Fuck Flowers

[Johnny Angel]

I, personally, don't think much of the romantic value of flowers. You can buy long-stemmed roses at the gas station from the same case the beer is stored in.

Workers in third world flower farms are exposed to levels of pesticides that would never be allowed on food crops. Those pesticides run off into their dwindling water tables, which have been steadily drying up since they introduced flower farming. All of this is to create an abundant supply of cheap flowers that we in America are willing to pay outrageous sums for because the industry has been programming us for years to invest deep emotional significance into it. When I say `deep' I don't mean intellectually or spirtually, because on those scales it's actually pretty shallow. I mean that it's deeply Pavlovian. We thoughtlessly salivate at flowers, because we have been conditioned to do so.

[Miller]

Hmm... Deeply held political conviction, or forgot his anniversary and is trying to cover his ass?

[Qadgop the Mercotan]

What? You don't enjoy having the severed sex organs of plants displayed all around you? how risible!

[AwSnappity]

Why would you give someone a symbol of love that dies within a few days?

Girls at my school always get flowers for small occasions and they parade them around and show them off and brag about how their *totally sweet* boyfriend bought them at Jewel. Whoo-freaking-hoo. Takes a lot of originality to buy someone flowers.

I've always hated flowers. And they way the smell, too.

[CrankyAsAnOldMan]

Originally posted by FireUnderpantsBoobs
Why would you give someone a symbol of love that dies within a few days?

Their ephemerality is what makes them valuable and significant. I wager that's part of the reason Mr. Cranky gives me cut daisies instead of a boxwood shrub.

Plus, I like the extra special thrill I get when I sink my nose into a bouquet and think about all those little pesticide-riddled, drought-suffering third world preteens with whip marks on their backs, just to bring me my four to seven days of eye and nose candy.

BTW, since this is the pit, I'm allowed to make up my own words, like "ephemerality."

[Johnny Angel]

Dying is not what's wrong with flowers. They're supposed to die. That is the essential part of their symbolism. The flower represents the woman in the fullness of her youth and beauty, and it withers and dies to illustrate why it is she should fuck her suitor before she, too, starts withering. But this has become a dead metaphor now. Most people who give flowers don't even read the doggerel that Hallmark rubberstamps all over their crap, much less Herrick or Waller.

[Kayeby]

::Kayeby the flower vendor strolls in, a basket of red roses in her arms::

"Hello sir. Would you like to buy a rose for your beautiful companion? A lovely lady like that deserves a lovely rose."

::Starts to look around. Sees scary, anti-flower faces begin to loom in, claws outstretched. Kayeby drops flowers and runs.::

[AwSnappity]

Originally posted by Johnny Angel
The flower represents the woman in the fullness of her youth and beauty, and it withers and dies to illustrate why it is she should fuck her suitor before she, too, starts withering.

That's so...beautiful?

Let's screw as much as possible before we <gasp!> get old and wrinkly!
...That wasn't my first thought when my boyfriend gave me flowers on New Year's.

I hope you're just bastardizing (for lack of a better word) that metaphor. I hope you don't really mean "fuck".

I just figured that since the wedding ring was a neverending circle, that other symbols of love should be neverending, also.

Maybe I'm uneducated when it comes to love, though.

[Manda JO]

To the Virgins, To Make much of Time

Gather ye rosebuds while ye may,
Old time is stil a-flying;
And this same flower that smiles today,
Tomorrow will be dying.

The glorious lamp of heaven, the sun,
The higher he'sa-getting,
The sooner will his race be run,
And nearer he's to setting.

The age is best which is the first
When youth and blood are warmer;
But being spent, the worse nad worst
Times still succeed the former

Then be not coy, but use your tiume,
and while ye may, go merry;
For having lost but once your prime,
You may forever tarry.

--Robert Herrick


To Blossoms

Fair pledges of a fruitful tree,
Why do ye fall so fast?
Your date is not so past
But you may stay here yet awhile,
To blush and gently smile
And go at last.

What, were ye born to be
An hour or a half's delight,
And so to bid good-night?
'Twas pity Nature brought you forth
Merely ot show your worth
And lose you quite.

But you are lovely leaves, where we
May read how soon things have
Their end, thogh ne'er so brave;
ANd after they hace shown thier pride
Like you a while, they glide
Into the grave.

