12 ms·

> Until now, it's been non-negotiable. I really hate to be a random person on the internet giving personal advice but... diamonds being "non-negotiable" seems

> Until now, it's been non-negotiable. I really hate to be a random person on the internet giving personal advice but... diamonds being "non-negotiable" seems like a huge, glowing, neon warning sign. Don't be surprised to find out a bunch of other things are non-negotiable if you divorce.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
Ironchefpython 10y ago
> diamonds being "non-negotiable" seems like a huge, glowing, neon warning sign It's deeply ingrained in Western culture. Think about it like eating dogs. There's no rational reason not to use dogs for meat, but most Westerners would throw a hissy fit rather than eat dog meat. So don't assume the prospective bride is unreasonable. In fact, assume the opposite, as she was able to read a rational explanation of the issues with diamonds, and change her mind.
- tedunangst 10y ago
  Horse may be a better example. Meat from carnivores tends to concentrate more toxins, which actually is a rational reason to avoid it.
  - eyko 10y ago
    Horse meat is quite normal in western culture, unless if by western culture you mean anglophone countries.
    - stouset 10y ago
      And not eating it is for non-taste/texture/allergy reasons is just as absurd as wanting to have a "real" diamond. It's all nonsense. None of it makes sense.
      - khedoros1 10y ago
        Culture just tends to be arbitrary, in the details. If you don't care about potential social consequences, then feel free to ignore the parts that you find absurd.
      - alphazero_hn 10y ago
        OT aside: I sometimes like to play automatic reading (ala dada) with google. So at this moment a google search for "It's all nonsense. None of it makes sense." brings up your comment at the top of the page and a few items below this link [1] which has a section entitled "Making sense of nonsense. Conant and Diamond read Wittgenstein's Tractacus". Now I wonder if that Diamond is a chance event ("nonsense") or correlation artifact from the search algorithm ("sense"). [1]: http://philosophy.uchicago.edu/faculty/files/conant/costello%20-%20making%20sense%20of%20nonsense.pdf http://philosophy.uchicago.edu/faculty/files/conant/costello...
      - chris_7 10y ago
        Does horse meat not raise the risk of digestive system cancer, as other red meats do? (and notably unlike fish and vegetables)
    - Grishnakh 10y ago
      I can't reply to stouset for some stupid reason, but why is it "absurd" to not want to eat horse for texture reasons? My understanding is that horse meat generally does not taste that good and is very tough, because those animals get a lot of exercise; it's like deer meat. Some people like venison, and there's no stigma attached to eating it, but it's hard to buy because demand is low (and they're not raised as livestock), and the meat is generally considered "gamey" and difficult to cook properly so it's tender instead of tough and nasty. Cow and especially chicken is popular meat because it's both relatively cheap and rather easy (and fast) to cook. It's really hard to screw up cooking chicken in fact.
      - tomjakubowski 10y ago
        > I can't reply to stouset for some stupid reason On deeply nested comments, if it hasn't been long since the post was made you have to click the "permalink" ("XX minutes ago" or "XX hours ago") link to reply. I think the extra step is to help slow down flamewars ("do I really need to reply to this comment, right now?".
        vxNsr 10y ago
        Hmmm... I didn't know that thanks for the heads up.
        Grishnakh 10y ago
        Thanks for the info, that's very useful. If this is the intention, it seems like it'd make more sense to throw up roadblocks to only someone else who's in the comment chain, rather than to someone who hasn't been involved at all and is just chiming in. Usually, those flamewars are long chains of comments between two people.
        hueving 10y ago
        It's also useful to slowdown people dog-piling the 'obvious' response to new comments.
      - Spooky23 10y ago
- woodman 10y ago
  > There's no rational reason not to use dogs for meat... Yes there is, unless you would make the same argument for having sex with relatives - which philosophers have rationalized against for thousands of years (way before the genetic consequences were understood). Morality is a rationalization. Dogs are genetically predisposed to be man's best friend - friends don't get eaten. Diamonds don't even come close, there is no positive moral argument - just a fairly recent PR campaign.
