the engagement ring

[kasia]

it seems quite often, or at least from time to time, that guys would intrude upon our discussions about inequality and such by telling us to give up our engagement rings. want to keep your last name? give up the engagement ring. complaining about doing the housework? give up your rock or stay silent.

so i'm guessing that they believe this 'engagement ring' is really that important to us - so important to the point where we are willing to give up our sense of worth and dignity.

so i would like to ask the ladies - absent any male input - how important is the engagement ring to you? what significance does it have? and please understand, by my above words, i'm not by any means saying that the ring should have no significance. so what does it mean to you?

[My Name Is...]

To me the ring is not all that important. I would just consider it another piece of jewelry I get to wear.
If I were to receive anything, I would want it to be something more useful.
But maybe I will see things differently if I do get engaged.

[shy]

for me, it's not that important. but i don't know... i think i know more women that like an engagement ring but NEVER said that they need one that costs so much! mine was pass down by family. and i guess we will pass it down to the next generation. i'd like to keep that going...

the wedding band is way more important to me... and it's got nothing to do w/ the monetary value of it. it needn't be gold/platinum even.

but the whole... want your last name or less housework, then give it up... bullshit!

what's the point of even recieving an engagement ring if it had these conditions attached to it?

if they guy wants to give her an engagement ring, then it should be w/ out such demands. if he doesn't believe in the engagement ring, then they had better discuss that issue before they get engaged.

[angel nympho]

It's not that important... it's just tradition. But don't get me wrong. I want one. I'm not about to fight for one though. If the guy is the type of guy who's gonna threaten to take that away from me as "payment" for doing housework or keeping my own last name.... I don't really want to marry him.

[coagulated fat]

It's just a symbol, a tradition. Doesn't matter to me if the ring is made out of plastic or platinum.

Just as long as it isn't ugly.

[Napoleon Chynamite]

Originally posted by coagulated fat@Jun 3 2003, 11:35 AM
It's just a symbol, a tradition.  Doesn't matter to me if the ring is made out of plastic or platinum.

Just as long as it isn't ugly.
So you wouldn't mind if, like, your guy picked up one of those nifty-ass glow-in-the-dark rings from one of those 25cent gumball dispenser thingies? Actually some of them are 50 cents nowadays due to inflation.

[coagulated fat]

Originally posted by FrozenPizza@Jun 3 2003, 11:43 AM
Originally posted by coagulated fat@Jun 3 2003, 11:35 AM
It's just a symbol, a tradition. Doesn't matter to me if the ring is made out of plastic or platinum.

Just as long as it isn't ugly.
So you wouldn't mind if, like, your guy picked up one of those nifty-ass glow-in-the-dark rings from one of those 25cent gumball dispenser thingies? Actually some of them are 50 cents nowadays due to inflation.
Nope. Glow in the dark stuff is swank.

[Napoleon Chynamite]

Originally posted by kasia@Jun 3 2003, 02:39 AM
so i would like to ask the ladies - absent any male input -
oh....I missed this part

I apparently should read the initial post before reading any of the responses from now on.

[amietron]

Originally posted by FrozenPizza@Jun 3 2003, 11:43 AM
So you wouldn't mind if, like, your guy picked up one of those nifty-ass glow-in-the-dark rings from one of those 25cent gumball dispenser thingies?
It's all about the upgrade.

[shy]

Originally posted by FrozenPizza@Jun 3 2003, 11:43 AM
So you wouldn't mind if, like, your guy picked up one of those nifty-ass glow-in-the-dark rings from one of those 25cent gumball dispenser thingies? Actually some of them are 50 cents nowadays due to inflation.
well, he can propose using that but i don't think i'd wear it. i will, however, hang it around my rear view window of my car! ;)

[Napoleon Chynamite]

Originally posted by coagulated fat@Jun 3 2003, 11:48 AM
Originally posted by FrozenPizza@Jun 3 2003, 11:43 AM
Originally posted by coagulated fat@Jun 3 2003, 11:35 AM
It's just a symbol, a tradition. Doesn't matter to me if the ring is made out of plastic or platinum.

Just as long as it isn't ugly.
So you wouldn't mind if, like, your guy picked up one of those nifty-ass glow-in-the-dark rings from one of those 25cent gumball dispenser thingies? Actually some of them are 50 cents nowadays due to inflation.
Nope. Glow in the dark stuff is swank.
Awesome possum, Janice. Does that mean I have a chance?


shiyaat I keep forgetting I'm not supposed to post here.

[coagulated fat]

Here's some examples of cheap engagement rings I would wear with PRIDE.

http://www.girlprops.com/images/swp02232.jpg

It just reeks of class. $5

http://www.naughtysecretaryclub.com/jewelry/rings/patsy6.jpg

You can get a ring made with this image. It's $12, does that still count as cheap?

And eh, maybe I'll look for some more examples later.

[tapestrybabe]

me, i've never been in any serious relationship where i even had to think about engagement... let alone... thoughts of marraige... but anyways... yeah, i see it as a sign of tradition... but i wouldnt mind being able to receive one from my signifcant other... just as i would hope he wouldnt mind that he received one from me...

the way i see things... engagement should be seen as a mutual decision... so why cant both parties take part in it...

[Chrysalis]

Nobody ever NEEDS an engagement ring, its just tradition. That said I do want to buy myself a diamond solitaire ring to wear on my middle finger. I always vowed that the first piece of diamond jewelery I would own would be bought by me. Also a ring should not come with a set of demands or expectations.

Chrysalis

[Barbs]

ladies--i think that your answer will also change with age...when i was younger, rings really had no significance to me. now that i'm older, call me shallow, but the sort of ring i get is quite important to me. certainly, what my husband can afford is the first consideration. but, i think you will find that most women in their mid to upper 20s and 30s will tell you that the size, shape, cut, quality and style of the band are REALLY important. after all, you will be wearing it the rest of your lives.

at the risk of sounding "classist", i also think that the TYPE of ring you have/want is also a product of the profession that you or your husband work in. there's a lot of societal pressure to get a at least a certain size ring, depending on what it is your peers are getting. being, after all, only human, we conform to these pressures.

additionally, i've noticed that the size/quality of the ring is also very important to many asians (as opposed to other races).

me personally, i know what i want:

*round/brilliant cut (possibly amenable to princess which is cheaper)
*two trillons on the side
*platinum band
*1.8-2.5 carats
*color: D, E, F (in descending order of preference)
*clarity: VVS1 or VVS2 (VS1 acceptable if color grade D)

on a side-note, this is what one guy once told me a ring meant to him: it is the symbol of my hard work and love. hard work because i work hard for my money and i want to buy a quality ring. love because this is what i will give the woman i marry as a token of my love.

[Tao]

Originally posted by Barbs@Jun 4 2003, 11:22 AM
ladies--i think that your answer will also change with age...when i was younger, rings really had no significance to me. now that i'm older, call me shallow, but the sort of ring i get is quite important to me. certainly, what my husband can afford is the first consideration. but, i think you will find that most women in their mid to upper 20s and 30s will tell you that the size, shape, cut, quality and style of the band are REALLY important. after all, you will be wearing it the rest of your lives.

at the risk of sounding "classist", i also think that the TYPE of ring you have/want is also a product of the profession that you or your husband work in. there's a lot of societal pressure to get a at least a certain size ring, depending on what it is your peers are getting. being, after all, only human, we conform to these pressures.

additionally, i've noticed that the size/quality of the ring is also very important to many asians (as opposed to other races).

me personally, i know what i want:

*round/brilliant cut (possibly amenable to princess which is cheaper)
*two trillons on the side
*platinum band
*1.8-2.5 carats
*color: D, E, F (in descending order of preference)
*clarity: VVS1 or VVS2 (VS1 acceptable if color grade D)

on a side-note, this is what one guy once told me a ring meant to him: it is the symbol of my hard work and love. hard work because i work hard for my money and i want to buy a quality ring. love because this is what i will give the woman i marry as a token of my love.
wow, i find it scary that you knew all that about rings.