--Robert Herrick


At least in 17-19th century love poetry flowers always represent the briefness of young love, of sometihng that is beautiful but which must inevitably fade. Growing old in the premodern world was a much more daunting proposition than it it today--by the time you were 30 you had likely gone through a series of painful childbirths, the deaths of several children, the deaths of siblings and parents, several abcesses severe enough to eat into your jaw bone, I would imagene had permanent yeast infection, etc, etc all without an asprin. Many women were advised/chose to be celibate if it became apparent that they wouldn't survuve another childbirth.

Furthermore, love and lust were much more closely linked--the idea of companionate marrige really started around the mid-17th century and didn't come into vogue everywhere until the nineteenth. THe idea of two people forming a partnership, tied together by emotion (rather than children and property) against all odds forever nad ever is not a universal or eternal sentiment.

[evilbeth]

Fuck that.

I still like an occasional daisy given to me by my beloved--pesticides, third-world flower laborers, Hallmark and withering youth be damned.

[Rasa]

Damn. I've gotten flowers before, but fuck flowers? Now there's a good way to a girl's heart...

[Johnny Angel]

FireUnderpantsBoobs wrote:

I hope you're just bastardizing (for lack of a better word) that metaphor. I hope you don't really mean "fuck".

"Shakespeare, madam, is obscene, and thank God we are sufficiently advanced to have found it out."

What did you suppose `deflower' meant?

If you're still in high school, then your teachers might still be talking around the underlying message of the carpe diem theme in poetry. But in college, they are more blunt. Study poetry sometime. You might find you like it.

If you want something cyclical and infinite, don't buy cut flowers, buy potatoes. They can grow in all kinds of soil, and they can spawn generation after generation of new potatoes with very little effort. As a metaphor for love, doesn't that sound better than on overpriced disposable flower?

[Cessandra]

i like to be given things that are pretty. guess i'm weird.

[RickJay]

Originally posted by FireUnderpantsBoobs
Why would you give someone a symbol of love that dies within a few days?

Because it makes them happy.

[JonScribe]

"Honey, I have something special for you ...

"I went to the store, today, and got you this meaningful bouquet of Russets and Yukon Golds.

"Let's go plant them in the back yard and celebrate the cycle of life."

"Then, we can go fuck."

[Testy]

When I saw the OP I immediately jumped to the conclusion that someone had finally come up with a genetically enhanced, pheromone spurting, WONDER flower! A bud that, upon presentation to the intended, caused her to topple over backward shedding clothes on the way down.

"Finally!" I thought, "The genetic engineering companies have made something I actually CARE about." I couldn't WAIT to go out and buy some genuine, patented "Fuck Flowers."

Never mind, natural ones work almost as well.

Testy.

[CnoteChris]

Originally posted by Johnny Angel
You can buy long-stemmed roses at the gas station from the same case the beer is stored in.

All they have to do is add some 10-40 to that case and they could call it the one stop lubrication center.

[Mercutio]

I tried to fuck flowers, once.

Note to self: Poison Oak is not a flower.

[Jonathan Chance]

Originally posted by Johnny Angel
But in college, they are more blunt. Study poetry sometime. You might find you like it.

And out of college you'll find the ladies are blunter still. Stick with the flowers. Trust me.

Originally posted by Johnny Angel
If you want something cyclical and infinite, don't buy cut flowers, buy potatoes. They can grow in all kinds of soil, and they can spawn generation after generation of new potatoes with very little effort. As a metaphor for love, doesn't that sound better than on overpriced disposable flower?

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the JDT of romance. When do we start power sucking the flowers?

[Arden Ranger]

Originally posted by Johnny Angel

If you want something cyclical and infinite, don't buy cut flowers, buy potatoes. They can grow in all kinds of soil, and they can spawn generation after generation of new potatoes with very little effort. As a metaphor for love, doesn't that sound better than on overpriced disposable flower?

Potatos? Potatos??

That'll get you about as far as giving me a Dust Buster for my birthday, bub.

Sheesh. I fear for the future of romantic gestures.

Potatos...

[JeffB]

Originally posted by CrankyAsAnOldMan
BTW, since this is the pit, I'm allowed to make up my own words, like "ephemerality."

Not to worry, Cranky, ephemerality is in the dictionary. It goes back to Carlyle, so you're in good company.

[matt_mcl]

Or really, if flowers ARE what your beloved wants, why not go traipsing with him/her through a lovely copse on a nice spring day and gathering garlands of lovely little wildflowers to deck him/her withal? Or something?

