I don’t think there is a simple equation of flashy ring = doomed marriage as some like to think. I’ve been married twice. My first ring was inexpensive and from Ratners and was very pretty, a pale oval Ceylon sapphire with a tiny diamond halo. I wasn’t sure I wanted an engagement ring as a feminist but caved. My second engagement ring is very expensive. However in my case, I love rings, I’ve always loved rings, and I was hoping to splurge on a secondhand solitaire for myself in the future but DH bought one for me instead as an engagement ring and I adore it and wear it daily. On a cost per wear it’s less expensive than some clothes I’ve bought and I don’t buy designer clothes.
I used to think that equating generosity to love was venal and selfish but actually I think there is something in it. Basically unless you are one of the super-rich, when you buy a nice gift for someone, you are sacrificing the ability to spend that money on yourself. Pleasing them and making them happy is worth that to you, just like sacrificing your own sleep or free time to share the burden of domestic chores or elder care is. I think when people are mean with money they sometimes ARE showing you that if there is nothing in it for them pleasure wise; why the fuck would they want to sacrifice money they could spend on themselves?
The engagement ring thing is complicated by the fact that it is only women who receive them and as a feminist that’s problematic but it’s a very rare example of material imbalance in favour of women. I bought DH a very expensive watch to mark an important work milestone for him so our relationship isn’t skewed to him being the giver and me the receiver.
Even as a child I noticed the imbalance in how family money was typically spent in the families around me. Women’s hobbies, if they had one, were generally low cost and individual, like crafts, and they often benefited the family: baking, knitting, sewing. One or two wealthier mums played tennis. Men seemed to have no problem spending hundreds or thousands on season tickets and attending matches with the associated socialising costs; or on golf membership, fees and equipment; their wives facilitating it all by looking after their children while they pursued these very time consuming hobbies on weekends and evenings. If all the poor menz have to worry about it a bit of societal pressure to cough up for one ring then I can’t get very excited about campaigning on their behalf. If they go on to marry and have children, even in society as it is now, they are highly likely to benefit financially and socially to a far greater extent than their wives.
Engagement ring are anachronistic but lots of things in culture are. I wouldn’t judge either way. I’m always happy to look at sparkly rings though. Thanks Auntie Mu from Whitley Bay!