There’s a convo currently going on on Twitter about how a man should invest a years salary on an engagement ring.
Um ..... No.
Traditionally,
It is a minimum of month to a month and a half of one’s salary on the ring, NOT a year.
Obviously, if you can afford a ring that costs more than a months salary, go for it.
It is right to invest in an engagement ring especially as it tends to be a family heirloom, so go for the best quality that your months salary can afford.
anything less is selfish and stingy and you might as well ditch altogether the tradition of getting engagement rings, of getting a wedding dress or even getting a wedding.
Complaining that even a months salary is too much cheapens your bride, is disrespectful and a sign that you should not even be getting married.
If you’re unwilling to invest a months salary in a ring, then you definitely ineligible to get married as you have displayed inability to provide and clear disrespect for your bride to be.
Getting married is a privilege NOT a right.
You don’t have the right to marry if you are not qualified and prepared for marriage and to show serious intent as a man, to protect and provide.
People, especially men, invest in people they value, so invest well .... 1-1.5 month is traditional; a year is too much!
And ladies, please stop being an entitled princess and demanding a years salary worth in an engagement ring. A month is fine.
However, if he is unwilling to invest something as small as a months salary, he doesn’t value, he sees you as cheap and he has no respect whatsoever for tradition or marriage as a whole.
Don’t be surprised if he ends up treating you and the marriage disrespectfully or as an afterthought.
People treat with utmost care that which they have invested in.