[Johnny Angel]

CnoteChris wrote:

All they have to do is add some 10-40 to that case and they could call it the one stop lubrication center.

Of course, your ideal Quickie Mart would also feature a condom dispenser and an ATM machine.

Jonathan Chance wrote:

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the JDT of romance. When do we start power sucking the flowers?

And thus we have the Straight Dope corrolary to Godwin's Law:

As a thread winds on, the probability that someone will be compared to Jack Chick or Jack Dean Tyler approaches one.

Arden Ranger wrote:

Potatos? Potatos??

You can throw in a boquet of onions. They don't smell as nice as roses, unless you fry them in a little olive oil, but that's alright, roses don't either. After years of being bred for beauty, roses now have to be sprayed with artificial scent.

That'll get you about as far as giving me a Dust Buster for my birthday, bub.

How about a Dust Buster full of flowers?

Sheesh. I fear for the future of romantic gestures.

Personally, I'm alarmed about the present state of romantic gestures. I believe that makes me more romantic than you.

matt_mcl wrote:

Or really, if flowers ARE what your beloved wants, why not go traipsing with him/her through a lovely copse on a nice spring day and gathering garlands of lovely little wildflowers to deck him/her withal? Or something?

A lot of places frown on picking wild flowers, on the grounds that if everyone did it, there would be none left. But nobody ever gets on your case for picking dandelions, and they'll make just as sweet a diadem as any daisies. Get them now, before FTC finds some way to trick people into paying for them, too.

[Giraffe]

Originally posted by CnoteChris
All they have to do is add some 10-40 to that case and they could call it the one stop lubrication center.

CNoteChris, this freakin' cracked me up. Very nice.

So far, I've learned:

1. Flowers are evil. I may as well bring my girlfriend the severed head of a Guatemalan boy.

2. Potatoes are less evil.

3. If your girlfriend is insensitive enough to like flowers, they will serve to remind her that she's only pretty and sexy for about fifteen more minutes, so she'd better give it up right there.

[Saint Zero]

I think it would work better if we all stuck to screwing our SO's.

[Creaky]

Flowers?

Bah!

Bring me diamonds, Boy!

[Johnny Angel]

Creaky wrote:

Bring me diamonds, Boy!

Way to get me started there. Diamonds sell for a lot more than they're worth, which you'll find out if you ever try to hock your wedding ring. They are dug out of the ground by what amounts to slave labor working under bandit regimes (literally, gun-toting bandits that call themselves `rebel forces' because that used to fool us) that chop people's arms off to enforce control of their nation's plunderable resources. Sure, floraculture poisons workers in South America. But diamond mining maims them in Africa. Now how much would you pay?

[Arden Ranger]

Originally posted by Johnny Angel

Arden Ranger wrote:

You can throw in a boquet of onions. They don't smell as nice as roses, unless you fry them in a little olive oil, but that's alright, roses don't either. After years of being bred for beauty, roses now have to be sprayed with artificial scent.

What is this hang up you have about roses? Did I say anything about roses? No. When I want roses I go to the lovely booth at the Farmer's Market that sells locally grown ones.

How about a Dust Buster full of flowers?

You're a charmer.

Personally, I'm alarmed about the present state of romantic gestures. I believe that makes me more romantic than you.



And you would be wrong. Again.

I see in preview that you also have objections to diamonds, which I'm sure spills over to other mined jewels. I'm sure you also have problems with chocolate because slave labor is used in chocolate production in Africa. Anything else we shouldn't mention?

[Giraffe]

To continue the diamond hijack, there's a good article about what Johnny Angel is talking about in the most recent issue of The Nation. (Unfortunately, this article is not on the website.) There is a bill proposed to keep these diamonds off the market, so maybe you'll be able to pay inflated prices for diamonds without the guilt of people's severed limbs on your conscience.

Me, I prefer to just whip orphan children in front of the girlfriend.

[Silver Fire]

I don't like getting flowers. Especially red roses on any holiday, particularily Valentine's Day. They're way too predictable. I got a dozen yellow roses this last Valentine's Day. They were nice because they were different and unexpected. But, for the most part, flowers are weak and boring and hardly surprising. Show some creativity if you want me to notice you, because glorified weeds don't do the trick.

[Michael Ellis]

Originally posted by Arden Ranger
I'm sure you also have problems with chocolate because slave labor is used in chocolate production in Africa. Anything else we shouldn't mention?

