Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm neutral on the love bangle, but really shocked so many people find it "embarrassing" to buy themselves jewelry. You think OP's friends' husbands picked those out themselves without any prodding from their wives? Please.

I also don't get it. I buy myself things with abandon and I'm becoming really good at colored stones and Edwardian jewelry. I'd love to go on a gem trip to Sri Lanka.

I think Opie is referring to the fact that the love bangle theme is that it’s a gift from your significant other and you cannot take it off (it needs to be removed with the screwdriver device) and that shows unyielding commitment. My guess is it hope he is concerned that some basic snob might say something to her like “oh who brought that for you? Your husband, your boyfriend, your parents? and then she would have to say “I bought it for myself,” and then risk a debate on whether that’s appropriate. Another words I don’t think that she would have trouble buying another piece of jewelry for herself.

I also think OP is overthinking it.

Anonymous wrote:I'm neutral on the love bangle, but really shocked so many people find it "embarrassing" to buy themselves jewelry. You think OP's friends' husbands picked those out themselves without any prodding from their wives? Please.

I also don't get it. I buy myself things with abandon and I'm becoming really good at colored stones and Edwardian jewelry. I'd love to go on a gem trip to Sri Lanka.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To all the people saying that the Love bangles are "tacky" or "trashy"... I'm confused. They are objectively a fairly minimalist piece of jewelry. Do I think that they are overpriced for what they are? No doubt! You can get a similar gold bangle for 1/3 the price, but this doesn't make the piece in poor taste. Maybe some of the people who wear them are trashy, but the piece itself is bordering on blandly understated.

I think what people mean when they says it's tacky is that it's the jewelry equivalent of the LV Neverfull. At one point in time it was somewhat unique and a status piece. Now it's everywhere and it's no longer a status symbol.

The real ones are not everywhere unless you live in an affluent area. Get a grip on reality, honey.

DC is an affluent area though.....

Curious if that poster lives in bfe.

Trust me, your DC neighbors are wearing reps and passing them off as real.

I doubt it. Those who can afford to spend $100k/year for two kids in private school can easily fill their arms with Love bracelets.

This thread is still going lol

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To all the people saying that the Love bangles are "tacky" or "trashy"... I'm confused. They are objectively a fairly minimalist piece of jewelry. Do I think that they are overpriced for what they are? No doubt! You can get a similar gold bangle for 1/3 the price, but this doesn't make the piece in poor taste. Maybe some of the people who wear them are trashy, but the piece itself is bordering on blandly understated.

I think what people mean when they says it's tacky is that it's the jewelry equivalent of the LV Neverfull. At one point in time it was somewhat unique and a status piece. Now it's everywhere and it's no longer a status symbol.

The real ones are not everywhere unless you live in an affluent area. Get a grip on reality, honey.

DC is an affluent area though.....

Curious if that poster lives in bfe.

Trust me, your DC neighbors are wearing reps and passing them off as real.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To all the people saying that the Love bangles are "tacky" or "trashy"... I'm confused. They are objectively a fairly minimalist piece of jewelry. Do I think that they are overpriced for what they are? No doubt! You can get a similar gold bangle for 1/3 the price, but this doesn't make the piece in poor taste. Maybe some of the people who wear them are trashy, but the piece itself is bordering on blandly understated.

I agree. Also, I assure you, the haters posting on here do not have them, and [b]most likely cannot afford them or they have no-one to buy it for them and lack the confidence to buy it for themselves[/b].

LOL, whatever helps you sleep at night knowing you are in the same jewelry league as tacky Bravo ladies....

But here you all are, continuing to prove this PP right...stop outing yourselves, its unbecoming.

The defensiveness on thread is kind of pathetic. I'm here to laugh at you. I am Pakistani, the jewelry I wear daily is worth far more than your little lock on bracelet, so trust me, I have no skin in this game other than finding this thread amusing and people like you kind of sad.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To all the people saying that the Love bangles are "tacky" or "trashy"... I'm confused. They are objectively a fairly minimalist piece of jewelry. Do I think that they are overpriced for what they are? No doubt! You can get a similar gold bangle for 1/3 the price, but this doesn't make the piece in poor taste. Maybe some of the people who wear them are trashy, but the piece itself is bordering on blandly understated.

