Sunday, 28 August 2011
-
Diamonds are For Suckers
So I don’t believe in diamonds. It’s not that I don’t believe in the actual gemstone, I do, it’s just that I don’t believe in diamonds for engagement purposes… kind of like I don’t believe in unicorns or stealing from sweet little old ladies. It’s just not my thing. Other things I don’t believe in include Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and Big Foot. But the Tooth Fairy? Well he’s real; I know this because I saw the Rock in the documentary “The Tooth Fairy.” It was fantastic.
Now you might be thinking, “How could you not believe in diamonds, Seth? It’s such an acceptable practice.”
Well I believe in diamonds serving a certain purpose. It’s the hardest rock nature can make; years and years of coal under pressure that, most times, creates an ugly smoky mass that can be used for a myriad of different purposes. That part is true. And it’s one hell of a cutting tool as well. It’s just that I don’t believe in the idea of the diamond, as society knows it.
If you don’t know anything about diamonds other than that you’re supposed to get one when your boyfriend proposes, I’m going to let you into a few secrets of the diamond industry. Diamonds are one of the most brilliantly marketed products this country has seen since cigarettes, and might even be more dangerous.
Just a little history lesson: In 1938, the De Beers cartel, I mean group, approached N.W. Ayer & Son, a prominent Advertising agency in NY. The price of diamonds had been stagnant at around $80 (1938 money) and De Beers was having a very difficult time convincing people that diamonds were the way to go for their gemstone of choice.
The agency came up with the idea to convince young men and women that diamonds were a symbol of love, and that a long lasting love could never be complete without a clear sparkling stone. This had never been done with a stone before. To create the idea that diamonds were the world’s rarest gem, N.W. Ayer & Son convinced De Beers to start locking up their stock of diamonds in safes to keep from over-saturating the market.
Since De Beers owned around 80% of the diamond mines in the world, this was not a problem. Well-funded ad campaigns involving celebrities, royalty and prominent female figures started to come out in print, and soon enough everyone was convinced that “Diamonds are Forever.” Future ad campaigns fueled by De Beers came out creating the idea that diamonds needed to be held on to, not passed down, and that the more diamonds you had stored away, the more wealth you would be seen to have.
They told America that anniversary diamonds should be given for the 10-year mark, and single women should purchase the “right hand” diamond to reward themselves. Later De Beers was influential in being able to convince everyone that the proper price of diamond to give your sweetie is equal to three months of his salary. Around 12-15K for today’s average male. Diamonds were soon seen as the most precious of stones and love, as we know it, changed forever.
The truth about diamonds: They are not the rarest stone in nature, rubies are. The diamond making process that takes millions of years in nature can be easily recreated in a lab. De Beers is one of the world's last remaining cartels. At one point this was dangerous as the Colombian drug cartels. They have no problem paying people who enslave and kill other people to get their diamonds cheap.
Now, of course since Leo brought all of this shit to light, you can now pay a premium on your stone to get it “non blood diamond” approved. Well that sure is nice, it makes me feel much better that I can buy a diamond that is guaranteed to not have caused someone’s death. Is there anything else you would consider buying and giving to your loved one that could have a blood trail on it? No? Interesting.
So let’s talk about the difference between diamonds and cubic zirconias. Although neither you nor any of your friends (unless they live in Antwerp) will be able to tell the difference, with the right instruments it’s easy to tell a cubic zirconia from a diamond. In fact, in many ways a CZ is much nicer. Most CZ’s are a perfect “D” on the diamond color grading scale, whereas only the rarest (most expensive) diamonds are completely colorless. CZ’s weigh almost 1.7 times a diamond’s weight, and have a dispersive power .016 higher than diamonds, meaning they are more prismatic (more shiny). Almost all diamonds have some sort of defect, whether it be a feather, remaining crystal or yellowish brown tint. CZ’s are created flawlessly for 1/1000th of the current flawless diamond going price. Makes you wonder, if you weren’t brain washed, would you actually pick a diamond over a cubic zirconia?
