Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to expect dp to spend a substational amount of money on an engagement ring?

541 replies

hotCheeseBURNS · 01/05/2010 13:18

Like one month's salary? The whole point of having a "guideline" like that is that a month's salary is a lot of money. To eveyone, whether you earn £10K or £300K.

We don't have a huge amount of money, but we don't really have any debt, and we like having stuff, we live in a materialistic world. If dp is happy to spend thousands on a flash car, or hundreds on an electric drum kit, if he wears designer clothes (albeit from TK Maxx) and has a top of the range mobile phone, am I being unreasonable to think that I should get the same treatment? A ring to wear for the rest of my
life, to hand down to grandchildren? A symbol of our relationship.

OP posts:
MaisietheMorningsideCat · 01/05/2010 19:08

Only some women Red

Oilersgirl · 01/05/2010 19:10

RRW - We bear their children

WhatFreshHellIsThis · 01/05/2010 19:12

Red - I refer you to my earlier post

Ryoko · 01/05/2010 19:15

I've been engaged for about 6 years, (we will get round to it eventually).

Yes you are being unreasonable, what the hell has money got to do with anything?, I picked my ring based on looks not price tag.

why does it matter anyway the mine in Africa that got that diamond out the ground probably got about £2 for it, the price of all jewellery is over inflated.

RedRedWine1980 · 01/05/2010 19:15

Some women never have children- and the kids are just as much theirs as ours!

sungirltan · 01/05/2010 19:16

marriage is a traditionally a property merger. the ring is the down payment. getting engaged isn't a reciprocal arrangememnt in the monetary sense - thats the marriage!

MrsC2010 · 01/05/2010 19:17

Haha Doodly, sounds like it! Outdated as it may be he phoned my dad earlier that day (not managing to see him in person without me) to 'ask permission' knowing full well the answer would be yes...it meant a lot he did so. The proposal was simple, meant to be at meal (our 1 yr 'anniversary') but he bottled it and did it when I was putting my make up on on the sofa! He'd been to a lovely, true artisan style jewellers to get it so it is a little unusual but very simple.

Anyway, sorry all for the self-indulgent reminesce!

Oilersgirl · 01/05/2010 19:19

Yes children are created by both parents but women bear them, this is not something men can do.

Had I received a cheap nasty ring, DH would have been out the door. There should be a value to the commitment and a ring is a symbol of it. If the DP is not willing to sacrifice a couple months of drinking, golf, etc to get it then are they really worth it?

posieparker · 01/05/2010 19:22

Red, do you spend money on anything?

Because most of us who wanted 'nice' rings that meant a 'nice' pricetag was attached had Dp's earning a lot of money....or rather enough, DP's who would think nothing of spending a fair few quid on a bottle of wine, gadgets, sports cars etc....my dp owned his own home, had holidays all over the world, bought tailored and designer suits...a few grand on my 'dream' ring would have been nice, but instead he spent much less than a couple of days pay. So the ring symbolised how selfish he was and I was pregnant at the time. Gift wise my DH gets more than me but then I'm great at buying for people, my DH just thinks 'lots' of 'whatever'...I think 'a little of something nice'.

RedRedWine1980 · 01/05/2010 19:22

Surely the marriage is the thing worth having? My word some people are so materialistic!

RedRedWine1980 · 01/05/2010 19:24

I know loads of people who've got married and were never engaged. Dont see them kicking up a fuss because their DH's didnt think they were worth the comittment...they DID think they were worth the comitment so they married them!

posieparker · 01/05/2010 19:24

Noone is disputing that the marriage should be the most important thing, but perhaps you shouldn't even have a ring...

Oilersgirl · 01/05/2010 19:25

RRW - The marriage or the man are not worth having if the man thinks that you and his lifelong commitment to you are only worth £19.99 if he can go on holidays, buy sports cars, play golf etc.

This is not materialistic it is realistic. Why would anyone want to spend their life with someone who values them and their relationship so little.

posieparker · 01/05/2010 19:26

They must have sort of been engaged for at least sixteen days....

I hope you spent nothing on the wedding either...mine cost less than £500, but then I had three dcs and four days away from giving birth to dc4

JaneS · 01/05/2010 19:27

'marriage is a traditionally a property merger. the ring is the down payment. getting engaged isn't a reciprocal arrangememnt in the monetary sense - thats the marriage!'

