I think you mean someone's about to be single

If video games are more important than your relationship, you are not husband material.

I think murder may be a hair too far. She wants to (or at least wanted to) marry him, usually that means you prefer someone alive.

Loose money and further damage their relationship, still easy?

#83, it's one thing to prefer a console over a game but it's another thing if your ring is taken from you to trade FOR a console. That's just not right.

Then you can't get the ring back

@169, what kind of logic is that? So when you buy a gift for someone and give it to them, do you still feel as though you have the right to do whatever you want with it just because you bought it? Months later are you gonna go get that gift back from the person you gave it to because you decided you wanted something for yourself instead? DECENT PEOPLE don't do these things. When you give a gift to someone, it is no longer yours, you're giving it away. He gave OP the ring, it's not his to do what he wants with anymore.

A game console is a gift to the whole family, so its not " selfish " or " indecent ". Its also much cheaper. Think of all the more important things that could've been done with that extra money instead of spending it on a ring that's likely to get lost anyway. If a woman needs someone to spend $1000 dollars on her to feel happy, she needs a new girlfriend/boyfriend.

The FML clearly states that he went to by himself a ps4. That wording leads me to believe she has no interest in a ps4, he bought that for himself, selfishly, and not for the "whole family". And the point is that he took back a gift he gave to her to buy something for himself, which IS indecent. It's not even about needing a boyfriend to spend thousands of dollars on a ring. It's the fact that he would get her the ring and then instead of asking for a ps4 for a holiday or birthday or just asking her for one (or just saving up the money himself) he decided to take her ring without her knowing and pawn it.

#171, first of all, who says OP had anything to do with the price of the ring? Her fiance could have chosen it and bought it on his own. That being said, taking it back and buying a gaming console is ******* inconsiderate and selfish. I'm a gamer but if my boyfriend bought me a ring, proposed to me, GAVE ME THAT RING, and then decided to take it back for something cheaper than my ring, I'd be pissed. Your argument makes no sense. This isn't just some little present, it's an ENGAGEMENT ring. Also, how do you know she'd lose the ring? With that logic, who's to say he won't break his new PS4 eventually? You can't tell someone not to be upset because something /might/ have happened to their gift.

You're 13, just wait till you're old enough to be proposed to then see if you'll get mad that the ring is ONLY $1000.

Oh, I highly doubt I'd be upset over that. I'd be more upset that he'd spend $1000 on something so pathetic. What on earth can you do with a diamond? Video games create bonds unlike anything else ever can.

Lol! Video games creating a bond? How about the bond the engagement ring was supposed to cause? Nice try. Also, YOU have your own obvious preference. Some men and women have a more expensive taste and some men and women have no problem giving those people what they want.

*sigh* Silly feminists.

Actually the ring was given as a gift so he doesn't have the right to do anything with it.

#83 You are so very wrong. It's not just a "dumb ring," it's a symbol on their love, understanding, and compassion; and OP's fiancé decided to pawn it off for his own selfish needs. That proves that he cares more of a video game than being together with his fiancée, and that is just selfish and indecent. If you think a PS4 is more important than love, wake up child.

Legally, once he gave it to her, it became HER property, and SHE may do as she likes with it. He may not. The only way he can get it back is to convince her to dump him. See, if she does the dumping, she is obliged to return the ring. However, if he does the dumping, she is not obliged to return the ring. Most women will return the ring, either way, however. Also, there have been cases when someone proposed on an acknowledged gift-giving occasion, such as Christmas, or the woman's birthday, and then the woman broke up with the man, and kept the ring. The man sued for the ring back, but the woman's attorney successfully claimed it was a Christmas or birthday gift, and thus, permanently hers.

Honest question: is it common for a man to get an engagement ring as well if he's the one who proposed?

I know some gay men give each other rings but I'm not sure about straight couples

Maybe they are getting married soon so he got her a new ring? Still not right though.

Women rarely give men engagement rings. He shouldn't have pawned her's in the first place.

@ 8 & 16, It's really rare for women to give their boyfriend an engagement ring. It happens, some women do propose to men and in that case they'll give them a ring. But I've never heard of a man getting an engagement ring when he's the one that proposed. I've heard of both exchanging promise rings but that's usually children.

/tangent rant/ The women's engagement ring is such a statement of being claimed...why should the man run around signalling bachelor to everyone else, but the woman shouldn't? While engaged, you're both claimed and both have the same intentions towards your mutual futures. Men's engagement rings should be a thing.

Jeez it's just a very old tradition. You have a point but it's not a big deal.

I'm giving my fiancé one but only because we're going to be engaged for a few years so I think it's fair...

Yeah, my husband is Italian and when we got engaged, everyone asked him where his engagement ring was; I hadn't gotten him one because I didn't know that in Italy both men and women wore them. I guess it makes sense that both genders would wear engagement rings.

After my husband proposed we got him an engagement ring, he actually went through 5 rings in our year long engagement (he's very clumsy and very picky). Many of our male friends who have gotten engaged also wear engagement rings, even if they're the one who asked.

No. It's common for both spouses to have wedding rings, though. Rings are usually exchanged as part of the wedding ceremony. Not legally required, though, and some people don't do it, at all, or only give one ring at the wedding. As for "likely to get lost," plenty of jewelry items do get lost. However, engagement rings and wedding rings are very rarely removed, and even more rarely lost.

