Diamond Ring Spammers

My musings on nontraditional / non-diamond engagement rings got many comments from ladies who have gorgeous rings that were meaningful, a little unusual, or budget-conscious (or all of the above!). A few gents also chimed in. Thank you so much for offering your thoughts.

I also got a few spam comments about rings, including one from an UK diamond store that I found hilarious. I guess my post is keyword rich in “diamond” and “engagement rings”! icon smile Diamond Ring Spammers

If you are searching gift for presenting on the day of engagement, then no gift would be better engagement rings so present a attractive and alluring diamond engagement to impress your beloved

Here is something interesting about engagement rings (diamond or otherwise): an engagement is a conditional gift, which means that if the engagement is broken, the ring’s ownership reverts back to the buyer – in most cases it would be to the gentleman. It doesn’t matter who was at fault for breaking up the engagement. If, however, an engagement ring is given on a nationally-recognized holiday (Christmas, Valentine’s Day), or the recipient’s birthday, then an argument can be made that the ring is a gift and not a conditional gift.

So.. forewarned is forearmed! Don’t ask on a holiday if you worry about rings / ownership / broken engagements.

Non-Traditional Engagement Rings

Nope, I’m not engaged! But I will be.. sometime. icon wink Non Traditional Engagement Rings When we do get engaged, we will be picking out the ring together. Like many women, I always thought of a colorless diamond solitaire as THE default / traditional engagement ring.

I’ve mentioned before that I’d rather have a great trip than an engagement ring. Then my friends started getting engaged (one in particular has an especially gorgeous ring!) and I was surrounded by diamonds. What’s wrong with having a great trip AND a ring, right? In a moment of bling-induced weakness, I told CB that, er, perhaps I DO want a diamond. I believe my exact words were: “I know I am a sucker for all the marketing, but they are so shiny…”

Say what you will about the diamond industry and its many problems (and let’s be honest, I don’t think mining for any type of gemstone is sunshine and roses), DeBeers is a branding genius and market maker and credit must be given where credit is due. Diamonds are fiery, precious, and hard enough for every day wear, and just beautiful from an aesthetic perspective.

Upon closer reflection, however, I realized that while I like and appreciate diamonds, I just don’t want a diamond enough to spend $5,000 or $6,000 it will take to get something that we like or to spend $1,000 and get a diamond of lower quality. A little voice inside me says, “$6,000 amortized over 50 years of marriage (optimistic one, aren’t I?) will be just a little more than $100 a year! So if you really want a diamond, go for it.” Then another little voice chimes in, “but do you really, really truly deeply do want a diamond?”

Once I started to move beyond the “diamond = engagement ring” paradigm, I started thinking about something a little bit more nontraditional. For example, how about something colored AND not a diamond? When I was growing up, ruby was my favorite gemstone. Red is my favorite color, and is, conveniently for me, also the color associated with love. When started googling ruby rings. I’ve found a picture of the ring I really like (see above): a large ruby surrounded by a halo of smaller diamonds. Best part is, many gemstones can be created in labs, which means they are cheaper than mined stones and free from the ethical issues that might arise with mining.

I am not 100% confident, but it’s looking more and more likely that I will be sporting a nontraditional engagement ring.

Do any of you have a nontraditional engagement ring? (i.e, a color gemstone or a non-diamond engagement ring?) How did you come to that decision? Have you regretted not getting a diamond?

The $10,000 Dating Budget

Love don’t cost a thing, but dating is another story.

Do you spend less money when you are in a relationship? Do you spend more money on grooming, apparel, and eating out when you are single / casually dating? These are the questions that come to mind after I read The Economics of Serial Dating: A Case Study. It’s a fascinating article about one New York City woman’s dating budget for the year. The article opens with a pithy introduction:

Meet Anna. She spend $5,468 a year on dating, before she even leaves the house.

economicsofdating The $10,000 Dating Budget

As the graphic shows, Anna’s total cost is even higher, at over $9,000 once the costs of taxi rides, professional photos, online dating memberships, clothing, shoes, dry-cleaning, personal grooming, and other costs are tallied up.

Given that my dates with my boyfriend generally revolve around In-N-Out (oh delicious burger) and that the most expensive piece of clothing I purchased with a date in mind was my $80 prom dress, I never realized how expensive dating can be. On the other hand, plenty of people date, and I can’t imagine most people spending almost $10,000 a year on this pursuit of Mr./Mrs. Right or their less attractive alternative, Mr./Mrs. Right Now. Or perhaps I have an unrealistically low budget for dating. Besides, I am sure the clients of Millionaire Matchmaker spend several hundred thousands, if not more, on their love-story-in-the-making.

Cost of Social Life vs. Cost of Dating

One thing I noticed is that most of Anna’s costs are the costs of having an active social life, not exclusively the costs of an active dating life. Going out every night and taking taxis are expensive, regardless of whether you do it with your friends or a date. The beauty products that Anna uses are also for her personal use, I’d argue.

