I know I shouldn't be offended but...

peachyprice

BMSrachael wrote: »

A little! It's 9ct white gold (not 18ct) with a fifth of ct diamond. It's pretty. And half price apparently!

Well now you have perfect reason for bringing the subject up without being accusatory. "OMG darling, I was looking at the hallmark on my ring and it seems that dirty scoundrel of a jeweller ripped you off, it's not 18ct like they told you"

System

I wouldnt hang him yet... i wouldnt marry him yet either

piglet74

i wouldnt care if my engagement ring was dirt cheap, in fact....im pretty sure it was!!

its the "bigging it up" i would have the problem with

i would just say to him that i found the receipt and was wondering if that was the full price as i wanted to add the ring to the insurance policy,

Lotus-eater

VfM4meplse wrote: »

I see a correlaton between the value of the ring and the committment.

I believe that engagement and wedding rings should be worth thousands, rather than spending silly money on a wedding party.

So instead of spending silly money on a wedding, you'd prefer to spend silly money on a ring that does nothing apart from look the same as one a 10th the price?

If you really love each other, the value of the ring shouldn't matter. That's how I feel and I wouldn't be with anyone who was a money grabbing piece of work like you.

In fact when I bought my OH an engagement ring, we picked it together, then I haggled with the jeweller and got a good amount off. My family told me off for haggling.... like it means less because I paid less.....? I've never understood this attitude.

I would never have lied about it though.

elvis86

I always thought that there was a significance to the value of an engagement ring, as it showed that the man had spent several months planning to propose and saving for the ring (symbolic of his commitment to his partner).

On that basis, a <£100 ring from a man who works but contributes little to the household as his partner earns more, is pathetic. Sorry, but it is.:(

Say he "saved" for just 3 months, that's £30 a month max. I bet his mobile phone bill is more! What does he earn? I can't believe that £30 a month is a significant % of his disposable income and rendered him "skint"?!

Obviously this is made 10 times worse by the fact that he tainted the surprise by dropping hints for weeks in advance about how expensive your Christmas gift was, and how "skint" it had rendered him (I would hate that - I don't want to be made to feel guilty about a gift's cost, and especially not before I've even been given it!).

He sounds like a loser, sorry.

burnoutbabe

agreed, there is a small white lie at the time of presenting it where you might say it costs you lots, or when out with mutual friends. Thats covering up embarrasment over how cheap it was and would be understandable.

But pretending for ages before xmas that it was to be this huge expensive suprise is just wrong. the fact he was getting you a ring and was going to propose would have been big enough surely!

Mojisola

elvis86 wrote: »

I always thought that there was a significance to the value of an engagement ring, as it showed that the man had spent several months planning to propose and saving for the ring (symbolic of his commitment to his partner).

It used to be symbolic of the man earning enough to keep his future wife - as she wouldn't have been expected to work outside the home - and the woman wearing it showed that she had been "taken off the market".

I didn't expect - or want - an engagement ring from my OH and we went together to choose matching wedding rings.

Why, in the 21st century, a man should have to prove his commitment by spending a lot of money on a ring is beyond me.

Lotus-eater

elvis86 wrote: »

I always thought that there was a significance to the value of an engagement ring, as it showed that the man had spent several months planning to propose and saving for the ring (symbolic of his commitment to his partner).

Rubbish It was an advertising campaign by De beers in the 20's or 30's which suggested the 2 (?, 3?) month wages by the man. They hoped to sell more diamonds. It must be one of the most cost effective marketing campaigns ever.

It's advertising! You've been brainwashed into the man spending more money and we've been forced into keeping up with the neighbours by the brainwashed women!

elvis86

Mojisola wrote: »

It used to be symbolic of the man earning enough to keep his future wife - as she wouldn't have been expected to work outside the home - and the woman wearing it showed that she had been "taken off the market".

I didn't expect - or want - an engagement ring from my OH and we went together to choose matching wedding rings.

Why, in the 21st century, a man should have to prove his commitment by spending a lot of money on a ring is beyond me.

I guess it depends on your relationship. You didn't want or expect a ring, presumably your OH knew that, so you didn't get one.

I'm in a gay relationship, but my OH and I both know that he'll be popping the question when the time's right. Don't really know how or why that was "decided", it's just something we both know, IYKWIM? Maybe it's because I like jewellery and he doesn't. Or more likely because he came to this relationship with lots of debt, most of which was racked up supporting his ex boyfriend and indulging him with expensive gifts, the likes of which he's not been able to afford to buy me (because I won't let him until he's paid off his debts!). The important thing is that we both know where we stand.

Whereas the OP's OH has bought into the tradition (presumably she does too), and then lied and fobbed her off with a cheap ring (which he has tried to make her feel guilty about him spending all of his money on!), which has left her feeling hurt.

BMSrachael

Person_one wrote: »

You can't carry on being so unequal financially, in fact I'm surprised that after 7 years and (presumably) living together you still think of it so much as 'mine and his' rather than 'ours'. That he's 'poor' but you aren't when you're planning to spend your lives together!

I don't think its mine and his, he's poor and I'm rich...(I don't sit feasting on hog roasts while he scrabbles around me hoping for scraps!) The fact of the matter is, I earn a little more so I contribute more, and I have more spare income to save towards things. So it'd take him a little longer to save up for something if he were doing it alone.