leftcoastdeac
Robert O'Kelley
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2011
- Messages
- 8,460
- Reaction score
- 1,745
Don't get a stone with a visual flaw - she'll see it eventually and it will make her self conscious about the ring, even if nobody else finds it.
Yes. Women are awful people. Single women with engaged friends are the absolute worst. When my fiance met up with friends after the proposal, the one girl who isn't really that close with my fiance anymore immediately asked how big it was and if she's sure it's real.
I'm only 26 and in my 2L year, so I could only afford close to $5k and she loves it. She's also 5'2 with small hands, which really helps when you can't afford 1.25ct like the OP. I'd just say pay what you can afford and buy what she wants. If she's pissed you didn't spend more on her engagement ring, she shouldn't get one.
Don't get a stone with a visual flaw - she'll see it eventually and it will make her self conscious about the ring, even if nobody else finds it.
Exactly. Sacrifice some size for better quality.
As others have mentioned, don't worry about the size of the stone, its the sparkle and color that count. The hearts and arrows stones are a little more but well worth it.
Small and angled to the right?
For whatever reason it really bothers me that most Americans feel obligated to fuel a disgusting industry because of a perceived tradition that was really just a great marketing ploy by De Beers.
For whatever reason it really bothers me that most Americans feel obligated to fuel a disgusting industry because of a perceived tradition that was really just a great marketing ploy by De Beers.
Something that's been going on for close to 100 years is more than a "perceived" tradition at this point.
For whatever reason it really bothers me that most Americans feel obligated to fuel a disgusting industry because of a perceived tradition that was really just a great marketing ploy by De Beers.
Meh... it is just stupid in my opinion. There are literally people enslaved to get the diamonds and people completely ignore it because its been a "tradition" for two to three generations. I honestly don't think I could buy a general diamond ring and look at it everday wondering how it got there. I will admit I am hypocritical since I don't give a shit where my Nikes or other stuff comes from, but for some really diamonds especially piss me off because its so blatant and the apathy is so accepted.
longer than that; it's at least as old as the civil war era.
Pay more for a non conflict diamond
Diamond engagement rings weren't common until the 1930s.
I've heard and read that you have to do pretty thorough research to ensure a diamond is truly non-conflict. There is no logical reason an engagement ring has to be a diamond other than societal pressure derived from a shady cartel marketing strategy. I don't understand why it doesn't bother more people.
Email George K. Walker?
I did take his conflict of laws class, but I can't remember the answer (nor do I care to look it up right now ).