Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why you think a ring is essential, OP. Seriously, I don't. It's something the diamond industry made up to get people to buy them. Are you that manipulable?

If someone wants a ring, fine. If they don't want a ring, that is also fine. Men don't wear engagement rings, showing it is not necessary. Why is it absolutely necessary for women to?

Because there's no bigger achievement for a woman than getting married.

Even when you file for divorce a month later?

That was sarcasm, but people who genuinely think this also think that women should stay married... even when the marriage sucks.

Anonymous wrote:Assuming you are not a troll, OP I would be less concerned about the ring and other trappings of the wedding and more concerned about how stable and long-term the guy seems to be. When I used to follow Babycenter a few years ago, I was shocked by the plethora of women who had multiple kids with their “fiance” or kids with multiple fathers. Opened my eyes to a different way of life. You don’t want your sister to join those ranks so make sure she thinks the guy will stick around.

Baby center blew my mind too! Every thread was a train wreck of bad decisions. I wondered initially if people were really just making these stories up- why would someone be having kid #5 with an addict, not engaged, lives with their parents? But after a while I realized they were true. Soooo much drama! I don’t know a single person like that in my life and I’m not particularly sheltered.

Anonymous wrote:My sister and another friend got "engaged" recently. None of them had rings and in the case of my sister, there was not even a proposal, just her and the guy agreeing on a date to get married later this year. I feel like it sets the bar very low for their partners and it's not something women should be ok with. My husband too popped the question without one and it felt incredibly informal, as if he wasn't serious about getting married. I told him that a ring was important to me and he popped the question again a week later with a ring.

A ring doesn't even need to be expensive, there are many cute rings for less than $500. It's the symbolism behind it that's important. It doesn't seem that my friend and sister are being taken seriously by their men, but they look like they're ok with it which is baffling. Women should stop pretending to be cool girls and set higher standards for their partners.

h

I’ll take “Things that other people do differently that I don’t have the mental capacity to understand” for 400, Alex.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why you think a ring is essential, OP. Seriously, I don't. It's something the diamond industry made up to get people to buy them. Are you that manipulable?

If someone wants a ring, fine. If they don't want a ring, that is also fine. Men don't wear engagement rings, showing it is not necessary. Why is it absolutely necessary for women to?

Because there's no bigger achievement for a woman than getting married.

Even when you file for divorce a month later?

I told now-DH I'd wear a ring when he did. He bought me earrings, because he wanted to buy me something. I had no interest in wearing a ring to signify I was "taken".

Once we’re married our accounts will be joint. Why do I want him spending our joint money on a piece of jewelry I wouldn’t buy with my own money? The whole thing seems ridiculous to me. It made more sense when it was a way to get money out of groom’s family and also operated as some financial protection for women in the event of abandonment by the man (during the coverture rules when the marital assets all belonged to the man and he could spend them.)

Here’s an interesting historical side note. The founder of Girl Scouts founded it in her middle age, after her husband had wasted all of their money and abandoned her and moved on with his much younger girlfriend. (And I think most of to r money he wanted was her inheritance.). She then sold the jewelry he gave her as a wedding gift to have the money to start Girl Scouts. Because she had the jewelry and it was hers. That was the original purpose of all the jewelry gifts to women — hard convertible assets not covered by the coverture laws. See also the song Diamknds are a girl’s best friend — the whole point of the song is that when he ditches you because you’re getting older, you can sell the rock to pay rent. It’s basically like an old timey prenup — this is what you’ll have in the event of divorce or abandonment. I do have a small diamond that a great aunt brought from the old country when she fled her abusive spouse. It’s probably about all she took.

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why you think a ring is essential, OP. Seriously, I don't. It's something the diamond industry made up to get people to buy them. Are you that manipulable?

If someone wants a ring, fine. If they don't want a ring, that is also fine. Men don't wear engagement rings, showing it is not necessary. Why is it absolutely necessary for women to?

Because there's no bigger achievement for a woman than getting married.

Hey, OP! If you think that rings are so important, why don't you get your sister one yourself?

I don't understand why you think a ring is essential, OP. Seriously, I don't. It's something the diamond industry made up to get people to buy them. Are you that manipulable?

If someone wants a ring, fine. If they don't want a ring, that is also fine. Men don't wear engagement rings, showing it is not necessary. Why is it absolutely necessary for women to?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t it sad that OP is so emotionally tied up in the idea that engagements should be inherently about a gender power imbalance?