I have spent some pretty penny on beauty treatments in the past – a $250 hair straight perm, a $80 facial, etc. But I wouldn’t attribute that to a cost I had to incur for my relationship. There are also many expenses (shoes, clothes) that Anna rolls into her “dating budget” but that are not really dating-exclusive purchases. Anna admits that she sometimes makes purchases that she may not have made without the specter of an upcoming date over her.

Still, it’s undeniable that there are very high social pressures for men and women – especially women, I might argue – to look good. Looking good doesn’t come without effort, or, most of the time, money.

So I am curious – How much do you spend on dating a year? Please tell us your demographic if possible (age range, location, gender).

source: bundle.com

Coupons on a first date, yay or nay?

coupon10 300x300 Coupons on a first date, yay or nay?Even romance can’t escape the recession – lately, I’ve been seeing frugal dating tips everywhere. One thing I’ve read is to use a coupon on a first date.

I love eating out, I love good food, and if I can do it for 10% or 20% or 50% off, all the power to me. CB and I have no qualms about busting out a restaurant.com coupon and enjoying a $60 meal for $40, or going to Restaurant Week, or ordering specials. But using coupons on the 293rd date is very different than doing so on a first date.

Using coupons on a first date, especially in a restaurant, a bit awkward to me. ChowHound had a very spirited debate on this matter, with the Yay-coupons coming slightly ahead of the Nay-coupons. I think I’d lean towards Nay to coupons on the first date, and this is why:

  • First date should be the time when you are extra careful to make sure the other person is comfortable. A coupon might give the appearance that someone picked the restaurant only because of the discount, and not because of its great lighting or special tapas or cool drinks menu. Even if that’s not the case (i.e. the asker has a coupon to a great restaurant that he/she already knows and loves), I’d much rather avoid the impression.
  • Most coupons require that you announce the fact that you have a coupon at the beginning of the meal. Some coupons are really hard to figure out. Buy 2 entrees and get an appetizer (but not entrees in the XYZ section) or spend $50 in these categories and get 20% off. The date might feel as if he (or she) must order in a certain way because of the coupon, and that’s not cool.
  • Some waitstaff are not as attentive when you mention that you have a coupon. It’s not right, of course, because people should tip on the original amount so the waiters who provide the same level of service should receive the same tip from a party using a coupon and a party that doesn’t. But I’ve gotten bad service just for only getting water and not the cocktail the waitress pushed, so.. imagine if I used a coupon. Again, having a snippy waiter is something to laugh about when you have been dating the other person for a while, but it can add to the stress on the first date.

The one thing that I don’t like is how using (or not) coupons is seen as an indication of character. For the purpose of simplicity I will make the very general assumption that men tend to ask ladies on dates and women tend to be asked (understanding that there are no hard-and-fast rules and that this gender dynamic rules out gays and lesbians).

In the ChowHound thread most of the comments either said that men who uses coupons are either financially responsible stewards of money or cheap stingy penny-pinchers. And that women who don’t like coupons are gold-diggers who are only out for a free meal ticket. I would never discount someone for using a coupon on a first date, but my personal preference is against it. But coupon is a coupon – you can’t extrapolate that one instance to make assumptions about a person’s whole financial outlook / money management skills (good or bad).

Instead of having my date use a coupon at a more expensive place on a first date, I would much rather have a first date at a cheap neighborhood place or a a taco truck. First dates don’t have to be expensive (seriously – my favorite taco joint sells $0.80 tacos – get 15 of them, grab a bottle of $6 Moscato, and take me on a picnic. I will swoon), but it should be comfortable for both people.

Coupons on first dates can bring mixed reactions, so I say it’s best to wait until the dating relationship is a little further along before those 2 for 1s and buy one get one 50% start coming out. Of course, if both people met on CouponCupid.com, then go forth and coupon!

So.. coupons on a first date. Yay or nay? I’d be very interested in hearing feedback from both guys and gals.

Business Insurance Experts Premierline Direct

Debt is the Kiss of Death for a Relationship?

debt and love Debt is the Kiss of Death for a Relationship?Debt isn’t just hazardous to your financial well-being, it can destroy your relationships as well.  Just ask one young lady featured in today’s New York Times article.  Three days after she divulged to her fiance that she had over $170,000 in student debt, he broke off the engagement.  For her future relationships, she decides that she needs to share that information much sooner, because it can be a “deal-breaker.”

Still, all of this raises the question: At what point do you have a moral obligation to disclose your indebtedness during courtship? On the eighth date? When you get to third base? In your eHarmony online dating profile?

“It’s a sliding scale,” said Ms. Riesel, the Manhattan lawyer. “It depends on the person and the nature of the relationship.” Ms. Winters, the Short Hills divorce lawyer, said it might depend on your definition of a serious relationship. “But I wouldn’t wait until you were signing leases for apartments or picking out engagement rings.”

