Enragement Ring

June 12, 2007 2:32 PM

How can I get past my resentment at having to buy an engagement ring?

I love my girlfriend and want to marry her, but having to buy a wedding ring upsets me. My objections are nicely summed up in this recent piece in Slate: it's a backwards, sexist, manufactured tradition that begins a relationship that should be based on equality with something that's distinctly unequal. My girlfriend agrees with most of this but wants one anyway.

I have credit card debt, so the idea of spending more money I don't really have on something I think is completely impractical and artificial bothers me. Also, my girlfriend makes more money than I do, so it seems unfair that I'm expected to buy something expensive for her and she isn't expected to buy something expensive for me. She said I could use money from our joint account, but that seems emasculating.

I suppose I just have to suck it up and get one because she wants one, but that bothers me, too. How can I get past this? I'm not upset enough to not get married, but I need some perspective.

posted by anonymous to human relations (116 comments total)

Wait, the ring is sexist and old fashioned but using some of her money is emasculating? That's a contradiction. Its old fashioned to think of her pitching in for the ring as emasculating.
posted by damn dirty ape at 2:37 PM on June 12, 2007 [13 favorites]

Engagement rings can be had rather inexpensively if you avoid a diamond.

I guess you are still expecting to buy wedding rings for both of you? Those are even less expensive, which boggles my mind to this day.
posted by mkb at 2:38 PM on June 12, 2007

And it's going to end up as your shared cash anyway as a married couple, so what's the difference there?
posted by mkb at 2:38 PM on June 12, 2007

because she wants one

see, you answered your own question

because she wants to is a very good reason for doing something. ignore that reason at your peril.
posted by caddis at 2:39 PM on June 12, 2007 [14 favorites]

If you don't get her a ring, and she leaves, she's not worth it. Is it that hard? You need to discuss with her very seriously the money issues she would be taking on by marrying an individual with debt.

Seriously, if you haven't discussed all this stuff yet, you're not ready be engaged, much less married.
posted by sian at 2:39 PM on June 12, 2007 [3 favorites]

Maybe it is just me, but the overall tone of your post just seems really belligerant and cranky. Is this really about the ring, or what?

Engagement rings are tricky...and, yeah, kinda stupid. But as a woman who did not get an engagement ring right away, I can tell you that it can be a bit awkward. When other women / family members / etc hear that you are engaged, the first thing they want to see is The Ring. Is it stupid? Yeah, kinda. But is it a nice gesture to give your future fiancee a symbol of your new committment? Yeah, kinda.

Maybe instead of the engagement thing being one-sided, you could exchange engagement gifts. I would think that's a fair & sweet way to start off on the road towards marriage.

Also, does it *have* to be a diamond ring? I have the feeling a gazillion people here will chime in with how evil diamonds are, and I don't want to get into that. But yes, diamonds are very cliche and kind of pathetic in that everyone has one. My friend recently proposed to his girlfriend, and he doesn't have a huge amount of money saved up either and is working on some debt. Instead of getting an expensive diamond ring, he scoured and scoured to find a really beautiful and unique looking antique opal ring to give to his now-fiancee. Engagement rings do NOT have to be diamonds. Non-diamond e-rings are becoming more & more popular these days, and I am sure you could find something gorgeous for just a couple hundred or so.
posted by tastybrains at 2:42 PM on June 12, 2007 [4 favorites]

Once option is to buy a second-hand ring, especially if she wants a diamond: that way you're not paying the diamond surcharge. Of course, you don't get to pick 'your' setting & specific gem that way, but serendipity can be a good guide sometimes.

It's also possible that she wants the whole play-acting thing of you going down on bended knee to ask for her hand in marriage. The value of the ring in question may or may not be important in this particular piece of role-play.
posted by pharm at 2:45 PM on June 12, 2007

Are you serious? Having to buy a wedding ring upsets you?

Are you crazy? You won the lottery. You found someone you love, who wants to marry you, that you also want to marry, and the fact that she wants to wear a symbol of that bothers you?

Incidentally, I don't support diamonds, and I don't think anyone should spend more than they can afford. But wanting a wedding ring *really* isn't unusual. You should really be able to give her that gift without resentment. And if you're genuinely not willing to pay for it, but you're not willing to let *her* pay for it, then you're trying to impose what you want (no ring) on her, and that's just not cool.

Good luck to you though, and congratulations.
posted by eleyna at 2:46 PM on June 12, 2007 [5 favorites]

it's a backwards, sexist, manufactured tradition that begins a relationship that should be based on equality... She said I could use money from our joint account, but that seems emasculating.

Well at some point you are going to have to resolve this tension within yourself; are in interested in feminism and equality of the sexes, or are you going to be obsessed with feeling "masculine"?

The engagement ring is certainly a holdover from a previous, worse time; it's a symbol of the man's possession of the woman between the engagement and the ceremony, and it's a symbol of the man's virility-by-proxy in that it proves how much bling he can afford. These things said, it's also a public symbol validating your love for each other and if you think about it, there's really nothing wrong with that.

In a perfect world, each couple would come up with its own public-love-validating symbol, it would be equal between the sexes, and it would be a cause of celebration for everyone. In our world, we have the engagement ring. It is some bad things and some good things wrapped into one.

Honestly I think your girlfriend has thrown you a bone here in saying that the ring can be a purchase both of you make rather than being your symbolic purchasing of her; though only she will wear it, it relieves some of the sexist overtones. The thing is, you're cramming them right back in there by refusing to be "emasculated" by participating in some sharing of responsibility with her. It seems like the point you insist on, you needing to prove how manly you are by shelling out the cash personally, is one of the very most problematic points with the whole affair. Though I don't have a concrete suggestion, try to resolve this internal conflict you've got going on, and the resolution will probably tell you what you need to do. And I don't think any of us can get you there.
posted by rkent at 2:47 PM on June 12, 2007 [6 favorites]

well, the vast majority of engagement rings i've seen elsewhere in the world do not feature diamonds. you could have something quite nice custom made (for example, i saw a wedding ring made and engraved by Jeannine Payer in San Francisco recently that was really, really pretty - probably the nicest ring i've ever seen, actually) for a fraction of the price of a big old rock.
posted by luriete at 2:47 PM on June 12, 2007 [3 favorites]

Has she considered getting you an engagement ring as well? I got my fiance a rolling ring, from a craft stand at the farmer's market ($10-$20, I think) and he loved it. He chose a ring for me as well, so we both had engagement rings.

It sounds like your fiancee would really like the recent-tradition of a diamond ring though, so I'd say use the joint money and take her along to choose. Since you've already asked her to marry you and she asked for a ring, she might as well pick out her favorite ring.) What's wrong with using her money to buy a present she asked for? After all, most people generally don't ask for presents.

The tradition of an engagement ring came about in the last century, around the time when you could no longer take an ex-fiance to court for declining to marry. I think the idea was that a ring should be expensive enough to pay for the loss of virginity should the woman get ditched at the alter. Now that we don't think that the loss of virginity carries such a bad connotation, or at least a price tag, the expensive ring no longer makes sense to most of us. I don't know if it helps to know where the idea comes from, but well, perspective, I hope.
posted by Margalo Epps at 2:48 PM on June 12, 2007

My fiance bought me The Perfect ring at a jewelry auction for about 120 bucks. So it doesn't have to be a wallet-buster. And if you feel so weird about getting her something with no expectation of return, then why don't you ask her for a nice engagement watch, or whatever else you're into (for example, I paid for an engagement trip to stay in a really nice hotel and watch his favorite baseball team play).

Sometimes, having an engagement ring can be really helpful for a woman. There are a lot of situations where, unfortunately, it's easier to be a woman who's "taken" than it is to be a woman who's single, and a ring on the left ring finger is the easiest way to signal that. It's disgusting, and I wish it weren't so, but it is.
posted by muddgirl at 2:50 PM on June 12, 2007

I'm on the "backwards, manufactured, sexist" side of the debate, but there's also a lot of positive symbolism in engagement rings: namely, they symbolize:

-that you are ready to make an expensive and public demonstration of your love/commitment;
-that you love her enough to buy something useless and impractical;
-in a sense, the entire institution of marriage is about hewing to traditions that may not necessarily make sense, for the sake of tradition and your families; it's not about a piece of paper proving your love for each other, but joining together two familes. So there's a sense in which the engagement ring can symbolize a certain commitment to the institution of marriage itself... even though it's a stupid manufactured sexist tradition.

It may help to look at it in that light. Or it may not.
posted by Jeanne at 2:51 PM on June 12, 2007

My wife and I split the cost of the ring; going together to pick it out was probably the best possible way to do it. I don't feel any more emasculated than usual.

We also didn't get a diamond, for the many reasons you probably already know. Is the diamond really necessary for her to be happy? Really?

Bring her down with you and look at all types of stones, then pay for it together. It shouldn't be a thing you have to stew over, either of you.
posted by BackwardsCity at 2:52 PM on June 12, 2007

my cousin got engaged with an emerald. it was beautiful.

HOWEVER, the diamond seems to mean a lot to her. you would score major points with it.
posted by thinkingwoman at 2:52 PM on June 12, 2007

Just to be clear, now: your girlfriend wants a typical diamond engagement ring and would be upset if she didn't have one? Or is this just you going along with what you imagine is expected of you without having clarified it with her?

Yes, I know, you're posting anonymously and can't answer. But it's an important point.