You're taking the piss, right?

Or do you forfeit the ring if you earn more than your DH?

nooka · 01/05/2010 19:41

Engagement rings are very anachronistic really. I earned more than my dh when we decided to get married - perhaps I should have bought him the ring?

Having said that I do have an engagement ring, it cost all of £40, and I chose it, and probably paid for it too. We spent the afternoon arguing about rings because I didn't like anything (I don't usually wear jewelery at all) until I finally saw a ring I liked. I don't like traditional engagement rings at all, too big and flashy, they often seem just to be about showing off (for the woman, "look what a rich husband I'm going to have" and for the man "she's mine").

MaisietheMorningsideCat · 01/05/2010 19:43

You mean you can be bought in the same way your DH can buy a set of golf clubs or car?

If you see the ring in terms of monetary value only, then that's materialistic.

MrsC2010 · 01/05/2010 19:45

Doh, reminisce not reminesce or however I spelt it further up.

Surely everyone has different opinions here, just because a ring matters to people doesn't make them shallow, materialistic people whose marriage doesn't matter to them as much as those who on principle don't have big rings?

My ring isn't very big (.75 carat), but it is very sparkly because it is totally flawless and very rare. That is why DH chose it, because he thought the concept of something totally flawless and perfect would appeal to me...certainly more than something big but comparatively poor in quality. Anything bigger would have looked silly on me anyway as I am very small boned. I adore it, it symbolises so much to me. But I also adore my very, very simple platinum wedding band. It is a 'halo' profile so fairly unusual, but very narrow and plain to suit my hand and work with my e-ring. (I'm not wearing it at the mo as am pregnant and fingers keep swelling!) My marriage means the world to me and is very, very strong. We are financially comfortable but certainly not extravagant or flashy, we don't splurge anywhere at the moment. I object whole-heartedly to being thought of or referred to as shallow or whathaveyou for having an expensive ring and loving it. I also think the references to Batty's relationship are totally out of order. I remember the thread, I appreicate not everyone has the same views but calling a sex line does not equate to cheating for me, and wouldn't be a deal breaker. It doesn't make him unworthy or denigrate the sentiments he put into buying a ring that he knew she would love, not does it reduce her to the status of 'shallow' because she loves it 'despite' whatever happened. (I am discussing another thread now, sorry.)

Also, just because someone loves a big ring does not mean they think small things are crap and people are crap for liking them, I think people are being too sensitive.

Morloth · 01/05/2010 19:47

MaisietheMorningsideCat "You mean you can be bought in the same way your DH can buy a set of golf clubs or car?"

Hell yes, souls are expensive though and I keep re-mortgaging mine.

LeQueen money does not equal class trust me on this, I speak from experience.

MaisietheMorningsideCat · 01/05/2010 19:55

If your soul is only worth a set of golf clubs then you need to look to a different lender

Morloth · 01/05/2010 19:59

Well maybe if they are really nice golf clubs, like magic ones - where you hit the ball and it turns into a bird or something.

Sorry, its the tequila, I am soooooo happy not to be pregnant any more!

Morloth · 01/05/2010 20:00

And if I was a car I would want to be that Bugati that the top gear guys raced against the plane. Now that car would probably be worth a soul or two...

MPuppykin · 01/05/2010 20:02

This might have been said already (I have only read the first page) I interpret the OP differently. She is saying that her DP is happy to spend ALOT on what he wants, but not on something that matters to her.So, I think she is NBU to say that it is important, and he should respect that. If he is not willing to consider something she values as important, but his toys are, then what does that say?

As for the one month guideline... totally dreamt up by the jewellers, who [ahem] MAY have a vested interest! My recommendation.... if the SIZE of the baumble is important.... go to some auctions. You can pick up some gorgeous jewellery at auctions from deceased estates (if you are not superstitious). If it is just the PRICE that is important, well, can't help you.

I say this as someone who deeply deeply loves antique jewellery. But at the same time I think it is silly to spend high street prices on it. Auctions... trust me are the way to go.

MPuppykin · 01/05/2010 20:05

bauble, not baumble.

posieparker · 01/05/2010 20:07

ponders on auctions, well who says I need to get jewellery from DH. I'll just buy some for myself.