With a dual-career couple, it’s not unsurprising to have combined debt levels of hundreds of thousands of dollars. An MBA and a doctor, or a pair of lawyers, for example, can easily graduate with over half a million dollars after their studies.  If both CB and I attend graduate school as planned, we will probably come out with around $100,000-$150,000 in individual debt loads, baring any unexpected windfalls (ahem, lottery, anyone?).  It makes a little easier knowing that any significant debt we incur will be when we are in a relationship together, so no one is blindsided by the topic.

I wonder, though, is there a dollar amount of my significant other’s debt at which I would “walk away” from an otherwise loving and secure relationship?  I would say no.  But I have never been in a situation similar to what was profiled in the New York Times.

Before a relationship gets serious, I believe in a frank discussion about finances, especially on the debt burden, is certainly in order. Whipping out your student loan statement or your credit report is a bit of a mood-killer, so I’d save that discussion until at least the third date! icon wink Debt is the Kiss of Death for a Relationship?

Questions for readers:

1. If you have significant debt, at what point would you share that information with your significant other?

2. If you are dating someone who has significant debt, at what point do you expect or would want to know that information?

3. Is there an debt amount that is a deal-breaker?

Photo by Sean Hering Photography via Flickr

Financial Topics for Living Together

It’s official. CB and I just put down the security deposit for our apartment. We will be signing the lease in a week and then getting the keys to move in.  I am looking forward to this phase of our lives together  (and I can’t say that the prospect of lower rent isn’t appealing!).

Everything moved pretty quickly – I honestly haven’t expected to find a place we both liked so soon. Our apartment was literally the 4th place that we looked at.  In two weeks, we will become the new tenants of a nice 1-bedroom apartment with ample natural light. Best of all, we get two parking spaces in the underground parking garage so neither one of us has to worry about finding a spot on the street.  This place has our must-have (2 designated parking spaces), most of our like-to-haves (upper unit, refrigerator), and even a few unexpected perks (a whole wall of closet space, dishwasher in the kitchen, wrought-iron chandelier in the dining area).

As for the finances of this move

  • We will be splitting the rent 60/40. Everything else housing-related (gas, electricity, and internet) will be split 50/50.
  • I’m not sure how we will treat groceries, but we probably can just buy our own food. I tend to get more expensive groceries – for example, I think of nothing buying free-range eggs, whereas CB will eat regular eggs just as happily.  On the other hand, CB eats more in terms of quantity, so it probably evens out in the end.
  • We may also be putting our cars with the same insurance carrier to save money. I need to research on what, if any, liabilities this step might expose us to.

Other than that, we have no plans to combine our money.  I’m not sure if we need to have a written cohabitation agreement, but I do plan on discussing all relevant financial issues.

What’s the most useful money-related tip you’ve received for living together? What financial topic is a MUST-discuss for you?

Do You Need a Dating Prenup Before You Move In Together?

datingprenups 300x225 Do You Need a Dating Prenup Before You Move In Together?In today’s brave new world of dating, mating, and personal finance, couples who are moving in together may well be considering a “dating prenup.”  What is that, you ask?  Well, I’ve never heard of the term either, until I started Googling. A prenuptial agreement is a legal document that spells out what happens to a couple’s assets and liabilities in the event of death or divorce.  A dating prenup is like a prenup for unmarried couples who move in together (and thus have none of the protection or guidelines offered to married people), providing terms and guidelines for a host of issues surrounding a breakup.

There might be some cohabitation in the not-so-far off future, and while CB and I have casually discussed the financial mechanisms of such a move, we haven’t really drilled down to the nitty-gritty.  Despite a penchant for all things personal finance, I don’t particularly want to make everything out to be so, well, contractual.  In other words, we both agree that if we make different salaries, it’s fairer to divide the rent according to percentage of total income instead of 50-50.  But we don’t (nor do we plan to – I hope) expect the one person to reimburse the other for a gallon of water that was not equally consumed.

When I typed in “moving in together finances” into Google, however, most of the websites that popped up mentioned the importance of a moving-in-together contract.  There are many names for this phenomenon: dating prenup, cohabitation contract, written agreement, pre-prenups, live-in contract, etc. I think prenups are generally a good idea (especially for community property states), but I’m surprisingly lukewarm to the prospect of drafting and signing a live-in contract with CB.

According to Kiplinger, though, I’m letting my heart rule over my head.  Kiplinger says that it’s essential to put your arrangement in writing:

This little piece of paper can help you keep your trial of domestic bliss from becoming a nightmare. In it, you should detail how much each partner will pay for rent, who will cover what household expenses, when bills are due, and other space-sharing arrangements.