*Spits out Hershey bar, makes a face like Steve McQueen did when he said "Oh shit." in The Towering Inferno*

Dammit, why'd you have to say that? I love choclate!

This is turning into a really rotten week. And it's only Monday, too.

[Arden Ranger]

Chocolate Slavery

Sorry, Michael. There it is.

[Johnny Angel]

Arden Ranger wrote:

I see in preview that you also have objections to diamonds, which I'm sure spills over to other mined jewels. I'm sure you also have problems with chocolate because slave labor is used in chocolate production in Africa. Anything else we shouldn't mention?

Gosh, you're awfully callous for a romantic. Weren't you people supposed to be sensitive?

Not only has the symbolism of flowers disappeared, the emptyness of the gesture is apparently worth a terrible price that others have to pay. Thank you for illustrating my point.

You may not think much of the idea of potatoes as a romantic gift, but I submit that anything other than the obvious and automatic says more for the giver's thoughtfulness and sincerity.

Giraffe wrote:

Me, I prefer to just whip orphan children in front of the girlfriend.

Say, you're a real go-getter. I myself merely write poems about beating orphan children.

[Jackmannii]

The romantic symbolism of flowers is sometimes less than subtle.

Here's one to get her in the mood .

[Kimstu]

Y'know, folks, it's actually perfectly possible in many places to obtain nice commercial flowers produced in comparatively eco-friendly places like Canada and the Netherlands. Since that Harper's article earlier this year (in the Valentine's Day issue actually, how sweet!) about the appalling ecological and health impacts of the South American flower trade, my local florist has learned to think of me as "the weird woman who always wants to know where they were grown." I've bought nothing but Canadian and Dutch flowers since February, and I really don't feel deprived at all (never much liked roses anyhoo). Buying a pot of flowering bulbs makes it even easier: just look for that "Produit de Canada" sign on the little plastic stake in the pot. They last longer than cut flowers too.

Similarly, you can buy "fair trade" chocolate that doesn't rely on six-year-old slaves working in cacao farms on the Ivory Coast. C'mon people, if you actually put in the comparatively small effort to get the facts about what you're buying, you can have the stuff you love (though of course you pay a bit more for it) and not have to feel guilty!

(As for the real message of the traditional romantic gift of flowers being "hurry up and fuck me before you turn into an old bag that nobody wants", this Edmund Waller lyric is even more candid about it than Manda JO's examples: )

GO, lovely Rose—
Tell her that wastes her time and me,
That now she knows,
When I resemble her to thee,
How sweet and fair she seems to be.

Tell her that 's young,
And shuns to have her graces spied,
That hadst thou sprung
In deserts where no men abide,
Thou must have uncommended died.

Small is the worth
Of beauty from the light retired:
Bid her come forth,
Suffer herself to be desired,
And not blush so to be admired.

Then die—that she
The common fate of all things rare
May read in thee;
How small a part of time they share
That are so wondrous sweet and fair!

[Giraffe]

Originally posted by Johnny Angel
You may not think much of the idea of potatoes as a romantic gift, but I submit that anything other than the obvious and automatic says more for the giver's thoughtfulness and sincerity.

I can't agree more with the idea of being original and creative when it comes to romantic gestures. However, I think you're really going to have to give up on the potato idea. No matter how much faux-romantic bullshit you use to dress it up, a potato, as an object, is simply the least romantic thing in the entire world.

Say, you're a real go-getter. I myself merely write poems about beating orphan children.

Maybe we could set up a website together...

[AwSnappity]

Keep in mind that my powers of detecting sarcasm are not being as strong as all of yours, but I think I understand what's going on here. I'm sorry that I tried to share my opinion. I guess my opinion was wrong. Flowers are nice! They're the best! What I fool I was to think that I wouldn't be pissing my pants in excitement to recieve a bouquet of flowers! How about I go out and buy y'all a nice bunch of flowers to make up for my stupid ideas? As for me and my SO, I'm sticking to presents which I know specifically he will like, and are going to stick around longer than 2-3 weeks.

_{P.S. I apologize if these sentences sound awkward grammarically. I just woke up and I'm so groggy. Sorry.}

[Jonathan Chance]

Originally posted by Johnny Angel
Jonathan Chance wrote:

And thus we have the Straight Dope corrolary to Godwin's Law:

As a thread winds on, the probability that someone will be compared to Jack Chick or Jack Dean Tyler approaches one.