In my mind, cigarettes are this country’s greatest marked product. Anyone who can convince a entire society that you’re not cool unless you’re smoking something that tastes like shit, will make your clothes smell bad and will eventually kill you, is a fucking genius. And on top of that, they’ve made additives that will keep you addicted to their product for years and years. 443,000 deaths are caused annually from smoking cigarettes and second hand smoke in the U.S. alone. Ouch.
But diamonds have to be the second most amazingly marketed product in our country. Girls everywhere are convinced that their man doesn’t love them enough to actually want to spend forever with them unless they buy the biggest, clearest, best cut diamond they can’t really afford. If diamonds are forever, why is marriage not held to the same standard? The government should come out with the same marketing campaign for marriage, “Marriage is Forever.” Or force women to give their ring to the state when they get divorced as a penalty for the couple breaking their vows and causing the state so much trouble. The man would be out of a ton of cash, and the woman would be out of the shiny jewel she was never going to wear again. One year of celebrity divorces and California would be debt free for sure!
According to the last census, in the year 2000 there were 957,200 divorces, a life changing event that in most cases, will ruin one or more of the involved parties’ lives (children included). That number when placed next to the number of lives harmed by cigarettes is staggering. And with diamonds being the acceptable marriage proposal symbol, wouldn’t logic tell you that if you purchase a diamond ring, you have over a 50% chance of ruining your life? That’s a tough $15,000 bet for under a Karat of condensed coal…
I don’t have GEICO insurance because a caveman told me to buy it, and I don’t drink Coca Cola because polar bears do. I don’t wear wranglers because I think Dale Jr. actually rocks them, and I don’t think smoking hot girls will actually show up in my shower if I use Axe body wash. So why would I want to purchase an overpriced rock if the only reason they’re popular is because a long running ad campaign has made it seem that way? I won’t be falling for this trick… for the same reason I won't be smoking cigarettes anytime soon to try and fit in.
So all of this being said, before I propose (if I ever do), I’ll probably give my future fiancé this article and ask her what she wants. Or maybe I’ll buy two rings of the same size, one being a CZ, and I’ll let her choose which one she wants to wear for “Forever.”
Maybe I’ll even try to create a new trend, get her a piece of coal and explain that since our relationship will be so strong, over the years it will squeeze and squeeze and create a diamond out of the ugly dirty lump that will be completely and only ours. Either way, it’s good to know the history of the thing that will potentially be on your little finger for a few years to life. Good luck with your next proposal.
WJNTY - Seth
Post a Comment
- Back to datingish's Datingish Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in datingish's local time zone: GMT -05:00 (Eastern Standard - US, Canada)



Recommend


Comments (73)
Rubies... not the rarest stone in the world. That dubious honor belongs to Jadeite or red diamonds. But if you are just thinking of typical stones that are set in rings, then it's emerald.
I don't even like diamonds. I'd rather wear my birthstone (garnet) and/or pearls if I'm wearing any sort of precious stone. Or fancy glass. I'm a total sucker for those fancy blown glass pendants.
This article just blew my mind... O_O
Started fist pumping when you said "If diamonds are forever, why is marriage not held to the same standard?"
Im not entirely sure that I want a diamond in my engagement ring (if I was to get one, hypothetically). Im a pretty unconventional person, and Im not really into the idea of a giant solitaire on my finger. I think its kinda overdone and somewhat tacky, and it just doesnt look good on my short, stubby fingers.
If I could pick my own engagement ring I would want something interesting-Eduardian style filigree stuff, vintage/estate inspired...I love the idea of a light green amethyst stone (close to my birthstone-peridot-but much prettier). I think anything over 1 carat is too much, and I would rather my (future/imaginary) fiance not spend a shitload of money on a rock. If I could find a guy who would be interested I would even consider getting ring-finger tattoos-I think a tiny infinity sign where a wedding ring usually is would be AWESOME.
To be honest, if it was the right guy I would love pretty much anything he picked out. Anytime a guy buys me jewelry it means A LOT to me, because I know he put a TON of thought into it, and made a sacrifice (from his wallet) FOR ME.
