This is mostly a vent and I've gone anonymous because this is stupid internal drama and selfishness. I'd love to know what the Hive thinks of no-ring engagments.
I'm afraid that due to expenses related to my moving across the globe to be with my SO there won't be funds for any ring. He fully intends to propose at his chosen time with or without it though and I'll be happy having that commitment even with a twist tie for a "ring" but part of me still wishes we could afford the ring we talked about. Instead, the money meant for that might be used to pay for moving some precious live cargo into our new country. I'd leave him with someone and bring him over later but he's a rescue dog, still unpredictable, and I'm the only person he's bonded with.
I was the one who brought up cutting the ring from the picture for now until we can afford it but I still hate myself for saying it and even more for still wanting the ring. Hopefully I'm worrying for nothing but unless I get a new job or my crafty skills bring in some money, I think there shall be no ring. Is this odd to be engaged with no ring? Do you consider people engaged without it? I should probably just suck it up and be excited about moving but I can't help worrying about the looks on people's faces (specifically my family) when they ask to see the ring and I have to say, "There isn't one, yet."
If you want a ring why not just get a stand in for temporary purposes? It may be a good idea to bring up to your SO to get a CZ , moissy or something like that for now until you are both more comfortable with spending money on a lifetime ring, and you will have something to look at and get an idea of what you like and can afford in the meantime.
Atleast this way you can say , this is the ring I am wearing until we can both find something we both love enough to keep for life. Good luck to you and don't let anyone make you feel awkward about whatever decision you and your SO do make.
It is pretty hard for me to wrap my head around a couple being engaged without a ring. I agree a "stand in" ring might do the trick and you don't have to break the bank!
A ring doesn't make an engagement, it's simply a symbol of the commitment you are making to eachother. Not having a ring won't make your commitment any less committed.
I don't think there is anything wrong with a no ring engagement or a no ring marriage.
I don't need a materialistic object, an overpriced ring of metal and shiny stones to prove to myself, my husband, or to the world that I love my husband and am 100% committed to him.
I don't need a ring to ward off "suitors" because I love my husband enough to tell them no.
I don't need a ring as a fashion statement, or a statement based on how "much he loves me" or how much we make.
At the end of the day, I just want to be with my husband, and if that means no formal wedding, no ring, no frills, that's fine with me.
I joked with him about being ok with a twist tie dipped in glue and coated in glitter, it's honestly better than nothing and I think it's cute but other people have asked if I'm missing my brain. The ring we decided on is a simple petite Tiffany setting with an Amora Moissanite in palladium (I have an allergy). I think he said the price was around $1,500.
I'm feeling better about the idea of a stand-in!
I was engaged for a few months without a ring. My fiance asked me to marry him and I said yes, therefore we were engaged. A ring means nothing in the grand sceam of things, if the commitment is there then what else do you need? Yes it is the most important piece of jewlery you will ever wear but it is still just jewlery. If you lost your wedding ring and didn't have one for a while would you still be married? It's the same thing. Having a ring is really special and it will feel great once it is on your finger and you are selfish for wanting one, but don't worry to much about not having yet, because it is knowing that your SO is completely commited to you that is important.
An engagement is an engagement. Rings are nice, but not necessary. I mean, I would still consider a couple married if they didn't have a traditional wedding, and instead went to the courthouse. Who cares what people think. All that matter is the love and committment you two have for one another. Hope it all works out! :)
I do see an engagement as just as legit without a ring. However, I know I'd really like one. That's normal. It is so common to have one in our culture, and even my FI wants a man-gagement ring.
If money were an issue I would ask for a plain gold band. If it were even more of an issue... silver, or even steel. I don't like "fake" anything, but there's always an elegant, cost-effective option.
I see an engagement as just the same with or without a ring. A ring is nice and sparkly, but unnecessary.
You can always get a temporary ring like CZ, or if you think sentimentality would cause problems with that, get a band first and choose a solitaire later that he can put on your finger at your wedding (so opposite order as usual).