Hey, I'm not the one who went over the top on the ol' Analogy-O-Meter, now, am I?

You earn the label by your actions, be prepared to wear it.

And Arden Ranger?

If it wasn't for the whole being-married-to-a-wonderful-woman-who's-really-good-with-a-knife thing...I'd buy you some flowers. Real pretty ones, too.

[Johnny Angel]

Kimstu wrote:

Y'know, folks, it's actually perfectly possible in many places to obtain nice commercial flowers produced in comparatively eco-friendly places like Canada and the Netherlands....

Similarly, you can buy "fair trade" chocolate that doesn't rely on six-year-old slaves working in cacao farms on the Ivory Coast.

Since I'm still recovering from the shock of the other poster callously dismissing the human cost of commercialized romanticism, I'm afraid you haven't quite restored my faith in humanity, but it was a decent go. Thank you for chiming in.

Giraffe wrote:

No matter how much faux-romantic bullshit you use to dress it up, a potato, as an object, is simply the least romantic thing in the entire world.

If John Donne were still alive, he'd make you eat those words.

FireUnderpantsBoobs wrote:

I'm sorry that I tried to share my opinion. I guess my opinion was wrong.

I know that last nail is a real bitch to get in, but you can stop already because we get the point.

Jonathan Chance wrote:

You earn the label by your actions, be prepared to wear it.

I win the Jack Dean Tyler ribbon before BrianBunnyhurt does? I think you're just biass.

[Arden Ranger]

C'mon people, if you actually put in the comparatively small effort to get the facts about what you're buying, you can have the stuff you love (though of course you pay a bit more for it) and not have to feel guilty!

Hence the buying of flowers at the Farmer's Market or from the horticulture sales at the local college which are actually cheaper than the florist. Personally, the chocolate doesn't effect me since I don't buy it anyway [half the household is allergic]. The OP's stance just rubbed me the wrong way as a condemnation of the people who like giving and recieving flowers.

Oh, and JohnnyAngel? I am well aware of the "human cost of commercialized romanticism". I am also well aware that the antique jewelry I buy and prefer as gifts from estate sales doesn't support it and the flowers I buy locally haven't contributed to it.

But I am also not naive enough to believe that refusing gifts that may have will have any effect at all on stopping the practices of other countries and will hurt the feelings of the person who gave it to me. So if being more concerned about someone in front of me then a stranger a world away makes me callous, so be it.

[Johnny Angel]

Arden Ranger wrote:

Oh, and JohnnyAngel? I am well aware of the "human cost of commercialized romanticism". I am also well aware that the antique jewelry I buy and prefer as gifts from estate sales doesn't support it and the flowers I buy locally haven't contributed to it.

And yet, you trivialized the issue, taking offense not at the predations of the industry but at me for bringing them up:

I see in preview that you also have objections to diamonds, which I'm sure spills over to other mined jewels. I'm sure you also have problems with chocolate because slave labor is used in chocolate production in Africa. Anything else we shouldn't mention?

Your backpedaling has been acknowledged and credited.

However, you have justified your own consumption of flowers and jewelry by giving examples of how you don't support the industries they represent, but I notice that you claim to be concerned with my implicit criticism of other people who `like giving and receiving flowers', the great majority of whom do in fact support the industry that you yourself have now disavowed. Your noble intention to stick up for them is undermined by you covering your own ass.

But I am also not naive enough to believe that refusing gifts that may have will have any effect at all on stopping the practices of other countries and will hurt the feelings of the person who gave it to me. So if being more concerned about someone in front of me then a stranger a world away makes me callous, so be it.

Nobody's asking anybody to refuse gifts, nor arguing that not buying them in the first place will make much of a difference. What I do claim, though, is that the giving of flowers does not deserve the kind of credit we as a society have been programmed to give it. It is not thoughtful, except in the shallowest way. The industry is badly behaved. The product itself is tainted with insecticides. The whole practice of giving flowers has been soured by overproduction and mass consumption, so that even what vestigal symbolic value flowers have left are banal fantasies that poorly withstand the slough of bitter reality.

[Creaky]

Originally posted by Johnny Angel
The whole practice of giving flowers has been soured by overproduction and mass consumption, so that even what vestigal symbolic value flowers have left are banal fantasies that poorly withstand the slough of bitter reality. [/b]

Dude. You gotta be kidding, here. A nice buncha daisies is, to me, nothing more than a nice buncha daisies. Yer makin' my head hurt.