A ringpop or an onion ring will do just fine.
I want a ruby, emerald or amethyst ring. I don't care about monetary value at all. I want something I love and that I find pretty.
you just saved me $3000! Here are 2 eProps for you :P
@Japanesenightpurplegeisha@xanga - mmm onion rings
I agree. The diamond is a very spiritless gemstone, and has grown to become more of a symbol of wealth than a symbol of love. I think, if a couple really wants to get a ring, it should be crafted with a material that means something to them, not just one that proves the man can buy something expensive for his lady friend.
Love this.
Yup, biggest scam in the world. But everyone is afraid to look cheap and out-of-style, so society will continue doing it regardless of how many people suffer and die for it.
Real talk! Great entry!
@Japanesenightpurplegeisha@xanga - Onion rings from Sonic's...NOM!
for an engagement ring, i'd rather have something with moonstone or jade.
Really enjoyed your post. I share your thoughts on many things, particularly with the standards of marriage and cigs being the most amazingly marketed product. Although a great argument, I still love diamonds.
De Beers, sounds like any other corporation on earth. They want to succeed and have taken measures to make it happen. You can't hate them for brilliance. To top it off, fortunately for them, diamonds have the ability to sell themselves.
The fact that diamond is one of the strongest substances on earth, paired with the idea of having the man you love ask for your hand in marriage with a traditional symbol of love, holds great value in my heart. If a man presents a girl with a cubic zirconia, it gives a bad stigma amongst her family (who are probably traditional) and friends. And what would happen if your 2carat cubic that you got for 1/10000000th of the price of diamond cracked under pressure? Lets hope she's not superstitious.
Her circle of friends and family will admire and ask about the ring-- its what women/friends do. She'll reply with the truth as it'll eventually spill, but trust me, she'll be embarrassed... I can assure you its better to get a totally different looking gem vs a diamond look-a-like as it looks like an imposter and as if you're trying to fool someone. Not classy.. and she has to make excuses for your judgement (Love how he's so practical, you know...) Also the fact you didn't take into consideration about her feelings as much as you care about saving money; Speaks for itself. Love can't be bought, but if you are in love, you'll want to give her what's genuine and what she really wants. And of course the girl will love whatever you give her if she loves you, but it doesn't sound like you work at McD's or have to max out any CCs... I'd say its a wise investment to go with a diamond.
So anyway, If you tell me your whole reason for going cubic is not about the money, tell me...for $60 if i were to give you a choice between a 2 carat diamond solitaire with good quality cut,clarity and color set in platinum VS a 2 carat cubic of the same quality set in sterling silver or 10-14k plated gold(because no one puts cubics on platinum or quality gold as it's not practical).. which would you pick for the same price?
ps: I do buy CZ on occassion, for example earrings because I know I'll lose them... so don't think I'm hating on your CZ. ;)
WHY... IS... MANCOUCH... DEAD?!? This should be on Mancouch. Mancouch is the only site that has sufficient epicness containment fields to hold posts like this.
just buy me a sexy convertible sports car and then we can go joyriding and watch the sunset together
mikimoto pearl necklace > diamonds.
Ruby!!! That's my gemstone!!! oh yeah
And while I don't get the diamond engagement ring tradition... I prefer the diamond's subtle glimmer over the CZ glare...
I like the piece of coal, too. I will be happy to accept that. I wish more guys had that kind of creativity and sense of meaning...
@QuantumStorm@xanga - I agree. BRING BACK MANCOUCH! BRING IT BACK.
@lovezpassion@xanga - "Her circle of friends and family will admire
and ask about the ring-- its what women/friends do. She'll reply with
the truth as it'll eventually spill, but trust me, she'll be
embarrassed... I can assure you its better to get a totally different
looking gem vs a diamond look-a-like as it looks like an imposter and as
if you're trying to fool someone. Not classy.. and she has to make
excuses for your judgement (Love how he's so practical, you
know...) Also the fact you didn't take into consideration about her
feelings as much as you care about saving money; Speaks for itself. Love
can't be bought, but if you are in love, you'll want to give her what's
genuine and what she really wants. I can assure you only women with a
chip on their shoulder will pick the cubic vs the diamond as long as
money wasn't the issue."