"two trillion on the side" <--- is that hard cash or in gold bullions? :lol:

[kboy75]

Originally posted by Barbs@Jun 4 2003, 10:22 AM
ladies--i think that your answer will also change with age...when i was younger, rings really had no significance to me. now that i'm older, call me shallow, but the sort of ring i get is quite important to me. certainly, what my husband can afford is the first consideration. but, i think you will find that most women in their mid to upper 20s and 30s will tell you that the size, shape, cut, quality and style of the band are REALLY important. after all, you will be wearing it the rest of your lives.

at the risk of sounding "classist", i also think that the TYPE of ring you have/want is also a product of the profession that you or your husband work in. there's a lot of societal pressure to get a at least a certain size ring, depending on what it is your peers are getting. being, after all, only human, we conform to these pressures.

additionally, i've noticed that the size/quality of the ring is also very important to many asians (as opposed to other races).

me personally, i know what i want:

*round/brilliant cut (possibly amenable to princess which is cheaper)
*two trillons on the side
*platinum band
*1.8-2.5 carats
*color: D, E, F (in descending order of preference)
*clarity: VVS1 or VVS2 (VS1 acceptable if color grade D)

on a side-note, this is what one guy once told me a ring meant to him: it is the symbol of my hard work and love. hard work because i work hard for my money and i want to buy a quality ring. love because this is what i will give the woman i marry as a token of my love.
I agree with this post.

The older the woman, the more I see that she DOES care. Not in a materialistic way. But in our culture, it is just the way it is. My female friends start caring when they see all of their peers getting rings. Sounds shallow, butit is just human nature. And it is the guys' way of showing devotion, commitment, and sacrifice. it represents what is already there.

I for one will save and try to get the best ring possible, because i know it will make my future fiance happy, and because, for the right woman, it really isn't much of a sacrifice.

And Barbs... 1.8-2.5 carats!?!? Geeez.... hahaha.. Haha, actually I am shooting for ~2 carats. If bigger, I will need to get another job... :P

[deez nuts]

instead of an engagement ring. why not let your husband brand his initials on your body.

that's true love right there.

[Barbs]

Originally posted by Tao@Jun 4 2003, 03:47 PM

"two trillion on the side" <--- is that hard cash or in gold bullions? :lol:
two trillons--maybe i'm not spelling it correctly. they're the "side jewels"--the little diamonds on the side of the main gem. the 1.8-2.5 does NOT include the two trillons. ;-)

u know what? re-reading my post made me realize that i find it scary that i know all that too. lol~ materialistic bitch.

[Barbs]

Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jun 4 2003, 05:14 PM
instead of an engagement ring. why not let your husband brand his initials on your body.

that's true love right there.
i'll let him brand me in much *MUCH* more imaginative ways... ;)

[SunWuKong]

Originally posted by Barbs@Jun 4 2003, 01:48 PM
Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jun 4 2003, 05:14 PM
instead of an engagement ring.&nbsp; why not let your husband brand his initials on your body.

that's true love right there.
i'll let him brand me in much *MUCH* more imaginative ways... ;)
now that's true love right there. :D

[Chester]

Originally posted by Barbs@Jun 4 2003, 07:22 AM
additionally, i've noticed that the size/quality of the ring is also very important to many asians (as opposed to other races).
It's important to all races. All women of all races compete with each other in petty ways, just like their men do.

*1.8-2.5 carats

Just my opinion, but I think anything beyond 1.5 looks out of proportion, unless one has very large hands. Anything beyond 2.0 looks garish, IMO.

Personally, if I were a woman, I would rather have an exceptional mid-sized diamond in a very stylish setting.

Of course, I guess one could get an exceptional mongo-sized diamond in a stylish setting, and then of course all her girlfriends will ooh and aw at how much her fiancé loves her...

[deez nuts]

Originally posted by Barbs@Jun 4 2003, 12:48 PM
Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jun 4 2003, 05:14 PM
instead of an engagement ring.&nbsp; why not let your husband brand his initials on your body.

that's true love right there.
i'll let him brand me in much *MUCH* more imaginative ways... ;)
feel the hot poker!

[Barbs]

Originally posted by Chester@Jun 4 2003, 06:00 PM
Of course, I guess one could get an exceptional mongo-sized diamond in a stylish setting, and then of course all her girlfriends will ooh and aw at how much her fiancé loves her...
you hit it right on the head buddy...

[Chester]

Originally posted by Barbs@Jun 4 2003, 10:01 AM
you hit it right on the head buddy...
Hah, well that's just the way it is.

Question to you: is the 1.8-2.5 size preference for aesthetic reasons or bragging rights? That is, do you really think a largish diamond looks better or would you kind of enjoy the "validation" it gives you? Or...do you think a largish diamond looks better and you would enjoy the validation?

Or do you think a largish diamond looks better and would prefer one even if you never showed it to any girlfriends to coo over?

Here's another question for you women: one of my friends despises the diamond industry -- for all sorts of reasons...but mainly for its cartel/price-fixing nature. There are other significant reasons to avoid diamonds, of course, but that's his main reason. He has declared to us in the past that he will refuse to purchase diamonds for his girlfriend/fiancé/wife, but that she can have any other stone she wants.

What would you women think if your boyfriend were to propose to you, but did so with, for example, a breathtaking ruby or emerald ring?

[coagulated fat]

Originally posted by kboy75@Jun 4 2003, 07:50 AM

I agree with this post.

The older the woman, the more I see that she DOES care. Not in a materialistic way. But in our culture, it is just the way it is. My female friends start caring when they see all of their peers getting rings. Sounds shallow, butit is just human nature. And it is the guys' way of showing devotion, commitment, and sacrifice. it represents what is already there.


The thought of me and my friends comparing engagement rings seems really repulsive to me. Even if it is just human nature to conform to the notion of bigger diamond = bigger love or "hard work" or whatever you want to call it, isn't it making a bigger statement to say that you don't need those kinds of standards to prove anything?

[Barbs]

Originally posted by Chester@Jun 4 2003, 06:17 PM

Question to you: is the 1.8-2.5 size preference for aesthetic reasons or bragging rights? That is, do you really think a largish diamond looks better or would you kind of enjoy the "validation" it gives you? Or...do you think a largish diamond looks better and you would enjoy the validation?

Or do you think a largish diamond looks better and would prefer one even if you never showed it to any girlfriends to coo over?

Here's another question for you women: one of my friends despises the diamond industry -- for all sorts of reasons...but mainly for its cartel/price-fixing nature. There are other significant reasons to avoid diamonds, of course, but that's his main reason. He has declared to us in the past that he will refuse to purchase diamonds for his girlfriend/fiancé/wife, but that she can have any other stone she wants.

What would you women think if your boyfriend were to propose to you, but did so with, for example, a breathtaking ruby or emerald ring?
diamonds are beautiful stones. the monetary price that humans have attached to them because they are "rare" and labor-intensive makes them valuable.

would i want a HUGE diamond ring even if diamonds were plentiful and not considered valuable? likely not. flowers in the wild are beautiful, but generally not considered valuable hence you don't see people walking around with huge flowers pinned to their lapels (well, most people that is). part of the superficial fun and appeal of getting a huge, high quality diamond is the joy derived from being the recipient of other females' envy & admiration. as for the price-fixing cartels, i'm getting my ring (if ever)at a deep discount from my friend who is a jewelry wholesaler. nothing feels better than paying less than others for the same or better quality merchandise.

accept no imitations or substitutes--no rubies, no emeralds, etc. then again, maybe i'm just a little conformist materialistic bitch.

[applehead]

Originally posted by Chester@Jun 4 2003, 10:17 AM
What would you women think if your boyfriend were to propose to you, but did so with, for example, a breathtaking ruby or emerald ring?
i think that's a great idea.
:)

[Tao]

Originally posted by Barbs@Jun 4 2003, 02:34 PM
Originally posted by Chester@Jun 4 2003, 06:17 PM

Question to you: is the 1.8-2.5 size preference for aesthetic reasons or bragging rights? That is, do you really think a largish diamond looks better or would you kind of enjoy the "validation" it gives you? Or...do you think a largish diamond looks better and you would enjoy the validation?

Or do you think a largish diamond looks better and would prefer one even if you never showed it to any girlfriends to coo over?

Here's another question for you women: one of my friends despises the diamond industry -- for all sorts of reasons...but mainly for its cartel/price-fixing nature. There are other significant reasons to avoid diamonds, of course, but that's his main reason. He has declared to us in the past that he will refuse to purchase diamonds for his girlfriend/fiancé/wife, but that she can have any other stone she wants.