The article even helpfully provides a sample cohabitation agreement.  AOL Personals shares horror stories of couples who didn’t have a cohabitation agreement and ended up fighting over a pen.  NY Post reports that more NYC couples are signing dating prenups. In addition to the more mundane financial aspects of living together, these pre-prenups can also set the terms of pet ownership / visitation after a breakup, expectations for graduate school support, even who pays for a termination of pregnancy, etc.  A recent CBS News did a segment on this trend, featuring a real life couple who has a dating prenup.

As sensible as these dating prenups seem though, I just can’t muster much enthusiasm for them.  Part of the reason is because CB and I don’t have combined finances (unless you count our joint savings account for Galapagos), and we have no plans to enter into major asset purchases before we are married.  We are both fairly financially-responsible.  We have been in a committed relationship for a long time.

Part of the reason is good old-fashioned optimist: I don’t think we will break up, though of course there are no guarantees.  Or, if we do, I harbor the hope that in the event that we break up after we move in together, we will both behave with grace, dignity, and respect for each other.  But I understand the prudence of a cohabitation agreement for couples who do have significant assets together, or if one partner would be giving up a job to move in with the other person.

My question is: Did you have dating prenup before you moved in? If so, what did you include? If not, how did you decide to forgo it?

image source: cbs.com

Money Attitudes In Relationship

This is a guest post by “Mia” for the My Honey, My Money series. Mia is a little concerned about the different money attitudes between her and her boyfriend. She shares her story and asks for your advice.

Hi there.  My boyfriend and I don’t really have any finance-related conflicts in our relationship – not outwardly at least.  We do, however, have very different ways of dealing with money, and moved in together about six months ago.

Living together, we share household expenses, and our current situation (he moved in to my place) has me fronting the money for rent and bills. I also cover groceries, since he hates grocery shopping and I love it.  He covers most meals out, and special purchases (like concert tickets), and at the end of each month, we tally up what we each spent and whomever spent less pays the other person the difference (usually, he owes me about $700).  This system works fine, and he is always willing to lend me funds throughout the month if for some reason I’m running short (if I’ve had unexpected large expenses, like plane flights or medical bills).

That’s not the “issue,” though, that’s just the background. icon smile Money Attitudes In Relationship

Like I said, we have VERY different ways of dealing with money, though our salaries are about the same.  I save and budget; he just goes with the flow. I have about $12k total (spread out in checking, 401k, savings, and a CD).  He has about $13k total (exclusively in checking; nothing in savings of any sort).  He has a credit card (that he hasn’t used since he paid off the balance a few years ago); I have never had one, though I have established credit through my car and student loan payments.  A couple of times a year, he mentions something like, “Oh, yeah, I should open up a savings account” but he never actually does it.

We are not married, we do not have a joint bank account, and we basically split everything down the middle – I am not responsible for his finances.  At this point, I feel like what he does with his money is his business (as long as he’s meeting his half of the monthly bills and such, which he always does, because hello, all of his funds are in checking).  Until it’s OUR money, it’s his prerogative and he can put his money wherever he wants.

I am, however, a little worried/concerned because of his lack of active interest in the area. When things DO move forward (marriage, large joint purchases, etc), am I going to have to be the money nag?  I am now (since I’m fronting the money, I am usually the one to say “Hey, it’s that time again; let’s go over money stuff”), but when we move forward together, am I going to have to be the one bringing up finances all the time?  When is it appropriate for me to ask him about his plans for retirement/other savings? Like I said, in the past, he’s said he “needs to do that,” but hasn’t actually done it.  And again, right now, it’s not really my problem…except for the fact that I think about it every so often.

At what point in your relationship do you “need” to sit down and have the money talk?  I feel like that point would be when we’re planning to combine our finances, and that for now, if I ask him if he’s going to open that savings account or start putting money away for retirement, I’m just being a nag.  I don’t want to push it…since it’s something he says he knows he needs to do, I feel like I should just let him do it in his own time, but I can’t tell if I’m just being non-confrontational. When did YOU all discuss moneys with your honeys?  icon smile Money Attitudes In Relationship

I look forward to your suggestions and advice!

Elizabeth Gilbert and (Ex) Husband Michael Cooper On Money

Elizabeth Gilbert, of course, is the best-selling author whose 2006 memoir Eat Pray Love vaulted her on to the Oprah Show, TED conference’s speaker schedule, and the inside of various magazines.

She recently came out with her second memoir, Committed: A Skeptic Makes Peace with Marriage, which combines a fascinating look on the ever-evolving institution of marriage along with her personal questions and doubts about matrimony. I went to Barnes & Noble and finished the book in 2 hours.

Part of the book focused on Gilbert’s hesitations about the financial underpinnings of marriage – she and her husband (the Brazilian gem-dealer “Felipe” in Eat Pray Love) decided to sign a prenuptial agreement. Gilbert admits that in the past, she had a habit of financially supporting the men in her live, including the checks she must still send to her husband (I assume this is alimony / spousal support as they do not have children).

