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

jerry r. garner said:
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.
Click to expand...

Whew. Glad you cleared that up for starsong. 😧lol. Makes me feel so much better about ‘my’ rambling. 😂🤣😂 Oh my tummy. 😂
 

Keesha said:
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.
Click to expand...
Very smart - both of you.
 
Unfortunately for many women, the value of the engagement ring is a symbol (in their minds) of how much a man cares for her - much like the cost of a casket indicates how much the survivors loved the deceased.
I've frequently chuckled when I saw women showing off their engagement rings to each other.
 

I'm sorry. I'm guessing you've lived in a society of well-off woman who've thought of themselves as only worthwhile as to how much a man would spend on them. You probability won't believe this, but that is not the norm. Where did you meet these women?
 
Last edited:
Olivia said:
I'm sorry. I'm guessing you've lived in a society of well-off woman who've thought of themselves as only worthwhile as to how much a man would spend on them. You probability won't believe this, but that is not the norm. Where did you meet these women?
Click to expand...
You may be as surprised as I was to have met both well-off & not well-off women who were like this.
 
jerry r. garner said:
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.
Click to expand...
Jerry, I'm still mostly at sea with what you're getting at.

If you're saying most various threads meander away from the OP topics and often circle back, I agree that it's an interesting window into the non-linear way that people think. Humans are experts at free association.
 
Last edited:
I am not a materialistic person when it comes to a man spending money on me in any way, and certainly not greedy for jewellery which if I needed or wanted I would buy for myself. I didn't require an engagement ring although my o/h could well afford one if I did.., and was happy with a budget gold wedding ring he bought me , and I him, since then I've bought my own diamonds , but on our wedding day it wasn't the jewellery that was important. And as an incidental neither of us have ever worn the wedding rings aside from the symbolic use of them on our wedding day .!!
 
Good marriages are built on each wanting to make the other's life joyful. Yes, a lot of women like jewelry, so a lot of men buy them nice engagement rings. Why wouldn't someone who is embarking on a lifelong partnership want to start it off with a generous, loving gesture if that's the tradition? Most men don't give a rat's patoot about jewelry but they buy it for their women because it brings them pleasure.

Likewise, most women don't pine for the latest, greatest, widest-screen TV, cable packages that include all the sports channels, wide arrays of corded and cordless versions of every power tool known to man, toolboxes the size of a refrigerator, RVs, pickup trucks, etc., but we are fine with it because those things bring our husbands pleasure.

Posters on this forum with solid marriages are easy to spot because we never speak with resentment about the financial costs. We focus instead on our good fortune at having a supportive partner to travel life's pathway.

If we can afford it and my sweetie wants 1000 channels for a tv that I can barely turn on, I don't blink an eye. That's what money is for.

Happy wife, happy life.
Happy husband, happy life.
 
StarSong said:
Good marriages are built on each wanting to make the other's life joyful. Yes, a lot of women like jewelry, so a lot of men buy them nice engagement rings. Why wouldn't someone who is embarking on a lifelong partnership want to start it off with a generous, loving gesture if that's the tradition? Most men don't give a rat's patoot about jewelry but they buy it for their women because it brings them pleasure.

Likewise, most women don't pine for the latest, greatest, widest-screen TV, cable packages that include all the sports channels, wide arrays of corded and cordless versions of every power tool known to man, toolboxes the size of a refrigerator, RVs, pickup trucks, etc., but we are fine with it because those things bring our husbands pleasure.

Posters on this forum with solid marriages are easy to spot because we never speak with resentment about the financial costs. We focus instead on our good fortune at having a supportive partner to travel life's pathway.

If we can afford it and my sweetie wants 1000 channels for a tv that I can barely turn on, I don't blink an eye. That's what money is for.

Happy wife, happy life.
Happy husband, happy life.
Click to expand...
Can you name one tradition that requires a woman to buy a man a TV, power tool, RV or pickup truck as part of a marriage proposal?
 
