Fake diamond engagement ring

[annie24]

It's too bad that you felt disappointed by the ring your husband got you. I wonder if it was important to him to get you a diamond?

 

Sometimes I wonder if the guy is more rooted in the tradition of buying diamonds than the woman sometimes.

 

yeah, i wonder the same thing....

 

personally, if i am going to wear a piece of jewlery every day the rest of my life, i'd like to have some say in what i get..... otherwise, i'll just wind up not wearing it, and that would be a waste...

[rocio]

personally, if i am going to wear a piece of jewlery every day the rest of my life, i'd like to have some say in what i get..... otherwise, i'll just wind up not wearing it, and that would be a waste...

 

I agree! My husband says that if he goes out and buys me an expensive ring as a symbol of his love for me I should love it unconditionally. I try to explain that if it's ugly, I'm not going to love wearing it, regardless of what it symbolises. He just can't get that. Luckily for us, we can't afford anything extravagent and I'm happy with the $80 white gold band that I wear, love and am proud of.

[Hope75]

yeah, i wonder the same thing....

 

personally, if i am going to wear a piece of jewlery every day the rest of my life, i'd like to have some say in what i get..... otherwise, i'll just wind up not wearing it, and that would be a waste...

 

This is a very good point too, Annie.

 

I couldn't see looking down at my finger and not feeling proud of my ring since I will be wearing it 'till death to us part' as they say.

[Aleadragonhawk]

If it's having a lab-created stone that bothers you, have you considered using a stone other than a diamond for her ring? Many women prefer other gemstones (I'm a sapphire girl myself), and it might be a compromise between price and not wanting her to have a ring that you'll always see as "fake".

[annie24]

white topaz is also very lovely, sparkly, could probably pass as a diamond to the untrained eye, and is a heck of a lot cheaper.

 

ambrella - i like the simple band - very nice!

 

actually, i don't even think i want an engagement ring. my "dream wedding ring" is a diamond eternity ring. (lab made diamonds would be nice). something like that, i wouldn't want to wear another ring on top of it...

[redrose85]

Personally, I would much rather have a tasteful CZ ring in a good quality gold setting (no more 10 K!) than a diamond. Or, no diamond at all and just a wedding band. That doesn't fly with my bf though. I really do think that men are more rooted in the whole engagement ring thing than women are!

[DN]

I find it a little odd that some people seem to have lost the significance of an engagement ring - it is a gift from a man to a woman to signify his love for her and the fact that he wants to spend the rest of his life with her. I would have thought she would have been proud to have worn it for that reason alone, especially knowing that he chose it, rather than view it as just another piece of jewelery.

 

Perhaps it would be simpler to end the tradition altogether. Or start a new one where both partners wear engagement rings they choose and pay for themselves.

[RayKay]

Ah yes DN - but it is a tradition and significance invented by DeBeers I think asking you to marry him signifies he wants to spend his life with you and love itself does not need to have a material "signification" in my opinion - it is in the actions overall. Plenty of women get engagement rings whom are treated like crap, quite frankly so I don't buy that it "signifies his love". Not saying that it cannot have a lot of meaning within it as well, just that not having one does not mean there is not a lot of meaning behind his love and commitment either.

 

There was a time where people (not that long ago!) got married without engagement rings - so I can can understand why not everyone puts that much emphasis on it.

 

As I said, I myself would be fine with not having that tradition (or starting a new one - and I would propose with a ring to him myself!); I certainly would NEVER see it as "another piece of jewelery" and would love any such gift as part of a proposal and would wear it most definitely; but I don't think it is required (for record - I would never pick out my own ring as I know some do (fine for them) because I trust him to know me enough to be able to pick something that suits me and us both).

[annie24]

I find it a little odd that some people seem to have lost the significance of an engagement ring - it is a gift from a man to a woman to signify his love for her and the fact that he wants to spend the rest of his life with her. I would have thought she would have been proud to have worn it for that reason alone, especially knowing that he chose it, rather than view it as just another piece of jewelery.

 

Perhaps it would be simpler to end the tradition altogether. Or start a new one where both partners wear engagement rings they choose and pay for themselves.

 

If my memory serves correctly, the original purpose of the engagement ring is the "keeper ring" that one wore over the wedding ring, so that the wedding ring - the important one - wouldn't slip off.

