If there's one thing that annoys me, this is not it. But if there are
lots of things that annoy me, and I think it's safe to say that there are, then one of them is
engagement rings. Their very concept angers me and I see it as nothing but a stupid tradition. The man is expected to prove his love by buying a meaningless trinket for her to wear on her finger. I shouldn't say "meaningless" because I know a lot of people apply meaning to it, but, really, what purpose does it serve? Proof of love? No, I think not. Love is in your day to day actions. Buying her flowers for no reason other than you're thinking about her is a better indicator of love. Proof of commitment. No, I think not again. Commitment is again defined by your actions. Not sticking your dick in another woman is a start, for instance. I've never seen an engagement ring that prevented
that. Is it for proof of the ability to provide? Well, maybe. I certainly think there is a tendancy among some men that feel the need to make it as big as possible, either to feel better about themselves or because they think that their woman wants to show it off... DeBeers and their ilk say two months salary? Um, fuck you. If I have to spend thousands of dollars to prove I love you then
you're the one who has love issues.
And then there's the whole other side. Why is it the man who has to provide some sort of collateral for the wedding? What about the woman? Maybe at one point men were more likely to ruin everything, but I don't know if that's the case today. I know a lot more women who've cheated on their SOs then men. And I know several instances where the ring IS collateral. My friend Karen has her ring from an engagement over 10 years ago. She says she deserves it because of how he ended the relationship (I get the feeling he cheated on her). But what if she had cheated on him? He might have got the ring back, in essence "breaking even", but not end up $5k in the black like she did. I know of others (anecdotally) where the woman did break it off, but felt that she didn't have give back the ring since it was a gift.
My most recent ex-girlfriend and I talked about marriage for a little, and she could give me no other reason why I should other than that she wanted one. She did say that a nice ring of a non-diamond gemstone (she liked sapphires) would be more than enough, but that it wouldn't ever be an engagement without a ring. She also agreed that if we got engaged, she'd get me a KitchenAid mixer in return, so I had that going for me.
So, my hope is that one day I'll find the right woman and eventually say "Zooey Deschanel (shut up, I said "hope", didn't I?), I love you and I want to marry you. Instead of a ring, I offer you my heart, my respect, my soul, and my promise to do everything in my power to make sure you know how much I love you every day." When we get married (who would turn me down? I mean... C'MON.), we'll exchange nice, simple wedding rings which will serve as personal reminders of our love and commitment. And then someday, years later and for no reason whatsoever, I'll buy her a diamond ring, if that's something I think she'd like.
Now, then, the apologies. First and foremost to
nymysys who posted pictures of her ring and got me off on this tangent. Sorry if I made it seem like my rant is about you; it's decidedly NOT. Secondly, I realize that most women don't marry for a ring, they marry for love. That said, however, I do think that a majority of women expect
some sort of ring at engagement. Third, I don't think that those women who DO expect a rock (or even demand one) are necessarily bad. I just don't understand it. Like William Faulkner novels or voting Republican, I just don't get it.