Diamonds Are Bullshit • Hacker News Board

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#631

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 3:16 PM UTC

ttcbj wrote: post #612

maratd wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> so they just leave De Beers to run around gouging consumers That's kind of missing the point. If diamonds were 5 bucks a piece, women would no longer be interested in receiving rings bejeweled by them. A woman wants a man who is financially secure. If you can't afford a shiny rock, you can't afford what's coming after it either, so there's no point.

From my perspective, this comment has some truth, but is a little off also. When I was single, I found the Epstein article compelling. Then, I met the right woman, and I realized the article missed the point. If a woman you love feels good because you got her a diamond ring, then the diamond has served its purpose (to communicate that you listened to what she wanted, and got it, and that she is important). I listened…

[deleted]

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#632

Post by overgryphon » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 3:20 PM UTC

clicks wrote: post #123

rayiner wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It irks me a little bit that the issue is painted as one of "reason" versus lack thereof. There is a rationality in adhering to social convention. My wife is a diamond nerd, as well as one of the most rational people you'll ever meet, and she'd explain it this way: the diamond is a test that serves various useful purposes from the perspective of the woman: 1) It demonstrates the man's ability to provide; 2) It demons…

1) It demonstrates the man's ability to provide; 2) It demonstrates the man's willingness to forgo the other things he could buy with the money for a gift for her that does not directly benefit him in any way; and 3) It demonstrates to the woman's peers her husband's social standing. To play devil's advocate here: If you substitute 'ring' with 'a $3k donation to redcross' you could still potentially qualify all of th…

That may sound like a nice idea, but it's a expression about your principles where she has deal with all of the consequences. The ring is for her, she will be the one who has to explain this decision to everyone who asks about the ring (read: absolutely everyone in her life). Many of these people will have diamond wedding rings, so now she has to explain this decision in a way to doesn't offend them. No offense, but she may prefer to spend that time gushing about how excited she is about her upcoming marriage and how awesome her fiancé is.

The ring does have functional value, but for her and not for you. Part of the point is that is doesn't directly benefit you at all.

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#633

Post by ensignavenger » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 3:24 PM UTC

enraged_camel wrote: post #304

maratd wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> so they just leave De Beers to run around gouging consumers That's kind of missing the point. If diamonds were 5 bucks a piece, women would no longer be interested in receiving rings bejeweled by them. A woman wants a man who is financially secure. If you can't afford a shiny rock, you can't afford what's coming after it either, so there's no point.

It doesn't have anything to do with financial security. Look, if your man is spending three months worth of salary on a piece of shiny rock, he is exercising poor financial judgment and that is a signal against future financial security. Women want diamonds not because of any symbolic reasons ("Diamonds are forever!") but because of reasons that are much more practical: they want to be able to show off the diamonds t…

I am very glad that my wife was reasonable and agreed that I need not get her a diamond. She still wanted a ring, so I designed and made a claddagh style ring for her, with a blue topaz set in silver. It cost me less than $50, plus many hours researching, designing, and carving the wax mold. (I have a friend who is a jeweler, and he was able to provide expert assistance and tools to get the job done :)

Now, rather than bragging about how big and expensive the stone is, my wife happily shows off her ring and tells her girlfriends how I made it for her, and how beautiful and special it is.

My wife is the most awesome woman ever! (Source: Personal experience and careful study and observation).

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#634

Post by randomdata » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 3:24 PM UTC

whatusername wrote: post #234

kscaldef wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to mention that $25k is considered a completely reasonable amount to spend on a car. There's no doubt that the wedding industry is a racket (oh, did you want your dinner guests to have forks? That'll be $3 each. Water glasses too? ...) but also there's something to be said for not cheaping out on what's ostensibly one of the most important days of your life. FWIW, we managed to pay less than many people, while ge…

A car has some level of re-sale value though. UNlike a Diamond or a Wedding.

I used to share in that sentiment, but then I realized a wedding isn't about me, it is about showing the people who have been there for me over the years a great time. Marriage just becomes an excuse to bring them together. What is a few bucks to show someone close to you a fantastic night at least once in your life?

My wedding was stockily expensive by my standards (low to mid five figures), but with gifts we essentially broke even and the party was priceless. I would do it again.

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#635

Post by jrmg » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 3:29 PM UTC

Thrall wrote: post #582

jrmg wrote: post #455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As we found out when looking for a ring, there is (perhaps manufactured) superstitious social stigma attached to using a used engagement ring. How do you know it's not from a failed marriage? Many jewelers were confused and incredulous when we asked about one. After a certain age is reached though, the stigma seems to go away somewhat. We got a 'vintage' ring (about 100 years old) in the end - but they're hard to fin…

> Many jewelers were confused and incredulous when we asked about one. Bear in mind that it is in the jeweller's interest to perpetuate such superstitions as it means they can persuade many customers to buy a new ring instead. Buying a diamonds as a romantic gesture, the buyer is vulnerable for two reasons: 1) They're unlikely to have much experience of buying jewellery; for many, this is the only occasion. 2) They p…

Absolutely - which is why I said the sentiment was perhaps manufactured. We went to multiple jewellers though, big and small, and either _all_ the employees were great actors or at least some were genuinely surprised that we made the request.

