I like one I saw online that is a cubic zirconia, does it matter if my fiance buys me that? I know the diamond is supposed to represent your love being eternal, but... is a rock just a rock?
2006-12-19 21:58:57 · 32 answers · asked by Geek Girl 3 in Family & Relationships ➔ Weddings
My mother said it should be a diamond. Because you know he means it if it's a diamond.
2006-12-19 22:03:52 · update #1
It's traditional for the engagement ring to be a diamond, but cubic zirconia is a great choice. In victorian times, ardent young swains would sort of compete with engagement rings; the guy with the biggest, showiest rock was a little more likely to bag the bride...however, this is not victorian times, you aren't superficial. So you might go for the zirconia, eh? You like the ring you saw online, it'd be affordable, and you'd still have something sparkly; plus, you'd have all that money left over to get a good head start on your new life together. Win/win situation all round.
Congrats, by the way, good luck to you both!
2006-12-19 22:06:58 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Well a rock IS just a rock except for that cubic zirconia is a FAKE rock. Personally I would not want anybody giving that to me as an engagement ring. It's not even real. But the decision is yours to make. If you are happy with a CZ, then go for it. But know that a diamond is forever and hopefull you will be with him forever which is why i think it is worth getting the real thing for.
2006-12-20 03:14:06 · answer #2 · answered by Mimi 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
First of all, the idea of a diamond engagement ring was started in the 1940s by De Beers, the largest diamond manufacturer in the world. Before their kick-butt marketing campaign, engagements were anything you wanted. It was only since then that people started thinking that they HAVE to be diamonds. And of course the diamond companies want you to think that! That's how they make their money! Who do you think started the whole "A diamond is forever" and "How else can 2 month's salary last forever."
Get the ring YOU like. Who cares if it isn't a diamond, if it's what makes you happy?
2006-12-20 04:29:18 · answer #3 · answered by Pink Denial 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The engagement ring can be any stone. Cubic zirconias were created because most people could not afford anything other than a tiny chip of a diamond. Other people prefer colored stones. A diamond is not mandatory. Anyone who says it is has their priorities in the wrong place. I personally would never wear a diamond (I think other stones are prettier and sparklier for alot less money) but that's just me.
2006-12-20 01:27:59 · answer #4 · answered by Cinnamon 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think its supposed to be symbolic to have a diamond, as you said eternal love.
But I don't think it matters, as long as you are happy with the ring, and its what you want. And why spend huge amounts on a ring, when you can put the money towards the wedding or your future home.
If you do get the cubic zirconia ring, just don't tell any one that's its a cubic zirconia.
All the best for the future, and good luck!
2006-12-19 22:19:05 · answer #5 · answered by reka_poti 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
It doesn't matter! Besides, you can always replace the cubic zirconia for a diamond later on if you change your mind and with a cubic zirconia you're 100% sure it's not a blood (diamond) rock anyways!
2006-12-19 22:23:55 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
My opinion -
If you are going to get a ring that looks like a diamond, it should be a diamond. Is there another stone that has sentimental value to you? My friend's mother wore a sapphire ring her whole life, and left it to him when she died. He had the stone put in another setting and gave it as an engagement ring to his wife.
My sister has a blue topaz, others I know also have birthstones. These are all gorgeous engagement rings, and when paired with a wedding band on the ring finger, serve the same function as a diamond.
This is something to consider as a cost-effective, but just as sentimental, alternative. You could also consider just going with a smaller diamond if cost is an issue.
2006-12-20 02:44:28 · answer #7 · answered by duritzgirl4 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well depends on how you look at life. A tattoo is more premanent than a diamond. LOL not saying get tattoos. but just to balance to view that when you look the true meaning of marriage its the RING (the band) that symbolize the marriage. The UNBROKEN CIRCLE. The why rings are ment for marriages, its not the DIAMOND that counts, that just the way society have remold the meaning of the wedding ring.
True enough any man who thinks the world of his women, no price is to expensive if he can afford it.
Ex: if your man makes say 300k per yr then buys you a $1000 ring that doesnt add up
Ex: if he makes 40k per yer and paying on your ring that cost like $5000 that means he loves you deraly and want to make you happy, even if it mens him working extra hr to pay off the ring...
from a womens point...WE ALL WANT DIAMONDS
2006-12-20 02:22:12 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
It's whatever you want. Technically he's supposed to spend 1-2 months pay on the ring... and keep in mind it is something you will wear the rest of your life! I would ask for a diamond.
2006-12-20 03:02:37 · answer #9 · answered by *Just Married* 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The ring is just a symbol - the exact details are not important. My engagement ring has a peridot with small diamond accents - not because he couldn't afford a diamond but because peridots are my favorite color and his birthstone, so it was what I wanted and it means way more to me then a diamond would have:)
2006-12-20 00:59:21 · answer #10 · answered by Chrys 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