[Arden Ranger]

I'm through with this one. Think what you like. You're going to anyway.

[RickJay]

Originally posted by Johnny Angel
The whole practice of giving flowers has been soured by overproduction and mass consumption, so that even what vestigal symbolic value flowers have left are banal fantasies that poorly withstand the slough of bitter reality. [/b]

What ignorant, utter nonsense. It is painfully (pitifully, really) apparent that you're just bitter because you have nobody to give flowers TO. I do, and the happiness elicited when I give her flowers is worth it at ten times the price. Shallow? Speak for yourself. How sad for you.

[pepperlandgirl]

I agree with Silverfire, spare me the flowers. On special occasions, my fiance gets me something he knows I love, and I can actually use. I think flowers are a huge waste of time and money. I'd probably be more upset with a dozen long-stemmed roses than happy.
If he wants to spend that kind of money, he can march himself down to the bookstore and get me King's latest, or a leather-bound copy of a classic, or well, anything but flowers!

[Johnny Angel]

RickJay wrote:

What ignorant, utter nonsense.

I have given good reasons for my position. I challenge you to respond in kind.

It is painfully (pitifully, really) apparent that you're just bitter because you have nobody to give flowers TO.

Perhaps when you have calmed down, you can explain why you felt the need to lash out with such a personal attack. You could try responding to me on point, but if you prefer to maintain the level of discourse you've used so far, you might instead want to accuse me of being gay, having a small penis, or being a pot-smoking crypto-communist tool.

In any case, I happen to be married. I won't presume to tell you how happy you and your wife are, if you don't presume to tell me how happy I and mine are.

and the happiness elicited when I give her flowers is worth it at ten times the price.

Okay, sure. But, what about the points I have raised?

Shallow? Speak for yourself.

Then what else? Because if something is not shallow, then there will always be more to say about it than that makes people happy. Happiness is not a sufficient condition for depth. Neither do flowers add credence to the depth and sincerity of your affections -- on the contrary, your affections validate and enrich the flowers. Or else do you believe your wife would be as happy with flowers from just any other man? If yes, then I apologize -- flowers are love itself. Does she doubt that you love her when she is not receiving flowers? If so, I take it back -- flowers are the coin of love. If your love were a million dollars to her, would some flowers fetch even a penny? If so, then call me a fool, but call yourself a miser. If the world ran dry of flowers, would she love you any less? If so, then consider me set straight -- flowers are deep; what's shallow is you.

[LateComer]

Johnny Angel wrote:

If you want something cyclical and infinite, don't buy cut flowers, buy potatoes. They can grow in all kinds of soil, and they can spawn generation after generation of new potatoes with very little effort. As a metaphor for love, doesn't that sound better than on overpriced disposable flower?

Surely you mean the Turnip? Could Dennis Cooper have been that wrong?


P.S. If you can't place this obscure movie reference, there will be a review after class.

[Albert Rose]

Say, Johnny Angel, how about buying flowering plants from a nursery? The two of you could plant and nurture the plants together, and experience joy and love over the beauty of your achievement when the flowers bloom.

Or, you could start growing flowers now, and then present them to your wife when they bloom. How's this sound for romantic?

I believe that the flowers ought to be coupled with a 2-hour scented oil massage, with candles and soft music. And lots of sugar.

[Sauron]

I, personally, have no use for flowers. However, the wife loves to get flowers. Not at accepted times, though; she'd die if I gave her a dozen roses on Valentine's Day. But she likes them, so occasionally, for no reason, I'll buy some for her.

Frankly, I value her opinion of what is romantic and appropriate far more than Johnny Angel's, so I'll continue to do this.

[kabbes]

As opined by pepperlandgirl:

On special occasions, my fiance gets me something he knows I love, and I can actually use. I think flowers are a huge waste of time and money.

And there's the rub. Whatever the symbolism of flowers used to be, the symbolism now is that you care for somebody enough to spend hard-earned cash on something for them that has no meaning or use other than to be itself. Pardon me - but that actually does mean something.

I don't like to always buy presents that can actually be used. Sometimes I want to "waste" a little money. That's the beauty of it - flowers have no function other than to look pretty, and that only briefly. What a dull world it would be if eveything was bought just for its intrinsic mechanical usefulness.