Naturally, this peaked my interest about her former husband. So just for fun, I googled “Elizabeth Gilbert” and “ex husband” and found this:

1998 interview by NPR’s This American Life (click on 38:00)

In this interview, you can listen to Elizabeth Gilbert and former husband Michael Cooper talk about spending their $10,000 nest egg on a lovely small wedding instead of the backyard affair that Gilbert had originally envisioned). The interview begins with Gilbert and her then-husband Michael Cooper sharing a childhood story that illustrated their differing views on money – Gilbert grew up in a household of thrift and constantly worried about money, while Cooper was much laisserz-faire about the topic.

When they were about to get married, Gilbert’s parents gave them a $10,000 windfall. Originally, she wanted to have a simple backyard wedding, then save the $10,000 windfall for the start of a nest egg. Cooper wanted a nicer wedding. They fought and cried and fought. But after much consideration, Gilbert realized that she would regret never dancing at her wedding, and so she and Cooper decided to spend that $10,000 on their wedding. Gilbert concluded by saying she would redo the wedding “even if it had been $100,000″.

Six years later, the marriage between Elizabeth Gilbert and Michael Cooper would be over.

I wonder if money issues had anything to do with the demise of Gilbert’s first marriage, and if she ever regrets the loss of that $10,000. Or if, in the aftermaths of an acrimonious divorce, $10,000 would seem like a small price to pay. The cynic in me thinks the latter – after all, at least they had a nice party. That $10,000 divided by two plus years of inflation probably wouldn’t amount to much in 2010.

For Gilbert’s marriage to “Felipe”, the ceremony was held in their home, with only immediate family members (and the dog) present. “Felipe”, the groom, made food for the reception. Gilbert had to remind him to take off his apron before they spoke their vows.

This post was featured in the 2nd edition of Yakezie Carnival.

Love Might Be Free But Long Distance Relationships Aren’t

This post is a guest post by The Asian Pear for the My Honey, My Money series. AP is a twentysomething Canadian who is trying to find a balance between a healthy lifestyle and frugal spending habits to yummy food and fashion indulgences.

long distance relationship Love Might Be Free But Long Distance Relationships Arent

I am one of those people who will always know the current conversion rate of the Canadian dollar to the Euro.** I am one of those people who will always know which are the best phone cards, who are the best long distance carriers and who has the best long distance plans. I am one of those people who will always know the going-price for airplane tickets to go to Europe. Particularly Finland.

The reason is because my boyfriend, Bear, lives in Finland. And I live in Canada.

In May, Bear and I will be celebrating our 8th year anniversary together. All of which has been through long-distance. I wish I can say that having a long-distance relationship was simple and easy. In some ways, it is. In some ways, it is not. One thing for certain is that a long-term/long-distance relationship is NOT cheap.

When you’re dating someone traditionally, you take a lot of things for granted such as the act of conversation. You just simply phone that person or meet them after work. For Bear and I, things get a bit more complicated and expensive… When we first started dating, we were on instant messengers frequently. It was and still is the cheapest form of communication. Soon it wasn’t enough.

So we both went out and bought $70 webcams and $20 mics. We had trouble finding a suitable relay system and started using phones instead. This was even more costly. I had a land line but Bear only had a cell phone and finding a long-distance plan that works on mobiles is quite difficult. I remember paying $100 monthly bills often. Bear once had a phone bill close to $200 even. (Thank goodness we’ve found Rebtel since!) And that’s just the financial cost of conversation. Don’t get me started on our time differences and scheduling!

When you’re dating someone traditionally, you can give gifts and little tokens of affection. When you’re in a long distance relationship, the rules of the game change. You have to consider: how big is the gift, how much it weighs, will customs allow it through, how much the postage will cost and the type of postage. The first gift I ever sent to Bear was a package of homemade cookies. Not having ever sent anything abroad before, I did not even know the rules. A box of cookies ended up costing me almost $70 for air mail to Finland. My homemade cookies probably only cost $7 to make. Now I know better. Send light meaningful things. Send it 6 weeks in advance by surface mail. Nothing more than 500g optimally or 2kg at most.

Physically seeing each other is the hardest and the most expensive task. There’s a lot of planning and saving when it comes to a long distance relationship. I’ve learned over the years that money and time is a paradox. When we had time, neither of us had any money to make the long trip abroad. Now that both of us have (some) money, we don’t have the time.

From my personal perspective, not only do I have to save the money now for the trips but I have to ensure I have enough paid vacation days to cover it. If not, I have to request unpaid vacation days (and honestly? Who wants UNPAID vacation days?). A trip to Finland from Canada will costs about $800 – $1,200 CAD depending on the time of the year. Basically, this is a continual savings goal. As soon as I spend it, I’m already saving for my next trip because I miss Bear already.

I can’t complain though. I am very happy with Bear. He makes me smile despite the thousands of kilometers between us. I know I am lucky to have found him. Despite what it financially costs to be with him, I would say he is well-worth it.

