Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Mine is 0.5; most in my circle are larger. I got married early and DH paid for it all himself.
My BFF has a HUGE ring. That her DH put on their joint credit card and took forever to pay off.
Better than being saddled with a tiny ring. I want a rock and if I had to pay for it, no problem.
DH makes 7 figures now; trust me - if I want a new one its not a problem. Its not a priority for me.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I married a few years later than most of my closest friends (28) and my DH was established so my ring is pretty sizeable, probably throws off the average. I'm also one of the only women in my circle that doesn't have a halo style ring and that always throws me off because the halo makes everything look bigger than reailty. I'd say most of the main stones are probably somewhere around 1ct.
Funny, this is us too. We married 6 years ago and all of our friends have gotten married in the last 2 years--every last woman has had a halo style ring, and I absolutely think that part of the allure is to make the center stone appear larger and to distract from flaws.
Yeah a halo is kind of a white trash ring.
Anonymous wrote:None of my friends (late 20s) do engagement rings -- it's an archaic sad/bad custom for people who aren't very good at feminism. Sorry, but that's the truth.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I married a few years later than most of my closest friends (28) and my DH was established so my ring is pretty sizeable, probably throws off the average. I'm also one of the only women in my circle that doesn't have a halo style ring and that always throws me off because the halo makes everything look bigger than reailty. I'd say most of the main stones are probably somewhere around 1ct.
Funny, this is us too. We married 6 years ago and all of our friends have gotten married in the last 2 years--every last woman has had a halo style ring, and I absolutely think that part of the allure is to make the center stone appear larger and to distract from flaws.
Yeah a halo is kind of a white trash ring.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I married a few years later than most of my closest friends (28) and my DH was established so my ring is pretty sizeable, probably throws off the average. I'm also one of the only women in my circle that doesn't have a halo style ring and that always throws me off because the halo makes everything look bigger than reailty. I'd say most of the main stones are probably somewhere around 1ct.
Funny, this is us too. We married 6 years ago and all of our friends have gotten married in the last 2 years--every last woman has had a halo style ring, and I absolutely think that part of the allure is to make the center stone appear larger and to distract from flaws.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I would say nearly every woman has a 1.5ct. We're late 20s.
We're mid-late 30's (most of us in the 10th anniversary range, give or take) and the rings are .75 - 1.0 I'd guess. Maybe 1 or 2 have something bigger but that's definitely not common. My group is mostly long term SAHM's though, so I guess our priorities are a little different.[/quote]
ugh. go away.
or other people have more disposable income
i hate these passive aggressive judgments.
Yeah, your priorities ARE different, SAHM above...you know the average carat weight of your friends' rings, and I have no clue, because we don't care, and we don't compare.
Anonymous wrote:Where do you all live that you get married so early? 10 year anniversary range for mid-late 30s and 28 being late for another circle? This doesn't sound like DC at all.[/quote
28 year old bride here, well 30 now. I live in DC proper and I've been here since '03. I will say my friends' early marriages weren't the norm for the area but youngish brides are out there. I traveled after graduation, lived on my own, etc so I was older for my circle but probably average aged for DC.