Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't need to be several months salary. I really don't know why people buy into that. Very smart marketing I guess.

But I do think rings are a sweet tradition, and they are a gift. And when you give a gift, you shouldn't be cheap about it. Everyone has a different idea of what is a cheap engagement ring, but I've seen a lot of men who make above-medial salaries say 50 dollars is perfectly fine. They get up in arms about capitalism, for the first time ever, when their fiancees complain. Give me a break. (Mine cost 1K, I picked it out, I think it's lovely)

It’s great for the woman not the man and it is not a gift.

NP. "Not a gift"? So it's quid pro quo, you expect something in return? I get it. You're a man, you're pi**ed that you shelled out for a ring and didn't get exactly what you want (probably ideal sex, on demand, every time) from your wife. Well, the "it's not a gift" attitude and the view of marriage as a transaction is why you aren't getting what you wanted....

I’m a woman and he is right. And engagement ring is a symbol of a commitment to marry someone. If you renege on the engagement the ring goes back to the man.
I have a nice 4 carat diamond ring and love sex and will happily give (or get) it on demand.
Maybe that why you are bitter about not get the ring you thought you deserved.

Anonymous wrote:When are we going to end this consumer spending trap? Why only a diamond ring worth several months worth of salary can show commitment? Aren't there other ways?

Mine was a black pearl

Is anyone still wearing diamond engagement rings around here? I haven't worn mine in 10 years. I don't really see anyone else wearing them either. No one is trying to get robbed or show off anymore. Simple bands are what people are wearing these days.

I think engagement rings are a stupid piece of jewelry. But to each their own.

My engagement ring is a sapphire from Gemvara. I picked out the stone and the band. After 11 years, it still looks good as new.

I don't know if diamonds or rings in general will e er fall out of fashion completely.

More couples are doing what feels right to them which I think is great.

DH and I are geriatric millennials. I was not interested in a ring. I'm not a huge jewelry person and I knew a ring would end up sitting in a box collecting dust. However it was really important to DH to give me something symbolic so he built me a greenhouse..

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't need to be several months salary. I really don't know why people buy into that. Very smart marketing I guess.

But I do think rings are a sweet tradition, and they are a gift. And when you give a gift, you shouldn't be cheap about it. Everyone has a different idea of what is a cheap engagement ring, but I've seen a lot of men who make above-medial salaries say 50 dollars is perfectly fine. They get up in arms about capitalism, for the first time ever, when their fiancees complain. Give me a break. (Mine cost 1K, I picked it out, I think it's lovely)

It’s great for the woman not the man and it is not a gift.

NP. "Not a gift"? So it's quid pro quo, you expect something in return? I get it. You're a man, you're pi**ed that you shelled out for a ring and didn't get exactly what you want (probably ideal sex, on demand, every time) from your wife. Well, the "it's not a gift" attitude and the view of marriage as a transaction is why you aren't getting what you wanted....

It's not a gift. It's demanded by the woman, in exchange for the marriage. It's not even about the quality of the ring, it's about the price (hence the opposition to higher quality lab diamonds or cost effective alternate gems).

90% Women aren't buying a "gift" like this for their fiance.

Weird to say this on a thread of women who are all saying to go lab-created….

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't need to be several months salary. I really don't know why people buy into that. Very smart marketing I guess.

But I do think rings are a sweet tradition, and they are a gift. And when you give a gift, you shouldn't be cheap about it. Everyone has a different idea of what is a cheap engagement ring, but I've seen a lot of men who make above-medial salaries say 50 dollars is perfectly fine. They get up in arms about capitalism, for the first time ever, when their fiancees complain. Give me a break. (Mine cost 1K, I picked it out, I think it's lovely)

It’s great for the woman not the man and it is not a gift.

NP. "Not a gift"? So it's quid pro quo, you expect something in return? I get it. You're a man, you're pi**ed that you shelled out for a ring and didn't get exactly what you want (probably ideal sex, on demand, every time) from your wife. Well, the "it's not a gift" attitude and the view of marriage as a transaction is why you aren't getting what you wanted....

It's not a gift. It's demanded by the woman, in exchange for the marriage. It's not even about the quality of the ring, it's about the price (hence the opposition to higher quality lab diamonds or cost effective alternate gems).

