[twigski]

Originally Posted by Miss Socialite

I'm sorry but, in my opinion, it's nothing spectacular. It looks like a large aquamarine and diamond ring; and it falls severely short of impressing me. In fact all her jewellery falls short of impressing me. I get the impression she goes for size and quantity rather than quality. Her yellow diamond ring is just as pale as this blue one, and just as unimpressive.

I agree. It just looks like a large M or a P in color if there's such a thing.

[Miss Socialite]

In my opinion, this is what a good quality blue diamond should look like, and this is what she should have bought if she truly wanted to impress people.

[twigski]

I just read this regarding Beyonce:

The singer says she did not want an engagement ring.

"People put too much emphasis on that," she told the mag. "It's just material and it's just silly to me."

Originally Posted by PrincessMe

another pic of Beyonce's ring

[Miss Socialite]

That statement is beyond hysterical, and hypocritical, to me. Someone who isn't materialistic doesn't wear a $5 million dollar, 18ct flawless diamond around... ever.

[AnayasMom]

Originally Posted by Miss Socialite

That statement is beyond hysterical, and hypocritical, to me. Someone who isn't materialistic doesn't wear a $5 million dollar, 18ct flawless diamond around... ever.

but I understand what she means. An engagement ring is different than a wedding ring, it symbolizes something different. And considering they had a small wedding very much out of the public eye, I dont think its hypocritical at all.

[Miss Socialite]

I, too, understand what she's eluding to. I believe that when it comes to the love of two people who want to share their lives with one another, an engagement ring is not necessary or warranted. The "issue", if you will, is she appears to be claiming that she's not materialistic, especially when it comes to something as "silly" as an engagement ring. Yet she walks around with a $5 million dollar piece of jewellery and her hand. If she thinks it's so "silly" and "material" why is she even wearing it in the first place? Why not just stick to the simple band and/or the tattoo? When you claim something is silly and material but you do it anyway, you're being hypocritical; and the definition of the word denotes this fact. It's like me saying, publicly no less, that flaunting one's wealth with expensive cars, handbags and jewellery is preposterous and pontificating yet I sit there with a large diamond on, clutching the latest, and most expensive, handbag with the keys to my Rolls-Royce Phantom dangling from my other hand. Hypocritical indeed, on all accounts!

As for your remarks about her wedding, I see no point. She did have a small wedding but a very lavish one. And it was hardly out of the public's eye. When you invite a slew of high-profile celebrities and it has media coverage, that is not "very much out of the public eye". Please note, however, that my remark about her hypocrisy was not about her wedding, how far it was from the public's eye or even her lifestyle in general. If it were I could go on, in great length, about just how materialistic she truly is. It was merely about a $5 million dollar, 18ct flawless bauble that sits upon a supposed not materialistic person's hand.

As an exceedingly materialistic person myself I don't blame her for relishing in the good life. I do myself, and quite frequently. However I'm not sitting there claiming that material things are silly and unneeded whilst thoroughly enjoying and flaunting them.

I'm not here to fight with you on this matter. We obviously have very differing opinions about her, and I most certainly respect that.

[Miss Socialite]

Oh I hope no one thinks I was trying to be nasty or antagonistic in my last post. I just re-read it and it does, at times, come across that way. My apologies if anyone, especially you Anayasmom, thought I was too cross.

[Swanky Mama Of Three]

but it was a gift. It's possible to not be materialistic AND wear big jewelry. It was GIFTED to her. What should she do? Not wear it?

[Miss Socialite]

Originally Posted by Swanky Mama Of Three

but it was a gift. It's possible to not be materialistic AND wear big jewelry. It was GIFTED to her. What should she do? Not wear it?

Yes that's always an option but obviously not a feasible one for you. Perish the thought. I have many things given to me that I choose not to wear because I don't care for it. I have had them auctioned off or just sold them and then given the money to charity. I don't wear things just to appease others.



My point was, and is, this, she's full of it. She's very much a material person. The things she buys, wears and the lifestyle she leads is a testament to that. As I said in my earlier post, if you're materialistic that's fine but don't sit there and attempt to make believe you're not. I have no respect for hypocrites, and IN MY OPINION, she is!

[Swanky Mama Of Three]

oh well

[karo]

One more shot of Beyonce's ring

[LOOKINGOOD35]

Does anyone have a photo of Rachel Zoe's Engagmetn Ring and Watch?

[Abel1337]

wow these are rediculous

[sweetdreamer16]

i wouldn't mind having her ring (beyonce) but i would sell it and buy me a house!!! And some bags of course!!

[AnayasMom]

Originally Posted by Miss Socialite

I, too, understand what she's eluding to. I believe that when it comes to the love of two people who want to share their lives with one another, an engagement ring is not necessary or warranted. The "issue", if you will, is she appears to be claiming that she's not materialistic, especially when it comes to something as "silly" as an engagement ring. Yet she walks around with a $5 million dollar piece of jewellery and her hand. If she thinks it's so "silly" and "material" why is she even wearing it in the first place? Why not just stick to the simple band and/or the tattoo? When you claim something is silly and material but you do it anyway, you're being hypocritical; and the definition of the word denotes this fact. It's like me saying, publicly no less, that flaunting one's wealth with expensive cars, handbags and jewellery is preposterous and pontificating yet I sit there with a large diamond on, clutching the latest, and most expensive, handbag with the keys to my Rolls-Royce Phantom dangling from my other hand. Hypocritical indeed, on all accounts!

As for your remarks about her wedding, I see no point. She did have a small wedding but a very lavish one. And it was hardly out of the public's eye. When you invite a slew of high-profile celebrities and it has media coverage, that is not "very much out of the public eye". Please note, however, that my remark about her hypocrisy was not about her wedding, how far it was from the public's eye or even her lifestyle in general. If it were I could go on, in great length, about just how materialistic she truly is. It was merely about a $5 million dollar, 18ct flawless bauble that sits upon a supposed not materialistic person's hand.

As an exceedingly materialistic person myself I don't blame her for relishing in the good life. I do myself, and quite frequently. However I'm not sitting there claiming that material things are silly and unneeded whilst thoroughly enjoying and flaunting them.

I'm not here to fight with you on this matter. We obviously have very differing opinions about her, and I most certainly respect that.

But we cant say that considering we dont know the circumstances. I highly doubt that she chose the ring or told J that she wanted a $5 million dollar ring. And im sorry but regardless of how unmaterialistic you are-if your husband buys you a gorgeous 18ct wedding ring worth $5 million dollars you arent going to turn it down.
Secondly, the wedding was low-key. Considering we have yet to even see a single picture inside the wedding is very low-key. Just because its lavish doesnt make it not low-key. And just because there were high-profile ppl doesnt make it not low-key. If your friends are high profile ppl then thats who you are going to invite.