Anonymous wrote:I don't wear an engagement ring. What does that say about me? Actually curious.

That you're not married?

I don't wear an engagement ring. What does that say about me? Actually curious.

I don't judge them. I have plenty of friends with small diamonds and plenty who have very large "upgrades" and all sizes in between. I don't really care. I wear my original which is small by today's standards and I don't think anyone judges my ring nor do I care if they do.

I judge when it's 4 tiny stones pushed together in a solitaire setting trying to look bigger. It's just so fake looking. Just wear an eternity band if you couldn't afford a larger center diamond.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we safely say that a good quality 1 carat solitaire is the safest bet judgement wise? It's not tiny but isn't flashy either. Pretty classic if you ask me.

It's just SO individual. I would rather have no ring than wear a quality one carat solitaire, precisely because I find them so basic and ubiquitous. I've never seen one and thought, "gorgeous!" They're just....there. Like, I guess it serves a purpose? Meh. But yeah, to some this is classic and desired. People just need to communicate with their partners over what they're thinking.

You are messed up.

Why? Does a round one carat solitaire that like 90% of women in DC have that are nearly indistinguishable from one another really speak to your personal taste and creative style? I'm not even judgey about it, it is what it is, but it doesn't speak to me at all and if someone bought me this I would think they knew absolutely nothing about me. It's the default.

Anonymous wrote:LOL, yes I judge them. The bigger the ring, the dumber the wife and the smaller the husband's cock.

This is a pretty crass way to put it, but I more or less agree. I think larger rings tend to reveal insecurities on one or both sides, and definitely project that material things are greatly valued by the couple.

Even if it's an heirloom (shoutout to you "I judge those of you who have to buy diamonds" pp!), there is something truly unsavory about walking around with the equivalent of thousands of dollars on your finger. Still reads as materialistic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The priest that married is said:

The more bridesmaids in a wedding party, the bigger odds they will divorce.

The same has been said about women that demand a huge diamond. The bigger the ring, the less happy the marriage.

They say that to make themselves feel better.

Who?

Anonymous wrote:The priest that married is said:

The more bridesmaids in a wedding party, the bigger odds they will divorce.

The same has been said about women that demand a huge diamond. The bigger the ring, the less happy the marriage.

They say that to make themselves feel better.

I judge the really big stones as wasteful. I wore my lovely antique ring for a year before our wedding and now only out occasionally. I wear the antique style gold wedding band instead. The engagement ring snagged on everything and I do too many things with my hands all day to worry about it.

Anonymous wrote:Define tiny. When I was in my 20s, women were happy to have a 3/4 carat stone. I love my 1 carat stone. These days, women think that's tiny and insist on these obnoxiously huge 2 and 3 carat stones.

This. 3/4 carat or 1 carat was great, back in the day. I think the larger stones, worn on a daily basis, look somewhat fake. I love my 3/4 carat stone in a custom setting and still get compliments on the design from random people.

All my friends who "upgraded" their rings to bigger stones ended up getting divorced. It seems that emphasizing the superficial may not pay off. Literally, because they lost a lot of money when they ended up selling those rings.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we safely say that a good quality 1 carat solitaire is the safest bet judgement wise? It's not tiny but isn't flashy either. Pretty classic if you ask me.

It's just SO individual. I would rather have no ring than wear a quality one carat solitaire, precisely because I find them so basic and ubiquitous. I've never seen one and thought, "gorgeous!" They're just....there. Like, I guess it serves a purpose? Meh. But yeah, to some this is classic and desired. People just need to communicate with their partners over what they're thinking.

You are messed up.

If it is ugly I judge.
If it is gorgeous and elegant I am impressed.
If it is small I probably assume they had less money back when they got married.

Anonymous wrote:Can we safely say that a good quality 1 carat solitaire is the safest bet judgement wise? It's not tiny but isn't flashy either. Pretty classic if you ask me.

It's just SO individual. I would rather have no ring than wear a quality one carat solitaire, precisely because I find them so basic and ubiquitous. I've never seen one and thought, "gorgeous!" They're just....there. Like, I guess it serves a purpose? Meh. But yeah, to some this is classic and desired. People just need to communicate with their partners over what they're thinking.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I LOVE it when I see a really wealthy woman climb out of her expensive car and she’s wearing a tiny, dated diamond ring. It says to me that she and her DH worked for what they have, and that their values are sound. Romantic!

How do you know that she didn't work hard for that money?

Reading comprehension much?

Anonymous wrote:I LOVE it when I see a really wealthy woman climb out of her expensive car and she’s wearing a tiny, dated diamond ring. It says to me that she and her DH worked for what they have, and that their values are sound. Romantic!

How do you know that she didn't work hard for that money?