Huh. Who knew they needed minding? Learn something new every day.
Any guy who needs to rely on jewelry to get himself laid is seriously fucked-up.
To be equal opportunity on the slam, I’ve known men who believe a gift of jewelry entitles them to get laid. I’ve met guys who believe an expensive dinner out should buy them sex. I can’t believe I’m the only person who ever heard a guy say “I dropped $200 on her and I didn’t even get a blowjob.”
So if this is an economic transaction, it isn’t one established merely by the women in the world.
“Take back the mink, take back the pearls, what made you think that I was one of those girls…”
That’s really sweet.
And if I saw an ad like this, it might almost convince me that a jewel would be quite the thing. But probably not quite.
No, I think she’s right. Or at least you’re both right. The idea that I don’t know how to show my girlfriend that I love her without overspending on a rock and funneling my money to terrorists and warlords is insulting.
I know this isn’t related to the OP, but the diamond commercials this year are also super-cutesy, to the point where I want to hurl after watching them.
Ohh so agreed. I prefer colored stones anyways.
It’s all complete bullshit, really. Jewelry has always had cultural significance for many members of human civilization, but the blatant commercialization of romantic relationships (don’t even get me started on the bridal industry :mad: ) replete with all of this made up crap about what men ‘‘should’’ be spending and ‘‘should’’ be buying and placing monetary value on human relationships is straight-up reprehensible. And the truth about diamonds, which is a subject I admittedly know little about, makes one nauseated to think about.
Actually, I have to believe there’s a book out about this somewhere. Anyone?
How about replacing “jewelry” with “earning power” and see how much sense your statement makes.
The fact that jewelry stores are not going out of business em masse suggests that the ads are working. Apparently, quite a lot of women DO like shiny rocks.
Speaking of which, when did the “rule” on a diamond ring go from a month’s salary to two months? I think some people are suggesting it “needs” to be even more now.
Not quite as much as the ads imply, I hope. But you’re right; I think the “every kiss begins with Kay” campaign is considered a very successful marketing effort.
Heck, I like shiny rocks, and I’m not even a woman. 
I do however find some of the ads used to sell such rocks in questionable taste, though no doubt the ad men know their business.
The worst to my mind was one, a print ad, which featured an older gentleman presenting a young lady model with a very expensive piece of jewelry. The subtext could not have been more obvious, and wasn’t in my opinion particularly romantic.
To my mind, shiny rocks are a luxury not inherently worse than any other (you can buy ‘ethical diamonds’ - here in Canada, you can buy Canadian, for example – look for the polar bear logo). http://www.1diamond.com/10x/polar_bear.html
Edit: “ad men”: gender used deliberately.
Yes.
Malthus, thanks for the link. It looks like they also do colored gemstones too. I am glad to know there are ethical options out there.
No prob.
Quite aside from the ethical “blood diamond” issues, the propping up of the value by cartels, the fact that diamonds can be made artificially, the insult quotient of ads, the “you gotta spend two month’s salary” thing - there is a tendancy to lose sight of why people ever liked 'em in the first place: they are, at least I think, genuinely … beautiful.
My reaction is much the same as that of the Crow in “The Secret of NIMH”: “oooh, a sparkley”. 
I bought some in the form of an anniversary band for my wife, because now we can afford to spend a little on frivolous luxuries (we didn’t when we got married so no diamond ring then - or rather, we spent our cash travelling instead), and why not?
Agreed. It doesn’t have to be a superficial, manipulative thing. Jewelry, to me at least, is aesthetically beautiful, like having a good piece of artwork in your home. It’s not a bargaining tool, it’s not a bribe, it’s not a magical relationship panacea… but it is a really beautiful and enduring luxury.
-Veblen explains the function of jewelry: it is a way to display conspicuous consumption. Useless goods like jewelry are good to disply wealth, because their utter uselessness provideds the owner with validation of wealth. In other words"look at me , my husband is so rich that we can blow a LOT of money on these ornaments I’m wearing".
The effect is lost when members of the lower classes emulate the behaviour, this time with inferior (manmade diamonds), instead of expensive, defective natural diamonds. Me, i’d rather have a nice vacation!
You know, there is such thing as excellent, beautiful jewelry with no precious stones in it at all.
Veblen sounds like a whole lot of no fun. 
First the growfing, then the joke.
You might know by now that I’m cynical about diamonds (except baseball diamonds,) for several reasons. A big part of it is the phony, smarmy ads. A man who starts his married life by forking over 2 months salary is making a statement. “I have no financial smarts!”
Picture a group of giggling, squealing young women.
“Where’s your sweetie?”
“He went to Jared!”
“He went to Jared!”
“Oooo, he went to Jared!”
(further amazed Jared giggling)
The young man comes in.
“What did you bring me…from Jared?”
Reaching into a Subway sack, “I got you a 12 inch meatball sub!”
(collective oooohs and giggling)
Y’know, they could at least hire good singers.
Good point!
Yes, and really lovely silver finework (or whatever the heck it’s actually called) is some of my favorite jewelry ever.