Writer’s Footnote: For those of you interested, as of writing (February 13th), the Canadian dollar to the Euro is 69.86 cents.

Do you have tips for surviving long distance relationships without going broke?

image source: cyberlens.wordpress.com

Marriage, Money, and Making It Work

vintage wedding cake topper 300x224 Marriage, Money, and Making It Work

Everyone grows up surrounded by cultural paradigms, lenses through which we view or interpret the world. I’ve been thinking about two common cultural dialogues surrounding marriage / commitment and household economics – topics that interest me because I am in a serious relationship and because I find money, cultural norms, and gender roles to be fascinating topics.

The Nag and the Commitment-Phobe

An underlying assumption of our romantic cultural dialogue is that men are dragged into commitment, kicking and screaming, while women are the planners and instigators of such commitment, plotting and scheming. Cultural discourse portrays marriage as an end for the man (the end of freedom, fun, excitement, etc.) but a beginning for the woman (the beginning of “happiness”, true womanhood, “real life”). Think about the jokes about women having to get married by 35, or about men who deserve “condolences” when they announce their engagement [see A Practical Wedding blog for more on these topics]. Even though they might be said with a wink and a smile, these assumptions are internalized and disseminated.

Popular media talk about the woman “trapping” or “getting” the man to marry her (can you believe there’s such as a thing as an engagement chicken!?). I find that kind of…well, strange. While I do want to get married, I don’t see my job as “getting” CB, or any man for that matter, to marry me. My job is to treat myself and my partner with love, respect, and honesty. Call me a romantic, but isn’t a relationship a mutual journey and not a one-way pursuit?

A few days ago, CB and I talked a bit about how we see our future (I want to keep my name but lose the engagement ring, we both want a smallish wedding but big travel plans, he wants a big screen TV where we can play PS3 together, etc.). Our relationship is playful, but I do not play games with the important things. That means we reach marriage by deciding together that we want to commit to a lifelong partnership, not by me imbuing poultry with magical powers of persuasion. That’s why I find the language and perceptions surrounding men, women, and marriage to be so insidious, because I believe the way we discuss marriage and the future impacts how we live our marriage and build our future.

Real Men Make (More) Money

Another, related, line of cultural dialogue is that the man has to be the main economic provider in order to be a successful husband and father. CB and I have actually discussed this at length, because the man-as-provider was the model he saw as he was growing up. These dialogues are evolving, of course; but they exist. CB has said that he feels the pressures to support a family, even though we have every intention of being a dual-career, dual-income household.

Many couples have problems with the wife making more money than the husband because money is seen as a source of power in the relationship – even if the income is pooled. Not only that, money is seen as a source of masculine power. That’s why many women (not just men) find themselves uncomfortable when the girlfriends or the wives are the breadwinners. Knowing where the source of that discomfort comes from, though, is a first step in negotiating the landscape where household economics may differ from the traditional norms.

These paradigms are worth exploring and understanding, not because everything has to be analyzed to death, but so that we don’t unconsciously fall into these definitions of “marriage,” “money”, and “power” in our own relationships. I believe that a traditional arrangement where the man works and the woman takes care of the children is every bit as valuable a relationship as one where the couple both works or the woman works and the man stays home or both work part-time, etc., etc. By acknowledging and examining these cultural dialogues, couples can choose how they want to build their lives together.

CB and I will probably fall into some traditional gender roles because our interests have aligned themselves with such activities – I’ll do most of the cooking, because I enjoy it, and CB will change the oil and check the tire pressure on cars, because he’s good at it. As a New York Times article said so eloquently, the point “is not to spit at tradition for the heck of it but rather to think things through instead of defaulting to gender.” Exactly! The key is that we arrive at these decisions on income-earning and home-making thoughtfully, with an understanding of the cultural forces that influence our thinking.

Valentine’s Day Gift Ideas

768px Stringofhearts main Full Valentines Day Gift Ideas

So the holiday of love (or over-commercialization, depending on who you ask) is coming up.

I am trying to think of some good gifts for CB, as this Valentine’s Day will also mark our seventh year together. We almost never celebrate our anniversaries, though last year CB bought me an absolutely delicious bottle of ice wine. And, on our first Valentine’s Day together, CB left a rose on my desk in one of my class and boy, did I get teased that day! High school kids are merciless.

Unfortunately, for this Valentine’s Day I seem to be fresh out of ideas on what to get him. The likeliest gift would be AAA membership. CB has an old car prone to problems, and I’ve suggested to him that AAA might be a good idea. I’ve had my member for a few years and it makes me feel better to know that if something happens to my car, help is only a phone call away. At $47 for basic coverage or $64 for premium, it’s not a cheap gift by any means, nor will it win any Romantic Gift of the Year award. But I think it’s a gift that will be most practical.

We’ll both be trying to keep this day on a budget – we might splurge for a nice dinner at a tapas place we love, but I’d rather we go out to eat after Valentine’s Day weekend.

