If you say "no', why you should be able to keep an expensive token of my affection?

A wedding ring was invented as a marriage trophy because it's a circle, meaning never-ending love. Jewelry were given to the wives so that men could prove and brag about how wealthy and succesful they were. I suppose that is still true today.
If a wedding ring indicates "never-ending love," why shouldn't both spouses pay for it? Aren't they both in love?
 

Sometimes some women are caught up in the "Cinderella" romanticism of an engagement ring and a wedding INSTEAD of focusing on the actual marriage --->> spending their life with the man they claim to be in love with.
^^^^ Bingo! And a woman's thinking is clouded by the knowledge that if she accepts a diamond ring (which, of course most women want), she has to marry the guy.
 

True.

Aside from $$, there's a huge difference between becoming a police officer and getting engaged to be married. (Ask a police officer!) That was a poor analogy imo.
I was trying to point out that an officer would feel slighted not getting the badge like all the other cops, just like a woman would feel slighted not getting an engagement ring (unless the man is very poor and can't afford it). But I agree, it was a bad analogy.
 
A little change.
No doubt same sex couples anticipating marriage would encounter the same. Having trouble though imagining a gay man being upset if there was no diamond.
 
Well, I disagree. My husband and I have similar interests, values, goals and plans. We go together like peas and carrots. He has never "bewildered" me and I doubt if I have him.
Same here. Nothing bewildering about either of us to the other. Except maybe wondering how he can be so organized and I can be so scattered. We found a way to make that work out just fine. Love finds a way.

Why all the hoopla over engagement rings anyway? They're a traditional piece of jewelry that most men are happy to bestow on the women they love. (Among the same-sex couples I know, with the two sets of women, they gave each other engagement rings. All of the guys skipped that part of the engagement tradition.)
 
love to see a thread go south. gives me a felling of normality, also fun to read

Taking the op father south, 'went south, take it south, going south, all were supplanted for 'go west,' which supplants of 'belly up' which was a term used by the Brit Navy of circa 1700-
overweight people when drowned float face up. How do I know this?

Jaded Linguistic Profs that sent us scurrying to the library to trace the etymology of obscure
words and phrases. Most of this info is now on the web.

The journals had several obscure and obscene phrases for drowned folk, as you can imagine.
Brit sailors had a language all their own: 'fatty up' was the only one I can remember that I can post.
Cannot locate the really obscene one, why are they the ones that stick in my mind, just nasty I suppose.
 
Like some others here, I think that if the engagement was broken and the marriage was never going to take place, I would just return the ring without a second thought.

We've been married for over 40 years and shopped for our rings together. Price meant little to me, I was never one to like jewelry and expensive bobbles. Since I worked a blue collar job, I rarely even wore my engagement ring, only the band. It still gets little use, unless I'm going out on a special occasion....which is rare.
 
Good grief. Nobody bribed me to get married. In fact, I'd been engaged several times before walking up the aisle, and returned each of those rings. The man I eventually married (and have been with for 40 years) didn't give me an engagement ring at my request, because I already had so much lovely jewelry that I'd bought for myself - including a 2-1/3 carat diamond solitaire.

An engagement ring is a traditional token of affection meant to bring the wearer great joy. Not a bribe.
 
love to see a thread go south. gives me a felling of normality, also fun to read

Taking the op father south, 'went south, take it south, going south, all were supplanted for 'go west,' which supplants of 'belly up' which was a term used by the Brit Navy of circa 1700-
overweight people when drowned float face up. How do I know this?

Jaded Linguistic Profs that sent us scurrying to the library to trace the etymology of obscure
words and phrases. Most of this info is now on the web.

The journals had several obscure and obscene phrases for drowned folk, as you can imagine.
Brit sailors had a language all their own: 'fatty up' was the only one I can remember that I can post.
Cannot locate the really obscene one, why are they the ones that stick in my mind, just nasty I suppose.

Jerry, what in the world are you talking about?
 
Star:
Taking an OP's thread south is the natural inclination of the reader's history, the original thrust of the post is about rings, marriage, relationships...
I like to observe the original OP's intent being interrupted differently by the readers
AND how it triggers reader's response which has little or nothing to do with the OP's INTENT..

When I take a post 'south' there is little doubt that 'this guy is dancing out there all by himself.'

Etymology is more than a hobby of mine, I view it as a blueprint of our history, the way we think, and why we think the
way we do.
The post is a crude explanation of how we 'drift any topic, apply our interpretation, then respond in a manner
inclusive of how we view the material presented. (Difficult to follow, yes)

Linguistics is a study of words, not highly regarded by other 'alleged' social scientist
;however, it can function as a blueprint.
I extremely interested in what 'triggers' another's response outside the perimeters of the OP's intent.