What would you women think if your boyfriend were to propose to you, but did so with, for example, a breathtaking ruby or emerald ring?
diamonds are beautiful stones. the monetary price that humans have attached to them because they are "rare" and labor-intensive makes them valuable.

would i want a HUGE diamond ring even if diamonds were plentiful and not considered valuable? likely not. flowers in the wild are beautiful, but generally not considered valuable hence you don't see people walking around with huge flowers pinned to their lapels (well, most people that is). part of the superficial fun and appeal of getting a huge, high quality diamond is the joy derived from being the recipient of other females' envy & admiration. as for the price-fixing cartels, i'm getting my ring (if ever)at a deep discount from my friend who is a jewelry wholesaler. nothing feels better than paying less than others for the same or better quality merchandise.

accept no imitations or substitutes--no rubies, no emeralds, etc. then again, maybe i'm just a little conformist materialistic bitch.
why not have him buy you a super fast sports car instead? I mean it's more practical and i'm sure he'll be more willing to shell out the cash for it rather than some compressed coal. Plus you'll be the envy of both men and women :lol:

[applehead]

i never understood couples shopping for a ring together.
i don't need or even want an engagement ring.
but i think a guy should ask around.
her friends, sister. whoever.
and find out what cut and setting she prefers.
then surprise her.
shopping for a ring together.
it just seems weird to me.

[shy]

Originally posted by applehead@Jun 4 2003, 11:10 AM
i never understood couples shopping for a ring together.
i don't need or even want an engagement ring.
but i think a guy should ask around.
her friends, sister. whoever.
and find out what cut and setting she prefers.
then surprise her.
shopping for a ring together.
it just seems weird to me.
actually it can be a lot of fun and very romantic. especially if it is a spontaneous idea. i know people who do that are very romantic several years after getting married.

how an engagement is purchased or how much was spent or how the engagement was done does not dictate the level of romance in a couple.

chacun sans gout!

[Elizabeth A.]

The engagement ring saga continues....

Important to me? Absolutely not. For one thing, diamonds are artificially expensive stones, and the good people at DeBeers make sure it stays that way. And sure, they tell you it's not one of those "blood diamonds" from Sierra Leone, but if they actually gave you that info would they do any business? And I think it's a rather overly extravagant way of spending "two month's" (more like 5 years for me!) salary. What about another stone? In Victorian times, garnets were popular for engagement rings, and they are far less expensive than diamonds. (Although they probably have "blood garnets" too. Sigh. I can't win)


I like the Scandinavian custom in which the couple give each other rings upon their engagement which are later used as the wedding rings.

[SunWuKong]

Originally posted by Barbs@Jun 4 2003, 02:34 PM
then again, maybe i'm just a little conformist materialistic bitch.
that's hot.

[angel nympho]

Originally posted by applehead@Jun 4 2003, 07:10 PM
i never understood couples shopping for a ring together.
i don't need or even want an engagement ring.
but i think a guy should ask around.
her friends, sister. whoever.
and find out what cut and setting she prefers.
then surprise her.
shopping for a ring together.
it just seems weird to me.
I thought you only shopped together for a WEDDING ring..?

[angel nympho]

Originally posted by Barbs@Jun 4 2003, 03:22 PM
ladies--i think that your answer will also change with age...when i was younger, rings really had no significance to me. now that i'm older, call me shallow, but the sort of ring i get is quite important to me. certainly, what my husband can afford is the first consideration. but, i think you will find that most women in their mid to upper 20s and 30s will tell you that the size, shape, cut, quality and style of the band are REALLY important. after all, you will be wearing it the rest of your lives.

at the risk of sounding "classist", i also think that the TYPE of ring you have/want is also a product of the profession that you or your husband work in.&nbsp; there's a lot of societal pressure to get a at least a certain size ring, depending on what it is your peers are getting. being, after all, only human, we conform to these pressures.

additionally, i've noticed that the size/quality of the ring is also very important to many asians (as opposed to other races).

me personally, i know what i want:

*round/brilliant cut (possibly amenable to princess which is cheaper)
*two trillons on the side
*platinum band
*1.8-2.5 carats
*color: D, E, F (in descending order of preference)
*clarity: VVS1 or VVS2 (VS1 acceptable if color grade D)

on a side-note, this is what one guy once told me a ring meant to him: it is the symbol of my hard work and love. hard work because i work hard for my money and i want to buy a quality ring. love because this is what i will give the woman i marry as a token of my love.
I DO know exactly what I want my ring to look like.. it's not all that important to me that I get my *dream ring*... I mean, it would be sweet of the guy to go and try to figure out what I'll like the best, but if that doesn't happen, it's not the end of the world. That's all I'm really saying.

And... I don't plan on wearing an engagement ring the rest of my life....?

What my wedding ring looks like, on the other hand, is very important to me. I have to like it if I plan to wear it. It has to be a lot smaller and more conservative than some flashy ass giant diamond engagement ring.

[angel nympho]

I personally would think it was kinda sweet for a man to give me an engagement ring that's been passed down through his family. :)

[tapestrybabe]

anyways, is it really that odd sounding for the woman to give an engagement ring to the man also?? my dad and his wife.. they BOTH gave each other an engagement ring... and they used the same rings for their wedding ring... the only difference... they wear the ring on their left hand now... you know, a symbolic thing that ppl do... wearing their wedding ring on their left hand...

what my dad and his wife did... i think thats a tradition i would like to follow thru as well...

[angel nympho]

Originally posted by tapestrybabe@Jun 4 2003, 11:01 PM
anyways, is it really that odd sounding for the woman to give an engagement ring to the man also?? my dad and his wife.. they BOTH gave each other an engagement ring... and they used the same rings for their wedding ring... the only difference... they wear the ring on their left hand now... you know, a symbolic thing that ppl do... wearing their wedding ring on their left hand...

what my dad and his wife did... i think thats a tradition i would like to follow thru as well...
Word.... If I have to wear something before I'm married that screams "IM TAKEN" to the world, he should too. LOL. I'll make the man tattoo my name to himself someplace. hahhaa

[Tao]

Originally posted by angel nympho@Jun 4 2003, 07:13 PM
Originally posted by tapestrybabe@Jun 4 2003, 11:01 PM
anyways, is it really that odd sounding for the woman to give an engagement ring to the man also?? my dad and his wife.. they BOTH gave each other an engagement ring... and they used the same rings for their wedding ring... the only difference... they wear the ring on their left hand now... you know, a symbolic thing that ppl do... wearing their wedding ring on their left hand...

what my dad and his wife did... i think thats a tradition i would like to follow thru as well...
Word.... If I have to wear something before I'm married that screams "IM TAKEN" to the world, he should too. LOL. I'll make the man tattoo my name to himself someplace. hahhaa
why don't you just take Dr.Bun's idea and brand your boy with a hot iron poker

[kboy75]

Originally posted by coagulated fat@Jun 4 2003, 01:30 PM
Originally posted by kboy75@Jun 4 2003, 07:50 AM

I agree with this post.

The older the woman, the more I see that she DOES care. Not in a materialistic way. But in our culture, it is just the way it is. My female friends start caring when they see all of their peers getting rings. Sounds shallow, butit is just human nature. And it is the guys' way of showing devotion, commitment, and sacrifice. it represents what is already there.


The thought of me and my friends comparing engagement rings seems really repulsive to me. Even if it is just human nature to conform to the notion of bigger diamond = bigger love or "hard work" or whatever you want to call it, isn't it making a bigger statement to say that you don't need those kinds of standards to prove anything?
yes, but that often isn't the case.

it's a nice idea and in an ideal world, that would happen. but as we get older life get smore complicated and people and society do affect us.

the ring is not everything. it alone will not show love.

like i said before, it is an expresion of what is already there.

[shy]

Originally posted by tapestrybabe@Jun 4 2003, 03:01 PM
anyways, is it really that odd sounding for the woman to give an engagement ring to the man also?? my dad and his wife.. they BOTH gave each other an engagement ring... and they used the same rings for their wedding ring... the only difference... they wear the ring on their left hand now... you know, a symbolic thing that ppl do... wearing their wedding ring on their left hand...

what my dad and his wife did... i think thats a tradition i would like to follow thru as well...
it's not weird at all... i hear it all the time. i have a co-worker that has an engagement ring. as he's not into wearing much jewelry, as soon as they got married, he replaced his engagement ring w/ his wedding ring.

[teaz0r]

yes. three carat. nothing less.

[amietron]

i think i have big hands. yeah, they're big. so i must have a big rock as well. things have to be proportional, don't they?