A few other budget / useful ideas I had were: a Nerf rocket-launcher (do they make those? CB engages in Nerf warfare with his friends. Sometimes I join in), movies (fun for everyone!), flask (very Mad Men, I think), a trip to the shooting range (this is something we’ve talked about since college but have never done), or wine-tasting (mmm wine).

What are you getting your partner for Valentine’s? Maybe we can get a brain-storm going in the comments. icon smile Valentines Day Gift Ideas

image source: ehow.com

On Love, Marriage, and Settling

In 2008, Lori Gottlieb wrote a fairly incendiary article in The Atlantic called Marry Him! The Case For Settling. She has since parlayed that article into a book called Marry Him: The Case for Settling for Mr. Good Enough (which was also optioned for a movie by Warner Independent Pictures).

goodenough On Love, Marriage, and Settling

From her Atlantic article:

My advice is this: Settle! That’s right. Don’t worry about passion or intense connection. Don’t nix a guy based on his annoying habit of yelling “Bravo!” in movie theaters. Overlook his halitosis or abysmal sense of aesthetics. Because if you want to have the infrastructure in place to have a family, settling is the way to go. Based on my observations, in fact, settling will probably make you happier in the long run, since many of those who marry with great expectations become more disillusioned with each passing year. (It’s hard to maintain that level of zing when the conversation morphs into discussions about who’s changing the diapers or balancing the checkbook.)

First of all – who is Lori Gottlieb to say that balancing the checkbook (and by extension, personal finance,) is not invigorating and fun?! icon smile On Love, Marriage, and Settling

But all joking aside – I found myself conflicted as I read this article. On the one hand, I agree that your priorities tend to change as you get older, and that if your stance if “I refuse to settle for anything less than perfection,” then, well, you’re probably going to end up disappointed. On the other hand, Lori Gottlieb makes such sweeping generalizations based on her very particular set of circumstances that she comes off, quite, well, rankling.

Lori Gottlieb seems to want a father for her child more than a husband (she became a single mother by choice in her late 30s/early 40s) – even though those are two roles often shared by the same man – it’s an important distinction. I think if a lady wants to have children, and she wants the father to live in the household and share in child-rearing, then that woman’s timeline for marriage may be very different from someone who does not want children. If someone is happy being childfree, then her timeline will be less constrained by biology.

But regardless if a person wants children or not, instead of exchanging a vision of Mr. or Ms. Perfect for Mr. or Ms. Good Enough, why not look for someone who is Mr. / Ms. Great For You?

If I find someone I love and respect, and he loves and respects me in return, and we are both attracted to each other, and find joy and laughter in each other’s company, and we agree on the broad contours of life (monogamy, children, religious beliefs), then I’ve hit the jackpot. I’ve found someone with whom to build a life and a future, and to say that I’ve settled is to spit in the face of romantic good fortune.

So I don’t call it settling if you’ve dreamed of a girl with red hair but ended up with a brunette or you’ve always wanted a man who is 6 feet tall but your beloved is 5’8″. It’s not settling if you wanted a movie star but ended up with an accountant. There is an ocean between falling in love with a flawed person (because, aren’t we all?) and having a relationship with someone who neither engages nor excites you (and, worse, with whom you always think you can do better), and I don’t think Lori Gottlieb explored that territory very well.

But my biggest problem with Lori Gottlieb’s piece, practically speaking, is this: if you think you are settling – even if the person you marry is smarter, cuter, wealthier, nicer, funnier (and whatever-er you want to add in there) than you are – you will act in such a way that says “I’ve settled.” You will try less, thank less, give less, and ultimately, receive less in this relationship.

It’s unhealthy to put your partner up on a pedestal – to expect infallibility from very fallible beings.  But those little moments of “how did I get so lucky?” is necessary in a happy relationship. Those moments push us to be a better partner and a better person. They help us get over the little hurts and perceived slights. I don’t want to commit my life to someone who looks at me day after day and think, “well, I guess she’ll do. But really, I deserve so much better than what she can give. ” Does anyone?

Getting married (i.e. entering in a complex legal and economic arrangement with another person with the expressed intention of being thus bound for life) when from the get-go you feel as if you’re settling strikes me as an uneasy proposition. I don’t think such a deal will work well for most people. I know it won’t work well for me.

image source: amazon.com

Financial Support in a Relationship

This title came about because I remembered a conversation CB and I had.

CB told me that he would support me/us financially in our future life together, if I wanted him to. I was a little touched and a little surprised, but I told him no – as supportive (ha! pun intended) as that sentiment might be to some people, I would much rather that we support each other in all facets of a relationship (which definitely includes the financial aspect).

Then he said, “it’d be like we’d support ourselves.” And I thought, well, yes, but even better.

I think “supporting each other financially” implies a deeper degree of the partnership model than “supporting ourselves financially” – because two people can support themselves individually, but only if they become true partners can they support the relationship / the household they build together.

