Live data from Hacker News

Diamonds Suck (2006)

diamondssuck.com

551–560 of 618 posts

Re: Diamonds Suck (2006)

#551

I'm the OP - surprised to see this at the top of HN today, but happy to post a quick update: My wife and I have been happily married for ten years now. She loves her ring, and it has held up extremely well. (She just had the band resized, absolutely no issues with the stones.) No one has ever thought it was anything other than a diamond ring, which includes several years of daily scrutiny from crazy New York City bri…

Question: Did you buy your ring at Charles & Colvard? (I want to know if that is a trustworthy site to place an order.)

Re: Diamonds Suck (2006)

#552
post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if you spend the same amount you would have spent on a diamond, but on a Moissanite ring?

While I love the idea of a crystal ring of any kind, metal beats it in two cases: 1. Crystals can shatter if stuck at the wrong angle (unlikely but possible). 2. Unlike a gold band the crystal ring can't be resized later in life.

You must be fun at parties...

Re: Diamonds Suck (2006)

#553

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uhm, well, because I'm having a conversation about cultural differences between the midwest and the north-east. I think it's appropriate to segway into another topic that way. If it's the sarcasm you find inappropriate, I respectfully disagree. If our new president fulfills his promises, friends of mine will be cataloged, deported. My own hopes of US citizenship and the life me and my wife had planned for ourselves i…

FYI, "segue" is the word you're looking for. A "segway" is one of those Dean Kamen scooters. Apologies if raising that is a jerk thing to do, but if I were on the other end I'd appreciate it. I can't tell you how long I went spelling "carotid" wrong, despite being aware of the printed word (I thought that one was pronounced differently, oddly enough).

TIL, thanks. Upvoted :)

Re: Diamonds Suck (2006)

#554
post #490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uhm, well, because I'm having a conversation about cultural differences between the midwest and the north-east. I think it's appropriate to segway into another topic that way. If it's the sarcasm you find inappropriate, I respectfully disagree. If our new president fulfills his promises, friends of mine will be cataloged, deported. My own hopes of US citizenship and the life me and my wife had planned for ourselves i…

The only people Trump has promised to deport are those here illegally, so I'm assuming that the friends you mention are illegal immigrants, whose mere presence in the country is a crime. Is it so much to ask visitors to our country to follow our laws? I've traveled to a lot of countries. Every country I visit, I read and follow the laws of the country, including visa and immigration rules. Many of these laws I disagr…

The friends I'm mentioning are a married homosexual couple; if the federal gov't stops recognizing their marriage, the non-citizen wife would lose grounds for residency.

I still want to address this though:

> Is it so much to ask visitors to our country to follow our laws?

I think this is a very strange thing to say. Obviously, if someone intentionally violates visas to stay here illegally, deportation is appropriate - the only main stream politicians who disagree with this are straw men invented by the Republican party.

What the immediate discussion is actually about is two scenarios:

One; you illegally enter the country with your young child. Your kid grows up in US preschool, elementary school, high school. She speaks English as her native language, hasn't been to Mexico since you left 25 years ago and legally works at Walmart under DACA.

Trump has said he wants to revoke DACA and deport the kid. I believe, like most on the left, that your kid should not be held responsible for you breaking the law, and should be given legal means to work and a path to attain citizenship.

Two; you illegally enter the country with your spouse. A year or so later you have a child born on US soil, that child gets a US birth certificate and becomes a US citizen.

As the law currently stands, you can now be deported, and your 2-year old would become a ward of the state, with the usual probabilities of success of those programs. There is a proposal to allow you to stay in the country to raise the kid, DAPA. Trump has said he will strike that down.

Eg: This is not about you breaking the law; it's about whether your children can be held accountable for it.

Re: Diamonds Suck (2006)

#555
post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this really a thing in the US? In Italy (and AFAIK in most of Europe) wedding rings are normally plain gold (rarely white or red gold, or platinum) bands. Engagement rings do have a stone, but they are not worn every day.

and AFAIK in most of Europe In Sweden at least it seems to be quite common to wear both rings. However it also seems to be more common to have inset stones, rather than one that sticks out. I've also seen several people who buy the engagement ring and wedding band together as a matching set to make sure they work together. (something which to me always felt rather presumptuous)

What is more presumptuous than getting married?

Re: Diamonds Suck (2006)

#556
post #487

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly this. The problem with every diamond critique I see is that their very first argument against diamonds is that they're expensive when that is, in fact, the entire point. Likewise, all the people who cry foul about the De Beers conspiracy are neglecting the fact that this does absolutely nothing to reduce their signal value. If I spend a large sum of money on something which I know to be worthless just to star…

This is a cultural thing you've bought into, that a man must give a woman a tool to signal with. In other cultures this is not important or works the other way around. I'm anti diamond and your pleas to come up with another useless signal fall on deaf ears - this manufactured need for the signal itself is something we should be fighting as we progress. For a start it's pretty damned sexist and regressive

Oh dear. We are constantly subjected to this sort of scolding in the name of some political ideology (in this case, 'wimmin'). Diamonds are exactly about signaling, as is an Ivy League education. Attributing useful properties to either only confuses the signal, which is purest when there is absolutely no utility. Since Ivy League schools pre-select, it is not hard to show that they add no value in and of themselves, apart from fleecing the recipients in exchange for safe spaces.

Re: Diamonds Suck (2006)

#557
post #485
post #478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't give in to peer pressure, none of the cool kids do

Are you peer pressuring them to not give into peer pressure?

It sounds a lot like my marriage advise which is "Don't listen to any marriage advise - except mine".