Isn’t it great that ops sister and her husband were equal partners in their decision to get married?

Op get a life.

It’s actually about a power balance. Having to work and come up with a ring indicates he’ll work and support his family while his wife endures the ordeal of childbirth, etc. Your brand of feminism has ruined women’s lives. Women aren’t men.

I got engaged via a conversation with my DH where we decided we wanted to get married. No proposal. I decided I liked the symbolism of a ring so we bought one together a few months later, a very simple band with a small diamond because I didn't want to spend a lot of money when we were saving for a house. My DH would have bought me something more expensive, but I worried if we got a larger ring I wouldn't wear it every day, and I wanted something to remind me of him every day.

When I had a baby, my DH supported our family for 3 years while I stayed home.

My "brand" of feminism involves talking and treating each other with mutual respect, making joint decisions in which both people's priorities are considered and respected. Not blindly following traditions with the assumption that men must be entrapped into doing the right thing, and women are helpless and passive.

But you do you. I don't care one way or another what other couples do when they decide to get married, as long as everyone is consenting.

You are proving my point. Your husband would have gotten you a nice ring had you wanted that. Subsequently, he proved to be a good husband. There is a big difference between your situation and what is often happening now, which is that the woman has to be the man and the woman financially while the man is a perpetual child.

Women aren't entitled to a ring any more than men are entitled to cars (or watches). This is the problem with tradition and it taht it creates a sense of entitlement.

The tradition is that both the man and the woman wear a wedding ring. The woman gets an engagement ring but her family traditionally pays for the wedding itself. Maybe tradition isn’t for you but don’t pretend there aren’t expectations on both sides, traditionally.

I don't think that families should be expected to pay for their children's wedding either. The point isn't that tradition isn't for me, the point is that expecting something because it's tradition and having a meltdown is self-entitled.

Anonymous wrote:What a weird thing to have a meltdown over.

Op is insecure.

Because they are getting engaged without a hymen

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t it sad that OP is so emotionally tied up in the idea that engagements should be inherently about a gender power imbalance?

Isn’t it great that ops sister and her husband were equal partners in their decision to get married?

Op get a life.

It’s actually about a power balance. Having to work and come up with a ring indicates he’ll work and support his family while his wife endures the ordeal of childbirth, etc. Your brand of feminism has ruined women’s lives. Women aren’t men.

A ring is an expectation. Men buying rings are just doing what's expected from them. A one time 1K gift is not a sign that he'll be ok with paying thousands of dollar a year for you to stay home.

What a weird thing to have a meltdown over.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t it sad that OP is so emotionally tied up in the idea that engagements should be inherently about a gender power imbalance?

Isn’t it great that ops sister and her husband were equal partners in their decision to get married?

Op get a life.

It’s actually about a power balance. Having to work and come up with a ring indicates he’ll work and support his family while his wife endures the ordeal of childbirth, etc. Your brand of feminism has ruined women’s lives. Women aren’t men.

I got engaged via a conversation with my DH where we decided we wanted to get married. No proposal. I decided I liked the symbolism of a ring so we bought one together a few months later, a very simple band with a small diamond because I didn't want to spend a lot of money when we were saving for a house. My DH would have bought me something more expensive, but I worried if we got a larger ring I wouldn't wear it every day, and I wanted something to remind me of him every day.

When I had a baby, my DH supported our family for 3 years while I stayed home.

My "brand" of feminism involves talking and treating each other with mutual respect, making joint decisions in which both people's priorities are considered and respected. Not blindly following traditions with the assumption that men must be entrapped into doing the right thing, and women are helpless and passive.

But you do you. I don't care one way or another what other couples do when they decide to get married, as long as everyone is consenting.

You are proving my point. Your husband would have gotten you a nice ring had you wanted that. Subsequently, he proved to be a good husband. There is a big difference between your situation and what is often happening now, which is that the woman has to be the man and the woman financially while the man is a perpetual child.

Women aren't entitled to a ring any more than men are entitled to cars (or watches). This is the problem with tradition and it taht it creates a sense of entitlement.

The tradition is that both the man and the woman wear a wedding ring. The woman gets an engagement ring but her family traditionally pays for the wedding itself. Maybe tradition isn’t for you but don’t pretend there aren’t expectations on both sides, traditionally.