90% Women aren't buying a "gift" like this for their fiance.

What do you means it’s not gift? It is not a demand. My wife didn’t demand an engagement ring. She didn’t even get one until the day before we got married and it was a surprise gift.

Why the negative outlook?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Buy a lab diamond. No one can tell the difference and they are 1/10 of the price.

I’m considering a lab diamond. Are there any negatives to them?

They are constantly being improved upon. If you have looked at a lot of diamonds, you'll notice that they aren't generally the warm buttery off-white that a diamond naturally exposed to tiny amounts of nitrogen would be. Their hues are more grey and brown. Make sure you look at it from the side against a sheet of white paper.

Likewise, the inclusions have also been a giveaway in the past. They can look like little logs, or pieces of pencil lead, which is not how naturally formed inclusions look. But if you can't see them with the naked eye, who cares?

I used to buy J-K SI diamonds that were perfectly cut to maximize brilliance but keep the costs down. I now own a pair of perfectly cut moissanite studs. My next purchase will be a lab diamond. Like I said, the technology has improved vastly in the last few years.

Anonymous wrote:I just got a 10 year anniversary "upgraded" set but went with lab diamond and my 2.02 G color diamond with pave band was $1400. Happy to recommend the jeweler- he's out of NY, but very easy to work with remotely and then overnights the ring. He also does estate jewelry so he can source earth mined stones from estates and then make them in to the ring you'd like fo much cheaper than walking into a big box store and purchasing a ring.

Please share the name of the jeweler.

Don’t let anyone tell you they can tell lab diamonds from earth mined.

It is not possible to differentiate them without special equipment.

Anyone who says they can tell is lying. Some people can distinguish moissanite from diamonds but most people can’t.

Anonymous wrote:They can tell the difference bc lab diamonds are unnaturally flawless.

Wrong. You do not know what you are talking about.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Buy a lab diamond. No one can tell the difference and they are 1/10 of the price.

I’m considering a lab diamond. Are there any negatives to them?

No, they're great. They're also not anywhere near 90% off a real diamond's retail. More like 25% off.

They shouldn’t be. Pricescope has a lab grown diamond forum and has a list of the manufacturers.

Light box and Ritani have great prices. For 2k I got a great diamond pendant.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I got a lab grown diamond and am glad no poor schlub had to risk life and limb to get it. I think it looks pretty.

If you don’t want one, don’t get one - fixed!

Unfortunately I'm just one man against a huge cartel of otherwise fine women who all demand it.

Up your game, then, mister. If every woman you date "demands" a ring as the price for marriage, you are dating the wrong sort of people. Stop complaining about these "otherwise fine women" and go find better ones. Unless...this is a "you" problem, and you prefer to blame those demanding women, perhaps.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't need to be several months salary. I really don't know why people buy into that. Very smart marketing I guess.

But I do think rings are a sweet tradition, and they are a gift. And when you give a gift, you shouldn't be cheap about it. Everyone has a different idea of what is a cheap engagement ring, but I've seen a lot of men who make above-medial salaries say 50 dollars is perfectly fine. They get up in arms about capitalism, for the first time ever, when their fiancees complain. Give me a break. (Mine cost 1K, I picked it out, I think it's lovely)

It’s great for the woman not the man and it is not a gift.

NP. "Not a gift"? So it's quid pro quo, you expect something in return? I get it. You're a man, you're pi**ed that you shelled out for a ring and didn't get exactly what you want (probably ideal sex, on demand, every time) from your wife. Well, the "it's not a gift" attitude and the view of marriage as a transaction is why you aren't getting what you wanted....

It's not a gift. It's demanded by the woman, in exchange for the marriage. It's not even about the quality of the ring, it's about the price (hence the opposition to higher quality lab diamonds or cost effective alternate gems).

90% Women aren't buying a "gift" like this for their fiance.

If you really believe the bold, well, sorry you've had such lousy experiences that burned you, but what you say is not true for all women everywhere. That fact seems to escape you. If you truly think women will yoke themselves to a man for the payment of a piece of jewelry, however expensive--you're wrong.