Engagement rings are primarily common in Western culture, I'm not ethnocentric so I understand that many engagements are valid no matter their differences and think that betrothal "gifts" are something that should be mutally given (ie. I plan on getting my SO a watch for engagement when the time comes, I'd be happy with a watch or ring, whatever he wants to give me) or not given at all. I think the most important part of engagement is the mutal understanding that you will be married soon. Rings and things are just bonuses and not necessary.
I would definitely get a CZ or some type of stand-in ring for the time being. You can find BEAUTIFUL rings from less than $500 and even less than $100.
@LemonyItch: My fiance and I are still pretty tight with expenses. I'm in college and he had recently just chaned jobs and bought a new car. What we did (I went with him to pick out my engagement ring before we were engaged) was that instead of spending $1000+ on a diamond, we opted for a white saphire. NO ONE notices the difference and ppl say how pretty and shinny my diamond is.
My saphire is pretty huge and was $250. So that could be an option for you.
I fully support stand in rings. We're gonna replace my saphire with a real diamond on our one year anniversary when we'll be established in our jobs. My sister and her fiance also used a stand in ring, i believe he bought it from kohls or macy's. It was like a $50 ring that looked like an engagement ring.
Hope that helps!
Yes someone can ask without a ring and its an engagement but the ring is symbolic of that. doesn't matter if the ring costs $100 or $10,000 the ring is the public signifier that you are officially taken, in my opinion.
An engagement is not dependent on a ring. An engagement is an agreement to marry. No jewelery necessary for that.
I was engaged without a ring, I opted not to have one at the time for various reasons. Somehow we still managed to be married a couple months later so obviously we were engaged. So yeah, not necessary.
I did get rings later on, after we were married but again, even if I do not wear them I am still married. Rings do not themselves make the engagement or the marriage. At least I sure hope not!
ETA: also, I agree with Hyperventilate in full. I do not need to publicly "prove" I am "taken" by wearing a ring (I actually hate that terminology and concept...my husband and I both freely choose to be together, freely love each other, we are equals, we are not there to be "taken" by the other or anything of that sort, we do not own each other after all).
@Hyperventilate: THIS and I wouldn't care if anyone thought I wasn't really engaged bc I had no ring. I see a lot of married people without rings so *shrug*
Yes get a stand in! I've been engaged since May with no ring and most people don't get it. It's always a bit awkward to explain, but since I didn't think of a stand in right away I figure its late in the game now for it, so I'm tough ing it out!
My coworkers are always checking my hand too to see if I've gotten it yet! That gets old.
I agree get a stand in if you're uncomfortable with the questions, but I think the ring is totally unncessary. I've also seen people who are "engaged" and HAVE a ring (albeit usually a cheap one) who have no imminent or future plans to wed, just some sort of vague agreement that they will marry. So no, I don't find the ring particularly meaningful. It's a piece of jewelry to which many women have chosen to attach a tremendous amount of angst and expectation.
It's all about what makes YOU comfortable. If you feel totally cool shrugging off the questions, then do it. If it makes you uncomfortable, then get a cheap stand-in if finances allow.
We never had engagement rings, and we've now been married for three years. I find it a bit hard to wrap my head around the concept that we were never engaged since we didn't have rings.
The whole engagement ring thing started as a marketing ploy by De Beers to get people to buy more diamonds. I find it appalling that people listen to advertising so much that they now can't envision an engagement without a ring.
My uncle was in med school when he proposed to my aunt and couldn't afford a ring. He promised to get her one later, but she didn't care - they never did get an e-ring, but that doesn't make them any less married, which is the point, right? They have been happily married for 30+ years... clearly, an engagement can be "real" without a ring - just be prepared to answer questions from people because someone will be rude enough to ask "If you're engaged, where's your ring?".
My parents did not have an egagement ring, and they are going on 37 years married now. He bought her a HUGE solitaire for their 25th anniversary!
