Last week the Internet went batch crazy over a recent survey conducted by The Knot. And the hoopla is still going. The results of said survey indicate than an increasing percentage of heterosexual women are splitting the cost of their engagement rings with their mates. Female respondents reported putting money down on their own ring to help out a less financially stable partner, paying for a ring with a joint account, or, in a few cases, agreeing to contribute in exchange for a larger rock.
Social media is still having a field day with the results of this survey and women who choose to contribute to the cost of their engagement rings are being called everything from desperate to pathetic. One popular blogger and friend to Triple B didn’t hold back on Instagram when she posted, “Say what? Put my own ring on it? I don’t think so!” Others (appearing to be the minority) argue that the tradition of a man spending a hefty amount of his earnings on an engagement ring are silly and archaic. Check out what one writer from The Slate shared on the sensitive topic:
It’s high time to end the tradition of the engagement ring, along with other wedding rituals that are built on the assumption that a bride is dependent and virginal. The entire discourse about women having to “snag” a husband and obtain expensive totems of his commitment to hold him in place before the actual wedding is offensive to both genders. Women provide for themselves now. Instead of hanging onto these sexist, retrograde wedding traditions, why not make up some new ones that reflect our modern era?
What are your thoughts? Does the idea of a woman splitting the cost of her engagement ring seem practical in 2013 — especially if the couple has already merged their finances — or should certain traditions simply be left alone? If a man cannot afford to pay for the engagement ring of your dreams does that indicate he can’t afford to be your husband? Sound off (and don’t hold back)!