 

the "traditional diamond engagement ring" is a tradition started by debeers, 100 years ago. prior, it was other stones. my grandmother had a ruby ring.

 

I know a lot of women do not want a big stone, especially if they work in an occupation where they have to wear gloves (ie, nurse, scientist, etc...) The rings rip and tear the gloves. Many scientists i know have an inlaid diamond, for that reason.

 

link removed

 

stauer has a 'diamond aura' collection. they were not forthcoming with details on the phone so much with the chemical composition of the stone, but from what i gathered, it is cubic zirconia that has been heated to high temperatures. i've never bought any of this stuff, but it looks pretty high quality.

[DN]

link removed

 

The inception of the engagement ring itself can be tied to the link removed presided over by link removed in 1215 link removed. Innocent declared a longer waiting period between betrothal and marriage; plain rings of gold, silver or iron were used earliest. Gems were important and reassuring status symbols to the aristocracy. Laws were passed to preserve a visible division of social rank, ensuring only the privileged wore florid jewels. As time passed and laws relaxed, diamonds and other gems became available to the middle class.

 

The origin of our custom to use diamonds in rings, and more recently, in engagement rings, can be traced back to the link removed and even the Romans. The Romans valued the diamond entirely on account of its supernatural powers. Pliny wrote that a diamond baffles poison, keeps off insanity and dispels vain fears. link removed. The medieval Italians copied these beliefs and added some to it: they called it the "Pietra della Reconciliazone" because it maintained concord between husband and wife. On this account it was recommended as the stone to be set in wedding (or espousal) rings. Note: not on account of its beauty thereforeeee, which was described by link removed as a small stone devoid of beauty. link removed

[Hope75]

I do not view my ring as 'just another piece of jewelry' and I never will- to me this is a symbol of my fiance's love and commitment to me- in addition to his actions which are consistent with that.

 

It's the only piece of jewelry I wear and it's meaning to me and my fiance is very significant for both of us.

 

We don't need a ring to signify our love, but the fact that he did give it to me as such means a lot to both of us.

 

We don't care who started the tradition, only what the meaning behind giving of this ring means to us as a couple.

[CarnelianButterfly]

I think of all the stones in the world, man-made are the best. They are created in a lab where scientist are held to strict standards of work safety, they are properly paid for their research and work, and the stones value is not inflated by a market monopoly created solely for the purpose of price inflation.

[RayKay]

link removed

 

But even that says the diamond use in engagement rings is recent (aka DeBeers) and again shows that engagement rings were about "status" more so than commitment at the time (back in those days....the engagement was a binding contract anyway - that is a sign enough!). I don't know, I am less inclined in the "tradition" as a tradition itself reading that to be honest...LOL. Not that I am against it, just that does not strike me as the least bit about commitment & love. The common use of diamonds as engagement stones (the mass-market) IS more recent.

 

And there are many, many societies that do not do the engagement ring at all; certainly does not mean the people there are less committed or loving, or giving - just a different cultural standard.

 

As I said, I would appreciate any gift I received - engagement ring or otherwise. I just don't think it is necessary if someone does not want a ring and I don't think it is necessary part of the engagement. I also know couples whom exchanged engagement "gifts" - not jewelery but something they wanted (one girl I know got a titanium mountain bike; she bought her hubby-to-be something as well though I cannot recall what now!). To me that makes some sense, rather than one person being "expected" to do it all because they are male - not necessarily by their partner, but by society in general.

 

Betrothal and marriage used to also be something largely "contractual" and based on gaining status or blending certain families together for social wealth and prestige. Not all things that are traditional are automatically thereforeeee mandatory. Not that there is anything wrong with believing in the tradition though; and I certainly have no issue with engagement rings themselves; as I said I would proudly wear a ring my partner gave me - I have a simple necklace for example he gave me two years ago that I NEVER take off (except for football when they make me!).

 

I NEVER said that to want an engagement ring was wrong; or that there was anything wrong in wanting to follow tradition. I certainly would appreciate any gift I received (and I honestly am personally not inclined to "pick" out my own ring or anything), I just had an issue with the implications that a ring means they are committed and love you more when one can look around and see plenty of engaged or married couples whom clearly are lacking commitment (and love).