But just as importantly, supporting each other financially means that we preserve the ability to support ourselves if something were to happen. And as CB and I talk more about our attitudes toward money and our financial backgrounds (conversations that we’ve been having for, literally, 6+ years), it’s always interesting for me to see how our conversations evolve. Money has become a natural topic for us, and as a personal finance nerd, I am excited about that.

And honestly, am I a disgrace to all the progress that women have made if I thought his comment was kind of sweet? No, right?

What do you think? Is there a difference between supporting each other and supporting ourselves?

Personal Finance Is Sexy

Recently CB opened a Roth IRA. Never doubt that personal finance knowledge is very attractive. (I wonder if my money nerdism has rubbed off on him).

I am so proud of him for taking this step. icon smile Personal Finance Is Sexy

So next time you are trying to interject some romance into your relationship, why not give your partner a card and say, “honey, I started saving for retirement!” Oh, the personal finance sparks will fly!

Cheap Ways to Keep Flames Alive in Your Relationship

Forget about romantic weekends at a bed & breakfast or island cruises. Those are wonderful ways to rejuvenate your relationship, but recessionary times calls for tighter budgets.

Besides, simply spending time together (even in a relaxing, romantic setting) might not be enough to keep the flames burning. According to a study detailed in the New York Times, couples who try new activities together will get that extra brain chemistry akin to those-newly-in-love.

Rather than visiting the same familiar haunts and dining with the same old friends, couples need to tailor their date nights around new and different activities that they both enjoy, says Arthur Aron, a professor of social psychology at the State University of New York at Stony Brook. The goal is to find ways to keep injecting novelty into the relationship. The activity can be as simple as trying a new restaurant or something a little more unusual or thrilling — like taking an art class or going to an amusement park.

With that criteria in mind (who am I to question science?), here are some cheap and scientific ways to make your relationship sparkle like a vampire (please forgive the Twilight reference):

1. Ballroom or Latin dance class. Even if you have two left feet, try it out. It’s a fun, social activity where close embrace is encouraged, the man gets to be the leader and the woman is treated as a lady. If you have rhythm, Argentine tango is a good dance to try. After all, it’s a dance described as the vertical expression of horizontal desire. Classes are affordable at $10-$15 per session.

2. Kayaking. Rent a kayak for $20 to $30 an hour and you’ve got a exciting trip out into the big blue ocean. Take turns paddling or try to keep time together. But you don’t need to achieve perfect synchronization for brain chemistry to turn on.

3. Amusement parks. What better way to act like giddy teenagers than to scream your head off on the top of a rollercoaster, munch on calorie-laden treats, and hold hands as you stroll through Cinderella’s Castle? For 2009, Disneyland and Disney World are offering free admissions on your birthday. Split the remaining ticket’s difference and enjoy Disney-brand happiness for less. Or, visit a lesser-known amusement park – they often offer specials that makes a day affordable. $15-$35 per person.

*By the way, all the methods above are tested by yours truly. They work.

Last Twilight post

Okay – this will be my last Twilight detour, I promise!

(might have spoilers below)

So today I borrowed Twilight and Breaking Dawn from a girlfriend. I thought that Breaking Dawn seemed so convoluted that I didn’t really bother to read all of it, just enough to get the happily-ever-after, vampire-style. As a fast reader and a ruthless skimmer, I pretty quickly went through Twilight‘s 400+ pages.

Stephanie Meyers really hit on a captivating storyline – I was very intrigued by the whole premise of the Edward-Bella (vampire-human) love story. But all the way I keep thinking, I really wish there was more character development (at the risk of sounding like an English teacher), especially in Bella.

I can’t really understand the love story between Bella and Edward – why does she love him so much? How can we tell it’s different from teenage infatuation? She is intoxicated by his physical beauty, and is grateful that he protects her… but what else? The love story seems a little more believable from Edward’s standpoint, only because he’s had 90 years as a vampire to understand himself (and really, who knows about vampires? Meyers’ characterization can be just as right as anybody else’s) – but Bella? I get the chemistry, I get the attraction, I just see Bella’s feelings for Edward as more passionate infatuation than deep, abiding love.

To be fair, although Meyers didn’t go into much of what happens after Bella becomes a vampire, it’s conceivable how her passion for Edward could develop into long-lasting love – whether bound by their experiences as vampires, or that they now have a baby, or that they will grow old stay young and unnaturally beautiful together.

But then again, Romeo and Juliet didn’t have time to develop a great, lasting, deep and abiding love either. Obviously, in fiction, lasting love is not necessary for the makings of a Great Love.

The best love story I’ve seen in a long time, portrayed by Hollywood, actually comes from Up. The first part of the movie is the best – bring tissues. Because you will tear up. (I spent the first 15 minutes of the movie trying to hold back tears because I will not cry in an animated movie!)