Your quest for, What the hell are you talking about is a rational question.
My topic supposed to depict what' taking a thread topic south means', to do that I have to define a colloquial
phrase; to do that I have to know where and why the phrase originated. and what it means today.

I ran out of space and time, I was left with a definition of what 'go south, without an explanation of it's
relationship to the OP.

Sorry
I promise to be more careful, but am weird when me minds starts stumbling around.
I'm not trying to be a smarty pants, just dancing by myself.
 
Good grief. Nobody bribed me to get married. In fact, I'd been engaged several times before walking up the aisle, and returned each of those rings. The man I eventually married (and have been with for 40 years) didn't give me an engagement ring at my request, because I already had so much lovely jewelry that I'd bought for myself - including a 2-1/3 carat diamond solitaire.

An engagement ring is a traditional token of affection meant to bring the wearer great joy. Not a bribe.
I'm certain a diamond ring brings the wearer great joy....as any expensive gift would.
 
Yes, I was married for 4 years - 37 years ago. I gave her a $2,400.00 ring because it was traditional & she expected it; not because I thought it was right.
Question: Why doesn't a woman have to bribe the man with an expensive item?
I gave her a $2,400.00 ring because it was traditional & she expected it;

...because you had to bribe her, imo.
 
I think it's sad to think that the only reason a woman would marry a guy is because of an expensive ring and she's been plotting all along to get an engagement ring and then calling it off and keeping the ring. If by the time that a guy would decide that he's so in love and compatible with the woman to want to live with her the rest of his life, he would know her by that time. Maybe pay more attention to the values you and she share. etc., recognize the person herself not only your desires and your expectations.
 
Last edited:
I'm certain a diamond ring brings the wearer great joy....as any expensive gift would.
I'm sorry win, but if you thought that $2400 was too much to spend on your future wife, WHY did you spend that kind of money? If she thought less money was not acceptable, you had the option to walk away and found a less ''materialistic'' partner. Or is it because the marriage only lasted 4 years?

The inflation calculator says that $2400 spent in 1982 would be worth $6385.72 today. Hell, I wish I could get back all the money I spent on stupid stuff throughout my life, but that's life, it's full of potholes and mistakes and regrets. Let it go, it ain't worth the aggravation. Hugs!
 
I'm sorry win, but if you thought that $2400 was too much to spend on your future wife, WHY did you spend that kind of money? If she thought less money was not acceptable, you had the option to walk away and found a less ''materialistic'' partner. Or is it because the marriage only lasted 4 years?

The inflation calculator says that $2400 spent in 1982 would be worth $6385.72 today. Hell, I wish I could get back all the money I spent on stupid stuff throughout my life, but that's life, it's full of potholes and mistakes and regrets. Let it go, it ain't worth the aggravation. Hugs!
I'm not aggravated about it & I don't want a refund. I'm just wondering why it's traditional & expected. And why shouldn't the woman be expected to give him an expensive gift?
"Find a less materialistic partner???" On earth??
 
I'm not aggravated about it & I don't want a refund. I'm just wondering why it's traditional & expected. And why shouldn't the woman be expected to give him an expensive gift?
"Find a less materialistic partner???" On earth??
There are LOTS of them if you're willing to look for them.

Here's everything you ever wanted to know (or not) about engagement rings, very interesting =
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engagement_ring
 
I'm not aggravated about it & I don't want a refund. I'm just wondering why it's traditional & expected. And why shouldn't the woman be expected to give him an expensive gift?
"Find a less materialistic partner???" On earth??

Find the right woman and you can make your own traditions. Any woman who sincerely loves you would do that for you.
 
There are LOTS of them if you're willing to look for them.

Here's everything you ever wanted to know (or not) about engagement rings, very interesting =
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engagement_ring
It certainly is interesting. Especially: "The popular belief that an engagement ring was originally part of the bride price which represented purchase and ownership of the bride, has been called into question by contemporary scholarship."
(I'm sure it's been "called into question," but that doesn't mean it's not true.)
 
I'm not aggravated about it & I don't want a refund. I'm just wondering why it's traditional & expected. And why shouldn't the woman be expected to give him an expensive gift?
"Find a less materialistic partner???" On earth??
I never received or expected an expensive engagement ring but nor did I give one either.
My partner and I agreed that we’d rather spend our money on things that matter more to us both and extravagant rings wasn’t one of them. I bought my husband a bandsaw instead.
 
I did however keep my first promise ring which is made from platinum gold. We didn’t get engaged and he said I could keep it so I did. 🤭 I was only 17.

Maybe I should feel bad but I don’t. The diamond came out but I still have it and am thinking about getting it fixed. My man won’t care and it’s not only an attractive ring but it’s super simple and comfortable and I wear no other jewelry. Sometimes a ring on the wedding finger comes in handy.
 


Back
Top