[DN]

I think people should do what they want. But I do feel sorry for someone who goes to the trouble to pick out a ring for the girl that he loves only to have her reject it. I think it is justified if she has strong views against diamonds or if it is really tacky in some way (Four Weddings and Funeral comes to mind) but in most cases it really is the thought that counts.

 

Having said that I will admit my wife and I chose the engagement ring together. But that was what I wanted to do - she didn't ask for that.

[RayKay]

I think people should do what they want. But I do feel sorry for someone who goes to the trouble to pick out a ring for the girl that he loves only to have her reject it. I think it is justified if she has strong views against diamonds or if it is really tacky in some way (Four Weddings and Funeral comes to mind) but in most cases it really is the thought that counts.

 

Having said that I will admit my wife and I chose the engagement ring together. But that was what I wanted to do - she didn't ask for that.

 

Well, I personally never said I would reject a ring - as I said previously, I would not pick it out - but I trust his taste (he has never disappointed me) - plus even if I WAS wearing it forever I would love it even if it was not my "ideal". I know he would not choose something tacky for me!

 

I also know however plenty of women whom put their engagement rings away after a while except for special occasions - I would probably end up doing that after a few months just because with my activities and the like having too many rings is a bit annoying for me - I would just wear the wedding band except for special occasions. It is not because I would not love it or what it represents, but because it really would not be appropriate for many of my activities.

[JadedStar]

I made it clear to my husband that i didn't want an engagement ring because I didn't need it, and didn't need him stressing out over picking it out or going in debt.

 

I have a beautiful wedding band with diamonds in it that was reasonably priced and i love it.

[Alezia]

Ah yes DN - but it is a tradition and significance invented by DeBeers

 

I thought the engagement ring was already a tradition for the King and Queens, Debeer just made it popular and accessible to the general population.

 

Btw, I do think that it's a great idea if that is what she wants. Prove that her opinion counts!

 

Sorry: was one page too late =)

[RayKay]

I thought the engagement ring was already a tradition for the King and Queens, Debeer just made it popular and accessible to the general population.

 

Btw, I do think that it's a great idea if that is what she wants. Prove that her opinion counts!

 

Sorry: was one page too late =)

 

Yes, that is the case; but it is still related to the "status" - and I am not sure that it is so much about promoting "accessibility" as it was about great marketing and making lots of money for them; and then just a general "pressure" for people to do so!

 

I am still very uncomfortable with diamonds due to conflict diamond issues.

 

I definitely would prefer another stone that could be verified to be conflict free (not a diamond), or a man-made stone/diamond. I would be okay with a Canadian diamond - but even then it is still about promoting diamond mining "overall" which affects the conflict diamond market and that makes me very uncomfortable.

[Hope75]

Yes, that is the case; but it is still related to the "status" - and I am not sure that it is so much about promoting "accessibility" as it was about great marketing and making lots of money for them; and then just a general "pressure" for people to do so!

 

I am still very uncomfortable with diamonds due to conflict diamond issues.

 

I definitely would prefer another stone that could be verified to be conflict free (not a diamond), or a man-made stone/diamond. I would be okay with a Canadian diamond - but even then it is still about promoting diamond mining "overall" which affects the conflict diamond market and that makes me very uncomfortable.

 

Hehe, Does your boyfriend know you feel about diamonds, RayKay?

 

Just in case!

[RayKay]

Hehe, Does your boyfriend know you feel about diamonds, RayKay?

 

Just in case!

 

LOL, yes, I have told him before! Not in relation to engagement rings; but just as general conversation and he knows how I feel about conflict diamonds (if he was listening at least!).

 

I don't think he would feel odd buying a man-made one either - he is an engineer and while careers do not always determine personality, he is very much engineer-like in any of his thinking and he and would probably think it was 1) kinda cool "engineering" feat 2) ethical and 3) while they are not always more affordable, most often they are and given his practical (and thrifty!) nature he would like that too!

[BeStrongBeHappy]

i think something that shouldn't be missed here is that the OP should really listen to what his fiance said... i.e., she not only doesn't care about an expensive diamond, she *objects* to one because of her personal beliefs that she doesn't want a diamond because the diamond trade today involves torture and genocide as part of the business.