I think what people mean when they says it's tacky is that it's the jewelry equivalent of the LV Neverfull. At one point in time it was somewhat unique and a status piece. Now it's everywhere and it's no longer a status symbol.

The real ones are not everywhere unless you live in an affluent area. Get a grip on reality, honey.

DC is an affluent area though.....

I live in a not affluent area and while some probably have real ones, so many have what are probably fakes. It all looks the same to me.

I love a gold bangle, but Those things are bougie.

Get one or more if you want. Simple.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To all the people saying that the Love bangles are "tacky" or "trashy"... I'm confused. They are objectively a fairly minimalist piece of jewelry. Do I think that they are overpriced for what they are? No doubt! You can get a similar gold bangle for 1/3 the price, but this doesn't make the piece in poor taste. Maybe some of the people who wear them are trashy, but the piece itself is bordering on blandly understated.

I agree. Also, I assure you, the haters posting on here do not have them, and [b]most likely cannot afford them or they have no-one to buy it for them and lack the confidence to buy it for themselves[/b].

LOL, whatever helps you sleep at night knowing you are in the same jewelry league as tacky Bravo ladies....

But here you all are, continuing to prove this PP right...stop outing yourselves, its unbecoming.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To all the people saying that the Love bangles are "tacky" or "trashy"... I'm confused. They are objectively a fairly minimalist piece of jewelry. Do I think that they are overpriced for what they are? No doubt! You can get a similar gold bangle for 1/3 the price, but this doesn't make the piece in poor taste. Maybe some of the people who wear them are trashy, but the piece itself is bordering on blandly understated.

I think what people mean when they says it's tacky is that it's the jewelry equivalent of the LV Neverfull. At one point in time it was somewhat unique and a status piece. Now it's everywhere and it's no longer a status symbol.

The real ones are not everywhere unless you live in an affluent area. Get a grip on reality, honey.

DC is an affluent area though.....

Curious if that poster lives in bfe.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So basic. If you actually want to invest in a nice gold bracelet get an Elizabeth Locke or Temple St. Claire. But then people wouldn't know how much you spent, which I assume is the point of the Cartier.

I can’t afford any of this, but the point of the Cartier bracelet is to have a certain spare aesthetic. I looked at those two websites, and they’re NOTHING like the love bracelet. Literally not a single thing on the Elizabeth Locke website that I wouldn’t return. I’d take a Cartier tank over any of those $100,000 necklaces. Now would I buy a bracelet I can’t take off? Nope. But that snark was completely uncalled for.

+1
I had never even heard of Elizabeth Locke or Temple St. Claire so I investigated. Pretty pieces, outrageously expensive - and nothing I would ever covet. Give me a Cartier tank too!!

I have some Temple St. Claire earrings and they are beautifully made but they were way over priced. I got them on sale but still they, like most jewelry, were far too overpriced.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To all the people saying that the Love bangles are "tacky" or "trashy"... I'm confused. They are objectively a fairly minimalist piece of jewelry. Do I think that they are overpriced for what they are? No doubt! You can get a similar gold bangle for 1/3 the price, but this doesn't make the piece in poor taste. Maybe some of the people who wear them are trashy, but the piece itself is bordering on blandly understated.

I think what people mean when they says it's tacky is that it's the jewelry equivalent of the LV Neverfull. At one point in time it was somewhat unique and a status piece. Now it's everywhere and it's no longer a status symbol.

The real ones are not everywhere unless you live in an affluent area. Get a grip on reality, honey.

DC is an affluent area though.....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get it, why not just buy a normal solid gold bangle? I like taking my jewelry off!

Because then people won't know how much you spent. That is why people buy them. The end.

+1.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guarantee half of the women in DC with one of these got it from Miss Chen/RepLadies.

Probably. You can buy a solid gold exact replica for 1000 or a shitty gold plated copy on Amazon. In any case, they all look the same imo and it detracts from the real thing looking like a special piece. So generic at this point

Sorry but no you cannot! An ounce of gold is currently sitting at $1700 and these weigh more than that. Unlike a lot of jewelry the solid gold actually has inherent value.

the labor that goes into 35 grams (1.03 oz) is not worth $4800.