[teaz0r]

Originally posted by amietron@Jun 6 2003, 02:41 AM
i must have a big rock as well.
http://pressurize.net/images/ring2.jpg

[kasia]

Originally posted by teaz0r@Jun 5 2003, 11:40 AM
yes. three carat. nothing less.
why?

[amietron]

Originally posted by kasia@Jun 5 2003, 01:05 PM
why?
because she thinks her hands are big, too.

[Emperor_Mike]

I'm going to forego the traditional engagement ring for my fiancee and go for an "engagement mansion", or an "engagement jet/car/boat" or maybe even an "engagement crate of gold bullion."

:D

[moschikat]

Originally posted by kasia@Jun 5 2003, 01:05 PM
why?
cuz' mommie's is FIVE cts! and i don't want to be upstaged by my mother!

On the other hand, i never really planned on getting married [well for real anyway]. . . so most likey i'll just end up taking my mother's ring. . . .

"i buy my own diamons and i buy my own rings . . ." :dance:

[amietron]

i think that's a valid reason. wanting one that's bigger than mommy's. life is all about progress, no?

[deez nuts]

hahahaha

is this what girls fantasize about? the size of the diamond on their engagement ring?

come on now. you have to make it worthwhile for the guy and be worthy of a big diamond. so in other words, the guy has to ask himself, "is this woman really worth a 5+ carat perfectly cut diamond engagement ring. is she and will she be a pain in my ass now, later and forever."

so that brings us back to square one and a whole new topic of: "pimping yourself and putting up a front to your man to get that bling bling and shiny shiny." which probably sets the feminist movement back a few more notches.

[shy]

Originally posted by Emperor_Mike@Jun 5 2003, 02:16 PM
I'm going to forego the traditional engagement ring for my fiancee and go for an "engagement mansion"
sounds good... wanna get married? :D

drat... i'm already engaged.

never mind.

[shy]

Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jun 6 2003, 04:25 AM
hahahaha

is this what girls fantasize about? the size of the diamond on their engagement ring?

come on now. you have to make it worthwhile for the guy and be worthy of a big diamond. so in other words, the guy has to ask himself, "is this woman really worth a 5+ carat perfectly cut diamond engagement ring. is she and will she be a pain in my ass now, later and forever."

so that brings us back to square one and a whole new topic of: "pimping yourself and putting up a front to your man to get that bling bling and shiny shiny." which probably sets the feminist movement back a few more notches.
easy big boy...

most of the thread has been about women who don't care as much. only about 3 or 4 have admitted to putting a lot of emphasis on the engagement ring.

<_<

[SunWuKong]

Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jun 6 2003, 08:25 AM
hahahaha

is this what girls fantasize about? the size of the diamond on their engagement ring?

come on now. you have to make it worthwhile for the guy and be worthy of a big diamond. so in other words, the guy has to ask himself, "is this woman really worth a 5+ carat perfectly cut diamond engagement ring. is she and will she be a pain in my ass now, later and forever."

so that brings us back to square one and a whole new topic of: "pimping yourself and putting up a front to your man to get that bling bling and shiny shiny." which probably sets the feminist movement back a few more notches.
man the girl had better have made me certified insane before i buy her a 5-carat ring. because that's just not going to happen, otherwise.

[deez nuts]

Originally posted by shy@Jun 6 2003, 08:24 AM
Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jun 6 2003, 04:25 AM
hahahaha

is this what girls fantasize about? the size of the diamond on their engagement ring?

come on now. you have to make it worthwhile for the guy and be worthy of a big diamond. so in other words, the guy has to ask himself, "is this woman really worth a 5+ carat perfectly cut diamond engagement ring. is she and will she be a pain in my ass now, later and forever."

so that brings us back to square one and a whole new topic of: "pimping yourself and putting up a front to your man to get that bling bling and shiny shiny." which probably sets the feminist movement back a few more notches.
easy big boy...

most of the thread has been about women who don't care as much. only about 3 or 4 have admitted to putting a lot of emphasis on the engagement ring.

<_<

lady, i wasn't just talking about the women on YW. there is an outside world.

it was more like a general statement and general response on my part.

and about the three or four women on yw that want the big rock just like jenny from the block, like you stated.

in terms of yw:

in my opinion, there's only about two, maybe three, women here on yw as a whole, i can see as 5 carat diamond material. and one of the three is married and don't have an engagement ring, if i remember correctly from a really old post.

just calling it the way i see it.


hahahaha /puts on the flame suit/

[shy]

Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jun 6 2003, 07:33 AM
Originally posted by shy@Jun 6 2003, 08:24 AM
Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jun 6 2003, 04:25 AM
hahahaha

is this what girls fantasize about? the size of the diamond on their engagement ring?

come on now. you have to make it worthwhile for the guy and be worthy of a big diamond. so in other words, the guy has to ask himself, "is this woman really worth a 5+ carat perfectly cut diamond engagement ring. is she and will she be a pain in my ass now, later and forever."

so that brings us back to square one and a whole new topic of: "pimping yourself and putting up a front to your man to get that bling bling and shiny shiny." which probably sets the feminist movement back a few more notches.
easy big boy...

most of the thread has been about women who don't care as much. only about 3 or 4 have admitted to putting a lot of emphasis on the engagement ring.

<_<

lady, i wasn't just talking about the women on YW. there is an outside world.

it was more like a general statement and general response on my part.

and about the three or four women on yw that want the big rock just like jenny from the block, like you stated.

in terms of yw:

in my opinion, there's only about two, maybe three, women here on yw as a whole, i can see as 5 carat diamond material. and one of the three is married and don't have an engagement ring, if i remember correctly from a really old post.

just calling it the way i see it.


hahahaha /puts on the flame suit/
first off all, this thread was in invite to women. as stated by the original poster.

secondly, you ALWAYS rant and rant and rant...

and this time, you didn't clarify that you were talking about OTHER women outside of yw. in fact, you posted that statement after a couple of girls stated the importance of a big diamond and as you didn't clarify yourself properly, then what the fuck do you expect people to read? we aren't going to read your mind. nor do we want to.

but if you want to get technical, i think guys like you take one or two girls as an example for the rest of the female population! dude... most women i know don't give a shit! sure... if the guy offers a nice ring, they'll take it. but they do not think of the ring as proof of love.

so yeah i'm going to get down on your bitterness and for making generalizations like that because i happen to be one of those women that are sick of people.. not just men, but all people, complaining their fucking ass off about the other gender!

it's like... quit whining and just get off your ass and make a difference if you're sick of those 'other ' people. sheesh!

wow. it's been awhile since i've ranted like that. feels pretty good. :)

bun-man, lets here your retort. go ahead.... make my day. ;)

[Barbs]

Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jun 6 2003, 03:33 PM


in my opinion, there's only about two, maybe three, women here on yw as a whole, i can see as 5 carat diamond material. and one of the three is married and don't have an engagement ring, if i remember correctly from a really old post.

just calling it the way i see it.


hahahaha /puts on the flame suit/
thank god you're not the *only* man in the world. *shudders*

one person's trash is another's treasure.

[deez nuts]

is this when we all have hot angry passionate sex?

i would have to turn you down. i'm taken.

[ChinaLama]

Originally posted by Barbs@Jun 6 2003, 04:52 PM
one person's trash is another's treasure.
yes, because the other man is trash who can't afford treasure. :lol:

[deez nuts]

Originally posted by shy@Jun 6 2003, 11:49 AM

first off all, this thread was in invite to women. as stated by the original poster.

secondly, you ALWAYS rant and rant and rant...

and this time, you didn't clarify that you were talking about OTHER women outside of yw. in fact, you posted that statement after a couple of girls stated the importance of a big diamond and as you didn't clarify yourself properly, then what the fuck do you expect people to read? we aren't going to read your mind. nor do we want to.

but if you want to get technical, i think guys like you take one or two girls as an example for the rest of the female population! dude... most women i know don't give a shit! sure... if the guy offers a nice ring, they'll take it. but they do not think of the ring as proof of love.

so yeah i'm going to get down on your bitterness and for making generalizations like that because i happen to be one of those women that are sick of people.. not just men, but all people, complaining their fucking ass off about the other gender!

it's like... quit whining and just get off your ass and make a difference if you're sick of those 'other ' people. sheesh!

wow. it's been awhile since i've ranted like that. feels pretty good. :)

bun-man, lets here your retort. go ahead.... make my day. ;)
no retort.

i got the desired response.

