Post # 212
NO minimum here. My only requirement was that it not be a diamond, or diamond simulant, because I don’t like them. I ended up with two rings, both with sapphires: one a 2.27ct blue-green brilliant cut and one a 1ct green cushion cut. The 2.27ct is my primary ring, and the 1ct is my “stand-in” for when the 2.27ct is off at the jeweler or when I am doing something active/dirty and don’t want to risk the more expensive ring.
Post # 213
@BrideToBe14: Your comment is filled with ignorance and hate. There is nothing wrong with loving a brand, no matter how many people have it or like it. Just because several people like BMWs doesn’t make them any less of a great car does it? Just because lots of people like Tiffanys doesn’t make them any less of a quality brand.
Post # 215
@SomedayHisBride: To be completely honest with you (and I don’t intend to be snarky), but from your posts you portray yourself as a spoiled brat. There, I said it! The fact that it has to be a Tiffany ring to prove how much your Fiance loves you just BLOWS my mind :O I really really hope I’m completely off with my ‘judgement’ about you.
On the topic, I have never really looked at rings before I got engaged and have no idea what carat size I would have wanted if I have. I think probably 1ct! I got a .78 and I think it fits perfectly my 5-sized finger. 🙂 and most importantly I am marrying my love, woohoo :))))))
congrats to all the ladies! Beautiful rings!
Post # 217
@BrideToBe14: I’m hoping that your comment was satire & it just went over other bees’ heads because tone is lost online.
If by chance you were serious though, it’s really quite sad. What a tiny, bigoted world you choose to inhabit.
Post # 218
@BrideToBe14: 1) lol Vera Wang brand not being diluted at Sears/Kohls/Macys
2) your post is full of very thinly veiled racism, classism and bigotry. “I’m so sad I can’t wear my legally blonde Tiffany’s necklace anymore because ew black people!”
I get that somedayhisbride is… “challenging” but youre coming off…awfully.
Post # 219
@Arshim: Bc I was previously married and had a large stone (2.5 carats), I was used to wearing a big ring so I wanted at least that…plus I had a bonus bc I was able to trade my old ring in towards my new one. So I was pleasantly surprised when I ended up with a 4 carat!
I love it and I think it’s important to get what you really like bc after all, it’s the only thing that you’ll have forever and wear every single day!
Post # 220
Why is this thread making me think of Courtney Stodden???
Post # 222
@BrideToBe14: I have never hated a post SO much! My lord….
Post # 223
@cinderella2: If my Darling Husband was super rich I would be a little concerned/hurt that he would give me a piece of string as opposed to a nice ring I really wanted and that he could afford.
She said in her first post “Would I say no to a smaller carat size? No”
would she be dissappointed? Sure! If you wanted something and your furture husband didn’t get it even if it was affordable then I am sure you would also be dissappointed.
@SomedayHisBride: Sorry for all the smoke that is being blown up your butt! I find it funny that you are being advised to take your opinion somewhere else while it is totally okay for us to force feed you our thoughts! I personally couldn’t care what Darling Husband gave to me because I PERSONALLY hate wearing rings. I currently am coming up on my one year anniversary and STILL do not have a wedding band because rings mean so little to me….However, my wedding was VERY important to me and I had a specific vision for our wedding and would have been pretty upset if Darling Husband said NO even if we could afford it.
Everyone on the internet is a saint.
@Arshim: As for what I would have accepted….I could have gone without any ring and would have accepted any size stone 🙂
Darling Husband and I picked out a .5 heart solitare ring and a .25 circle solitare ring. Darling Husband liked the bigger one better and chose it after he asked me to leave the store lol
I have no idea on specs or whatever haha
Here is my lovely ring!
Excuse the flash and my nails (yuck!)
Post # 224
@hismrstobee: I don’t think anyone is “threatened or agitated” by anyone else’s “wish list.” I think they, like me, are shocked when people talk about “minimum requirements” for something that is supposed to be a gift and a symbol of love that in most cases, is being bought by someone else.
If I were a guy and the woman I was considering proposing to started talking to me about her “minimum requirements” for a ring I was shelling out for without any regard for my feelings or budget, I’d be reconsidering the entire relationship.
Little girls can fantasize about ginormous rocks from designer stores but one would hope by the time they’re old enough to marry, they understand that their beloved may not be able to afford or wish to spend the boatload of money “required” to fulfill a childish, materialistic fantasy.
To be clear, I have no gripe with big or expensive rings. The issue is the entitlement.
Post # 225
@Zhabeego: I think most people when having a wishlist have a thought in their head that is left unsaid ‘as long as he can afford it and wants to buy it’ I know I was that way, even though I wanted a Tiffany’s ring, I only wanted it as long as he could afford it and was willing to buy it. I chose a smaller ring for a designer brand, my minimum requirements were fine to Fiance.
ETA: The title of the thread is “what minimum carat size centre stone would you like?” not “what minimum carat size centre stone do you demand?”
Post # 226
@Jacqui90: Ok? I think everything you said in your post is fine and I don’t take issue with the title of this thread.
If someone’s guy walks her into Tiffany’s and tells her go pick out whatever she wants, good for them! If you and your dude set a budget and it allows you to buy exactly what you want? Congrats!
But demanding a man make a financial sacrifice to fulfill a little girl fantasy to prove his love? Ew. Someone, anyone, taking it upon themselves to decide what someone else can and should spend on them gets a little to close to picking pockets for me.