Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by wasserkool, Jul 31, 2005.
The very thought of shelling out 4-6k for a "respectable ring" makes me sick to my stomach
A little history of De Beers.
I wonder how my gf would react if I asked for a rolex for our engagment :roll:
I feel the same. I consider any woman _demanding_ a diamond ring to be a stupid whore.
Direct link btw (to the higher bitrate version) (might have to wget it): http://ia300131.us.archive.org/2/items/diamonds/diamonds_256kb.mov
Oh, and some non-malware with which to watch it: Quicktime Alternative
Yes becuase the marraige to your SO depends on the prescence or absence of a rock. :disgust: It's small minded women that contribute to the problem.
I would call that one NSFW...
I don't think so.
Look at it this way- if diamonds were that plentiful and demanded an unjustified price, why don't other companies get involved and undercut debeers?
Because, de beers is paying most major diamond mines to not mine / not sell, and the remainder of the market does not have enough of a % of supply to push down prices.
Debeers is large, but they don't have 100% of the market. There is still 20% of the market left, and those companies could play the spoiler if they really wanted to. That's like AMD compared to Intel- smaller but still capable of making an impact.
But why would another diamond company do that? Unlike the CPU business, diamonds are a commodity. What business wants to lower the price of the product it sells? Most likely, the other diamond companies are in collusion with DeBeers, and they all agree to keep the prices high because that means more money for everyone.
Ever see the diamond rings at Walmart and Kmart?
Which may well be. I don't think either of us are diamond experts. Obviously, they can't practically collude explicitly, but if debeers has pegged the price high, and the competetors are able to get both good volume and de-beers prices, they have no incentive to compete on price, especially since debeers is willing to act to stop people from entering the market at a lower price point (i.e., if they break the tacit deal, they get killed), the market is pegged to debeers.
Of course they can't collude explicity, that would conflict with the definition of collude, which implies "secretly".
But yeah, I agree with the rest of what you said.
thanks everyone for the useful contributions and effectively bashing the small-minded people here to oblivion, its those statement that truly sickens me!
GREAT THANKS TO ArtVandalay for providing the alternative quicktime linky!
I was lucky and did not marry a greedy, money obsesed women like tami (thank god!).
When it came to buy my wife a engagment ring she picked out a nice small one with a wrap for the wedding. totel cost was less then $900 or so. Considering the budget was about 5 times that i was very happy.
The rest? we got new furniture, odds and end stuff for the house. We also took a extra vacation that year.
When my daughter was born i did get her a nice mothers ring ($300) but that is all the jewlery she has gotten since i have been married to her. She would rather get something that is usefull then something to show off how much we spend.
But i knew how she was BEFORE i even thought about marrying her. i knew she thought blowing money just to show off was a waste.
yes dammit, could have used the warning
wasserkool: first of all, welcome to ATOT. keep in mind that the "small-minded" people you speak of are female, and well, that fact alone should speak for itself. it's not the first time that a diamond thread has appeared on ATOT, and it's usually the females that defend them (an obvious minority). that said, this argument, regardless of how it's presented, is always one-sided primarily because there's more testosterone on AT than in, say, uh... modernmoms.com.
i'm going to address the other comments slowly.
first, i'll speak for myself. i'm female (if you haven't realized by now). unlike most females who wear lots of jewelry, until i got engaged, i was wearing absolutely no jewelry at all. for me, now, the presence of an engagement ring says a few things: i'm happily unavailable, and i feel good about myself knowing that someone loves me to make that part known (and no, i'm NOT saying that someone loves me BECAUSE he gave me a diamond). i look at my ring every day. it's not something i forget and ignore like earrings or a necklace that i may wear for a special black-tie affair once or twice a year. it is something i carry with me every day and realize that i am that much closer to my husband.