**wink**wink**

i guess my sense of humor is one that you, personally, would have to learn to appreciate as times goes on and not look at it as ranting and whining.

you will learn to appreciate me...you wild mare you. and who's yo daddy.

[deez nuts]

Originally posted by Barbs@Jun 6 2003, 11:52 AM
Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jun 6 2003, 03:33 PM


in my opinion, there's only about two, maybe three, women here on yw as a whole, i can see as 5 carat diamond material.&nbsp; and one of the three is married and don't have an engagement ring, if i remember correctly from a really old post.

just calling it the way i see it.


hahahaha /puts on the flame suit/
thank god you're not the *only* man in the world. *shudders*

one person's trash is another's treasure.
would your opinions change if i said you were one of the three?

[Barbs]

Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jun 6 2003, 04:59 PM

one person's trash is another's treasure.
would your opinions change if i said you were one of the three? [/quote]
now now, flattery will get you nowhere.

fork over the 5-carater (actually, i'm satisfied with the 1.8-2.5 range as i don't have overly large hands) and then we'll see...

as for the "hot angry passionate sex" would that be a group activity? personally, i'm not a good "team player". ;)

[shy]

Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jun 6 2003, 08:58 AM
and who's yo daddy.
gross! :gross:

[deez nuts]

Originally posted by shy@Jun 6 2003, 12:06 PM
gross! :gross:
i'm wearing you down!

oh just admit it. i'm growing on you.

look at barbs, she's buckling already!

[Barbs]

uh huh. now back to the original topic....

you know there's one episode of sex & the city where carrie accidentally finds the ring that aidan bought and she opens it up and it's this pear-shaped GOLD monstrosity (in her and IMHO). anyway, she tells her girlfriends that if a guy gets a ring that's ALL wrong for her then he doesn't REALLY know her at all and he's not the right one. i kinda would tend to agree....

[shy]

Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jun 6 2003, 09:08 AM
i'm wearing you down!

oh just admit it. i'm growing on you.

look at barbs, she's buckling already!
it's not you. it's the phrase... ewww.

[SunWuKong]

Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jun 6 2003, 11:33 AM
in my opinion, there's only about two, maybe three, women here on yw as a whole, i can see as 5 carat diamond material. and one of the three is married and don't have an engagement ring, if i remember correctly from a really old post.
definitely agree with you about the married one without the engagement ring. her husband's a lucky bastard.

[SunWuKong]

hahhah this is funny as hell.

i love women. especially shy and barbs. :D

[artsfartsyjanet]

The engagement ring isn't important. I've been given an engagement ring, but I never asked for it. Better yet, I pawned it as a consolation. heheh

[Chester]

Originally posted by artsfartsyjanet@Jun 6 2003, 10:36 AM
The engagement ring isn't important. I've been given an engagement ring, but I never asked for it. Better yet, I pawned it as a consolation. heheh
You didn't give it back? Or he wouldn't take it back...?

[artsfartsyjanet]

Originally posted by Chester@Jun 6 2003, 01:40 PM
You didn't give it back? Or he wouldn't take it back...?
He didn't deserve it. It's a gift. I can do whatever I want with it.

[Barbs]

Originally posted by artsfartsyjanet@Jun 6 2003, 06:42 PM
He didn't deserve it. It's a gift. I can do whatever I want with it.
oh yeah, i remember this.

A$$HOLE!!!!!!!!

u did good janet.

[Chester]

Originally posted by artsfartsyjanet@Jun 6 2003, 10:42 AM
He didn't deserve it. It's a gift. I can do whatever I want with it.
I obviously don't know the story.

[UNSOLICITED SERMON]
But just to seize an opportunity to run at the mouth, I believe rejected engagement rings should be given back, regardless of how much of an asshole the proper might or might not be. I think most gifts are something that one could think over, but an engagement ring, in my opinion, is not a gift. At most, it's a conditional gift.

Personally, my opinion is: if you want to spite him, go ahead and hawk it, but donate the proceeds the proceeds to charity. I wouldn't want to benefit in any way from someone I dislike.

Push it around the other way and let's say a guy proposes to a girl. Let's say the girl's parents buy them/him something extravagant...like a new car. Let's say he breaks off the engagement. In my opinion, he needs to give the shit back. Regardless of whether or not she or her parents are or are not assholes.
[/UNSOLICITED SERMON]

Okay, I'll shut up now.

[Barbs]

Originally posted by Chester@Jun 6 2003, 06:56 PM
I obviously don't know the story.

[UNSOLICITED SERMON]
But just to seize an opportunity to run at the mouth, I believe rejected engagement rings should be given back, regardless of how much of an asshole the proper might or might not be. I think most gifts are something that one could think over, but an engagement ring, in my opinion, is not a gift. At most, it's a conditional gift.

Personally, my opinion is: if you want to spite him, go ahead and hawk it, but donate the proceeds the proceeds to charity. I wouldn't want to benefit in any way from someone I dislike.

Push it around the other way and let's say a guy proposes to a girl. Let's say the girl's parents buy them/him something extravagant...like a new car. Let's say he breaks off the engagement. In my opinion, he needs to give the shit back. Regardless of whether or not she or her parents are or are not assholes.
[/UNSOLICITED SERMON]

Okay, I'll shut up now.
the engagement ring is a promise (of marriage). if the man breaks off the engagement in a normal, non-harmful situation, then yeah, give it back. but if the man cheats or does something to wrong the girl, she should get to keep it b/c he broke the promise.

likewise for a marriage gift from the girl to a guy. i guess it could be a modern-day "dowry".

[artsfartsyjanet]

From what I understand, a conditional gift for an engagement ring is,"if you marry me, have the engagement ring. If you don't marry me, don't take it."

I decided to commit to someone for the rest of my life. The guy decided to cheat on me BEFORE proposing to me as well as having an unplanned pregnancy with another person. I find out, he confirms my findings, and the basketball is in my court. After speaking to him and hearing his excuses, I determine that this guy doesn't deserve anything... not even my voice... let alone a piece of jewelry that bears no meaning anymore. I don't think pawning a piece of jewelry makes me a less of a person.

[Chester]

Originally posted by Barbs@Jun 6 2003, 11:08 AM
the engagement ring is a promise (of marriage). if the man breaks off the engagement in a normal, non-harmful situation, then yeah, give it back. but if the man cheats or does something to wrong the girl, she should get to keep it b/c he broke the promise.

likewise for a marriage gift from the girl to a guy. i guess it could be a modern-day "dowry".
Well, yeah she can keep it. I'm not really thinking about legality here.

But I guess you're not either.

Even if the guy is cheating and thus breaks the engagement, I think the ring should be given back. In my mind, if it wasn't a "blood diamond" before, it is now.

On the other side of the coin, if my fiancée cheated on me during the engagement, I wouldn't ask for the ring back. For the same reason: I wouldn't want anything to do with the object or any proceeds from it.

Just a difference in opinion, I suppose. Ugly situation any which way you look at it.

[Chester]

Originally posted by artsfartsyjanet@Jun 6 2003, 11:15 AM
After speaking to him and hearing his excuses, I determine that this guy doesn't deserve anything... not even my voice
Amen to that.

... let alone a piece of jewelry that bears no meaning anymore.&nbsp;

But as you said: if you marry him, you keep it. If you don't, you don't.

You didn't.

From my viewpoint, you don't keep it if you don't marry -- whether or not it's his fault that you're not getting married.

I don't think pawning a piece of jewelry makes me a less of a person.

I'm not saying that. In the overall situation, the fate of the ring is pretty inconsequential. If you're comfortable with it and if it maybe gives you a bit of solace to have gotten something out of a shitty situation, more power to you.

I'm just saying that I wouldn't be comfortable with it. I'd rather throw the thing back in his face.

[SunWuKong]

Originally posted by Chester@Jun 6 2003, 02:56 PM
I wouldn't want to benefit in any way from someone I dislike.
that doesn't make sense to me. i would totally love to benefit from someone i dislike.

[artsfartsyjanet]

Originally posted by Chester@Jun 6 2003, 02:17 PM


On the other side of the coin, if my fiancée cheated on me during the engagement, I wouldn't ask for the ring back. For the same reason: I wouldn't want anything to do with the object or any proceeds from it.

