back out of it.

If it’s a joint account where either person can make changes/etc (as opposed to the bank requiring consent from both), he could probably just move all that money to a personal account she has no access to and tell her to go f*ck herself.

Queen Frostine
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 01:59 pm: [report]

@ Arsenic: The act of marriage itself is proof that one agrees to provide for the other. Taking vows to support one another, for richer or poorer. Support should be mutual. If one is in need, the other provides.

When someone says, “I want a ring as proof he can financially provide” it’s foolish, because nothing is certain in life, especially money, just like ECM said. And it comes off to me as vaguely sexist. The man should equally expect a woman to provide in case he has, say an accident and can no longer bring home the bacon. But yet, men never require women to offer symbols that they can provide for them?

ki4910
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 02:05 pm: [report]

There absolutely does not need to be a ring!  My father was paying his way through college when he proposed to my mother, and didn’t have a ring.  She didn’t expect one, either.  They’ve been married for 26 years and are completely happy.  There are much more important things in marriage than a piece of jewelry.  This doesn’t even just apply to this current economic climate, but any time.  It’s ridiculous to say that you can’t ask someone to marry you without a ring.

Arsenic
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 02:15 pm: [report]

@Queen Frostine
This is exactly why I will be giving my SO a ring as well. As I said before, if you would read my previous post- I think both parties should be concerned with being able to provide for the other should something untoward happen. And also, I never said that the *ring* is a symbol of financial responsibility. As I said in the post before that, the ring need not be expensive- it is my opinion the act of saving for a wedding that helps provide evidence of financial responsibility (along with a history gleaned from discussion with/living with your partner of course)

Arsenic
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 02:20 pm: [report]

And to prevent further confusion- YES we BOTH will be participating in in saving up for the wedding as well.

Ryan
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 03:02 pm: [report]

I don’t want an engagement ring because I would always have this troubling feeling that I had been bought. Also, engagement rings don’t seem very special to me… almost every bride has one too! Personal feelings aside, I think engagement rings can range from thoughtful expressions of love and commitment to dangerous indicators of a commercialized society. It’s all wrapped up in how much importance the individual couple places on the ring.

Sofjna
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 03:26 pm: [report]

One of my teachers in high school was also a marine biologist.  Since her hands were always in water or getting messy, when her husband proposed he got her a diamond earing.  No one knew why she only had one ear peirced until she finally told us.

Lynn
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 04:13 pm: [report]

Yes, I would like a ring at my proposal. If he doesn’t have the money or inclination to buy one ahead of time, that’s fine, but just stop at a gumball machine or at K-mart and get something for $5! I like the tradition and I think rings are a sweet token of the occasion.

Unohoo
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 04:21 pm: [report]

I worked in a upscale jewelry store for 7 years while in my 20’s.  Maybe this will help.
#1.  The “rule” that a man should spend 2 months (I laughed to see it is now THREE months) salary was made up as a marketing campaign.  Pre 1900’s hardly anyone wore diamond rings.
#2.  The diamond trade is riddled with atrocities.  There are some countries that export “clean” diamonds but you pay more. 
#3.  I wear a wedding ring that my husband and I designed that uses a Montana Yogo sapphire (the same type of center stone that was in Princess Diana’s wedding set) as the center stone - bezel set.  I get far more compliments on it than my 1st marriage’s traditional set.  Frankly, the thought of wearing a diamond as my centerstone makes me a little ill. My husband has a plain gold band that he wears attached to his watch band.  (its a military thing)

I liked the idea of taking the money and paying for that extra champagne toast.  Our life experiences are way more valuable than a hunk of gold and stone we lug around on our finger.

babychels09
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 05:02 pm: [report]

For me a ring is a must but it doesn’t need to be a diamond.

babychels09
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 05:04 pm: [report]

I wanted to add this to my previous post but it wouldn’t let me.  Let me ask this question to everyone.  How would you like to be engaged but then when you tell someone they ask where’s the ring?  Kinda goes like this ring = engaged no ring = platonic

develange
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 05:09 pm: [report]

OK, so I totally understand what people are saying about wanting a ring. I know part of it is tradition, but why don’t more guys get engagement rings? (manly ones, of course). It’s not like only one person is making a promise, or one person is engaged.

I really have no idea how much engaagement rings typically cost. But if it’s thousands of dollars, why not buy a car, a vacation, make a down payment? Seems much more meaningful and useful than something I might drop down the drain.

MaeBelle
wrote on June 10 2009 @ 07:33 pm: [report]

I need and want my diamond. The husband can come too…

Karmatir
wrote on June 11 2009 @ 06:04 am: [report]

Frankly if *I* have to wear the ring forever (which is likely right?) then why does *he* get to pick it out? I trust my man in everything but jewelry. No way. I would much rather be proposed to without the ring so that we can go pick it out together. Whichever is first I guess.