(also, a silly but pertinent side point for you guys, diamonds match better than purple stones or red stones or blue stones or whatever else you may prefer to substitute for it.)
now, onto my previous post (for orosum and anubis and the gang):
i wasn't speaking for myself. being a technological-savvy female on a forum should say a lot about who i am. i'm your atypical woman. i like computers. i build them. i play with linux. i was an athletic kid. i am not your average shopper and i'm not your average chick who owns 28 pairs of shoes (i think my sister owns more, actually). however, i still have plenty of friends who are female. when one gets engaged, it's a VERY regular occurrence for people to ask, "omg! can i see the ring?" and if the woman does not have a ring, people are surprised and shocked ("how could she not want one?"). i never realized that society placed such emphasis on diamond engagement rings until i was about 21. what have i learned? not much that we didn't already know, except that it's EXPECTED of many women to want a diamond engagement ring. usually, if that's the case, the woman will be very articulate to her fiance-to-be about the kind of ring she wants (or to a close friend who will help out the husband) and they'll have lengthy discussions about it. again, obviously, that's not the mentality around ATOT as far as i can garner, and out of the hundreds of friends i have that are married, there has only been one woman who has rejected a ring and not for any humanitarian reason (she wanted a very expensive book-set instead).
i think that women do feel that diamonds are rare (in that diamonds are used for rare occasions), and consequently, wearing one says a lot: "i'm taken," "somebody loves me and wants you to know it," "my mother had one and i have one too!" etc. it's also tradition in many generations (granted, it wasn't a standard thing until the early 1900s as stated).
i must go on to just inform you all that i was not presented a ring at the time that my husband proposed to me but I SAID YES. (i didn't even think about a ring!) later on, a number of people (read: women) asked me if i was getting a ring, and since i didn't have an answer for them off the bat, i told them "wait and see."
understand that this argument is almost about a women's mentality versus a man's. i do not think women should reject a man's proposal because they don't have a ring. however, again, as i said, a woman is more likely than not to expect one (and to have adequately prepared for one with the man she is to marry).
as far as other rings go for, owning a ruby ring, for example, just doesn't cut it for reasons i specified before: it's not traditional and well, how is one to know that you're engaged without the standard diamond (or even a CZ)? (remember the tomato thread about the guy asking her out to fantastic four, anyone? sometimes you just need to wear it. think about television: the OC, when kirsten didn't wear her ring... i'm just trying to point out very legitimate points to wearing one and the fact that it won't be interpreted the same if it's another kind of ring)
i would say that many women agree that a ring isn't the "key" to commitment ("oh, here's a nice shiny rock. let us be soulmates" -- doubtful). a commitment should stem from a bundle of emotions and love, of course. however, the diamond in the ring is almost a status symbol -- in that it's used for such rare occasions (how many times in life do you want to be engaged?) and it's, sadly, society's way of making that happen.
btw, jpeyton, my ring is hardly "unreasonable" as you put it. it's a simple elegant ring, and the stone is less than 1ct. naturally, both my husband and i have better plans for the future than to spend a ludicrous amount of money on the "stone of commitment," like a house and a future for our children (to be).
Ever try to give your gf jewelry you bought at wal-mart or k-mart?
I just think it's ridiculous to spend that much on an engagement ring that she won't be wearing forever. The ring serves as something a woman can use to brag to her friends about. If I was to get married, I would look into emeralds or sapphires.
Good defense on yourself. I NEVER SAID all WOMAN are small-minded. PLEASE KEEP THAT VERY CLEAR, ITS IS SPECIFICALLY LABELLED TOWARDS YOU, and i am very Sure many people here think of you the SAME WAY FROM WHAT YOU HAVE SAID.
I started this discussion about the humanitarian consequence of blood diamonds, I NEVER STARTED IT AS "DO NOT BUY DIAMOND LETS BE CHEAP GUYS" Your myopic vision lack of reading skills turned this thread into a bash-thread.
A very lengthy but utterly USELESS discussion you made from the post i quoted, just to get rid of your own guilt for writing the earlier post in the first page of this thread, which obviously won't help. Good luck on defending yourself further.
OH yes, thanks for sending me this PM:
"you've only been here for 2 weeks. i suggest you smarten up."
don't be a moron. speak to other women (do you know any?) and see what they have to say to you about diamond rings. i already have received PMs applauding what i have said. they just don't want to be the target of other attacks that seem to be directed ONLY TOWARDS ME (to address what you just said).
by the way, i've said it before and i'll say it again, you should attack my statement, not me. what i have said in this thread says little about my character. i've merely made a statement knowing that i am among women who feel a particular way about diamonds. your statements so far have given me the impression (perhaps wrongly) that you don't really interact with anyone besides the male gender or at least not about the sensitive issue of diamonds and their role in today's society.
it's a propoganda sham by debeers. my gf went gaga over a $6k diamond we saw, $hit if she ask for that over settling on a house, she'll be sitting on the curb.