I don't see it as a proceed. The diamond was a symbol of a commitment. That was its intent. If I pawned it and received money as a result of it, I don't see it as "dirty money." Sure, the source of the money came from the ring I pawned, and the ring came from the ass hole who gave it to me. Believe me, the money I benefit doesn't outweigh the peace of mind he stripped from me after being with him for four years. He hasn't apologized for his actions. If anything, he attempts to justify cheating and having an unplanned pregnancy behind my back. So, where's the justice in that? My only justice, and what little justice it is, I decided to pawn the ring, and I don't feel any less because of it.

[artsfartsyjanet]

Originally posted by Chester@Jun 6 2003, 02:21 PM

I'm not saying that. In the overall situation, the fate of the ring is pretty inconsequential. If you're comfortable with it and if it maybe gives you a bit of solace to have gotten something out of a shitty situation, more power to you.

I'm just saying that I wouldn't be comfortable with it. I'd rather throw the thing back in his face.
ok. got it.

[shy]

Originally posted by artsfartsyjanet@Jun 6 2003, 11:15 AM
From what I understand, a conditional gift for an engagement ring is,"if you marry me, have the engagement ring. If you don't marry me, don't take it."

I decided to commit to someone for the rest of my life. The guy decided to cheat on me BEFORE proposing to me as well as having an unplanned pregnancy with another person. I find out, he confirms my findings, and the basketball is in my court. After speaking to him and hearing his excuses, I determine that this guy doesn't deserve anything... not even my voice... let alone a piece of jewelry that bears no meaning anymore. I don't think pawning a piece of jewelry makes me a less of a person.
shit... you did the right thing then. i would have pawned it too...

if anything, just to get closure. you deserved at least that.

[arby]

Between an $8000 ring and $10000 in cash, which would you prefer?

Curious.

[shy]

Originally posted by arby@Jun 6 2003, 12:34 PM
Between an $8000 ring and $10000 in cash, which would you prefer?

Curious.
cash, baby.

[lethal]

Originally posted by Barbs@Jun 6 2003, 01:16 PM
uh huh. now back to the original topic....

you know there's one episode of sex & the city where carrie accidentally finds the ring that aidan bought and she opens it up and it's this pear-shaped GOLD monstrosity (in her and IMHO). anyway, she tells her girlfriends that if a guy gets a ring that's ALL wrong for her then he doesn't REALLY know her at all and he's not the right one. i kinda would tend to agree....
Carrie also ended the engagement becasue it seemed like she was not ready to marry him. Perhaps he wasn't the right guy for her, but I don't think it was his fault.

About the gold...love how you put it in all caps. I knew the sentiment against gold was strong...but didn't realize that it was that strong...not that I'd get a gold band anyway.

[lethal]

As for the legality (not morality) of keeping the ring after a broken engagement, reference this article. Laws vary from state to state.

http://www.nolo.com/lawcenter/ency/article...E9395985EE7E825 (http://www.nolo.com/lawcenter/ency/article.cfm/objectID/E2120B2B-1C65-4E77-92A0ADC4FA3EDC2A/catID/697DBAFE-20FF-467A-9E9395985EE7E825)

The Return of the Ring
The engagement is broken. Long after the heartbreak has healed, one nagging question often remains: Who gets to keep the ring?

The engagement, started by candlelight, soft words and promises to wed, is over. In addition to the sorrow, the heartbroken must deal with explanations to friends and relations and the return of the deposits left with the caterer, the florist and the dressmaker.

But when all that dust has cleared, one rankling question often remains: Who gets to keep the ring? For the answer -- or for vengeance -- many turn to the legal system. There are more than a hundred cases now on the books in which courts grappled with the mysteries of the human heart and tried to determine who should keep the ring. Some of these battles were hard fought, going all the way to the supreme courts of their states -- the final stopping point for questions of state law, like this one.

State courts around the nation that have considered the ring issue have reached differing conclusions. And such controversies that have made it all the way to court have had a similar, almost Victorian tone: It is the men who give rings, the women who receive them, and the courts that seek a just determination of rights and wrongs. Real life, of course, can be more complex than that and both women and men can give rings to each other. The legal principals in these cases apply to all couples facing this question, regardless of who bought and who received the ring.

When Is a Gift a Gift?
Courts generally treat the engagement ring as a gift, from the donor (the person who gave the ring) to the donee (the person who received it). To find a legal gift, a court looks for three things: the donor's intent to give the ring as a gift, the donor's delivery of it to the donee and the donee's acceptance of the item. If the person to whom the ring was given can show all three elements, the ring is considered a gift to him or her.
Gifts With a Twist
But the majority of courts also consider such a gift to be a conditional one. That means that until some future event occurs, the gift isn't final; if that event does not occur, then the donor has the right to get the gift back. In real life, many parents overuse this idea by, for example, giving a teenage daughter the keys to the family car, on the condition that she maintain a certain grade point average for a specified period of time. If she doesn't make the grade, the keys must be returned.
Women who want to keep their engagement rings often argue that the condition needed to make the engagement ring a final gift is simply the acceptance of the proposal of marriage, not the completion of the marriage ceremony. That way, if the engagement is broken, the ring remains her property.

But this argument often loses. The majority of courts find that the gift of an engagement ring contains an implied condition of marriage; acceptance of the proposal is not the underlying "deal." Absent some other understanding -- say, that the ring is merely a memento of a great trip to Hawaii -- most courts look at engagement rings as conditional gifts given in contemplation of marriage: "Once it is established the ring is an engagement ring, it is a conditional gift." Heiman v. Parrish, 942 P.2d 631, 633 (Kan. 1997). (The Supreme Court of Montana has recently come down on the opposite side of this fence, rejecting the conditional gift theory and declaring that an engagement ring is an unconditional, completed gift and that's that. Ex-fiances in that western state are unlikely to get help from the courts if they want to get an engagement ring back. Albinger v. Harris, 2002 WL 1226858 (Mont. June 6, 2002).)

Pointing (Ring) Fingers
When divining who gets to keep the engagement ring, courts do not agree whether or not it should matter who did the breaking up or why. To some judges, it isn't fair that the donor should always get the ring back, especially if the donee stood ready to go ahead with the marriage. The same judges think it would be unfair for the donee to keep the ring if the engagement was broken because of unfaithfulness or other wrongdoing. In such cases, they order that the ring should be returned to its purchaser.
Other judges, though, think that the whole matter of who broke up with whom isn't any of their business. If the wedding's off, they say, the donor should get the ring back, regardless of who, why, where or when the engagement ended. After all, they reason, no-fault divorce makes it possible for marriages to end without bitter court fights over whose fault it was; engagements should be treated the same way.

Just a few years ago, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania stuck steadfastly to the no-fault reasoning and decreed that the donor should always get the ring back if the engagement is broken off, regardless of who broke it off or why. Lindh v. Surman, 742 A.2d 643 (Pa. 1999). Iowa, Kansas, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York and Wisconsin have the same rule. Heiman v. Parrish, 942 P.2d 631, 636 (Kan. 1997). The alternative rule, and still the majority approach, is that a donor who breaks off the engagement for a reason that has nothing to do with the donee's behavior cannot recover the ring. This is the fault-based rule.

Justices on the Supreme Court of Kansas, which also adopted the no-fault rule in 1997, detailed the difficulties that they imagined would be theirs with a fault-based approach:

[S]hould courts be asked to determine which of the following grounds for breaking an engagement is fault or justified? (1) The parties have nothing in common; (2) one party cannot stand prospective in-laws; (3) a minor child of one of the parties is hostile to and will not accept the other party; (4) an adult child of one of the parties will not accept the other party; (5) the parties' pets do not get along; (6) a party was too hasty in proposing or accepting the proposal; (7) the engagement was a rebound situation which is now regretted; (8) one party has untidy habits that irritate the other; or (9) the parties have religious differences.
Heiman v. Parrish, 942 P.2d 631, 637 (Kan. 1997).
In New Jersey, a court rejected a rule that required a determination of fault, declaring it "sexist and archaic." The court looked to the history of ancient Rome, where a woman who broke off an engagement was required to return not only the ring, but also its value as a penalty. And it also cited England, where a man was required to give the woman the ring if he broke the engagement in recognition of the fact that he had just ruined her reputation and her prospects. The court concluded that "the rule of life was the rule of law -- both saw women as inferiors." Aronow v. Silver, 538 A.2d 851 (1987).