 

so it is also about HER opinion on something that might not be a trivial issue for her. if she says she doesn't want a mink coat because she doesn't believe in real fur, don't even try to 'surprise' her with one 10 years later!

 

there are so many lovely stones other than diamonds out there that don't *literally* cost people arms and legs! or something that people are now catching onto if you do like diamonds, purchase an antique ring with a diamond in it that was mined and cut before all the modern troubles with the diamond industries started.

 

many women LOVE antique jewelry because it is so unique and special and very beautifully crafted, and it is not just another expensive diamond that looks like anything else...

 

i think whether to buy modern diamonds or not is a personal choice, and for some people does involve ethical choices, just like it does for vegetarians, or people who won't wear fur etc.

 

since the fiance has expressed a choice, the OP certainly shouldn't ignore her and go for the 'status' move and feel he must follow the rest of the herd... he should be thinking about her and her wishes first, just like all good marriages should.

[FarthestEdge]

You're a lucky man. You will build a strong future together with such a pragmatic woman who doesn't make unreasonable demands for you to "prove" your love...

 

A couple of my thoughts:

 

1) I liked Batya's idea of a different stone. Even Princess Diana's engagement ring was actually a sapphire surrounded by diamonds. There are many beautiful gemstones that you could substitute

 

2) Canadian certified diamonds are mined in Canada and are lasar marked as such- they are more expensive because they are mined in a more ethical manner. I have an American friend whose husband bought her one because of those ethical issue (plus she has a cottage in Canada). It's a story she's always proud to tell anyone who comments on her ring.

 

3) Should 2) interest you, perhaps you'd like this suggestion. Diamonds have many quality grades of cut, colour, clarity. I knew a woman once who had a relatively small diamond, but proudly told people that he had picked it to represent her: Unpretentious, internally flawless (which incidentally is the highest clarity grade) and eternally beautiful. She was so proud to wear that ring, because it was more important to her that he thought she was perfect, than it was to be a big flashy ring.

 

4) Have something custom made- perhaps a design that intertwines your initials or some other icon that is important to both of you. This wouldn't even have to include stones at all if she wasn't interested. Plus you could make it from titanium, or platinum to be a little more unique

 

No matter what you do, I'd recommend that given her particular approach to the situation, that you include her in the decision making process..this makes it a whole lot easier....

 

Congratulations to you on finding such a great lady!

[Gath]

5000 - 10000?

 

debeers certainly was successful in infecting our society. You know before their ad campaign in the early 50s / late 40s engagement rings practicaly didn't exist? what few people who did buy them ussually got inexpensive birth stone rings on a simple gold band?

 

Debeers used a marketing campaign to infect people's minds with this insane expectation that at the worst financial time of their life they should sink a large quantity of cash into something that has extremely low resale value and no pratical purpose.

 

In my opinion, if you're going to sink 10,000 dollars into something for this girl, make it a house. At least you can live in that.

[DN]

debeers certainly was successful in infecting our society. You know before their ad campaign in the early 50s / late 40s engagement rings practicaly didn't exist? what few people who did buy them ussually got inexpensive birth stone rings on a simple gold band?

Sorry but that seems off the mark to me. My daughters recently inherited family jewelry from various forebears including diamond engagement rings from mid Victorian and Edwardian times.

[RayKay]

He said they "practically didn't exist" - not that they didn't exist. He is right in that it used to be more more the upper classes or particular segments of society...it was indeed Debeers that created the idea that it was a "mandatory" process of sorts:

 

From Wikipedia:

 

The diamond engagement ring did not become the standard it is considered today until after an extensive marketing campaign by link removed in the middle of the 20th century, which came to include one of the most famous advertising slogans of the 20th century: “A Diamond is Forever”.

 

In the early 20th century, the United States jewelery industry attempted to start a trend of male engagement rings, going so far as to create a supposed "historical precedent" dating back to medieval times. The attempt failed, although the industry applied lessons learned from this venture in its more successful bid to encourage the use of male wedding rings

 

 

I included the part about the male band as you can see that much of the success of the engagement ring as we think of it is also tied to marketing; and how well the companies (ie Debeers) was able to market the "history" of the engagement ring.