An engagement ring no longer costs three months salary

The outdated rules have ‘really shifted’ for millennials.

By Rebecca Cope
There’s a well-established belief that an engagement ring should cost three month’s rent.
We’re not sure where it originated (or even why, as most people’s salaries vary so greatly to make it totally skewed) but luckily for anyone planning to propose this Christmas, the so-called ‘three-month rule’ has gone out the window for 2017.
According to US-based jeweller Anna Sheffield, the rules have ‘really shifted’ for millennials.
She told the US Metro: ‘The idea of any equation dictating what to spend on something this personal and special is kind of tied to that same status quo of a white diamond/white gold solitaire being the only ring to get. A solitaire is a classic, but it shouldn’t have to be a white diamond if you prefer black, or grey or champagne or even a moonstone for that matter.
The idea of the engagement ring now, I feel, is more tied to values and integrity of the material and the maker, as well as the people who will ultimately own the rings. They are symbols of their love after all!’
While celebrities often cough up eye-watering amounts of money for their bling (Jay-Z reportedly spent $5 million on Beyoncé’s), the ‘average’ cost of a ring today doesn’t actually exist, as we are spending anything from $500 to $5000 with the focus usually being on finding something uniquely tailored to the individual, rather than a big rock.
Many couples even choose to design a ring together themselves, making the process less about showing off and more about symbolising the relationship.
This is post was originally published on Grazia Daily