I didn't buy my wife one, and she didn't want one. Around the time we got engaged, I did find a Hello Kitty ring for about $6 (she likes Hello Kitty) and bought that for her, just for grins. She decided to wear that as her engagement ring. When she mentioned to a co-worker (much younger and raised in a sheltered, wealthy world) that she had gotten engaged, the co-worker said "oh, let me see your ring!" She flaunted Hello Kitty, and the co-worker, confused, asked "how are you going to add diamonds to that?"
posted by adamrice at 2:55 PM on June 12, 2007

Well, I think your first step should be to talk to your girlfriend and figure out why, exactly, she wants a ring. I'm no fan of engagement rings either, for the reasons spelled out in the article you linked to, but maybe understanding the reasons behind why it's important to your partner would help you find a solution that mutually acceptable. Perhaps she's more interested in some sort of outward sign to the world of your mutual love--in which case, buying a brand-new expensive diamond might be unnecessary, because a relatively inexpensive other gem might work just as well. Or a more traditional but second-hand diamond ring.

In terms of equity, I know my step-mother bought my father a very nice watch as an engagement present. It ended up to be about the same price as her engagement ring, and he's worn it every day since they got engaged.

In any event, I'd definitely talk to her and try to figure out a way to meet whatever need that engagement ring would fill for her in a way that makes you both happy. And it sounds like before you do that, you need to really sit down and think through what exactly is pushing your buttons so hard on this--you're obviously very resentful of the idea, but I can't figure out whether it's due to the cost, the sexism, the assymetry in who gets the goods, or your general disdain for all jewelry as "impractical and artificial." (Definitely don't use those words to describe what she obviously feels is important.)
posted by iminurmefi at 2:57 PM on June 12, 2007

Sounds to me like you just don't want to spend the money. Even if that's not true, you'd better believe she's going to read your ambivalence as a comment on how much (or little) you love her and then you're in for a world of hurt, my friend.

The only way to reach a satisfactory compromise on this issue is to have a loooooooong, honest talk about it. It may be awkward, but if you're ready to marry you're ready to have this sort of conversation.

If after you talk you decide you want to get married then, as BackwardsCity suggests, go ring shopping together. You might be surprised that her expectations and yours aren't so far afield from one another.
posted by TryTheTilapia at 3:00 PM on June 12, 2007

Being in a relationship means sometimes doing things just because it will make her happy. It may be something that you loathe, something that you're opposed to on principle, but if it makes her happy, that's sometimes enough.
posted by chrisamiller at 3:01 PM on June 12, 2007

An engagement ring is supposed to be a symbol of love and commitment on your part toward her. But if she wants one and you do just suck it up and buy one, it really wouldn't then seem like a symbol of love but rather a symbol of appeasement. If I got something from someone that I really wanted that had been given to me out of durress, I don't really think I'd enjoy it or appreciate it as much as if it had been given out of sincere care or love (I can't speak for your girlfriend of course).

I think it would be really helpful for the both of you to spend some more time talking about other options other than a diamond ring, something you could afford on your own that would be a representation for the both of you of your commitment and love. It could be a less expensive ring as tastybrains has suggested but it doesn't even need to be a piece of jewelry. When I was younger, I remember thinking that I would want an engagement guitar. It would be more useful and I would enjoy it much more than a diamond ring. And later on, when you are out of debt and have saved up some money, you can offer her a ring without the financial worry.

If your girlfriend is unflinching about having a diamond ring and you're willing to sort of split the cost, you can think of it as making a really great sacrifice for the person that you love. I would try to do what it takes to keep the resentment out of it because that would not be good for either of you.
posted by inconsequentialist at 3:01 PM on June 12, 2007

Suggestion: pinpoint if its The Ring, The Symbol, or The Moment that is at the core of her issue here. Because believe me, all of those things are wrapped up in a rock on a band.
posted by DarlingBri at 3:06 PM on June 12, 2007 [1 favorite]

cadis has the best answer thus far. You're buying the ring for her, not for you. If you think its sexist, backwards, etc, that's nice, and you should tell her not to buy you a diamond ring. (Also, she's cool with you using her money to buy a ring? That's pretty impressive.)
posted by chunking express at 3:07 PM on June 12, 2007

why not costume jewelry? or simulated stones? or whatever they're called? how many people really can tell the difference?

you'd have to be in agreement of course; it won't do to give her costume jewelry without her knowing. but if she were in agreement, she could get a ROCK! then spend the money on the wedding rings/settings where you can get better value in the metal.
posted by elle.jeezy at 3:07 PM on June 12, 2007

All a ring is is a tangible symbol of your love for her.

My husband bought me a cheapie diamond (we were both broke as dirt) and it didn't matter-all that mattered is the symbolisim-which to me was simply I'M GETTING MARRIED.

(The cheapie diamond escaped from the setting a few years later and we haven't replaced it. If we ever do I don't want a diamond (for all the politically correct reasons) and if we don't it is no biggie. )

By the way, your attitude is almost identical to that of my son, who sees rings as useless wastes of metal (he refused to get his AIR FORCE ACADEMY class ring, which ticked me off to no end.) You know, sometimes overthinking a custom is worse than overthinking a plate of beans. Get her a ring, with YOUR money, let her get YOU a nice watch with HERS, and go forth and have a nice life.
posted by konolia at 3:09 PM on June 12, 2007

She wants some pretty jewelry to celebrate a happy occasion in her life. She is willing to pay half of the cost of said pretty jewelry. This is not a battle of the sexes, nor is it a question of your masculinity, and it needn't be something that will break the bank. Unless there is a lot more to this than you are describing, she is not being unreasonable, and she is not imbuing this situation with most of the antifeminist trappings that engagement rings often carry. If you would like a present that will be meaningful to you to commemorate this happy occasion, ask her for said present. Do not make yourself crazy over this.
posted by decathecting at 3:11 PM on June 12, 2007

I totally 2nd TryTheTilapia. When you talk to your partner about this, figure out your main problem with the whole engagement ring and stick to it. Fair or not, if you have a discussion where you throw out four objections in a row (one of which is "this really great article I found on the internet just today that magically summarizes my entire position"), and the last reason is "plus I have credit card debt and this is really expensive," rightly or wrongly most people will take the previous three as total bullshit to cover for your cheapness.

Not that I'm calling you cheap. I think diamonds are a terrible investment and 99% of engagements would be better off putting that money towards a downpayment. I just want to point out the way that you've phrased your question really does come off as desparately grasping for reasons to not buy this that don't make it sound like it's all about the money (and you end up sounding like it's all about the money anyway, in a much worse way than if you just said that in the first place).
posted by iminurmefi at 3:11 PM on June 12, 2007

You aren't clear in your question on whether she just wants an engagement ring, or whether she wants one with a diamond.

I bought a beautiful sapphire engagement ring for soon-to-be Mrs. Kwine not three hours ago. We picked it out together, she loves it, it was about 1/3 the cost of an equivalent quality diamond. I think a non-diamond precious stone is the best compromise for you if she does not insist on a diamond.

If she insists on a diamond, you should get over your emasculation and let her help you buy her one, because you love her, if you love her you should make her happy if you can, and you can make her happy by buying a diamond engagement ring.
posted by Kwine at 3:12 PM on June 12, 2007

I am a lady, but definitely on your side about this. I've never gone in for frilly but useless things. Flowers are just going to die, and an expensive ring is a waste of money. Feeling compelled by society to get an expensive ring to somehow "prove" your love - ick! In my mind, that really cheapens the relationship.

However, Jeanne's comment above really got to me:

[A ring symbolizes] that you love her enough to buy something useless and impractical

It's about being willing to get her something she wants, because it will make her happy, even though you don't understand. That's a truly beautiful sign of love.

Also, despite my opening paragraph, I've often debated whether I would want a standard diamond ring when/if I ever get engaged. The thought of fending off confused/insensitive/critical relatives, friends, and coworkers makes me equally as nauseous as the thought of spending a ton of money just to avoid that situation. Sometimes I think the expense would be worth it, just so I wouldn't have to keep explaining why I didn't have a ring. As the guy, you're not going to have to deal with this, but I imagine that it could be very stressful on a girl. Like it or not, people are going to judge her, you, and your relationship together if you don't get her the ring - especially if it's clear that she wanted one and you didn't get her one. Don't put her in a position where she has to fake a smile and tell her coworkers that she "didn't really want a ring that much anyway." That's a terrible way to start a life together.
posted by vytae at 3:12 PM on June 12, 2007 [4 favorites]

In addition, if you're getting this resentful about the very first crappy, antiquated, sexist tradition surrounding a marriage, I can't wait until you two actually start planning the wedding!
posted by muddgirl at 3:12 PM on June 12, 2007 [4 favorites]

Dude, it's just a gift. It doesn't (and shouldn't) represent any underlying metaphorical enslavement or sexist connotations of ownership. It's *just a gift* just like a necklace or a surprise vacation or a bundle of roses.
posted by Brittanie at 3:12 PM on June 12, 2007

Are you also clear on the fact that you'll really be buying 2 rings (your first sentence says "engagement" then you say "wedding ring"). If that doubles your resetment...hoo-boy.
posted by tristeza at 3:13 PM on June 12, 2007

...it's a backwards, sexist, manufactured tradition that begins a relationship that should be based on equality with something that's distinctly unequal. My girlfriend agrees with most of this but wants one anyway.

Holy crap-on-a-biscuit, you sound like you'll be a riot to be married to!

Not trying to be mean, but damn!

To answer your "How do I..." Just remind yourself of the treasure you gain by giving a bit on this. It does NOT compromise your precious values by buying a ring for someone you love, who wants a ring!

That's what a relationship is about: give and take. You wouldn't want her to deprive you of, say, playing basketball because she believes it's a (hmmm, let's see) "primitive expression of male dominance resulting in sub-human chest-thumping and adrenalin addiction. It's just an artificial replacement for war!" And YES, for you to engage in something you enjoy, it does cost her. It costs her time with you, scheduling, and some energy on her part.

Your get over the resentment by realizing that your values are misplaced. You should value your beloved over your own anti-ring stance, which is JUST as "artificial" as the pro-ring custom.