The fault rule might be archaic, it might be sexist, but judges who use it think that justice can't be done without a complete understanding of what went wrong. They might have a point. Consider the case of George J. Pavlicic, a 75-year-old man, who had a romance with Sara Jane Mills, aged 26. They became engaged in 1949. He bought her a house, two cars, an engagement ring, and a diamond ring in anticipation of their marriage. George then lent her a significant amount of money, including $5,000 to buy a saloon. Sara Jane then disappeared. The next time she was heard from, she had indeed used the $5,000 to buy a saloon, but it was in another city, and she had married another man, two years younger than she was.

George went to court. He wanted everything that he'd given Sara Jane back. He won. But Sara Jane argued on appeal that a new law, the Heart-Balm Act, made his lawsuit illegal. The Act outlawed all legal actions for "breaches of contract to marry." The Pennsylvania Supreme Court sided with George. The Act, it held, was aimed at "exaggerated and fictional claims of mortification and anguish purportedly attendant upon a breach of promise to marry." It was meant to end a kind of legal blackmail, where people threatened lawsuits for breach of the promise to marry that would tarnish the other person's reputation; lawsuits scary enough to force a settlement, even from innocent people.

But the Act, the court concluded, didn't alter the rule of conditional gifts. "The title to the gifts which Sara Jane received, predicated on the assurances of marriage with George, never left George and could not leave him until the marital knot was tied. It would appear from all the evidence that the knot was fully formed and loosely awaiting the ultimate pull which would take title in the gifts from George to Sara Jane, but the final tug never occurred and the knot fell apart, with the gifts legally falling back into the domain of the brideless George . . . To allow Sara Jane to retain the money and property which she got from George by dangling before him the grapes of matrimony which she never intended to let him pluck would be to place a premium on trickery, cunning, and duplicitous dealing."
Pavlicic v. Vogtsberger, 136 A.2d 127, 130 (Penn. 1957)

Some courts applying this fault-based rule consider the exchange of the ring to be more like a contract than a conditional gift: the ring is just a symbol of the agreement to marry. If that agreement is not performed, then those involved should be restored to their former positions -- as they would be if the contract was for, say, the delivery of a bushel of wheat -- and the ring should be returned to the person who first had it. But if the donor backs out, the donee should keep the ring, because a person who breaches contracts should not be rewarded for doing so. Spinnell v. Quigley, 785 P.2d 1149 (1990).

Do You Really Want That Thing?
While the laws on the issue of ring return and the views of the judges applying them are instructive, maddening or entertaining, they often beg commonsense. As Nolo's advice columnist, Auntie Nolo recently soothed a jilted fianceé upset over the possible return of an engagement ring:

"It may not feel that way just yet, but you were lucky to learn a hard lesson before -- not after -- you married. Give back the ring and get on with your life. On a personal note, a burglar made off with my wedding ring shortly after my First Husband and I called it quits. These many years later, I often look down and am mightily relieved to see neither him nor that ring as reminders of the vainglorious past."

[lethal]

I can look up your state for you if you really want to know, janet. (I know what state it is). PM me.

[Barbs]

Originally posted by lethalweapon@Jun 6 2003, 08:45 PM
As for the legality (not morality) of keeping the ring after a broken engagement, reference this article. Laws vary from state to state.

ok that was extremely tedious. i don't think we need to re-hash contracts class all over again.... grr~

[kimpossible]

Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jun 6 2003, 07:33 AM
Originally posted by shy@Jun 6 2003, 08:24 AM
Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jun 6 2003, 04:25 AM
hahahaha

is this what girls fantasize about? the size of the diamond on their engagement ring?

come on now. you have to make it worthwhile for the guy and be worthy of a big diamond. so in other words, the guy has to ask himself, "is this woman really worth a 5+ carat perfectly cut diamond engagement ring. is she and will she be a pain in my ass now, later and forever."

so that brings us back to square one and a whole new topic of: "pimping yourself and putting up a front to your man to get that bling bling and shiny shiny." which probably sets the feminist movement back a few more notches.
easy big boy...

most of the thread has been about women who don't care as much. only about 3 or 4 have admitted to putting a lot of emphasis on the engagement ring.

<_<

lady, i wasn't just talking about the women on YW. there is an outside world.

it was more like a general statement and general response on my part.

and about the three or four women on yw that want the big rock just like jenny from the block, like you stated.

in terms of yw:

in my opinion, there's only about two, maybe three, women here on yw as a whole, i can see as 5 carat diamond material. and one of the three is married and don't have an engagement ring, if i remember correctly from a really old post.


well damn baby, where's my ring? *taps foot*

[deez nuts]

Originally posted by SunWuKung@Jun 6 2003, 12:36 PM
hahhah this is funny as hell.

i love women. especially shy and barbs.&nbsp; :D
heh heh i love getting a rise out of the yw women.

i worked this thread like a maestro.

i got nothing but love for all you yw broads. just some are worth more carats than others. hahahahah

[deez nuts]

Originally posted by Hello_Hapa@Jun 6 2003, 05:58 PM

well damn baby, where's my ring? *taps foot*
baby, i got you.

[kasia]

Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jun 7 2003, 11:35 AM
Originally posted by SunWuKung@Jun 6 2003, 12:36 PM
hahhah this is funny as hell.

i love women. especially shy and barbs.&nbsp; :D
heh heh i love getting a rise out of the yw women.

i worked this room like a maestro.

i got nothing but love for all you yw broads. just some are worth more carats than others. hahahahah
he called us 'broads'. :blink:

[deez nuts]

Originally posted by kasia@Jun 7 2003, 02:38 PM
Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jun 7 2003, 11:35 AM
Originally posted by SunWuKung@Jun 6 2003, 12:36 PM
hahhah this is funny as hell.

i love women. especially shy and barbs. :D
heh heh i love getting a rise out of the yw women.

i worked this room like a maestro.

i got nothing but love for all you yw broads. just some are worth more carats than others. hahahahah
he called us 'broads'. :blink:
how about hunniez?

call me poppa-san and you all can be my titty buffet. i'll bring the hot sauce and supply the heat!

[Barbs]

Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jun 7 2003, 07:35 PM

i got nothing but love for all you yw broads. just some are worth more carats than others. hahahahah
some women are carat-worthy; others are just carrot-worthy.

[Fireblade]

[rumor]guards of diamond mining companies cut off the hands of south african girls if they are ever caught holding any of the diamonds.


just something I heard.

[Chrysalis]

Okay, first of all I'm astonished albeit impressed with the knowledge that some of you girls seem to have on the topic of diamonds. I don't even know how it goes. Why do you get an engagement ring? Do you wear it after the wedding or is it replaced with a wedding band? Why then must you receive a engagement ring if not to wear it later? Do men get engagement rings? What finger/hand is the engagement ring worn, what about the wedding band?

No I haven't been living under a rock I just don't know these things. Also I'm quite offended at the idea that some girls are worth more in carats than others. What is with this attachment of self worth to a stone? I'm confused. BTW I think other stones are okay for an enagagement ring. Engagement derivative portfolio also okay with me.

[Chester]

You poor thing...

You apparently never received the memo regarding Obligatory Materialism. Have you been getting any of the memos? You haven't been...<gasp> opening doors for yourself, have you?

[kimpossible]

It's not difficult to understand the grading system of diamonds. I didn't until a few years ago but all I had to do is hop on a website and learn like 5 basic qualities. Took 5-10 minutes max. I had to put more effort and research into buying a car or choosing my primary care provider.

If I want to own a diamond, I'm going to own a diamond. Sorry if this is thumbing my nose against the Ya-Ya sisterhood or some shit like that but it's just a ring. I know about DeBeers since I posted about them last month in this thread. (http://forums.yellowworld.org/index.php?act=ST&f=38&t=7367&st=15) I got married without rings or a big wedding (yeah, I had multiple banquets but no church wedding) and this year my husband decided to give me a couple diamond rings. I said, "Oh they're beautiful. Thank you." Well thank god, now I know. I should have gotten mad, thrown them at him and yelled at him for supporting DeBeers and taking our relationship to such a materialistic level.

[deez nuts]

i have no problems getting and giving my wife an engagement ring. i'll even go all out to a reasonable degree.

i'm materialistic and yuppy'ish. i will sometimes express my affection through material ways. i also lack creativity and the occasional spontaniety.

i'm not an easy guy to get along with in a relationship (prolly even worse in a fiance or wife scenerio) and my career at times may impose upon my wife to make some sacrifices i.e. not being able to spend as much time together as she would like. etc etc etc.

so it's all good by me. whatever works. if it makes her happy, it's fine by me.