How many times have we heard a woman say, "He's a good catch." What do you think they're referring to? $$$$
 
win231 said:
How many times have we heard a woman say, "He's a good catch." What do you think they're referring to? $$$$
Click to expand...

Most women are looking for men who will be faithful, truthful, positive, enjoyable, open-minded, and pull their own weight. Not to float the entire financial boat, but willing and able to do their share. That's a "good catch."

Buying a $5000 ring? Pfffttt... over the course of a lifetime that's chump change. Women are far more interested in a guy who'll change his children's diapers without whining, coach soccer or Little League, help with homework, be pleasant and helpful to the in-laws and his own family, make dinner and/or do the dishes, give a hand with the laundry, stay faithful, tell the truth, and do all of this with a positive attitude and a smile on his face.

There are some guys who would never be considered a good catch, no matter how much money they have.
 
win231 said:
How many times have we heard a woman say, "He's a good catch." What do you think they're referring to? $$$$
Click to expand...
Sorry you went through life without one good relationship but hey, you can't miss what you didn't have. Not being sarcastic, I truly am sorry. I'm in the category of better to have loved and lost then never to have loved at all.

eta--I didn't have an engagement ring. We just decided we wanted to be married.
 
StarSong said:
Most women are looking for men who will be faithful, truthful, positive, enjoyable, open-minded, and pull their own weight. Not to float the entire financial boat, but willing and able to do their share. That's a "good catch."

Buying a $5000 ring? Pfffttt... over the course of a lifetime that's chump change. Women are far more interested in a guy who'll change his children's diapers without whining, coach soccer or Little League, help with homework, be pleasant and helpful to the in-laws and his own family, make dinner and/or do the dishes, give a hand with the laundry, stay faithful, tell the truth, and do all of this with a positive attitude and a smile on his face.

There are some guys who would never be considered a good catch, no matter how much money they have.
Click to expand...
Teehee. "Likes" from....females. Not surprising, eh?
 
Olivia said:
Okay, it's apparent that you only want to complain. But I will go ahead anyway and say that the way your're looking at it is looking at women as commodities, kind of like hog futures. How little can I invest in a sow and still get the most out of her.
Click to expand...
LOL!!! I'm not complaining. Just tellin' it like it is.
 
Meanwhile-407d58-2874055.jpg
 
Times have changed. Women often earn as much or more than their spouses/bf. Can't remember last time I heard that phrase "a good catch". A woman earning six figures isn't with a man earning $50k because he gave her a big engagement ring or because he's a "good catch" in the financial sense - she most likely loves him, he's a good husband & father, and he doesn't cheat on her.
 
Last edited:
Win, you are pretty far off base about most women's motives when choosing marital partners. There's no point in continuing this conversation because your mind was made up about women decades ago.

Several of your posts on other threads describe a horrific childhood at the hands of a particularly savage mother. I'm truly sorry for what happened to you. No child deserves to be treated that way. Furthermore, I don't blame you for being suspicious of women or believing us to be untrustworthy beasts. How could you not?

The thing is though, only you can reconsider the lens through which you perceive women. Not even a Mother Teresa can wipe it clean for you. It's something you must choose to do for yourself.
 
Last edited:
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?
Click to expand...

Win, you've asked this question in several notes now. Did you read my note #70 where I mentioned the generous dowry traditionally paid to the guy who was going to take an unmarried female off her father's hands? That tradition was a pretty well-known fact of life in Europe (and maybe Asia as well?) in previous centuries.

Of course the dowry wasn't paid by the woman to her future husband; women generally did not have any wealth of their own. They went from being supported by their fathers to being supported by their husbands. With a dowry, the man was being "rewarded" for taking on the responsibility, in return for which (I imagine) he was promised future children.

Not sure if dowries coexisted with diamond engagement rings. If they did, figuring out the finances involved could get very interesting.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top