Should be, and perhaps one day will be. Change like this tends to happen slowly. I've heard of some women proposing, and giving the man a watch, which is nice, but the men are still signaling as a bachelor, without that visible symbol. I read a book, once, where upon reaching sexual maturity, everyone in the culture got their ears pierced. The kind of earrings they wore symbolized their sexual status and availability. It seemed like a fine idea, to me.

Wii U :p

Xbox Blows donkeys for quarters.

@20 At least Microsoft didn't get hacked like sony did. And that hack was also a very simple hack, so simple that your grandma could do it. They literally just copied and pasted a malware program.

45, you realise the recent Sony hack was on an American part of the company which is for films only, right? If you're talking about the hacks where people lose their credit card details several years ago (multiple times) then yeah, it's kinda bad.

#75 I thought the gaming side of Sony got hacked shortly after Black Friday. Could have sworn I heard something about it

They did get hacked. But so did Microsoft. All it did was shut down online play. The same group did both.

Both Microsoft and Sony have suffered attacks from hackers in recent months, though mostly DDoS attacks, taking their online services down. Good timing, 98. Got it there right before me!

45- Xbox live has been hacked... several times.

You know who doesn't get hacked? Nintendo ;)

Are you serious?? Try playing any Call of Duty game online on the wii and you'll be in for a hacking surprise! Modified codes have also been created for other games on the Wii platform as well. Take the conduit for example. Hacking has ruined online gaming on the wii!!

you misspelt the first word. It's spelt PlayStation.

And you misspelled "mispelled".

#161, You're both wrong. It's "Misspelt," which is a past tense verb. Autocorrect fails again...

why the **** would he want to do that?

calm down Satan.... actually, don't.

Xbox also got hacked

Just because OP's fiancé was enough of a douche to do that, it doesn't mean they should break up.

Yes, it does. It indicates that he isn't a real grown-up and not bf//husband material.

He pawned her engagement ring for video game system. If he's doing that kind of crap now he'll still be doing that kind of shit when they're married. He's clearly not worth it.

Wouldn't it make more sense if he got her a controller instead of a ring? I'd want my bf to do that.

#85 You'd carry your controller around to show you're engaged? lol

"Unnecessary luxury"? I think not. Everyone needs to unwind and relieve stress every once in a while. Maybe that's his way of relieving stress. However I am not defending his action of selling the ring. He should have saved up money.

If you don't have the money for a video game system then save it up, don't sell your finances engagement ring. I agree that video games are a fun way to unwind but I would never sell something that belongs to my boyfriend just to get a system and he wouldn't do that to me either. Why? Because we're real and fairly considerate adults. This man does not deserve his finance, he needs to grow up before he considers proposing to anyone again.

#48 just said the same thing as me, just worded differently. How did I get down voted.

No, that's not what happened at all.

"However I am not defending his action of selling the ring. He should have saved up money" "If you don't have the money for a video game system then save it up" uhh... I think so!!

@ #93 & #148; it's because you said that it is a necessary luxury. yes it is a nice way to relieve stress, but there are plenty of other things that accomplish the same thing. so yes, technically it is an unnecessary luxury. and this is coming from an avid daily gamer.

actually, it is his. An engagement and wedding ring is property of the man (assuming he paid for it, as is almost always the case) until the wedding is made final and a marriage license is issued and signed. But even so, it sounds like a shitty thing to do, but we don't know the whole story. Maybe there was a one day only sale on the PS that he was going to get with his next check, but wouldn't have gotten paid for z couple days, meaning he would miss the sale, so he pawned the ring for a couple days so he could get the PS and save a fair amount of money. If it is something along those lines then I think he was smart. A bit tacky, but financially it was a smart move. However, regardless of the reasons, he should have used something else instead, I just really doubt that ring was the ONLY thing he had that he could have gotten a pawn shop to take.

Wrong, 163. The ring is considered a gift, meaning it is the exclusive property of the recipient. Yes, it is considered customary to return the ring if the recipient breaks off the engagement, but it is not always a requirement. In this case, OP did not break off the engagement, so her fiancé had absolutely no claim to the ring.

So, #163, you're telling me that the pair of shoes I got for my birthday are actually my boyfriend's shoes since he bought them and we're not married? lol! How silly. It was her ring. She's not just borrowing some damn ring from him. He GAVE it to her.

#159 No, I didn't say that. In reality, not many luxuries are really necessary. My point is, nobody here is defending OP's fianceé, including myself. I think he is a huge dirtbag for doing what he did, and since he gave the engagement ring as a gift, it is rightfully hers! #21 was just stating his opinion on video games,again without defending OP's fianceé. If he has no right to state his opinion on video games, then #9 has no right to call them unnecessary luxuries. I hope this clarifies the intentions of my post.

No, it is considered a "conditional gift" meaning it is only a gift on the condition they actually get married. Until that happens the ring still belongs to the purchaser. This was told to me by a judge when my ex tried to force me to let her keep the ring after she broke off our engagement, she lost. It also happened to my brother, same thing happened. As for the shoes, no that is another story.

http://m.chron.com/life/article/Texas-law-says-engagement-ring-is-a-conditional-2078505.php This is Texas, where I live. You can Google other states for yourself. In SOME states it depends on who broke up with who and why, and one or two agree with you. But the majority agree with me. Go ahead, look it up.

In Canada the recipient of the ring gets to keep it. It's considered a gift regardless. UNLESS the recipient of the ring is the one who breaks off the engagement then they're supposed to give it back.