[kimpossible]

csb> i think we're enabling each other here. let the smartass yuppie scum unite.

[kasia]

Originally posted by Hello_Hapa@Jun 10 2003, 05:55 AM
Well thank god, now I know. I should have gotten mad, thrown them at him and yelled at him for supporting DeBeers and taking our relationship to such a materialistic level.
i don't think anyone is saying that the sole act of giving a diamond ring as a present carries with it any inherent meaning. it is what it means to the two parties that matters. and some couples allow DeBeers to construct the meaning for them. but some don't.

re: professor frink's comment - how recent is this tradition?

[kimpossible]

Sorry, was just drama queenish for fun. I'll stop. :o

[Chrysalis]

Nobody answered any of my questions :(

Chrysalis

[kimpossible]

Okay, some answers minus my foolery.


Why do you get an engagement ring?[

Honesly don't know. I assume it's some sort of physical manifestation of intentions to legally commit. I have no idea why a ring rather than say a necklace. Though I've been told some cultures use things like bracelets, so a use of something circular with no end and no beginning may be a theme.

Do you wear it after the wedding or is it replaced with a wedding band?

I actually think the 'classic' white diamond solitaire has been replaced numberswise by wedding ring sets where the engagement ring and band for a woman come in a premade interlocking set.

Why then must you receive a engagement ring if not to wear it later?

Er... we did it backwards. We got married first, finally got around to buying cheapo bands after like our second anniversary and he bought me a small (less than .5 carat) but very high quality (colorless, once removed from flawless, etc.) diamond solitaire and another ring of wrought white gold flowers, the 'petals' are diamonds.

The solitaire is always locked away and I wear the floral about twice a week. Most women wear engagement rings constantly. I'm just freaky that I'm not a huge fan of wearing my jewelry 24/7. I usually don't even wear my cheap band. But again, I believe it is customary to wear it constantly. Keep in mind that you don't need anything. No big wedding, no ring. I've done it but I don't think the people that do it are wrong or shallow. I think celebration is a wonderful part of life, there are certain rituals that are demarkations of important times in life. The 'traditional' stuff is just that, tradition. You can do or not do.

Do men get engagement rings?

I've heard of it becoming a trend.

What finger/hand is the engagement ring worn, what about the wedding band?

Oh god, I think the rings go on the ring finger left hand. At least that's where I put my band when I wear it. Can't help you with the engagement ring. Don't have the experience.


Also I'm quite offended at the idea that some girls are worth more in carats than others.

Take that up with bunboy.

What is with this attachment of self worth to a stone?

*shrug* I'm more likely to place my self value into my driving skills, marksmanship and cooking ability. But in an attempt to answer your question, I can say that I like my diamond rings. They're pretty and shiny. I wear them on occasion, otherwise they stay in my jewelry box or my safe deposit box. Well, I rarely wear my cheap ass wedding band (retails for $60 US) either. I find it gross to work with things like raw meat and dough wearing jewelry.


I'm confused. BTW I think other stones are okay for an enagagement ring.

I think the white diamond solitaire is more of a 'classic' engagment ring. I'm no expert but I think a diamond solitaire with two colored gem baguettes is popular these days. Had I an engagement ring my preference would have been emerald and/or pearl. Bottom line is it's your jewelry, wear whatever you feel. On somewhat of a side note, I believe it's not too expensive to have rings personally designed if you shop around. Some people are big into Celtic inspired designs and those seem to be more about the quality of craftsmanship that goes into the metals rather than placing value upon stones.

Engagement derivative portfolio also okay with me.

To each his or her own. For me, spending one day in the studio for wedding pics was enough. I wouldn't have wanted to do it twice. Plus I never had an engagment ring when I got married so there wasn't anything to take a picture of. Justice of the Peace during finals week. I might have worn a T-shirt or something.

[deez nuts]

Originally posted by Hello_Hapa@Jun 11 2003, 11:12 AM
Take that up with bunboy.




lol

it's all about the net worth and cost vs benefits, baby!

[TyroneK(prettypretty)]

If a woman really loved me, she'd cut off her ring finger and give it to me when we got married instead of me having to give her a ring.

[moschikat]

Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jun 11 2003, 08:44 AM
Originally posted by Hello_Hapa@Jun 11 2003, 11:12 AM
Take that up with bunboy.




lol

it's all about the net worth and cost vs benefits, baby!
High risks = high returns.

[deez nuts]

Originally posted by moschikat@Jun 11 2003, 05:28 PM
Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jun 11 2003, 08:44 AM
Originally posted by Hello_Hapa@Jun 11 2003, 11:12 AM
Take that up with bunboy.




lol

it's all about the net worth and cost vs benefits, baby!
High risks = high returns.
if i wanted that, i'd marry my stockbroker.

[Green_Jade]

I presonally want my engagement ring a bit fancier than my wedding band. But I like rings that are simple... I hope my wedding band is a white gold with a diamond set IN the band... so it'll have to be a tiny one, but that's how I'd like it... mmm white gold.

[sOKaLiBoY]

all i want is for my earring to be bigger then my future wife's engagement ring :lol:

[Emperor_Mike]

Originally posted by VBKao@Jun 11 2003, 02:18 PM
If a woman really loved me, she'd cut off her ring finger and give it to me when we got married instead of me having to give her a ring.
That's just gruesome. I mean, where would you keep it? Pickled and in a jar? Or in some cotton lined box where it can decompose? Really now, severe limbs and appendages aren't exactly practical. Sure, it can be romantic if you're into that sort of thing, but think of the blood and the questions. But that's true love, huh? :luv:

[kasia]

Originally posted by sOKaLiBoY@Jun 11 2003, 09:19 PM
all i want is for my earring to be bigger then my future wife's engagement ring :lol:
you're going to have saggy earlobes when you grow old.

[Chrysalis]

Originally posted by Hello_Hapa@Jun 11 2003, 08:12 AM
Okay, some answers minus my foolery.


[

Honesly don't know. I assume it's some sort of physical manifestation of intentions to legally commit. I have no idea why a ring rather than say a necklace. Though I've been told some cultures use things like bracelets, so a use of something circular with no end and no beginning may be a theme.



I actually think the 'classic' white diamond solitaire has been replaced numberswise by wedding ring sets where the engagement ring and band for a woman come in a premade interlocking set.



Er... we did it backwards. We got married first, finally got around to buying cheapo bands after like our second anniversary and he bought me a small (less than .5 carat) but very high quality (colorless, once removed from flawless, etc.) diamond solitaire and another ring of wrought white gold flowers, the 'petals' are diamonds.

The solitaire is always locked away and I wear the floral about twice a week. Most women wear engagement rings constantly. I'm just freaky that I'm not a huge fan of wearing my jewelry 24/7. I usually don't even wear my cheap band. But again, I believe it is customary to wear it constantly. Keep in mind that you don't need anything. No big wedding, no ring. I've done it but I don't think the people that do it are wrong or shallow. I think celebration is a wonderful part of life, there are certain rituals that are demarkations of important times in life. The 'traditional' stuff is just that, tradition. You can do or not do.



I've heard of it becoming a trend.



Oh god, I think the rings go on the ring finger left hand. At least that's where I put my band when I wear it. Can't help you with the engagement ring. Don't have the experience.




Take that up with bunboy.



*shrug* I'm more likely to place my self value into my driving skills, marksmanship and cooking ability. But in an attempt to answer your question, I can say that I like my diamond rings. They're pretty and shiny. I wear them on occasion, otherwise they stay in my jewelry box or my safe deposit box. Well, I rarely wear my cheap ass wedding band (retails for $60 US) either. I find it gross to work with things like raw meat and dough wearing jewelry.




I think the white diamond solitaire is more of a 'classic' engagment ring. I'm no expert but I think a diamond solitaire with two colored gem baguettes is popular these days. Had I an engagement ring my preference would have been emerald and/or pearl. Bottom line is it's your jewelry, wear whatever you feel. On somewhat of a side note, I believe it's not too expensive to have rings personally designed if you shop around. Some people are big into Celtic inspired designs and those seem to be more about the quality of craftsmanship that goes into the metals rather than placing value upon stones.



To each his or her own. For me, spending one day in the studio for wedding pics was enough. I wouldn't have wanted to do it twice. Plus I never had an engagment ring when I got married so there wasn't anything to take a picture of. Justice of the Peace during finals week. I might have worn a T-shirt or something.
Thank you Hello Hapa. :rolleyes: