Post # 1
I was going through jewelry pictures on pinterest because I had some time to kill, and with one thing leading to another, I ended up on an article from some online magazine which said something in those lines (might not be the exact quote): “unless she’s a basic girl, don’t propose to her with a big rock.” After a quick research, I stumbled upon multiple articles and social media posts all stating that big rings are a tasteless choice, that only tacky people choose them, and so on.
When you think about it, 20 years ago, the same comments were made about smaller rings and 10 years ago, it was about gemstones/non diamond rings. Women are judged for wearing a ring, not wearing one, wanting something bigger (some relationship advice dude enraged me by writing that if a women wants a bigger ring she isn’t worthy of her man’s love).
Isn’t it insane that to all those people, your taste in jewelry determines what kind of person you are? Why do you think some rings get bad rep like that for no apparent reason? And most importantly, how does this stop? Women have enough issues to deal with already, let us wear our rings in peace!
Post # 2
I think most sane, mature and normal people don’t care, and are just happy for you.
Tastes vary. Makes the world interesting. Otherwise, there would be a one-style-fits-all engagement ring. How boring.
Post # 3
So only “basic” women like bigger stones? It sounds like the article was written by a man who does a lot of wishful thinking. As for being judged, people will judge, it’s human nature. But it only matters only if you actually give a shit about their judgement. Telling people not to judge actually has the opposite effect.
Post # 4
I am of the opinion that the writers of these types of articles are attempting to cause this sort of negative reaction in the reader so they will click on the article and they can make money. I think the best thing to do is not click on such articles as nothing good will come out of it except for the writer.
Post # 5
By that criteria, Elizabeth Taylor, Grace Kelly, Kate Middleton and Beyonce are basic? Enough said.
Not to stir up a NEW pot, but its always been understood that a man will get his woman the best diamond he can afford. There is a reason that Blake Lively, Angelina Jolie, Scarlett Johansson, Jennifer Aniston and Amal Clooney engagement rings are regularly photographed. We love the bling and apparently most women are magpies drawn to the shiniest biggest one they can be proposed with. I think most of us would be familiar with the specifications of our fav celebrity ring.
Mariah Carey’s flawless diamond is 35 carat! The richer your billionaire, the bigger the rock.
NOT basic at all.
Post # 6
RayofLight : Not to stir up a NEW pot, but its always been understood that a man will get his woman the best diamond he can afford.
I actually disagree. Most men can afford much more than the rings they’re buying, it’s a pretty dumb guy and gal who’d spend as much as they can on a ring when there are so many more important bills to be paid, and even if you’re in the tax bracket where bills get paid without making a dent then there investments to be bought and boats, houses, cars, planes.
The reason celebs get big rings is because they’re in a game of the Jones, except they’re each others’ Jones. So you know, keeping up is a lot more blingy and a lot more expensive. Our 1 carat is their 20. Same game, different ballpark.
New pot, especially on this site. Can we stop judging women by what stones they choose – everyone has their own reasons for choosing their stones and their rings, just assuming that women who choose X stones do so because of money issues. The arrogance.
Let’s just stop judging women period. The world judges us enough – children or no children, ring or no ring, size of ring, career or children, judges us on the man we choose…I don’t see men under the same scrutiny.
Post # 7
I don’t know anyone in real life that judges on this basis. I don’t know what you’re reading or what is meant by “basic” but that quote is ridiculous. People buy or are given rings that are a symbol of love. Rings come in all shapes and sizes. Bigger doesn’t always mean better. Neither does smaller.
Post # 8
“Most men can afford much more than the rings they’re buying, it’s a pretty dumb guy and gal who’d spend as much as they can on a ring when there are so many more important bills to be paid.”
I think that’s a pretty judgmental statement to make. Maybe a piece of jewellery is more important to someone than a boat or an extra car? It’s not dumb to prioritise one luxury over another, no one needs a plane or an expensive car, those are luxuries, just as a diamond ring is.
If someone wants to buy the best ring they comfortably afford because it’s important to them why on earth does that make them dumb because you think there are better things to spend money on?
I don’t particularly care for cars, I drive a 9 year old VW polo and will only get a new car when this one becomes uneconomical, that doesn’t mean anyone who buys the best car they can afford because they love cars is dumb. They’re all luxuries at the end of the day, as long as someone can afford something why does it matter what they prioritise?
Post # 9
Wow. After all of my many decades on this planet, I was completely oblivious to all of this judging by ring size that was going on all around me.
Don’t I feel dumb now.
I hope it’s not too late for me to catch up.
There’s a lot of silly nonsense I’ll have to shake out of my head first, though. Like what’s going on in my life; my pets; the well being of animals; how I can be of help; questions that spark my curiosity and demand further research; and the state of the world.
But, with practice and discipline, I can get there.
Post # 10
- Wedding: September 2020 - Summer Camp!
I think it was more a comment of living within your means.
Either way, if it’s something the couple values and can afford it, go for it. If they can but value other things more, choose something else. Or maybe they don’t like diamonds at all for ethical/environmental reasons. It’s the couple’s choice, and we shouldn’t judge them for whatever they decide.
Post # 11
I read it as if you buy the best you can afford you’re dumb because there are “better” luxuries like boats and cars to buy instead, but maybe that poster didn’t mean it in that way.
I think afford is a relative term anyway, I’ve seen posts on here from people saying they don’t think they can afford to have kids unless they have 100k in savings and people saying they can’t afford to get engaged or married until they earn a three figure salary etc. I personally think afford means that it doesn’t put you under financial stress to buy something and you’re not sacrificing essentials to pay for it. So to me if that applies then the rest is irrelevant as long as the couple are happy.
Post # 12
These articles are just fluff designed to provoke a reaction, treat them as such.
I can’t imagine anyone I like or respect coming up to me saynig omg did you see her rock?! phht how basic she must be
Post # 13
People can get whatever diamond or non diamond they want, but it certainly hasn’t ‘always been understood’ that men would get the best diamonds they can afford.
In fact, it’s a very recent, 20th century American specific phenomenon. Most of the rest of the world doesn’t do things this way. Even amongst Americans, it’s probably not a universal thing.
Post # 14
I work in sales, in a very affluent area, and 90% of my clients are women. Some of my wealthiest clients wear the most simple thin gold band with no Ering. Actually very few wear huge rocks, with the exception of the older ladies (65+). A lot of them wear absolutely GORGEOUS vintage rings with the most stunning diamonds in them.
Post # 15
I think the irony of berating people on not judging women based on their rock size was lost on you when you then proceeded to call those who DO want to spend almost all they can afford ‘a pretty dumb guy and gal.’ The arrogance indeed.
Anyhoo, the point I had in my original post was about how some people judge bigger rock sizes as being ‘classless.’ To me, a big rock does not equal classless and it never has been linked to being basic. For those to whom it does matter and they are willing to pay the best they can afford, I wouldnt deem that as classless or basic. Or, for that matter, ‘dumb’. But I think it will be eye-opening to the OP to see your thoughts on that.
It wasnt a dig at the other women who would much rather have a smaller stone. Nothing in my post implied that it was beneath a woman to accept a small rock. Its upto the couple and their individual circumstances, preferences, finances and daily lifestyle.
In the end, what they can afford is upto them and their own personal set of criteria. Five year investment plans and boat and plane costs included. Hope that makes it clear.