I think an engagement is legitimate with or without the jewelery, BUT I would also be bummed if I didn't have one. It's very special to me and I realize it's a societal thing and doesn't really matter to the relationship, but I am a definitely a product of the culture, lol. That being said, I don't think anyone should break their budget for a ring. Many people have suggested cz or moissy (personally, I want to UPGRADE to a moissy, lol - I love the look of them) but you could also simply go for a smaller stone. Some have a problem with that but FI and I were students in college when we got engaged and didn't have much money. He presented me with 1/4ct solitaire and it's absolutely beautiful, but didn't break the wallet, you know? I think it was under $600 and granted, I don't know the Cs, but I can say it sparkles more than many other bigger rings I've seen in person.
My point is, you can still find a "real" (although I think all rings are real) ring for a very affordable price.
I think that there are more important things than the ring.. even though I understand your desire for one. I dont think what others consider normal or right should affect your decision and your choice to get engaged or not. If you are planning a wedding and are in love and consider yourselves engaged, than who cares what others think.
If you didnt more or didnt have the rescue dog because you bought a ring instead, how happy would you really be?
You can buy a ring when you can afford it, until then just remember that the ring isnt what makes you happy, what it represents does.
You obviously don't need hardware on your finger in order to make the decision to marry, but I certainly don't think you're selfish for wanting an engagement ring! I'm in favor of having a stand-in ring until you can afford the lifelong ring you want. Maybe you could get a promise ring, they're smaller/less $, and as far as I know, there's still a large selection.
I'm wondering why 15 people who said "no" aren't speaking up. I'd like to hear your thoughts.
Also, why do 8 people say that the OP is selfish or crazy? What part of this is crazy?
Just for the record OP, it's okay to want a pretty shiny. You shouldn't feel guilty for wanting something like that.
@LemonyItch: I'm engaged without a ring!! It's not a money issue, I really wanted to pick out my ring and I also thought it would be romantic for us to ring shop together. I have not decided what I want yet....so when people ask I say "I'm still picking out what I want" and it's the truth! People seem to love that I get to pick out my own ring. No one thinks it's weird at all. I got engaged a few weeks ago and I think we'll pick out the ring in february.
I was engaged with no ring for almost 2 years then he reproposed with a ring. I thought I was engaged but only told a few people, and the people I did tell didnt really see us as "engaged" particularly my parents. They were the main reason he even got me a ring ( i didnt really need one but it is nice) I didnt start officially planning the wedding until he got the ring. So it wasnt that wierd for me and I see people all the time without engagment rings and just wedding bands
So you say a twist tie is fine but you don't really mean it. I think this is pretty common. A ring is necessary for most of us.
Why not get a stand in simple cz ring & upgrade when appropriate.
My FI gave me a stand-in until we got one made. Would that be an option for you? Then you could wear the stand-in as a RHR or use it as part of your set if it is a band
ETA that is just to address the ring issue- I think an engaged couple without a ring is absolutely as engaged as a couple with a ring.
I was engaged without a ring and it was my choice. With a new house and vehicle payments I couldn't fathom spending $1000+ on a ring when it could be used in far more important areas of our life. Besides that, I have a metal allergy so why bother buying something I couldn't wear.
I appreciate the opinions and wish more people who said that I wouldn't be considered engaged would speak up.
Maybe I also should have added that I'm not generally a jewelry person, I have three pieces that all have significant meaning for me and maybe are worth $100 combined. Only one of them gets worn. I also don't want a diamond but I can see why people assume I'm talking about a diamond ring. I've offered to give my SO the CZ ring I bought years ago but he told me to get rid of it because it's fake and he doesn't want something fake to represent something real. (I recently got my SO to reconsider moissanite because he used to put it together with CZ)
If it comes down to it and I have to choose between a ring and my dog, I'm obviously choosing my dog. The ring isn't the end all be all of my existence but I did fall in love with the looks on my grandmothers' faces when they would look at their engagement ring/wedding band and talk about how much they loved their husbands, children, lives, and how they hope I find someone as good as my grandfathers. For them, it was a daily reminder worn on the most easily seen part of our bodies about their romance, their love, their lives, and was a tangible way to recall them. Maybe instead of a ring I can use my love of photography and take a picture right after of the two of us and just tell people that we're ring shopping or waiting until wedding bands.