As a divorced man, I can tell you that when I do find someone who wants a ring from me, I will be thrilled for the privilege of being able to give something as a small token of my affection and commitment.

Your resentment comes from focusing on the wrong symbolism. What it means to her is what matters, not what it means to freakin' Slate.

Oh, and congratulations.
posted by The Deej at 3:13 PM on June 12, 2007 [5 favorites]

Okay, dude. I see two options here:

1) You have genuine ethical issues with the concept of diamond engagement rings. You don't want to support the diamond industry. You recognize that engagement rings are a tradition manufactured by De Beers in postwar America. You realize that diamonds are a bad financial investment. You have no interest in the symbology of the ring, one that demands a man put a price on his love for a woman. As a feminist male, the idea of engagement rings smacks of paying bride price.

That's fine. All of those things are negotiable, and easy to fix. Start by changing the stone to something else: sapphires are nice. Or you could skip the ring entirely and get her a pearl pendant. Agree to swap pricey presents to avoid the sexist conundrum. Or agree to swap modestly-priced presents to avoid the financial one.

2) Or none of those make you feel better, in which case you could give a fuck about the politics of engagement rings, and you're just using this as a handy justification of your real anger, which has to do with Your Girlfriend Making You Do Something You Don't Want To Do.

That's an entirely different kind of problem, and one that no amount of helpful alterna-ring suggests on the internet will solve for you.
posted by thehmsbeagle at 3:18 PM on June 12, 2007 [10 favorites]

I got engaged about a year ago now; and while my fiancee and I were initially torn about diamonds and what it means to give an engagement ring, we ultimately decided to go with it and get a Canadian mined diamond to avoid some of the evils associated with it.

I personally found it a good step for me. The act of going and picking the ring, getting up the guts to ask, figuring out how to do it, etc. makes the whole thing very real. I feel like if I hadn't done all of this it would have made the change in our relationship less actualized - particularly since we'd already been together for some time.

I'm sure that receiving it had a similar effect on her.

So while it is somewhat one sided, and outmoded in a sense, and yes - DeBeers is Evil, I think it can be a valuable part of the process.
posted by heh3d at 3:19 PM on June 12, 2007

This lesbian (who certainly could become engaged, should she wish to, since there's no legal impediment to that) is on your side. Diamond rings are expensive and useless.

In 1947, De Beers began advertising South African diamonds with the slogan "A Diamond is Forever." Despite half of all marriages ending in divorce and many heterosexual couples never marrying, many 21st century American women still crave diamond rings.

Talk it over with her. Your values may differ so much that you should call this off. If she just wants something to show people, let her buy it herself!
posted by Carol Anne at 3:27 PM on June 12, 2007

Also, my girlfriend makes more money than I do, so it seems unfair that I'm expected to buy something expensive for her and she isn't expected to buy something expensive for me.

"Fair"?!

Sometimes in a relationship, you give more. Sometimes your partner does. That's why you need each other, to balance things out. If you are already keeping score, good luck on making a marriage work. "Okay, I bought this, now she has to buy me something," is not a great beginning.

Please do some serious thinking about what being married will really be like. I think you have some childish notions you need to work through. Are you planning on having kids? You do realize that some of your money will go to raising them, and you won't get that back, right? That's not fair, either, it's just the way it is. Plus, they will get much of your girlfriend's/wife's attention. Are you mature enough to handle that?

I don't mean to be snarky here, but I really can't understand your resentment. Yes, you will buy the ring, because you love her and it is important to her. Isn't that reason enough? She will repay you many times over the years, in other ways, because she loves you. That's the way life really works.
posted by misha at 3:28 PM on June 12, 2007 [2 favorites]

Not being married (and in no hurry to go there), I can't speak personally ... but my parents, who are in other ways very traditional, conservative people, did a gift-exchange in lieu of the more traditional one-sided engagement/wedding gifts.

She wanted a ring -- she got a ring. He didn't, he wanted something else, so he got something else. (He actually got a handgun, but lots of people do it with slightly-more-traditional gifts; watches seem to be the popular ring-alternative.)

Anyway, I think you need to talk about these issues with your girlfriend and make sure she knows you feel a bit put-upon from all this. Maybe she doesn't know how you feel? As soon as you guys get married, "your debt" (as in you, personally) is going to become "our debt," so you should really be deciding this together.
posted by Kadin2048 at 3:31 PM on June 12, 2007

I think your "ethical concerns" and "sexist tradition" are all just words you're using to mask your real resentment to having to give her a RING that you have to spend YOUR money on and you feel like you want to REBEL AGAINST SOCIETY because you feel like you want to be a little punk but don't have any backbone to actually understand what rebellion really means.

Grow up.

You feel that society is telling your girlfriend how to think and you don't want to spend money on her for things you don't agree with. You have certain social conditions bred into you and are becoming resentful because you want to violate some while clasping on to another. That's fairly hypocritical right there and undermines the sexist and ethnical argument that you claim to believe in. You just don't want to spend the dough.

Tough shit.

Find the exact ring that she wants, spend the money on it, use the money that she has offered, and then, when you propose and see her face light up because you, the man she loves and has no problem mixing her life, her emotions, her world, with has just given her the little rock that she dreams about. You want emasculating? Be her knight in shinning armor, slay that dragon, and realize that in twenty years, when you're suffering a midlife crisis and need to buy that overpriced sports car, she's gonna post an ask.me just like this.
posted by Stynxno at 3:33 PM on June 12, 2007 [3 favorites]

My girlfriend agrees with most of this but wants one anyway.

No matter what you do, money will always be more important to your wife, and women in general. Girls don't want to ride round in a 1992 Civic. They want the G35.


If you don't buy a ring you will be cheap and she'll divorce you in less than 5 years. Believe it.
posted by four panels at 3:36 PM on June 12, 2007

Despite half of all marriages ending in divorce and many heterosexual couples never marrying, many 21st century American women still crave diamond rings.

Actually, I think this is part of the reason some women DO crave diamond rings. You may think it is an outdated custom, but women and men are still on a different plane financially, epsecially in the South where I live. If a woman, say, stops working to have kids, which many of us do, and then there's a divorce because her husband ran off with a younger woman or something, which also happens a lot, she can sell the diamond ring to get back on her feet financially.

And if she moves in with a man, they plan on getting married, he dumps her, and now she's stuck having to get a new apartment, there's first and last month's rent to think about.

Of course, if she breaks it off, she is duty-bound to return the ring.
posted by misha at 3:38 PM on June 12, 2007

Like many others, I picked out a garnet (my husband's birthstone) and white gold ring. But my mom offered me her first wedding set form the 60's. My folks have been married for 40+ years and she has 3 sets. I found this really touching and we didn't have to have deal with the "diamonds are evil" issue.
Maybe your/her mother or grandmother has a set that they would like to pass down that is an heirloom.
posted by nimsey lou at 3:41 PM on June 12, 2007

I've always thought that I'll only accept a proposal from someone that gets me a mood ring. I figure that that person would have enough of a handle of my personality (kooky, weird, not a jewelry person, likes unusual things, moody) that they'd work out how a mood ring is the best representation of me.

Are you thinking about her when considering the ring, or just thinking of yourself?
posted by divabat at 3:42 PM on June 12, 2007

I should have said AND my mom offered me her ring. I wear hers on one hand the one my husband got for me on the other.
posted by nimsey lou at 3:43 PM on June 12, 2007

I suppose I just have to suck it up and get one because she wants one, but that bothers me, too.

Really? You're perfect? She never makes compromises or defers to you or puts up with something just because it's what you want and that's what people in well-balanced relationships do?

Seriously?
posted by DarlingBri at 3:44 PM on June 12, 2007

The answer is simple. You buy one that's really nice and not expensive (not the cheapest, but not far off!). That way you still meet the commitment, get the joy out of making her happy, don't spend too much money, and everyone's happy. If she then bitches about getting a "cheap" ring, then you know you shouldn't marry her.

I've already explained to my girlfriend that's how it's going down, and she's happy with it and only cares that I get something pretty :) (it's kinda like Christmas.. you gotta do it, but you don't have to spend much.. just do the sentiment)
posted by wackybrit at 3:44 PM on June 12, 2007

No matter what you do, money will always be more important to your wife, and women in general. Girls don't want to ride round in a 1992 Civic. They want the G35.

whoa, that is just wrong.
posted by caddis at 3:45 PM on June 12, 2007 [10 favorites]

It doesn't have to be expensive. Really. For that matter it doesn't have to be from a top name jeweler. "Estate" rings can be had reasonably priced. eBay has rings for sale, I am willing to bet a nice shiny quarter your town has a place with a name like "Silver and Gold Exchange" that can set you up (or point you to a buddy who can), or there's always the pawn shop. Furthermore, if it happens to be CZ, really only you, her, and the salesman will know.

Or you can do what my husband did: buy a very modest ring now, with the pledge that you will buy her something more in keeping with her station for your 10th anniversary (when hopefully money will not be so tight).

Listen, I agree that in a perfect world you would *both* exchange a visible symbol of your love and committment to marry. We don't live in a perfect world, and she has the burden of saving face at work and among her friends. If she doesn't have a ring, whispers will happen to the effect of "Jeez, what a freakin cheapskate/bum/loser, he can't/won't get her a ring, I feel so sorry for her" or "She's making it up, I'll believe they're getting married when I'm invited to the ceremony." See, she's held to a double standard too, and frankly women are much meaner about it.
posted by ilsa at 3:49 PM on June 12, 2007

The main thing I think you should realize is that your girlfriend does not see the symbolic enslavement of women in the engagement ring. She doesn't see it as a symbol of being treated as property. She sees an engagement ring as an important symbol of your relationship, or endless love, or something. If you tell her that you oppose engagement rings because of the historical implications, she will take this to mean that you do not respect what she sees the ring as symbolizing.