This entire line of reasoning is irrelevant given the artificial and criminal nature behind the diamond industry. The sheer fact that the diamond could be marked with blood-guilt ought to be enough of a moral disincentive towards any desire for the product. This to say nothing of the fact that even if the diamonds are guaranteed bloodless (a guarantee that we have no reason to trust, at any rate), even "legitimate" mining operations reinforce colonial-era values that have plagued and subjugated Africa for generations.
Also, fuck traditional values. Who should give a damn about anyone's stigma when confronted with the very clear moral issue we're discussing here? Anyone who weighs the issue against what their friends may think about the supposed "cheapness" or lack of consideration what anyone wants for a bauble on their finger needs to take a good hard look at their humanity.
Recently I'm beginning to care less and less about those traditional things. I've already decided that if I ever get married I'm not wearing a white dress, and it won't be in a church (though that's more because I'm atheist than anything else). Now I'm beginning to wonder if a marriage ceremony is necessary at all -- I mean, eloping to Vegas sounds like more fun, and a courthouse marriage isn't any less valid. The only difference is that I wouldn't get to wear a pretty dress.
I'm on the fence about the diamond thing, though. I'm not sure if it would feel like an engagement ring without a diamond, but at this point I'm not opposed to colored stones. By the time I actually get engaged (if it ever happens) I'm sure I won't care about whether or not it has a diamond, and I think I'd be happy with anything he got me... unless it's fake. That's sort of where I draw the line, to be honest. I understand wanting to save money, but if I'm expected to wear this ring for the rest of my life it better be real, dammit. :P
Last post I read this in, I said I'd ask her what she wants and go to one of those find it yourself mines. Dig there long as it takes to find one. There's a story behind it and work behind it then. Anyone can buy rings.
@Babylons_Crowing@xanga - I am not for the criminal nature behind the diamond industry, but also don't kid yourself in believing that they're the only industry that is corrupt. Anyone with power and money has a tendency to be corrupt.. if you are against the use of any of these corporation's products, you would be better off living in Africa. I'm sorry you don't like my truth regarding how most women will feel if given a CZ for a once in forever engagement ring. Unfortunately I cannot fuck traditional values either. I respect them, and I understand where most of it comes from. I don't find anything wrong with ppl who like to be cheap. A cheap diamond engagement ring can be bought for less then $300. You can also get a different gemstone which many of the ladies here seem to love as an alternative form of an engagement gem. Judging humanity is another topic, and I'm not sure if you were trying to say I need to take a good look at my humanity... but if so, forget traditional courtesy, I will take your advice and not give a fuck about that.
I'd rather be proposed to with a lump of coal than the condensed version. It shows that my man knows his science, and science nerds are beyond sexy.
@lovezpassion@xanga - I have no imagining that diamonds are the only product from a corrupt agency. Crime is rampant in construction, for instance. Many companies involved in the clothing business employ criminally exploitative labor. Hell, you can't even buy a goddamned banana without potentially putting money in the hands of someone willing to puts other people's lives at risk. The difference here being that you need food, clothes and shelter to survive. Since these are absolute needs, turning to industries that guarantee no harm was done to produce these items can be prohibitively expensive, and so many people get put into a tight spot. As for being "better off living in Africa," besides being a condescending, ridiculous and ineffectual proposition on its face, it's also not logistically realistic since peoples' movement is limited by geography and resources.
As for "your" truth. There's a great deal that falls under the purview of subjective ethics, a broad range of issues on which any number of views could be perfectly legitimate. However, no one needs diamonds. And the proposition that knowingly putting money into the hands of nefarious men for something that you do not need, the value of which is entirely fabricated, is a pretty universal moral wrong. How someone feels about a diamond vs cubic zirconia shouldn't even enter into the equation.
And regarding the traditional values thing, I suppose we're going to have to just disagree there. I know where they come from too, which makes them reprehensible to me. Traditional values are holding us back as a society.