Thank you, Bees for your opinions and messages of support. They really are appreciated.
I have definitely known people to be engaged without a ring. It depends on the situation, but generally no I don't think a ring is not necessary. There have definitely been some situations on the bee where people think they're engaged but never got a ring - thoguh I think that is more a miscommunication that they took it as being engaged when the "fiance" said Do you want to marry me, in a curious conversational way, not a proposal type of way.
You seem to want a ring though, so I think you should at least get a stand in! Find a nice CZ (try berricle.com) ring until you guys can afford to upgrade. I don't think it's selfish either. It's okay to want the whole shebang! (even if you formerly said you didn't need it). I'd definitely be bummed if he wasn't holding my ring when he proposed!
@LemonyItch: This must be hard, but what about buying a nice but inexpensive (like $100) ring that you can use as a stand-in? My coworker did this, not due to financial reasons.. but because she was super picky and still looking for the perfect ring. Everyone understood... and I don't think many people even asked.
In this case I think it's important to be practical. I would wear the stand-in ring and say "oh, this is the ring he proposed with but we plan on getting a different one when the time is right - with all these overseas moving expenses, a ring isn't a huge priority, but marriage is!" and leave it at that. If people don't understand this, they're idiots and mean spirited.
You will get the ring of your dreams... it's not like your SO is giving excuses or anything. It'll just take a little more time!
ETA: I would make the ring look like a normal ring.. not an engagement ring per se, if you don't want to explain it's CZ or whatever. Nothing wrong w. CZ but I'd feel weird if people were admiring my "diamond". Get a pearl ring or something like my coworker did (he proposed in Hawaii with a black pearl ring).
Or... you could just run off and get married and wear a wedding band hehe. No engagement questions :D
@myluverbuny: this was me. I got engaged in August and we booked everything at the end of October. I didn't pick out my ring until last month.
My grandpa proposed to my grandma without a ring. He simply couldnt afford it. Her wedding band was plain gold. Years later he bought her an engagement ring that he could afford even though it was still very small by Bees standards (1/8 carat solitare). They were married for a few months shy of 40 years when he passed away. They had what I would consider a perfect marriage-based on love not material possessions. So yes, I would fully consider someone engaged even if they never not a traditional engagement ring.
Yes you will still be engaged without a ring! Get a stand-in, I bet you can find a beauty for $50. Or even just a titanium band or something. If people ask just tell them you are still looking. I would take my dog offer a peice of metal and rock anyday too!
My fiance actually proposed to me without a ring. Three days later we did go to the jewlery store to pick out a ring, but I consider our engagement date as November 17th not November 20th. Without the ring I was so happy to be engaged. I like having my ring and enjoy showing it off, but if I was to take it off now I would still "feel" engaged. But everyone is different and I could see how to some it may appear that you're not engaged if you don't have a ring. It's a personal decision just like everything from now until you get married and even when you're married. It's about how you feel and if you want to have a ring, talk it over with your fiance. Get a simple ring now and then later, maybe on an anniversary, he/you can get another one/"upgrade"?
Wow now 23 people say that you have to have a ring to be engaged. I guess their culture is the only one that exists?
You must log in to post.
| User | Posts Today |
|---|---|
| AllieANT | 79 |
| pengoala | 69 |
| badabing88 | 55 |
| TaurianDoll | 43 |
 beachbride1216 |
36 |
| vorpalette | 35 |
| MsBeer | 35 |
| MrsPanda99 | 34 |
| s2bmrscook | 31 |
| adoc86 | 30 |
| User | Posts Today |
|---|---|
| MsBeer | 27 |
| lsimpson | 14 |
| badabing88 | 14 |
| TexasSpringBride | 13 |
| Zhabeego | 12 |
| NLbride | 8 |
| rickhurst35 | 7 |
| MrsPanda99 | 7 |
| MrsK86 | 6 |
| AllieANT | 6 |
