Millennial trend — Engagement piercings, not rings
This cannot be true. Media reports say there is an emerging trend among young people who are becoming engaged. Instead of a traditional engagement ring, they are opting for having a diamond embedded right into their finger through a piercing.
CBS2 in New York reports many piercing parlors are seeing a sudden surge in millennials looking into it. It's just what you'd think; a piercing with a diamond then attached to the finger with an anchor beneath the skin. The procedure costs about $100 and takes 10 minutes. Of course the cost of the diamond is separate. The downside? The healing process takes up to 20 weeks so the risk of infection increases if you slack on aftercare.
The usual warnings are being droned out from piercers about finding a hygienic and reputable parlor and from medical people about this being a surgical procedure and how tendons and other structures are so close to the skin on fingers. But the part that I can't get past is why bother in the first place? How did the engagement ring become a thing of the past? And why would you want something as valuable as a diamond to be permanently on your hand when it could so easily snag, tear the skin and be lost forever? There are always certain tasks for which women remove their engagement rings not wanting to risk it.
Though the bigger question is probably how real is this 'trend'? Many times you'll see news stories about emerging trends with a few quotes of growing popularity yet they'll never cite any actual data. I'm all but calling b.s. on this but just in case it's really happening, would you do it? Take our poll below.
More from New Jersey 101.5