Previous HN Thread on why Diamonds are worthless. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4535611
Diamonds Are Bullshit
481–490 of 774 posts
Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit
#482One of my favourite customs for propositioning marriage has, unfortunately, largely died out. In Wales, and I believe parts of Scandinavia (which opens up interesting theories as to vikings bringing the custom to Wales), a man would propose with a spoon: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lovespoon To me that is infinitely more expressive and thoughtful than purchasing a transparent rock. Maybe it's because I currently liv…
Forgetting about diamonds for a moment, I think there's something nice about a ring: a symbol of commitment that everyone can see. Only bummer is that it's not customary for a man to wear one before marriage.
One of my friends bought himself a mangagement ring a few weeks after he proposed because he was feeling left out :D
Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit
#483Earlier quoted context omitted.
>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 to their group of (female) and boost their social status among them. I suspect that the demand for diamonds for both men and women has way less to do with that kind of forward thinking (or subconscious status weighing), and way more to do…
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 difficult. - Easy way to test this would be RQ: Do couples with relatively more expensive wedding rings for their income level(s) stay together longer than those who spend less on their wedding ring (controlling for other initial ritual costs like the wedding, although I suspect similar effects and interactions there).
2. Symbolic Interactionism This suggests that the initiation rites are there precisely to bind people together socially. It's a social-level theory explanation for all of the rites of passage rituals which are common in mating-couple pairing cultures in humans (and probably other primates, for that matter). A big token like this is a constant reminder of the commitment, and the meaning ascribed to this again helps with the ongoing project. If course this is entirely consistent with the marketing phenomenon, as it's more of an anthropological descriptive approach.
3. and oh... Shiny!
Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit
#484Earlier quoted context omitted.
My grandfather ran a grocery store throughout the Depression, and he accumulated a large selection of diamond rings from cash strapped customers. When my father and his brother were getting married, they had their choice of the rings. I've always wondered how other diamond rings get recycled or removed from the market. Diamonds are forever, after all, so why doesn't the price collapse from being awash in used stones…
"Diamonds are forever, after all" De Beers marketing worked on you. It is not that hard to destroy diamonds. Google "burning diamonds" for examples.
nobody does it, after all
Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit
#485Everyone wants an iPHone, iPad, i-this, that, and most of them really don't have any use of it. Is that a bullshit too, I suppose? Or marketing is the bullshit?
Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit
#486Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's like believing in the Tooth Fairy or the Easter Bunny, but for adults. What other manufactured fairy tales have huge quantities of humans swallowed hook line and sinker?
Wine. Wine prices are based mostly on arbitrary criteria, not on actual quality. If you blind taste test wines, it looks like there's nearly no correlation between price and quality above $5-$10 a bottle.
Up to a point. The correlation is not good, and I've had some horredous expensive wines, but for a weak-medium price-quality correlation I'd say the cut off is more like $50 or so, after which it gets a lot weaker! This is because there are better wines, but you can't tell the nuances until you hone your palate... practise a lot! It's just as a professional skier gets more use out of the nuances of his or her skis for greater performance, so does a mindful and interested drinker (aesthete?) of wines, beers, or eater of good cheese for that matter, find more depth in the aesthetics because of the attention to the process over time.
Now, there is a lot of bull inovlved in some wine places, but don't commit the baby and bathwater fallacy by saying it's all rubbish!
Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit
#487Earlier 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…
| they want to be able to show off the diamonds to their group of (female) and boost their social status among them. That's true. But why do diamonds have high social status? Because they are expensive. They are a reliable signal of the wealth of the man. Social status is a proxy for actual wealth and power, and thus the probability of wealth and power for the woman's potential offspring. Unfortunately they have beco…
Lots of things are expensive though, so it has to be more than that.
Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit
#488Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
It doesn't qualify (3), which is a very important one. I've got a daughter. She's only 4 months old, but I've had occasion to think a bit about this. I would not want her to marry someone who wasn't willing to give her a ring? Why? Reasons (1) and (2) I mentioned, sure, but also reason (3). It is the mark of a sensible man that he cares what other people think about him. People who buck social conventions sometimes b…
> People who buck social conventions sometimes become trend-setters and are incredibly successful for it, but more often just make life harder on themselves and the people that depend on them.
That's a pretty loaded way of putting it. It comes across as saying that the only two options are being an incredibly successful trendsetter or making things difficult for themselves and dependents. Yes, you could argue that technically it's not saying these are the only options, but it sure strongly suggests they are.
I think that dichotomy is ridiculous - as if the two ends of the spectrum are the only two possible outcomes. If you put it that way of course it seems like a bad thing to buck social conventions.
> Do I want my daughter to be with a man that is willing to create headwinds for himself out of foolish principles and refusal to conform?
I don't think your comment gives an argument for why those principles are supposedly foolish.
.
You are of course free to say and do as you please. Such freedom of views also applies to others, and IMO the attitude expressed in your comment is a small-minded one.
Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit
#489Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
It doesn't qualify (3), which is a very important one. I've got a daughter. She's only 4 months old, but I've had occasion to think a bit about this. I would not want her to marry someone who wasn't willing to give her a ring? Why? Reasons (1) and (2) I mentioned, sure, but also reason (3). It is the mark of a sensible man that he cares what other people think about him. People who buck social conventions sometimes b…
If suitability of the partner is determined by the giving or not giving a ring (instead of knowing the partner) it is better so stay away from the marriage altogather.
Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit
#490Earlier 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…
> This is why many women will accept, at the rational level, that diamonds are horrible and stupid and even evil (since they fuel all kinds of violence in Africa, where they are mined). But most of them will not be able to bring themselves to accept substitutes such as sapphires, rubies, or emeralds. Because that would make their female friends think that the guy does not value them as much (or that they weren't able…
> but eventually had to settle for a natural one which wasn't sourced from Africa
Because Africa is all one big war zone. Because any money sent to Africa funds violence.
Seriously? Why is it so much better to buy from Russia than South Africa or Botswana? (the money's all going to De Beers -- which was originally a South African company -- or a similar multinational anyway).
The top four diamond-producing countries in Africa (the top two are actually not African: Russia and Canada) are Botswana, Angola, South Africa and Namibia. All of these countries are poor, sure. They all have some political problems, sure. But they are all democracies with somewhat functional governments; none of them are at war (the Angolan civil war ended in 2002).
Multinational mineral companies aren't always the best thing for locals, but the idea that the only money sent to Africa should arrive on a UN food truck is far worse.