Anonymous wrote:As a feminist guy, this is a deal-breaker for me and I feel pity and mystification for my guy friends when I hear about them doing it -- some of them are shelling out literally thousands of dollars for a ring that their partner isn't paying for half of. For these guys it's like the sexual revolution never happened.
If your answer is 'yes, I totally would', is it because you don't consider yourself a feminist, or what?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP sounds very very cheap. This is just a way of making excuses to not buy something expensive. Being cheap is really a red flag for other issues. If I was the girlfriend, I would not marry someone with this line of thinking. It's a preview of bigger issues to come.
Women can say that being cheap is a red flag for other issues, but really it's not. If you want another person to give you stuff, own it. If it were truly "a red flag for other issues," you'd see the concern about cheapness running both ways between the sexes in approximately equal measure. But you don't. Men don't expect much in the way of material things from women, and when women don't provide those material things, it's not "a red flag for other issues."
Anonymous wrote:Lol feminism goes right out the window if the feminist thinks it means she won't be getting free jewelry any longer. A true feminist woman would insist on buying her own engagement ring And one for her man.
We all know that will never happen.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:When DH and I got engaged, we were both in grad school, and I was very opposed to debt for a ring. I got a classic $300 Pearl ring. That was what was in our budget (note the our budget-- because if you are going to get married, it should be a you plural budget). He said at the time that he wanted me to have a diamond someday, and about 7 years later, when we were a lot more financially secure, he bought me an anniversary band with a solitaire, which was a huge surprise. This ring means a lot to me-- because DH had kept a promise he made and had slowly saved for it for years in a separate account (and there was no discussion about this, hints by me, resentment, etc in the intervening years-- I loved my original engagement ring), and because we really could afford it.
The point is, an engagement ring is a symbol. What you spend should matter a lot less than what it means to both of you. but it is a gift. And, as when you are married, one you should buy with an eye toward your future wife's jewelry preferences and you shared long term financial goals.
Why didn't you buy him one?
Anonymous wrote:When DH and I got engaged, we were both in grad school, and I was very opposed to debt for a ring. I got a classic $300 Pearl ring. That was what was in our budget (note the our budget-- because if you are going to get married, it should be a you plural budget). He said at the time that he wanted me to have a diamond someday, and about 7 years later, when we were a lot more financially secure, he bought me an anniversary band with a solitaire, which was a huge surprise. This ring means a lot to me-- because DH had kept a promise he made and had slowly saved for it for years in a separate account (and there was no discussion about this, hints by me, resentment, etc in the intervening years-- I loved my original engagement ring), and because we really could afford it.
The point is, an engagement ring is a symbol. What you spend should matter a lot less than what it means to both of you. but it is a gift. And, as when you are married, one you should buy with an eye toward your future wife's jewelry preferences and you shared long term financial goals.
Anonymous wrote:OP, try this.
An engagement ring is meant to be the physical symbol of your promise to marry someone that you love, with all the attendant devotion and affection and respect that entails - for this feminist woman, anyway. There are certainly people who see it as a mark of possession or a tradition of the patriarchy used to prove that women can be bought.
If your intended wife is a woman who expects a flashy ring, but that is not something that matches your values, then don't propose to her. If you find yourself chaffing at the idea of spending gobs of money on a piece of jewelry with a dodgy ethical past, possibly constructed from materials produced exploitatively, then don't propose to her with a ring.
Stop making this about feminism and defining that as sharing things 50/50. There are lots of things that are not going to be shared 50/50. I will always be the one who gives more than my 50% share of my body to my marriage because I am the only one who can physically bear children. My husband will always contribute more than his 50% share of our income, because he will always make more money than me.
That you feel PITY for your friends who are getting engaged is pretty sad.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Good grief dude. White Men invented 99.9 percent of every modern day necessity, system and luxury. Embrace the grace and glory that is man and buy her a ring.
Actually white men stole credit for many inventions by white women and people of color.
Like? What a stupid assertion.

Anonymous wrote:OP sounds very very cheap. This is just a way of making excuses to not buy something expensive. Being cheap is really a red flag for other issues. If I was the girlfriend, I would not marry someone with this line of thinking. It's a preview of bigger issues to come.