Secondly if he proposed to me using a bought diamond I would have to refuse. If he didn’t know me well enough to know that I despise the diamond trade (despite being my birthstone) then he isn’t the one for me. I would much rather go hunt for a diamond in Arkansas and get that made into a special ring than anything else. The BS, politics and advertising/marketing that surrounds diamonds is disgusting and just plain wrong. Not to mention inflated prices. I collect vintage advertising and the normal price for engagement rings in the 30s/40s/50s translated to today’s dollars is 1/4 to 1/2 of the same price now - and yet this is supposed to be a global market!! Pfft.

anatomization
wrote on June 11 2009 @ 07:57 am: [report]

on the who gets the ring in a break up it seems like it should go back to who gave it.  A ring in the sense of marriage(A contract), is not exactly a gift like a box of chocolates or flowers or lingerie or clothes or cds or movies or anything like that.  Besides alot of people give family heirlooms and other rings with sentimental value.  Why would someone want to keep that, other than spite/meanness.

CheeeeEEEEse
wrote on June 11 2009 @ 08:08 am: [report]

@anatomization: The ring is not a contract! The marriage license is much more of a contract than a piece of metal!

Also, if I gave lingerie, I’d expect it back for entirely different and much kinkier reasons. I also expect recently consumed chocolate to be regurgitated as well.

duckie
wrote on June 11 2009 @ 08:19 am: [report]

I have to say- I never really cared about getting a ring until I got one.  Even when I first got it the jeweler had to tell me what a big deal my ring was- I didn’t know different band designers or different cuts of diamonds etc.  Now that I’ve been wearing it for a while I couldn’t give it up!  I mostly like looking at it and thinking about our future, or going around town with it- showing that I’m with someone- though I might not feel that way if I never got a ring, and I’d probably be equally as happy with a simple inexpensive band.

duckie
wrote on June 11 2009 @ 08:20 am: [report]

@ cheese- hahahaha. but don’t worry about giving me chocolate in the first place- I’m trying to lose a few pounds.

Keesh Mia
wrote on June 11 2009 @ 09:01 am: [report]

A ring is a must. It’s a symbol of marriage in the western culture.  If we were in a remote village in Africa, I would say “No” but we are NOT. 

It’s like saying Christianity will remain the same without the cross.  Well kind of yes but truthfully, no.

The symbol of the ring forces romance into a relationship, similar to what a wedding does and valentine’s does. I think it’s all good just don’t go crazy and spend more than you can afford.

TessD
wrote on June 11 2009 @ 09:41 am: [report]

I work in this industry and was really astounded to see someone up there quote three months salary as a guide for how much to spend. As @unohoo noted, DeBeers, who initiated that crazy, but oh so effective concept, does a hell of a job with marketing. 

My ring was my mother’s. She gave it to me when she inherited my grandmother’s rings and I have treasured it simply because it’s a part of my family history.  I loved my husband and never would have thought of not marrying him because he couldn’t afford a ring.  It just didn’t and doesn’t matter.  I am astounded at how mired we are in this not very old tradition and how eager some of us are to equate how much someone spends on us equate with how much they love us.

In this business I have seen people buy a ring and then decide they were unhappy because it reflected their current income level and not the income level they aspired to.  I really have to walk away shaking my head at such unbridled commercialism and how people are so willing to be judged by their possessions.

EastCoastMale
wrote on June 11 2009 @ 10:02 am: [report]

@Joyy

I know these are different examples but that is just the thing, I do not consider an engagement ring a gift in any manner. I believe it to be a sign of commitment based on taking another step towards marriage. That being said, if the relationship ends under whatever circumstances I do not believe a ring should be kept but rather given back and both people move on. The ability to pick and choose whether or not to give back a ring depending on how an individual feels basically is bunk.

sensualmess
wrote on June 11 2009 @ 10:17 am: [report]

A ring’s not necessary.  Save your money for better things - a house, whatever.

Lynn
wrote on June 11 2009 @ 10:59 am: [report]

@Keesh Mia - What? A wedding, a ring, and Valentine’s Day make relationships? I would have to disagree. I could even give you the benefit of the doubt with the wedding, if you were saying that a romance before a wedding isn’t as intense a relationship or something, but the Valentine’s thing has completely lost me.

joyy
wrote on June 11 2009 @ 11:05 am: [report]

@Lynn - I had the same reaction.  But hey, some people like to buy into the shallow, prescripted view of ‘western’ romance, like Keesh Mia.  Most of us know better, are at least curious enough to look for other, more meaningful things, or can at least take the shallowness for what it is.

resullins
wrote on June 11 2009 @ 11:15 am: [report]

@Joyy: So you equate wanting romance and tradition to being shallow? While I don’t agree with what Keesh Mia said, I don’t agree that you being judgmental about other people’s desires and outlook on a relationship is any less shallow of you.

I do want a ring, I do want a wedding, I don’t think they’re necessary, just something I would like. If someone requires the $50,000 wedding, or doesn’t want to have kids, or wants to quit her job to raise her kids, whos business is it BUT hers to make those decisions?

Don’t judge, you’re not the one wanting to marry her.

B1ll
wrote on June 11 2009 @ 11:23 am: [report]

Actually Cheese, if you want to be blunt and take the romance out of it, it is a contract.  The “Proposer” holds out (offers) the ring (consideration)to the “Proposee” and asks ‘Will you marry me?’.  The “Proposee” says ‘yes’ (acceptance) and agrees to marry the “Proposer” (consideration.  That is a contract.  Breach a contract and you lose the consideration.

