Engagement rings for men catching on

My how times do change. Story here. Excerpt:

'A jewellery chain is set to be the first in the country to sell engagement rings exclusively for men.

H Samuel says the move comes after demands from female customers for equality - as increasing numbers of women propose to their partners.
...
As well as issues of equality driving demand for male engagement rings, H Samuel says women are equally enthusiastic about them as a means of making it clear their men are spoken for.

An H Samuel spokesman said: 'Women are no longer waiting until the man pops the question. We are equals in the workplace, equals in our relationships and we make our own decisions.'

Rather belies feminist assertions about "relationship inequality" doesn't it? If marriage is so oppressive to, why are they now doing the asking? It just don't add up.

I have never heard of a case where a man in a relationship with a woman has instigated marriage. The idea is always brought up first by the woman and brought up repeatedly until she gets a proposal. Perhaps it's a sign of progress that if marriage is going to continue to exist as a legal matter, at least now some women are finally admitting to the reality of things and taking their chances asking a fellow for his hand in marriage.

Not that I think it'll change the response rate that much.

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

I find the price disparity of engagement rings intriguing. A female ring can cost upwards of $10,000, the male ring -- a modest £79.99. I'm not sure how much that translates in American dollars, but it isn't that much.

Like0 Dislike0

firstly, it shows how really cheap most women really are.
they constantly harp on how cheap men are, but then they
won't even spend a DAYS salary to show their love & devotion?

secondly, it mirrors her unquenchable desire to own a man.
once the fool has proposed, she wants to keep other women away.
it's getting harder and harder to get one of us to "step up"
and assume total responsibility for anything this grown child wants to do for
the rest of her priveleged life, and she wants to make sure her
lottery ticket has her name on it.

thirdly, it gives him a visual reminder that he is no
longer free to partake of "other fruit" that will be hanging around
everywhere during the lead-up to the "big day".

fourthly, it is her way of being "equal". she has to wear one, and all
the men will know she is taken, so why shouldn't he have to wear one
as well?

and lastly, besides showing how cheap she is when it comes to spending
money on him, it is not acceptable that he actually own anything of value that
she can't take with her when she eventually leaves. after all, the entire time
they are to be married, no matter how short the time may be, he must constantly
shower HER with expensive gifts, like more jewelry.

"oh, he went to jared".

Like0 Dislike0

The article reads: "The spokesman added: 'The ring aims to redress the balance of one side of the couple giving and the other simply receiving, as well as being an outward and visible sign of being "taken"."

What, he's a commodity to be purchased for a paltry $130.00 +/- bucks???

But look on the bright side guys, she could have gone to PetCo and bought a collar and leash for what... ten bucks?

Gunner Retired

Like0 Dislike0

I guess it just illustrates the control factor of a relationship which women care about so much. They need the commitment, but if they're the ones who have to propose, they don't want it to be a huge expense like it would be for a man. Like you guys have said, a commitment apparently is only worth around a buck fifty to a woman. Although, I must say, ultimately it is a step in the right direction. At least some women are trying to make a step towards equality in this department. I must admit though, I'd probably be insulted to receive an engagement ring that cheap.

Evan AKA X-TRNL
Real Men Don't Take Abuse!

Like0 Dislike0