Why would it matter if you can't afford jewelry to get married? If this were at a time where the husband is expected to be the sole earner, that could be a problem. But this is 2026. He's working, she's working, and getting married will not change that.

If anything, his and her individual financial burden will decrease by getting married by combining their finances and sharing bills, if they aren't spending stupid money on diamond rings, big weddings, exotic honeymoons, etc. They'll share a home, utilities, online subscriptions, etc. That will save them both money. If they can afford to live individually without luxuries, they can more easily afford to live together, maybe with the occasional luxury.

Stupid take.

[–] Wilco@lemmy.zip 28 points 3 hours ago (3 children)

22 years of marriage here. Never bought, given, or worn a diamond in my life.

Marriage rings are a marketing campaign created to sell you a piece of carbon that is so "rare" they put them on $12 drill bit sets.

Yep. Yep. Different quality stones. Gotcha. Interested in buying a bridge by chance?

[–] melfie@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 hours ago

Carbon is the 4th most abundant element in the galaxy. Silicon is twice as rare, so maybe spend 6 month’s salary on a quartz ring instead? Either that, or save up for a down payment on a house. Nah, who needs a place to live when you can have a hunk of mineral, right?

[–] myotheraccount@lemmy.world 3 points 3 hours ago

How much for the bridge? I would need a guarantee though that it's actually used and not just buolilt on flat land in the middle of nowhere! I am no fool after all.

[–] protogen420@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

natural diamonds, are indeed rare, in part because of the marketing campaign driving up demand for an completely useless use of them

[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today 4 points 1 hour ago

They really aren't, De Beers just had a cartel on the diamond industry and artificially restricted the supply to drive up prices. They have massive deep storage vaults filled with gem quality diamonds just so it can maintain pricing.

[–] ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk 3 points 2 hours ago

Gem quality materials are overall "rare", but among gems... diamonds are practically common.

[–] JensSpahnpasta@feddit.org 9 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

I really hate those pictures that just show some randoms with a sob story. I always feel that they are totally fake.

(and if this is true: You can get cheap wedding rings. You do not have to pay thousands of money for them. You can get a cheap ring and that does work, too. Feel free to propose to the human you love even if you can't afford some expensive ring)

[–] Zacryon@feddit.org 12 points 3 hours ago

(You also do not need a ring at all.)

[–] ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk 2 points 2 hours ago

Well the tagline is bullshit editorialising, yeah.

[–] RunawayFixer@lemmy.world 31 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

That he can't afford it is a stupid assumption imo, this looks like a deliberate choice. Being responsible for raising and taking care of a kitten together is a much bigger commitment than wearing a ring.

[–] Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works 9 points 6 hours ago

Meh, it's all fake af probably but the initial post says he was couldn't afford a ring so if we're going with it then yeah he is poor in this hypothetical.

[–] starlinguk@lemmy.world 29 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

I hate these made up headlines.

[–] SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world 7 points 4 hours ago

"Man going to eat kitten in front of his succubus goddess wife to proof his devotion"

[–] yermaw@sh.itjust.works 25 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

[–] Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works 4 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

I saw that when i was like eight years old and apparently you're the only other person in the world who saw it because nobody acts like anything on the internet could ever be fake

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 3 points 4 hours ago

Yeah but also there's the "nothing ever happens" crowd and they're equally as annoying.

I think in this case it's a bit irrelevant anyway, the financial situation is irrelevant but clearly he is proposing in clearly he does have a kitten everything else is immaterial really.

[–] yermaw@sh.itjust.works 6 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

It was the only cartoon that was on the minute I got back from school. With 4 channels available it was this, Bargain Hunters, some soap opera or the news.

Arthur was not very funny or particularly interesting, but it sure beat out the alternatives.

The theme tune has been stuck in my head for 30 years...

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] CouncilOfFriends@slrpnk.net 7 points 5 hours ago

While a cat will cost more on the long term, proposing with a kitten seems like it would be nigh impossible to turn down. Who says no to a kitten?

[–] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 127 points 10 hours ago (11 children)

the jewelry is the least important thing about being married.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 3 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I agree, but also, if you can't afford a cheap ass ring, you probably can't afford a pet. It doesn't need to be something fancy. If you care about that tradition (not implying the person in the image does), you can get rings pretty cheap if you don't need the whole diamond thing, and even cheaper if you're willing to buy second-hand.

[–] darthelmet@lemmy.world 1 points 40 minutes ago

Surely a second hand wedding ring must be cursed or something right? Why was it available in the first place? Did they die? Get divorced? Lose their hands and or fingers in some fetish play gone horribly wrong?

Better to just avoid the whole situation and get a cat.

[–] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 40 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I think my spouse and I spent... $80 total on our rings. Seemed like a waste of money to both of us.

[–] PhoenixDog@lemmy.world 3 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

That was us. Our wedding bands were about that all in, and I got their engagement ring for about $125.

I think everything we did for our wedding, rings included, was around $1500. The majority of that was booze.

[–] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 1 points 7 minutes ago

Good on you, when I hear how much people are spending on weddings man. Over 50k is "normal" to them? We put our money to a down payment. Much better use for it.

load more comments (9 replies)

[–] volore@scribe.disroot.org 64 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

Smart. Easier to say 'no' to a shiny rock, hard to say it to a kitten.

[–] pachrist@lemmy.world 0 points 54 minutes ago

Nah, unless you're as dumb as a rock, no matter how shiny, this is not a question you ask unless you're 100% sure of the answer.

[–] BillibusMaximus@sh.itjust.works 27 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

She could say no, but she won't. Because of the implication.

[–] HumanOnEarth@lemmy.ca 23 points 8 hours ago

"We both know that this cat only lives if you say yes"?

[–] MousePotatoDoesStuff@piefed.social 15 points 8 hours ago

Apparently the idea of poor people getting married is too woke for Julie :P

load more comments