However, since (you hope) the ring is a symbol of mutual love and an on-going promise to respect, appreciate, and support each other in a relationship that will not end, its value should not matter but its existence should be important. 

The value can never truly represent the depth of love because you can always have spent more.  But as a statement to the world that says “I love this person. I want her with me for the rest of my life, and I want everyone to know it” it has no equal.

No, it is not a symbol of possession.

A Romantic might want to surprise someone with the ring given in a way that will create a special memory.

A Practical Person might want to propose without a ring and then buy it together.

Regardless of which, I think it should be there.

joyy
wrote on June 11 2009 @ 11:26 am: [report]

@resullins - I think her view thata ring=romance because that’s the tradition here is shallow.  To clarify, I don’t think a ring=shallow.  But a ring for the sake of looking around you and seeing that everyone else is doing it so that must be the right way to do it seems pretty shallow.

Lynn
wrote on June 11 2009 @ 01:26 pm: [report]

Keesh Mia, I think I mis-read your comment. I thought you were saying that a ring forces A romance to be a relationship (like, it makes a just-for-fun coupling into a serious thing).

Now I think you said that a ring injects some romance into an already-established relationship.

My reaction was based on my misunderstanding - sorry!

Juddha
wrote on June 11 2009 @ 07:36 pm: [report]

My friend’s engagement ring was a bread twist tie. She wore it until her fiance and she were able to afford wedding bands for when they got married.

wonder_bread
wrote on June 11 2009 @ 07:36 pm: [report]

i want a ring i don’t need one. for me its a sign that i am taken rather than having to say it.. i know my guy loves me with or without one.. and i don’t want to break his bank or cause him to go in debt i don’t evenw ant a diamond i want a gem a sapphire or opal or emerald…and wen we get married he will have a wedding ban to say the same for him.i dont mind being labeled as taken. and i don’t believe in the flip flop loving the world plays with now.. before i get married ai am goin to the best i can to find the guy that best fits me the good bad and ugly and commit for life the ring is jut a symbol of Our commitment and status sicne we will both have one

PinkRanger
wrote on June 11 2009 @ 08:18 pm: [report]

I definitely don’t think there needs to be a ring at a proposal, and the only reason I would want him to have one at the actual proposal is as a sign that he has been planning it, and has thoroughly thought it through. Having said that I plan on buying him something as well, whether its some type of ring, a watch, or anything really to show him that I want to love, support, and provide for him right back! I definitely don’t want an expensive ring, and maybe not even a diamond, something vintage or unique is more my style. I do feel its pretty sexist to just expect a ring and not give anything in return. I don’t need a dowry!

JackieO
wrote on June 12 2009 @ 10:04 am: [report]

A ring at a proposal go hand in hand and lets not deny it that’s what we all wish for ever since we were little girls.

majicksand
wrote on June 12 2009 @ 12:23 pm: [report]

I’m getting married in a week and a half, and my ring is beautiful.  We went together to choose mine and his.  He picked out a band, and I designed my set.  Did I need it? No.  Did I want it?  Absolutely.  Our money is already joint, so I bought it for myself every bit as much as he bought it for me.  It’s pretty, I like it, I want it, so I bought it. 

Not gonna lie, I get a little charge when other people admire it.  If that’s shallow, oh well.  I earned all of my jewelry.  I wear it because I like it, but I’m not above admitting that it’s gratifying when other people notice it’s pretty.

@Queen Frostine:  I truly hope I misunderstood your comment about men not requiring symbols that a woman can provide.  Just because those symbols are not usually material does not mean they don’t exist.  There are lots of ways to “provide”.  Men require considerably more reassurance in my experience.

Hannah P
wrote on June 14 2009 @ 09:47 pm: [report]

It would still technically be a proposal if there was no ring BUT the ring is the actual symbol of commitment and the man would need to get one very soon after the proposal, if he didn’t already have it.

If there was no ring, the proposal would feel half-hearted and unprepared. It wouldn’t be memorable, as a proposal should be, and I could see the woman resenting the man for it later.

Girl_Friday
wrote on June 14 2009 @ 11:01 pm: [report]

I think the diamond engagement ring is a very American thing. Where I’m from, when a couple gets engaged they both get a simple silver band. And then when they get married they both get a gold wedding band, with or without diamonds.

Personally, I proposed to my husband, and it was completely spontaneous. But he was thrilled, and took me out to go ring shopping the next day

landesign
wrote on June 15 2009 @ 12:45 am: [report]

All these frugal people! Whats the matter with an inexpensive ring? Four hundred dollars for my wife’s ring,
and she loved it. The ring is just another level of commitment, a symbol for others to see. The fact that a lady would accept and wear a ring is an honor for the dude.
As far as getting the ring back with a breakup, it has to
be a cut and dried time limit, like the time a store gives you to bring an item back. Breakup within a year, he gets the ring back. Fault usually can’t be determined when there’s a breakup,the causative factors could be endless. Unless it shows up on an episode of ‘Cheaters’, of course.