3 ms·
I am not advocating diamonds, just pointing out that they serve a need. Generations before us had a very different way of getting into relationships. Maybe our
by facepalm 11y ago
I am not advocating diamonds, just pointing out that they serve a need.
Generations before us had a very different way of getting into relationships. Maybe our modern lifestyle made diamonds more important.
I am also not saying that diamonds are unavoidable.
Edit: somebody else posted a more educated comment. Prior to 1935, apparently women were entitled to compensation when an engagement was broken off - http://homes.chass.utoronto.ca/~siow/332/rings.pdf http://homes.chass.utoronto.ca/~siow/332/rings.pdf
- lotsofpulp 11y agoCompensation actually makes sense and is useful after receiving it. As diamonds are an extremely poor store of value, the only purpose it provides is a show of status, as far as I can deduce.
- nostrebored 11y agoBecause investing in something that's only useful to the two of you doesn't create a store of value in your relationship? Think of it as a sunk cost if you're a cynic, or literally a monetary non refundable deposit into your relationship otherwise.
- hueving 11y agoAre you advocating that women cannot care for themselves and we need to consider sexist traditions of men being forced to provide for them in the case of a failed engagement?