Money Moral Dilemma: Should I buy an engagement gift for my fiance?

I don't know how you're going to organise your finances, but if he earns more than you and is going to keep sole control of a portion of his earnings, then it's reasonable that he buys you more expensive gifts than you get for him.

I also agree with posters who say it would have made sense for him to raise this beforehand. On the other hand, men can feel a lot of pressure to produce the perfect proposal, and since a sparkly ring is expected as part of that it can feel more like an obligation than a gift. You shouldn't normally expect to receive something in return for a gift, but at the same time it seems unfair to always expect men to spend a massive wodge on some bling and get nothing in return. Discussing it beforehand would have allowed the opportunity for you to let each other know what's really important. But perhaps he got the impression from you or from Hollywood that the perfect proposal had to be a surprise, which makes that impossible.

Engagement rings and expensive watches are equivalent. They're both expensive jewelry with little practical use and surprisingly poor resale value. The difference is cultural: men are expected by society to buy their fianc! a ring. But if you subscribe to gender equality, you should view both the same. So if you're​ concerned about money why not suggest trying for a refund on the ring? It may sound unromantic, but looking at it another way isn't it rather distasteful to expect a diamond as a precondition for marriage to the man you love? Just don't sell it second hand because you probably won't get close to what he paid for it. And if your friends expect to see a ring and you can't be bothered to educate them, get a silicon carbide replacement.

For those who think this is terribly "modern", expensive diamond engagement rings are a relatively modern phenomenon. The idea began to be pushed by De Beers in the 1930s, and it didn't really take off until after the second world war.