"Honey, I want you to give me a symbol of your love." "Darling, I will not force upon you a symbol of male dominance." Something is lost in that conversation.

I also have to nth how important the finances come across in your post. Your girlfriend will see it the same way. If the finances are the only thing that is truly bothering you about buying an engagement ring, and everything else is just (at some level) an excuse, that is not going to help your argument. If you are just concerned about the money, tell her so. Figure out something that'll work, financially. Not a big deal! No matter what a post or two above may want you to believe about women and money, your girlfriend doesn't really seem to care about the money behind the ring. But if, on the other hand, you hide concerns about money behind gigantic issues of symbolic enslavement? So won't win you any brownie points.
posted by Ms. Saint at 3:51 PM on June 12, 2007 [1 favorite]

A ring is a symbol of engagement. It doesn't have to be a symbol of going-to-the-poorhouse. If you really are committed to this relationship (and aren't just using the ring issue as a smokescreen for other, deeper problems) why don't you pick out something together that you both feel comfortable with. That's what my husband and I did for our engagement, and my ring suited me and our budget just fine.
posted by pinky at 4:02 PM on June 12, 2007

Really, think about it. Reviewing your life when you are closer to its end, do you want to think, "My wife wanted an engagement ring, but I did not give her one because I thought it was a stupid tradition."

That argument isn't fair though. He could say the same to her. What would make her happier.. a ring or his happiness? If everyone thought like that, we'd spoil our kids rotten, buy every piece of crud everyone important in our lives wanted, and, well, die from lack of a backbone.
posted by wackybrit at 4:06 PM on June 12, 2007 [1 favorite]

buy her a nice ring. if you don't she will always want one but never feel right asking for one. believe me.
posted by n9 at 4:08 PM on June 12, 2007

Your new mantra: happy wife, happy life

Repeat as necessary.
posted by i_am_a_Jedi at 4:12 PM on June 12, 2007

A story: My great-grandmother got married during the Depression when she was 15. Her whole young life she'd wanted a diamond ring (ever since she heard a story about a little girl who found one on a dirt road), but didn't for a minute expect one. After she'd been married for some years, she picked out a diamond and paid for it herself in weekly installments. Later, when her husband died, our family paid to have the stone reset.

When she died, that ring went to my grandmother. When, after eight years together, the dear boy and I decided we wanted to get engaged, we gave a lot of thought (and a lot of talk) to what we thought the whole business was about, what traditions we liked, and what we thought was bullshit. We've both got piles of issues with a lot of what marriage means and all the yucky power dynamics it tends to imply, so it was sort of a tricky decision for us to make (even though we were certain we wanted to spend our lives together).

My grandmother gave my great-grandmother's ring to me, and my mom paid for the dear boy and I to have it reset. When I wear it, I am reminded of that decision, of our love, and also of all the women in my family who wore the stone before me.

If I hadn't had such a meaningful stone, I'm certain I wouldn't have wanted a diamond. The cost and the symbolism carry too much baggage. But, I think, I would still have wanted something, a symbol, of that choice. Why not pick out and pay together for a ring that can be that symbol for her? As a ton of people upthread have said, there's no reason to be stereotypical about what kind of ring it is or the process by which it is paid for. For myself, at least, I love having an unusual story about where my ring came from, and I love that every time it catches my eye, it makes me smile and think of the man that I love.
posted by mostlymartha at 4:14 PM on June 12, 2007

i agree with most of what everyone says in terms of doing this because it will make your fiancée happy and it being a symbol of your commitment, blah blah etc.

i also agree with jayder about your attitude (or at least the attitude your post is conveying). do another thing for your fiancée and don't show the kind of resentment you seem to be oozing here because she actually wants the ring. it would just be suck upon suck if i felt my fiancé bought a ring for me out of disgruntled obligation rather than the desire to see me happy just because. in fact, there would probably be a part of me that will always think of your resentment every time i even looked at the ring.
posted by violetk at 4:20 PM on June 12, 2007

I think you're expecting her to be able to give you a clear, reasoned argument for why she wants one, but that's not gonna happen. (I also think you might be feeling a little betrayed and resentful not about the ring, but because her wanting the ring is contrary to an image you have of her. You thought she wasn't into that kind of stuff; now it turns out she is and you're confused.)

The point is that she wants it. She's probably wanted it forever, and even though she has some good reasons not to get one, she still wants it. That's OK.. you probably want lots of things that you don't have really good arguments for, either.

Anyway, I think you should figure out what matters most to you on this (you hate diamonds? or the expense?) and ask her to compromise on that aspect of the ring. There are lots of options and compromises here. I think you'll find a way to get a ring that satisfies both of your needs.
posted by stefanie at 4:20 PM on June 12, 2007

Can you both go shopping for rings for each other, and pay for both out of your joint account?
posted by croutonsupafreak at 4:21 PM on June 12, 2007

Nobody is going to ever care in a million years where the money came from for the ring except apparently you, Mr. Anonymous. Emasculating? If you're worried about out-dated and sexist views, certainly there's one place you can easily change the world. Take (perhaps some of) your collective money and buy one half of your collective something nice guilt-free boyo. Take heart in the fact that it is noticed and her girl-friends will gush over it which will make additional nice moments for you. Also: engagement-night sex does not suck.

I guess I'm a bit piggish but I kind of like'd the "sold!" sign it put over my pre-wife's head but I like my own ring for that reason: "Back off, chica, I've got superpowers of wife invocation!"

I've known more than a few guys who've gotten engagement rings. If you want one 'cause you want one and not just 'cause you want a pony too, by all means press for it. As many have said, if you're playing the pony card you too will be walking down the aisle atop flowers in a pretty dress. Just keep telling yourself it will all soon be over ;)
posted by Ogre Lawless at 4:28 PM on June 12, 2007 [1 favorite]

You guys have serious issues about money that you should sort out before you get married. She wants to waste money on a ring when you have credit card debt? That's dumb.
posted by footnote at 4:31 PM on June 12, 2007 [1 favorite]

When I got engaged to my now-husband, we discussed whether or not to get a ring. We decided in favour for several reasons. Firstly, it was eaisier to explain to relatives. We were having a hard enough time to get his family to accept me as a girlfriend; as a finance, without a ring? No chance. And he still had to live with them. Secondly, we wanted a visible sign of our committment; for daily wear, that means jewellery of some description, as that's the only thing durable enough to stand up to 50+ years of abuse. Earrings are out - I don't want new holes, and I like to occasionally match my earrings to my outfit. Necklaces I wear once a month or less. Bracelets are uncomfortable. A ring it was.

About the ring: we got it half price (due to interesting things happening in the stockmarket and to the dollar that weekend), we chose the (australian) diamond together, and got the ring itself made. We didn't spend a lot; about USD300, I think.

I suppose one could look at it as a symbol of his ownership of me; equally, these days, it could be considered a trophy of my successful hunt of him. If, of course, I was going to think in such cynical terms.

Personallly, I look at it, and see a symbol we chose together, and a symbol I hope to still have on my finger 50-plus years from now.
posted by ysabet at 4:35 PM on June 12, 2007

Misha's got it right about "fairness."

I don't think it's emasculating to use money from the joint account. In fact, it seems odd to me to be talking about "your money" and "her money." When you get married, it's going to become "our money" right? (in fact, it already is to some degree since you have a joint account). Sometimes you'll contribute less than you take out, and sometimes the opposite will be true. Those things aren't supposed to matter so much when you're married.
posted by chndrcks at 4:37 PM on June 12, 2007

In addition, if you're getting this resentful about the very first crappy, antiquated, sexist tradition surrounding a marriage, I can't wait until you two actually start planning the wedding!

Holy crap-on-a-biscuit, you sound like you'll be a riot to be married to!

come on people, it's 2007... I know I'm a bit of a weirdo, having grown up in down town NY with hippie-academic-artsy parents, but it's really not that hard to have a wedding / marriage without following all the old fashioned sexist traditions. The groom doesn't have to ask the father for permission, the father doesn't have to give the bride away, the bride doesn't have to take the groom's name, the bride doesn't have to wear white, no one has to be a virgin... You can keep traditions you like and change the ones you don't. I personally find engagement rings really weird as they're so one-sided, and it's hard for me not to think they come across as symbolic of male ownership - which is why they have to be so big and expensive, because they're subconsciously the price he'll pay for you.

Anyway, I'd agree that there are two issues here: one, you need to work out your own real feelings about this as you express two opposing attitudes, the idea that this is sexist and old fashioned, and the idea that her paying for part of it denigrates your classic / old fashioned male role. You have to decide how you really feel about your classic male role, and what equality between you means, and why you chose to say it would be "emasculating" if she paid for part of it. Second, you need to find out why she feels this is important, and try to understand the symbolism and tradition that's important to her. Don't approach it looking for a fight, but if it honestly bothers you, it's the kind of thing that will show up in the way you think about other things, and you should be able to talk about it just as a "I want to understand you better" issue.

There are lots of alternatives, but if she wants to do some things the traditional way, you can't just insert alternatives without discussing it. It's all about what these things mean to people, so you can't escape the fact that you have to talk about what this means to each of you, and find out where you're crossing signals.
posted by mdn at 4:38 PM on June 12, 2007 [5 favorites]

This is just one of many compromises you're gonna have to go through when you're married. If you can't get past this, you're gonna have a helluva time with the rest of your lives together. Other people have already pointed out that this is theoretically "our" money, and not "your" and "her" money.

Here's another context: forget about the baggage associated with an engagement ring. This is a financial decision: let's say you're already married, you have a joint account. *You* want to buy a big screen TV. *She* wants to save the money for something else. Whadya do? What's "fair"? What's "equal"?
posted by edjusted at 4:45 PM on June 12, 2007

So, you're already in credit-card debt. Were all of those purchases as important as getting engaged? If not, what difference does a bit more debt make? I honestly see all this whining as a lot more emasculating than just using money from the joint account.

I got engaged a couple weeks ago, and I'm glad he went the traditional route.* If he couldn't have afforded it, I would have pitched in. The first thing people want to see is the ring, and I'd feel like I have to make excuses for him if it wasn't a traditional ring.

* Except that I insisted that the diamond not be from Africa, which it isn't.
posted by desjardins at 4:49 PM on June 12, 2007

What damn dirty ape said, at the top of the thread: You're feminist enough to consider engagement rings a "sexist, manufactured tradition," yet you think using shared money for it would be "emasculating?" Maybe I shouldn't expect consistency in your opinions on such a charged subject, but really.

Don't get hung up on the "impractical" aspects: Practicality is so far from the point of an engagement ring, they're actually at antipodes. It's all about symbolism. Please talk to your girlfriend about what an engagement ring means to her - keep an open mind, and don't be accusatory. She may not be demanding a big honking rock. You might be able to compromise on details while having neither of you give up on deeply-held principles. And maybe you can embody your commitment to equality by having an exchange of gifts. Can you ask her to get you something you really want, even if it's not normally something she'd consider buying? A ring for you -- or an engagement iPod?
posted by expialidocious at 5:03 PM on June 12, 2007

I wanted to elaborate a little more. In a marriage, if one of you is in debt, then you're both in debt. There's no reason for "you" to go into debt when she has money sitting in the bank.

You're planning your lives together. That should include your financial lives. If you, individually (and single), had money in the bank, you'd be paying off that debt right?

Now "you" is a couple. You, as a couple, need to, together, be making the wisest decisions for your financial decisions. There's no reason for you, as a couple, to take out a loan for something you could afford (as a couple).

I realize part of the point is that you're giving a gift to her, but from a completely practical point of view, once you're married, what's yours is hers and what's hers is yours.
posted by chndrcks at 5:09 PM on June 12, 2007

No matter what you do, money will always be more important to your wife, and women in general. Girls don't want to ride round in a 1992 Civic. They want the G35.

whoa, that is just wrong.

Of course it's wrong- girls don't care about cars. We care about jewelry :-D

If you want something expensive as an engagement gift, why not ask your girlfriend for it? A nice watch, cuff links, a TV, a purebreed boxer puppy, whatever. Something that will mean something to you (and not just in the way half a cookie means something to a spoiled child stealing from his sister). Might that make you feel better about buying her the ring she wants?

Or you could get over the idea that "equality" means your lives have to be direct mirrors every second. How boring is that! Life is a journey. Sometimes you'll be up and she'll be down, and vice versa. You are commiting to be there for each other no matter what life brings your way. Take this lesson as a chance to begin practicing love for your future wife.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 5:11 PM on June 12, 2007 [1 favorite]

come on people, it's 2007... it's really not that hard to have a wedding / marriage without following all the old fashioned sexist traditions.

Oh, Please! No one is faulting anon for bucking tradition. It's for being a dick regarding the wishes of HIS OWN FIANCEE, whether those wishes are traditional or not.

Aside to Potential Future Mrs. Anon... if things don't work out, look me up. I know how to treat a lady.
posted by The Deej at 5:23 PM on June 12, 2007

If a woman, say, stops working to have kids, which many of us do, and then there's a divorce because her husband ran off with a younger woman or something, which also happens a lot, she can sell the diamond ring to get back on her feet financially.

...no. As soon as you buy it, a diamond ring is going to lose at least half its value. It depreciates faster than a new car.
posted by oaf at 5:26 PM on June 12, 2007

Lots of good ideas and opinions here. Another one: get her a token ring -- something amusing/sweet but on the inexpensive side. Really look for something unique and special that you think she will like and that represents something about your relationship or some characteristic that you find especially adorable in her. Suprise her with it. Propose, if you love her, in a fantastic way which will be memorable to you both. Get those nervous butterflies that you're supposed to get when you're really asking someone to commit to you and love you for the rest of your life. After she says, "yes" and you guys pop champagne and laugh and kiss or whatever, let her know that you'd love to go and pick out rings together with her (this is way after you two have decided how you'll do the costs) so that she can get exactly what she wants.

And, like so many have said, getting married is about having and handling the tough discussions -- so go ahead and do that part. Maybe by the time you pony up for the real rings, you'll be less in debt.
posted by amanda at 5:42 PM on June 12, 2007 [1 favorite]

My grandfather couldn't afford an engagement ring, so he gave my grandmother his class pin. His mother later paid for a expensive fancy wedding ring, but my grandmother didn't wear it and now she doesn't know where it is, because that ring was never important to her. She kept the pin for 60 years, though, until she gave it to me.

When I saw this question, I was expecting to read that your girlfriend was demanding something extravagant from you. But not only is she not insisting on a diamond or something else outside of your budget, she's offering to pay for it herself. It sounds like she's just asking for something to mark the occasion, not asking for you to go broke or enslave her to the patriarchy.
posted by lemuria at 5:42 PM on June 12, 2007 [1 favorite]

This story just seems strange to me.

She wants you to buy her an vastly overpriced piece of metal and rock regardless of the fact you have debt already. She wants a ring so badly that she's offering to pay for it herself.

I would be concerned about that kind of attitude. Marriage is a lot of negotiating about money. Most marriages break up over them. Do you want to spend five or ten years arguing over financial priorities?

You need to have those kinds of conversations before you get married. This is a perfect time.
posted by winna at 5:47 PM on June 12, 2007 [1 favorite]

You thought she wasn't into that kind of stuff; now it turns out she is and you're confused.

I think there may be a lot of truth in this. If the fact that she wants a ring is coming as a surprise to you, this may be a Bad Sign. Maybe you should rethink what you're doing...

I didn't really consider this aspect when I responded earlier, but since then I think more and more that perhaps this whole thing doesn't bode well for your future together.
posted by Kadin2048 at 6:15 PM on June 12, 2007

Wow. I think a lot of people above are missing the mark. Stefanie is one of the few who even comes close. I'd be really bummed, thinking I was dating some super rad indy chick who understood me, only to find out that really, she's not so socially conscious after all.

You remind me of me, a bit. I don't like jewelry, and I can't help but see an engagement ring of the traditional diamond variety as anything but another sign of the mindless conspicuous consumerism of our culture. I hear the symbol argument, and I get it. But why does the symbol have to be something that has all the human rights ramifications of a diamond, and the environmental degradation of the precious metal it's set in? Could you buy her a piece of art, or something like that? Something that doesn't go against your ethical sensibilities or her desire for a symbol of your love? Because that (some public proclamation of your love), is something everybody can get behind, right?

And I have to admit, a lot of the answers upthread are pissing me off. Stynxno and the Deej in particular. The posters values DO matter. I would hope his values are one of the reasons his gf/fiance loves him. And the basketball analogy is just ridiculous. There are real environmental and human rights issues surrounding diamonds and precious metals, and not so much surrounding a sporting contest. Is that not obvious?

Lastly, I don't actually think your question comes off as being mostly about the money. I read it as, you don't like the idea of the diamond engagement ring to begin with, and the debt on top of that is adding insult to injury. And for that matter, why can't he be upset that DeBeers (not society, but DeBeers and the admongers DeBeers hired) are telling his fiance how to think, and she's listening? I'd be pissed.
posted by HighTechUnderpants at 7:01 PM on June 12, 2007 [5 favorites]

Maybe I'll get myself in trouble saying this, but here goes: Sometimes you get stuck doing shit you don't want to. Expensive shit, like buying shiny trinkets that serve no purpose other than to shine and be trinkety. Girls like them. Even liberal, well-educated, pseudo-feminist girls. And guys buy them. Even liberal, well-educated, pseudo-feminist guys.

Find something that isn't overpriced. Find something that that will make her happy. If brand-name is important, check e-bay. Seriously. Just get something and forget the money. You'll both be far happier than getting her to grudgingly accept the truth about engagement rings as you (and I) see it. Because she won't really accept it and she'll get depressed anytime she sees someone else's ring. You'll end up buying a ring anyway, but it won't be the same. Get one now. Avoid the guilt and hassle. Just trust me on this.
posted by the christopher hundreds at 7:02 PM on June 12, 2007

nimsey lou: Maybe your/her mother or grandmother has a set that they would like to pass down that is an heirloom.

This is really the best solution that I'm seeing here -- and you'd get bonus points if, say, you added something to the ring (like 2 smaller guard stones, to "represent the two of you forming a new life together" or whatever romantic b.s. you want to make up.

My boyfriend bought me a $6 "blue topaz" ring when I was 16 years old, i.e. 16 years ago. I love that ring more than any diamond in the world because he bought it to show me how much he liked me and wanted me to like him back -- long story short, he'd kicked my ass at chess for the umpteenth time in a row at the coffeehouse, I was pouting and looking at the wares of the local hippie jewelry person, and he bought it for me when my back was turned.

In other words, it's not the cost of the damn thing, it's what it means to her. Get the ring.
posted by bitter-girl.com at 7:02 PM on June 12, 2007

my fiancee, now wife, selected a bunch of not overly expensive rings and had me pick one. we avoided he diamond and ended up with a nice ring at a reasonable price.
posted by spacefire at 7:20 PM on June 12, 2007

If she insists on something you don't want and can't afford, and sticks to this desire even though she concedes it's irrational, it doesn't sound like a solid basis for a relationship.
posted by anildash at 7:26 PM on June 12, 2007 [1 favorite]

Why do folks think that she wants a diamond? I don't see the word "diamond" anywhere in the first post. Not only that, but I don't see anything that says she wouldn't be happy with estate jewelry, a family heirloom, something inexpensive from a local designer, or any other sociopolitical stipulation you would like to put on it.

The only thing we know that she wants is a ring. In and of itself, I don't see why that desire would deduct from her super rad indy points.
posted by lemuria at 7:27 PM on June 12, 2007 [1 favorite]

I haven't read all of the responses above, but:

I am a girl who was recently married. I love my diamond engagement ring, but I would have been just as happy -- honestly -- with another stone, with an antique, or with something else non-diamond that had genuine sentiment behind it. There's a good chance your girlfriend feels this way too. Talk to her about it.
posted by AV at 7:49 PM on June 12, 2007 [1 favorite]

I think my cousin's engagement ring cost like $24. You could go that route.

On the other hand, another friend said she was amazed how many people, and which people, cared about seeing her engagement ring. And the size of the diamond, even. You could consider it this weird social ritual your gf has to go through, and you want to help her get through it feeling good and not embarrassed.

Or why not both get engagement rings? That's less sexist and more equal.
posted by salvia at 8:15 PM on June 12, 2007

Eww. Your attitude reminds me of my ex. Stingy with both his money and his affection.

You're only excuse would be if your girlfriend was demanding some crazy expensive rock, which doesn't seem to be the case. I just saw the most beautiful opal and diamond ring at an antique store for $200. My fiasco had his heart set on getting me a more expensive ring but I would have been just as much over the moon to receive that opal. A gorgeous engagement ring can be done for far less than the diamond industry would lead you to believe.

Most men are proud of the rings they give their future brides (no matter the price) and they do it with a loving heart. I feel awfully sorry for your girlfriend that she's not going to experience that.
posted by Jess the Mess at 8:26 PM on June 12, 2007

Sometimes you get stuck doing shit you don't want to

yes. that is what this boils down to. Sitcoms will tell you marriage is about compromise and it's oh-so-amusing to be made to do things that cause you to lose respect for yourself and your partner.

In my opinion, not so much. Yes, throughout history, people have swallowed this kind of thing and gone on to be happy, or at least tell themselves they're happy.

but this isnt about history, it's about you and your fiancee. Think very very carefully about what this says about her, what this says about you, and if you should be promising to spend the rest of your lives together.
posted by drjimmy11 at 8:33 PM on June 12, 2007

Without reading 82+ comments, I'd say it's like this: Guys say a lot of things. Any woman who's had a few relationships has heard a lot of empty promises.

When she's ready to tell her friends and family that she has a real promise, that this guy is actually making a commitment, typically she and they will feel much better if there is a concrete symbol of the promise that represents a material sacrifice. Until then, until such expression of seriousness as cannot be doubted, many women are prepared to underestimate the degree of your seriousness.

If it bothers you that this is unequal (and it is, and it should), decide with her what would constitute an equal symbol of promise from here. There is no reason you can't both wear an engagement ring, or that she can't buy you something else very significant to you.
posted by Miko at 9:07 PM on June 12, 2007

here = her.
posted by Miko at 9:08 PM on June 12, 2007

Moissanite. It's prettier than diamonds and cheaper too.
posted by IndigoRain at 9:11 PM on June 12, 2007

Here's my experience in this area - we're still shopping so it's up-to-the-minute.

We have a lot of the societal THE RING pressure, coupled with some of the points made in the Slate article. Once we talked about it, tensions dissipated.

I was firm in that I wanted something, but it didn't need to be a traditional diamond ring if it would put us in financial jeopardy. We talked at length about it. We discussed what the ring represents to us individually and as a couple and criteria for the ring itself that we could both agree on. There was some compromising and some seeing things from the opposite perspective, which is good practice :) Maybe it's a little unromantic to some, but it has been a good exercise in establishing priorities and forming a team and a united front (particularly against pushy salesmen). Talk to her a little more and see if you can get to the heart of why/what it represents and that should be helpful. Once we knew where the other was truly coming from, it was easier to find a middle ground. Honestly, this is probably going to be the easiest of issues that you'll face in a marriage, so if you're steaming mad over this and not communicating with her, it might not be the best sign.

Also, if you're going to be getting married and (presumably) merging your finances, eventually you're going to have to get over the resistance to use money that she earned.

AFAIK the woman traditionally buys the man's wedding band, so technically, she is expected to buy something expensive for you. But really, it's not about tit-for-tat.
posted by ml98tu at 9:19 PM on June 12, 2007 [2 favorites]

Very well said ml98tu! Sounds very, very like my own recent experience but was succinctly and elegantly put.
posted by mostlymartha at 9:25 PM on June 12, 2007

I don't have a diamond engagement ring for many of the reasons listed in the poster's question. Sexism, the expense and the unfairness of it all made the idea unappealing. So, my fiance gave me a copy of the Codex Seraphinianus and I bought him a guitar. In the end, few people are rude enough to question me on my lack of ring, but these joy vampires do appear in my life from time to time.

Lots of women expect to have their ring finger scrutinized when they tell people about their engagement. It is an outward sign of how much their fiance is worth, and by extension, how much they are worth. The problem is that this whole game is silly and the only reason it exists is because everyone is playing along. It takes a lot of chutzpah to dismiss Aunt Clara when she insists that it isn't an engagement without a ring and a date.

As more of us opt out of this tradition it will require less and less explaining. Consider brides who keep their own names; once unthinkable, it scarcely draws any notice these days. In the meantime, it is hard for some women to resist the diamond engagement ring. I can't blame them; it is shiny and preeeetty, and everyone expects an engaged woman to have one.

I know it seems unfair, but don't make her fight tradition unless she wants to. It's tough and requires one to stand up to strangers and family members alike. Plus, she wants one. And yes, they are preeeety.

Really, women are damned if they do or damned if they don't. With a ring, they are seen as greedy, unthinking magpies or they are careless (not to mention unloved) iconoclasts without one. Brides get judged and harangued about so many things. Don't start your engagement with the groom judging her, too. She is giving you a break by paying half. Maybe you could return the favor by lightening up on her a little.
posted by Alison at 9:28 PM on June 12, 2007

I hate diamonds. I am totally in sympathy with you on this.

That said: if she wants a fucking diamond, you're really going to have to suck it up, add to your debt, and buy it for her. I'm serious. She'll end up resenting you forever if you don't buy the damn diamond. If you do find out that a diamond isn't a requirement for her and you can get away with buying some other stone, or she buys you a ring as well and you feel better, or something, go for it. But if it's a diamond she really wants...suck it up.

At the very least, I can tell you from personal experience that women really, really, REALLY get a massive amount of shit for not having a fucking diamond when announcing their engagement. As at least one person above me has pointed out, some people don't consider your engagement real without one. I do not agree with those people worth a damn, but they are out there. It is entirely possible your girlfriend is feeling pressure from that as well, and that may be a reason why she wants one.
posted by jenfullmoon at 9:30 PM on June 12, 2007

I second HighTechUnderpants and the other minority votes here.

The many caustic responses you've gotten that presume your values don't matter and that you are a whiner or immature are off base. Of course your values matter. The question is how much? No one can answer that for you. Obviously you value her as well. Does this make you feel differently about her? If not, buy the ring, make it a pleasant experience for her and let the experience fade from your mind as quickly as possible. If it does, then I guess you have a lot of long conversations to go through. Perhaps you haven't really talked about how you see yourselves spending and saving money?

Personally, I have the same opinions as you and a few others and I understand exactly where you are coming from. I'm not sure I would use the word emasculating but something about her money going towards the purchase of her ring feels contrived, like you're stepping through the motions. But since you are getting married and I assume joining finances what does it matter? Just think, no more credit card debt.

I like the CZ recommendation above, but don't do that. It's amusing to the spectator but in a real relationship the potential blow-up is not worth it. If the above doesn't resonate do think about going to a pawn shop. I think diamonds actually lose a lot more than 50% of their value so you should find some very good deals in the city.
posted by BigSky at 9:49 PM on June 12, 2007

Also, my girlfriend makes more money than I do, so it seems unfair that I'm expected to buy something expensive for her and she isn't expected to buy something expensive for me.

Like a few other posters, I have to point out that you seem to be pulling some really immature behavior right here. If your finances aren't settled, why are you getting married? You can't seem to give her what she wants without being immature and resentful, so don't burden her with your inner drama.

Also, you're already crying foul over what you think is some kind of reverse discrimination against males (never mind that she might lose some years of working life and body elasticity after getting pregnant and bearing your children, if you plan on kids, anyway)

Also, consider the fact that you can pee in the woods without having to squat or take off your pants as far more valuable than a diamond. It's a utility we simply do not, as women, have. That is your gift from God and be thankful for it, don't ask for anything else. So quit being a baby and help her fulfill her desire of being a traditional bride. And don't pout and mess it up for her. You sound very childish and self-centered.
posted by onepapertiger at 9:54 PM on June 12, 2007

why is everyone so damned freaking convinced the girl wants a diamond when nowhere in the OP's post is the word "diamond" even mentioned??

everyone, get off your freaking high horse about the girlfriend being a selfish bitch because she a) wants a ring (not necessarily a diamond one either) and b) offered to help pay for it. the OP is the selfish one here, spouting off about feminist ideals and yet would deny even going in halfsies for a ring for his lady because why? cause he'll feel like a pussy cause he can't pay for it all himself? does OP want to have his wedding cake and eat it too?

she's getting married–ostensibly to the guy she wants to spend her life with. let her have her freaking token of sentimentality and romance—and make sure she knows you're glad to make her happy.

sheesh.
posted by violetk at 9:59 PM on June 12, 2007 [1 favorite]

why is everyone so damned freaking convinced the girl wants a diamond when nowhere in the OP's post is the word "diamond" even mentioned??

The Slate piece mentioned by anonymous is specifically about diamond engagement rings. Plus, the cost would be less of an issue if the poster had considered alternate stones or estate jewelery.

There are some really wonderful things available for great prices at estate sales, but some people are turned off by rings with history. One of my girlfriends would only take a new ring because a used one might be tainted by divorce or premature death.

If the used stuff is unacceptable, go for moissanite. It is the one stone with more sparkle than a diamond (as indicated by its refractive index), and because they are artificial there are no pesky human rights issues. Plus, it costs about 1/10th of a diamond.
posted by Alison at 10:20 PM on June 12, 2007

If it helps, take a look through Beowulf and look at all the references to lords as "ring-givers".

I know there are plenty of pathetic attempts to put a feminist spin on it. But giving someone a ring really is an ancient feudal tradition, showing that the ring-giver is the master in the relationship, and the ring-receiver is subservient in the relationship.

Don't think of it as a gift. Think of it as a necessary brand that you need to mark your property.
posted by TheophileEscargot at 10:38 PM on June 12, 2007 [1 favorite]

Okay, here's my two cents.

#1: are you sure you're compatible? You have a specific point of view on this, and your rational side is the side you've, er, sided with. She, on the other hand, agrees with the rational side of things, but has elected to run with the irrational side (she wants it "anyway") -- meaning she's either driven more by emotional needs and wants, or she's lying to you about agreeing with the rational side as a way of avoiding conflict. Either way, it's a yellow flag, if not a red one.

#2: you seem more concerned with how this impacts your finances, and at the same time you want it to be your money or no ring at all (so that you won't be emasculated, you say) -- well, none of that is taking her feelings into account. You're aware that she has a desire, and you are resentful that she expects you to fulfill that desire, even though she's agreed to a compromise to ease your financial commitment. That speaks volumes about how important her needs and wants are (rather, aren't) to you.

I'm going to say that perhaps you need to take a step back and look at this marriage from a long view. When I hooked up with my soon-to-be-wife, I not only bought her a ring (had it custom made using a diamond provided by one of her family members), but I started paying down her debt (about $8000) and eventually (post-marriage) got it down to nothing. Judge Judy would have had my hide for doing these things pre-marriage, but I did 'em for a very specific reason: it made her happy, and her happiness was more important to me than the inconvenience and risk it presented to me. I went in with my eyes open about the financial risks I was taking and debt I was accruing (even as I paid hers off) but I did it anway.

Also, her mother (much more well-off than my folks, but hardly loaded) offered her a choice: an expensive wedding, or the down payment on a house. I left the decision up to her, because it was her mother's offer, and she went with the wedding. I would have gone for the house, but didn't sweat it.

And you know what? Eight years later, I can't remember *ever* thinking about those expenses until reading your question. Meanwhile, she always tells people (to this day!) how amazing I was to take on her debt even before we were married. And we ended up getting a house eventually anyway.

So, here's the bottom line as far as I'm concerned: if her happiness is important to you, suck up the hardship financially and morally and get her the ring. At the same time, if this is a huge hardship for you financially and morally, so huge in fact that you can't bring yourself to suck it up, then you've got a legitimate and significant incompatibility on your hands and should be glad it came up before the wedding -- pay attention to how you both resolve the conflict, as it'll be the kind of conflict you resolve often.

Note that if you're unable to suck this up, I am not implying that you're a bad person, or in the wrong; I'd have given her the same advice about giving up the ring for the man she loves, to ease his hardship*. Don't think of it as "s/he right, s/he wrong", think of it as "we're compatible/incompatible in our needs and wants."

*what else is a wife for, but to "ease his hardship?" Wink wink, nudge nudge
posted by davejay at 10:39 PM on June 12, 2007 [4 favorites]

If it helps, take a look through Beowulf...giving someone a ring really is an ancient feudal tradition, showing that the ring-giver is the master in the relationship, and the ring-receiver is subservient in the relationship.

I'm not sure if ancient literature is helpful, but just in case it is, there are lots and lots of Arthurian legends about rings given from women to men for various reasons.

I suppose you could argue that all of this only signifies that Lancelot, Tristan and Perceval were frivolous bridezillas hounding their poor women for the biggest rock, but I myself think that a boy should be allowed to have a pretty bauble once in a while.
posted by lemuria at 11:45 PM on June 12, 2007 [1 favorite]

Davejay put it quite well, I think. How much of a history do you have together in terms of making financial decisions? Because the "resentment" issue may be significant (and I note that one of your tags is "enragement", which I recognize is a pun, but sounds sort of serious nevertheless); this might be a great time to try to sort out whether you two are likely to ever be on the same page regarding financial decisions, because a lifetime (or even many years) of arguing about money seems like a little slice of hell to me.

My husband and I are almost completely alike in terms of our attitudes toward money - what we are willing to splurge on, what we economize on, etc., so if ever we disagree, we are each quite willing to compromise or give in since we both feel that the other has always been so reasonable that if he/she want to indulge for once, or feels insecure or negative about being spendy for once, it's no big deal to switch plan, and we both stay happy.

If she wants an expensive ring, a big wedding, and an exotic honeymoon, and you want no ring, a small wedding, and a weekend bed & breakfast honeymoon, then it's really time to think seriously about the decision you're both making. If you've lived together, handled financial decisions together and always agreed until now (and don't really see any reason this should change in the future), and you've hit this one stumbling block, then it should be easy to compromise if you each trust the other. And resentment shouldn't be an issue.

You should probably try to examine honestly whether you fear that this is the beginning of a long series of issues in which you suspect you will be pressured to spend more than you're comfortable with (which would sort of explain what seems, possibly, a bit of an overly emotional reaction on the question of the ring), and if you do feel that way, try to determine why. Has any of your experience with your girlfriend indicated that maybe she's more extravagant with money than you are comfortable with? Or is there perhaps some family history on your side involving arguments/unhappiness about money that may be making you fearful at this rather stressful time? If you've seen your parents, for example, having huge arguments about money, or if you've seen financial decisions or problems causing sorrow and recrimination, it would be natural to be wary about it happening in your own life... but it's important to determine if it's a legitimate fear, or a holdover emotional issue that might poison your relationship for no real reason.
posted by taz at 12:06 AM on June 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

Lemuria: note that knights are of lower rank than Queens and Ladies.
posted by TheophileEscargot at 1:15 AM on June 13, 2007

... My girlfriend agrees with most of this but wants one anyway.

Just an aside but should anyone talk about someone they love and want to marry this way? It's quite uncharitable.

Two points:

First point

To you this may seem empty and inauthentic but to her it may really mean something.

One important aspect of marriage is understanding how your partner needs you to express your love for them.

For some people they feel loved if their partner does something nice for them, some like words, some crave physical contact and some like romance.

I can only guess because your girlfriend's feelings are not really represented here, but she might appreciate the ring from you as a symbol of your everlasting love for her.

Second point

Once you annonce your engagement, absolutely everyone she knows is going to ask her about the ring.

If she does not have one she will have to say "Oh we/anonymous didn't want a ring because ... enslavement of women and inequality blah blah blah"

If she doesn't really believe this, and she really actually wants this ring, having to say this to everyone is really going to stick in her craw and cause her to resent you.
Furthermore she's the one who bears the brunt of people's thinly veiled disapproval, derision and general confusion over such a stance.

And BTW, you're getting engaged? Congratulations!
posted by BAKERSFIELD! at 2:38 AM on June 13, 2007 [1 favorite]

The fact that you are so opposed to buying a ring, makes it all the more important that you don't screw this up.

You see, it will mean even MORE to her, when you come through with the ring, because she knows how you feel about it.


If you don't do this properly, every time in the future that you prioritise something before her, it will dredge up feelings of how the engagement started out ... and she may kick up a stink.

If you do do this, any time you put her second, she will have a ring on her finger as a reminder that you DO love her and she is first priority. It will keep her company on the occasion that you're not there.
posted by mjao at 3:31 AM on June 13, 2007

Point no. 2 ->
How can you be quite happy to get engaged and married, which is another tradition borne out of more patriarchal times, and yet be staunchly opposed to just one aspect of this tradition? Seems like you're rebelling against society when it suits you, yet blindly following tradition the rest of the time.

(This is coming from someone who considers herself "married", but in fact, is not married; my partner and I do feel that the whole tradition is a bit outmoded, and that includes "rings" and symbols. Still, if I were going to get married, I would want a ring.)
posted by mjao at 3:36 AM on June 13, 2007

And I have to admit, a lot of the answers upthread are pissing me off. Stynxno and the Deej in particular. The posters values DO matter.

You'll get over it. Plus, I never said his values didn't matter. Nor did his reasons for not wanting to buy a ring have anything to do with diamonds, world injustice, etc etc. the Slate article notwithstanding.
posted by The Deej at 7:23 AM on June 13, 2007

But giving someone a ring really is an ancient feudal tradition, showing that the ring-giver is the master in the relationship, and the ring-receiver is subservient in the relationship.

The entire Western wedding ceremony is built on archaic patriarchical holdovers, from white dresses to groomsmen to 'giving away' the bride, so if ownership symbolism bothers you, don't have a conventional wedding. But regardless of what the history of a symbol is, you can't tell anyone what a symbol means to them. Imbuing a traditional symbol with new meaning isn't 'pathetic;' both regular people and branding consultants manage it every day. Our present-day wedding-ring tradition has been influenced by medieval 'courtly love' and by 20th-century ad campaigns, to be sure. But those meanings were new at one time, as well. Rings have also symbolized fealty, membership, status, affiliation, agreements, and many other things over the centuries and across cultures. At the simplest level, they are a way of storing (and displaying) wealth. In no way can anyone say definitively that rings always and only have signalled ownership or subservience.
posted by Miko at 8:15 AM on June 13, 2007

I think you can get her a meaningful ring without breaking the bank- provided she is not fixated on diamonds and platinum, etc..