Re: Diamonds Suck (2006)

#558
post #96

I told my girlfriend (5 years) how I feel about diamonds and that I reject the very notion of buying a diamond engagement / wedding ring early on in our relationship. Several months ago, we landed on the marriage conversation, again. I reiterated that I am against diamond engagement bands. She then said: "What about a wedding ring then?" I told her it applies to wedding rings as well. We got into a heated argument an…

You seem unable explain why she requires a diamond ring, which makes it very unlikely you would be able to change her mind.

Engagement/wedding rings are status symbols. Most women feel this more strongly than men. When first engaged most women will want the ring to be noticed and be rather conspicuous about making it visible. Many of her friends and colleagues will comment on it and having a high value ring will be a point of pride.

It feels good to show off. By saying you don't want to pay for a diamond, she may feel that she will be missing out on all of the pride and status effects.

My own tactic for convincing my wife to accept a moissanite stoned ring was simple. Reframe it as the higher status option. The moissanite stones are higher quality and have more brilliance. Moissanite are "conflict-free" stones. We went ring shopping together and allowed her to choose rings/settings that she liked. I pointed out that some of the settings would be out of our price range even with a flawed diamond, but we could substitute a flawless moissanite and people would notice the improvement.

Ultimately if she still wants a diamond stone, it is her choice and it is her status symbol.

Re: Diamonds Suck (2006)

#559

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's also another argument: what exactly is the woman's role in this relationship? Is she merely a possession? If she insists on a diamond, then I think she should also be expected to be treated as a possession, and an inferior person. Because she's not acting like an equal partner by insisting the husband spend a ton of money on a worthless rock to "prove" his dedication and love for her. A woman who's really an…

First off, I don't understand how you make the jump from "wants a possession" to "deserves to be treated as a possession." Even if we accept that wanting a diamond ring would make her dumb (and I don't accept that), it still wouldn't warrant treating her like property. That seems like an awfully dehumanizing perspective to hold. Second, the fact that the tradition is a modern one, that started with an advertising cam…

She deserves to be treated as a possession because somehow the man is expected to shell out all of HIS money for this stupid rock, solely for her benefit. What exactly is SHE contributing to the relationship anyway? Obviously, she has nothing to contribute except being a possession, so she should act like this, because this is the role she is demanding. After all, why isn't SHE blowing 3 months' worth of her pay on something for you?

Is this dehumanizing? Damn right it is. If you demand a dehumanized relationship, then of course it's dehumanizing. If you don't want to be dehumanized, then demand a relationship based on equality. I'm not going to treat a woman as an equal if she doesn't act like it, and instead demands to be treated as some kind of possession, which is the only reason there is to spend 3 month's salary on a stupid rock for her.

And yes, it absolutely IS a marker of unintelligence for her to not reject this idiotic tradition. What do you think of women who demand to have their or their daughters' genitals circumcized because of tradition? That's pretty stupid too. This is no different. Again, if you want to be treated as an intelligent person, then start acting like it. There is no rational basis for wanting a diamond ring worth 3 months' salary. And while I may not be perfect as far as rational preferences, I try damn hard to make sure I am rational and am not clinging onto stupid beliefs for no good reason. This also isn't to say that all traditions are stupid: for instance, I like the tradition of putting up a Christmas tree (which of course comes from Germanic pagan traditions). It looks nice, it's seasonal, it's fun putting up the ornaments with family, etc. And these days you can get artificial trees so you're not killing trees for the tradition (you can also get trees with intact root balls and then replant them after the holidays). But the important key here is cost versus benefit: holiday traditions are fun and a nice family practice, but they're also pretty cheap. Artificial trees and ornaments are not at all expensive these days, unless you're desperately poor.

Now, as for your comment about a ring being a burden, it damn well is a huge burden, for everyone. Did you forget the part about it having to be 3 months' salary? This isn't like a Christmas tree which is generally fixed-price, it scales to whatever your income is. Can you seriously afford to take 3 months of your salary, withdraw it as cash, and set it on fire? I don't know anyone who would do anything that stupid; if I'm going to lose 3 months' pay, I might as well just take a 3-month unpaid vacation instead of working my ass off for money when then gets wasted.

And no, a house downpayment is not a "needless extravagance"; that is an utterly stupid thing to claim. People need a place to live, and while you can debate things like rent vs. buy, real estate appreciation rates, and the current market conditions, in general, for middle-class people, home ownership in the US is a fairly stable store of value if you don't plan to move for a while, and owning your own home means you don't have to pay rent any more. If you don't like the mortgage example, change it to something else, like putting the money in the bank or a stable value fund in case you lose your job. Or into a good index fund, where it's most likely going to appreciate significantly over the years. There's plenty of places where you can invest 3 months' pay that are perfectly sensible and will give you a far better return than just lighting it on fire.

Re: Diamonds Suck (2006)

#560
post #490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only people Trump has promised to deport are those here illegally, so I'm assuming that the friends you mention are illegal immigrants, whose mere presence in the country is a crime. Is it so much to ask visitors to our country to follow our laws? I've traveled to a lot of countries. Every country I visit, I read and follow the laws of the country, including visa and immigration rules. Many of these laws I disagr…

The friends I'm mentioning are a married homosexual couple; if the federal gov't stops recognizing their marriage, the non-citizen wife would lose grounds for residency. I still want to address this though: > Is it so much to ask visitors to our country to follow our laws? I think this is a very strange thing to say. Obviously, if someone intentionally violates visas to stay here illegally, deportation is appropriate…

> As the law currently stands, you can now be deported, and your 2-year old would become a ward of the state, with the usual probabilities of success of those programs. There is a proposal to allow you to stay in the country to raise the kid, DAPA. Trump has said he will strike that down. >Eg: This is not about you breaking the law; it's about whether your children can be held accountable for it.

Out of interest, would you feel differently if the parents involved were convicted of a non-immigration crime and were sent to prison instead of being deported?

Post reply on HN