Still, 'real' superstition or manufactured one, we didn't fall for it. I suspect many do though. A web search for "used engagement ring back luck" reveals the superstition is pretty widespread.

[Edit: Not that I mean that many people actually _believe_ that the used status of the ring will affect their marriage - I suspect they're more concerned on how their partner and, perhaps more so, their peers will judge their decision]

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#636

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 3:34 PM UTC

brokentone wrote: post #382

Interesting post, which sums up as so: "Nearly every American marriage begins with a diamond because a bunch of rich white men in the 1940s convinced everyone that its size determines your self worth." - I get the correlation with rich and men, but is the race baiting language really necessary?

[deleted]

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#637

Post by caffeine5150 » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 3:34 PM UTC

triplesec wrote: post #483

csallen wrote: post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think there has to be merely one single solitary reason for the popularity of diamonds. Whenever you see profound effects (in this case, a massive number of people people grossly overpaying for a useless rock), it's worth considering the possibility that you have several strong forces all pushing in the same direction. In this case, yes, advertising doesn't hurt. But there are plenty of other factors that may…

csallen, thank you for thinking of making a list! I do have one or two more reasons to add to your list. 1. Cognitive dissonance reduction: he spent so much, so to avoid cognitive dissonance he's going to tell himself she's worth it. Helps keep marriages together. It is the same reason that hazing ritual happen in college and why secret societies have all sorts of strange initiation rituals, often hazardous or diffic…

In graduate school, I took a class on evolutionary biology. One of the principles put forth was that women (think cave women) evolved to focus on seeking a mate that provided time and resources because women are more focused on the long-term reproduction strategy of investing in their offspring and want a mate to help maximize their success (i.e. that offspring surviving to reproduce). Both men and women were shown to engage in both short and long term reproduction strategies of sorts. Men sleeping around (short term) and supporting a child (long term). Women supporting a child with a mate's help (long term) and sneaking out on mate to have sex with genetically superior mate (short term). One of the supporting studies showed that in a list of things that would most anger a man or women relative to their mate, men rated sexual infidelity as number one (this is in part because men have paternal uncertainty and their worst outcome is investing in the long term strategy of raising another male's child). Women listed sexual infidelity as somewhere in the top few, but number one was their mate spending time/money/resources on another woman. For example, imagining their guy taking another woman out to dinner, spending time and thought on her, buying her a gift, etc. upset them more than the thought of him simply have sex with a women he wasn't otherwise invested in. Within this theory, an expensive diamond communicates that the male is making a large investment and communicates to other women that the woman with the diamond is worthy of that large investment. In real life, women of course range from "don't care or think that way" or "achieve that validation through non-material means" to "totally obsessed with sucking material goods and services from a man and showing that off to other people (mostly women). It was an interesting course and study.

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#638

Post by randomdata » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 3:43 PM UTC

arbuge wrote: post #13

"So here is a modest proposal: Let’s agree that diamonds are bullshit and reject their role in the marriage process. Let’s admit that as a society we got tricked for about century into coveting sparkling pieces of carbon, but it’s time to end the nonsense." Hear hear, but good luck convincing zillions of single women that they'll be the first generation in living memory to miss out on their carbon.

Technically speaking, marriage is as ridiculous as the diamond that symbolizes it. If you want to hang on to the symbol that marriage represents, why not include the symbolic diamond as part of that? Sure, it is just worthless carbon, but it doesn't need to be anything more.

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#639

Post by RougeFemme » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 3:44 PM UTC

blots wrote: post #566

enraged_camel wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't have anything to do with financial security. Look, if your man is spending three months worth of salary on a piece of shiny rock, he is exercising poor financial judgment and that is a signal against future financial security. Women want diamonds not because of any symbolic reasons ("Diamonds are forever!") but because of reasons that are much more practical: they want to be able to show off the diamonds t…

> It doesn't have anything to do with financial security. Look, if your man is spending three months worth of salary on a piece of shiny rock, he is exercising poor financial judgment and that is a signal against future financial security. I don't get it. Why would you even want to be engaged with women so stupid to want a shiny rock no matter what. If anything I'd want a man-made diamond, because it's cooler. I neve…

I wanted my birthstone, a sapphire, and that's what I got. Everyone in my family and circle of friends thought it was great. The only one who had an issue was my mother-in-law, who said "I know my son loves you more than that". My MIL and I had different values. . .

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#640

Post by RougeFemme » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 3:46 PM UTC

glenntzke wrote: post #622

n09n wrote: post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wanting the respect of others in your peer group is sad now?

It's important to think about how this is a product of the people with whom one surround oneself. I think my SO would be happy with an alternative stone (or perhaps no stone at all!) and that's because her and my friends largely aren't the type to ogle a ring, a watch, or a car. Friends that do fancy material things are able to recognize it and laugh at their own materialistic tendencies because they are the outliers…

Exactly. If you aren't into those sorts of symbols, odds are the friends you select aren't, either. None of my friends had diamonds - including me - and none of the rest of us cared, one way or the other.