A friend of mine worked with an artisan to design rings for her and her husband to be- and they were really beautiful and unique. I don't think they spent more than $500. If you put this kind of thought into the gesture, I would hope your fiance will be really touched...

And by all means take her up on using the joint account. Make rings for the both of you!
posted by mistsandrain at 10:32 AM on June 13, 2007

Wow, there are a lot of people here giving the poster shit for having an emotion; their suggestions to solve the problem boil down to what the poster already intends to do. Reading comprehension is not as widespread as I thought.

Anonymous, were I you—and note that while I am not wealthy, I have marketable skills, and have never had too much trouble earning a reasonable living, so if you’ve just graduated with an English major and have no contacts in the working world this advice will be worse than useless :-(—I would internalise that it’s just money, it’s a few months of staying in and reading and of bringing lunch to work. More exactly, just a few months more after paying off the credit card debt. Money is important, but as you describe it, you value your fiancée more.

To those criticising the poster's feelings on splitting the bill for the ring; if his fiancée is irrational enough that she accepts in the abstract the irrelevance of engagement rings, but still wants one, it may well be the case that the part of her that decides on who she’s attracted to is equally irrational, and will think less of the poster, despite her being fine with it in the abstract.
posted by Aidan Kehoe at 11:41 AM on June 13, 2007

Of course I'll get over it. But I haven't yet, apparently. :)

It does NOT compromise your precious values by buying a ring for someone you love, who wants a ring!

Come on dude...the phrase 'precious values' comes of as pretty condescending. If it doesn't say that his values don't matter, it seems to imply that at the very least his values are silly or irrational and he should 'just get over it.'

And second, it just seems awfully presumptuous to take the poster at anything less than face value. Yes, the finances bother him, but he states (and states first) that he has an objection to the symbolism of the ring; maybe we can at least do him the courtesy of believing him?
posted by HighTechUnderpants at 2:14 PM on June 13, 2007

Come on dude...the phrase 'precious values' comes of as pretty condescending. If it doesn't say that his values don't matter, it seems to imply that at the very least his values are silly or irrational and he should 'just get over it.'

Of course it's condescending! This is MeFi!!!

Yes, his values are silly and irrational, if he places what a ring means to others over what it means to his fiancee. He should get over it.

It is up to EVERY couple to determine the meaning and symbolism behind what they do. Not their parents, not unknown people in centuries passed, not freakin' Slate.

He certainly does not think a ring he gives to her represents his ownership of her, and neither does she. In fact, no normal person in the western world takes that as the meaning of an engagement ring. So why should he determine what a ring "means" based on people, things, ideas, and traditions that have nothing to do with their relationship.

He is letting dead strangers decide what his actions mean. That is what is silly.
posted by The Deej at 3:26 PM on June 13, 2007

In planning the wedding, and in your married life, you're going to have to pick your battles. Is this one worth it?

Often you will not get your way, on things that you think are important. You'll have to do things you don't want to do, do things that go against some of your principles, etc. Some of this can be minimized by lots of honest talking, but some of it is just the nature of two different people trying to accomplish important things together.

Try to honestly understand what the ring would mean to her (asking her is a good start). See if you can bring yourself around to seeing it that way.
posted by LobsterMitten at 10:13 PM on June 13, 2007

Symbolism does not just get 're-tasked' because a couple wants it to. All of the negative symbolism, as well as the positive, is inevitably bound up in making a public gesture like this. Pretending that it means only what the couple wants it to mean, and nothing else, is just as silly as 'letting dead strangers decide what his actions mean.'

Furthermore, whenever you buy a company's product, you support that company. Period. Even if he's okay with his partner wanting a ring, he still has to deal with the fact that by buying her a ring, unless he buys an heirloom peice, or other non-traditional thing, he supports the diamond and jewelry business by putting his (and her) money in their pockets. Don't ignore that symbolism. Perhaps that's me reading too much into the poster's question, as human rights and environmental concerns are my main objection to engagement rings. But as a result of my objection to that, no matter how great the symbolism I had 'decided on' with my SO was, I would have a really hard time buying a ring because it supports companies whose actions I abhor.
posted by HighTechUnderpants at 2:24 PM on June 14, 2007

Sometimes people want things without rational reasons. The "irrationality" of love, anger, and betrayal doesn't make them any less real; acknowledging that there are reasons to feel differently doesn't make the feeling any less real.

If physical tokens are the way she recognizes love being expressed, you should be aware of that. Get her something you think she'd like, without breaking the bank, and enjoy her happiness. And let her know, when it's not a demand of immediate tit-for-tat, what it is that you recognize as an expression of love, whether that's praise, helping out around the house, or passing on luxuries to help pay off your shared debt. A marriage is a lot of work, and figuring out what makes the other party happy is a great first step.
posted by Lady Li at 3:48 PM on June 14, 2007

It is up to EVERY couple to determine the meaning and symbolism behind what they do. ..He is letting dead strangers decide what his actions mean. That is what is silly.

yeah, when I said "fuck your mother", I meant "nice haircut" - whatever you might mean by those words is irrelevant, as they're just sounds - it's up to each of us to determine the meaning...

cultural symbolism is a language that we learn from the society we live in. The traditional rituals of a wedding have traditional meanings. These meanings can shift over time, but you can't just change them for an individual isolated incident as if you aren't part of the culture. Perhaps the meanings of engagement rings will shift enough that they'll continue to be normal, or perhaps they'll fade out of popularity, but for now, there are still plenty of conflicting opinions about what gender roles are meant to be and what marriage ought to represent, etc, that traditional rituals seem to quite clearly reinforce the traditional viewpoint.
posted by mdn at 9:12 PM on June 14, 2007

yeah, when I said "fuck your mother", I meant "nice haircut"

o

bruh

thar
posted by The Deej at 4:46 AM on June 15, 2007

:), sorry, that was a bit hyperbolic - but really, it's silly to imagine the larger cultural connotations aren't there. You can agree with one other person to encode a phrase differently - I could agree with a friend that 'fuck your mother' = 'nice haircut' between the two of us - but it would be dumb for us to imagine that a)secondary overtones would never be felt at all; b)our family & friends would never assume the standard meaning; and c)that we could alter the meaning without explicitly communicating what we wanted & why we were doing it (not just assuming we had the same interpretation).
posted by mdn at 10:48 AM on June 15, 2007

I dunno. I guess in my 25 years of being married, and knowing married people my whole life, and my considering getting married again at some point, it never once occured to me that a ring was symbolic of anything other than your love and commitment to one another. Nor have I heard anyone else express anything different.

Anon can do as he wishes, obviously. But as I said... he is looking at it the wrong way. And if he didn't have his doubts about it, he would not have posted here.
posted by The Deej at 11:25 AM on June 15, 2007

meanings can shift over time, but you can't just change them for an individual isolated incident as if you aren't part of the culture.

By what other process could they be expected to change than by individuals making innovative decisions? I can think of any number of symbols whose meaning has transmuted over time because of individual actions: Santa Claus. The word 'nigger,' the word 'queer.' The pink triangle. Tattoos. Symbols are simply physical repositories for cultural information, and they mean nothing in and of themselves, as physical objects. As culture changes, they change.

I'm not suggesting that the OP has total control over others' perception of the ring symbol; he doesn't. But I am definitely suggesting that it's crap to say that rings always and only symbolize ownership. There are those who say wedding rings always and only symbolize marriage between a man and a woman. What then about commitment rings in civil unions and gay marriages? Those obviously symbolize something, too, to the couple and the assembled wedding guests, regardless of what a third party thinks they mean or don't mean.
posted by Miko at 8:21 PM on June 15, 2007

I dunno. I guess in my 25 years of being married, and knowing married people my whole life, and my considering getting married again at some point, it never once occured to me that a ring was symbolic of anything other than your love and commitment to one another.

wedding rings for each other are one thing; one party giving the other a large chunk of money which she wears on her finger to show off to everyone the down payment he's put on her is another... That is simply how the engagement ring reads to me, and I am always surprised by women who have no reservations at all about it.

By what other process could they be expected to change than by individuals making innovative decisions? I can think of any number of symbols whose meaning has transmuted over time because of individual actions: Santa Claus. The word 'nigger,' the word 'queer.' The pink triangle. Tattoos. Symbols are simply physical repositories for cultural information, and they mean nothing in and of themselves, as physical objects. As culture changes, they change.

I said above, you can change the meaning, but it is complicated. As I said, there are overtones leftover, there are family & friends who aren't as hip who may not know the new reclaimed meaning you intend, and most important, if the old-fashioned meaning is still imbued in the culture to any extent, you certainly have to make your intent explicit when you use the same words or rituals but are thinking something different. If you are white and use the word nigger, especially if you live among white people, you cannot expect people to know that you mean it in some kind of "reclaimed" way. If you say queer in a conservative small town area where no one is openly homosexual, you may understand that you mean it in a progressive context, but you cannot count on the people who hear you to make all the connections.

But I am definitely suggesting that it's crap to say that rings always and only symbolize ownership. There are those who say wedding rings always and only symbolize marriage between a man and a woman.

I'm not talking about wedding rings. I'm talking about the ritual of the engagement ring, which is a separate and bizarre tradition, where only the woman is given a very expensive diamond ring as a sign of commitment from the guy. He is, according to the ad campaigns in the US, meant to spend 2 mo salary on it, and when she announces the engagement to her friends, she is meant to show it to everyone as proof of his financial investment. It's all sort of subconscious and ritualized, but it's about how big the diamond is...

anyway. Yes, by all means, just as I said in my earlier comments, talk to your woman and find a way to make the engagement ring mean something that both of you are happy about. But commenters who deny that it carries cultural baggage and doesn't need to be addressed because it simply "doesn't mean" anything you don't directly, personally, consciously intend, are missing the bigger picture.
posted by mdn at 4:35 PM on June 16, 2007