  - cmdrfred 10y ago
    "Dogs are genetically predisposed to be man's best friend - friends don't get eaten." I take it you've never met a cow, horse, pig, chicken or tame deer. Most animals will befriend humans if you are patient enough.
    - woodman 10y ago
      All those animals were domesticated for very different reasons. I've spent a lot of time with horses, my family had three, and they're great animals - but they don't come anywhere close to dogs when it comes to trust and the ability to read people. I've seen dogs trained with nothing more than praise - the desire to please is that strong for them. That doesn't work for horses.
      - cmdrfred 10y ago
        I've owned horses too. It depends on what you want them to do. If you want to jump on their back and ride them around, sure. I don't do that personally, and while they don't read you like a dog can I've taken unsocialized "mean" horses and turned them into friendly companion horses with nothing but patience and the occasional cookie or carrot.
  - joesb 10y ago
    Unless your children keep having sex with their siblings as well, just pair of incest marriage doesn't actually have significant risk of genetic consequences.
- coldtea 10y ago
  >It's deeply ingrained in Western culture. It's only "deeply ingrained" in the US. In most of the Western Europe etc it's negligible. And from what I've read it wasn't some deep rooted tradition in the US either -- it took a lot of advertising from diamond companies to instill it... http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/02/how-an-ad-campaign-invented-the-diamond-engagement-ring/385376/ http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/02/how...
  - tjalfi 10y ago
    http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/02/have-you-ever-tried-to-sell-a-diamond/304575/ http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/02/have-you... has some details on the ad campaigns.
  - CalRobert 10y ago
    Eh, my wife got some flack in Ireland when she didn't have a diamond engagement ring. Yet somehow we're still together.
ejcx 10y ago
Wow. It's very difficult to respond to you civically. We've been together for a long long time. It is amazing what people you don't know on the internet will assume about you. There was no alternative before this article. Cubic is cheap and tacky. Diamonds are overpriced and awful. Lab diamonds not much better. This article has a real alternative. That's a huge contribution to all diamond haters everywhere.
- lacampbell 10y ago
  Right, I read that as your SO dictating to you that you must give her a diamond. My apologies.
  - tukelully 10y ago
    I think you were in the right and didn't really assume as much as suggested. I got the same impression particularly because of the language chosen. "non-negotiable" implies that there was a second party to necessitate negotiation. Saying "no alternative" would come closer to describing a personal taste threshold.
    - ejcx 10y ago
      Non-negotiable was a bad choice of words. It's been very negotiable. She just really didn't want cubic because of the perception, like someone else had noted. It's just a little ridiculous to read 3 sentences a stranger types and tells them they are going to get a divorce. Bad form as far as unsolicited advice goes.
      - mythrwy 10y ago
        I think he was trying to help (even if misguided) and besides he apologized. You could be gracious about it.
        nikatwork 10y ago
        Hey mythrwy are you pregnant, you're looking a lot bigger? And also you should dump your partner because they conform to mainstream social standards, total red flag. Oh and you're raising your kids wrong. Hey why are you offended? I was trying to help! You could be gracious about it.
Grishnakh 10y ago
I have to agree that it's not a great sign if she insists on this. What other trendy stuff is she going to demand just because "everyone else does it"? I'm somewhat recently divorced now, but one good thing about my ex is that she was never superficial like this. She was perfectly happy to get a $70 Titanium wedding band, and loved how lightweight it was, and never wanted a silly gemstone on her hand. We did get her a couple other rings with gemstones (much cheaper ones, and prettier too; I think one was Tanzanite?), for wearing at special occasions, but wearing a gemstone ring every day is impractical and dumb really; it's just going to get in your way, and worse it's easy to take it off and then lose it. I knew a guy once whose wife dropped her $10k diamond ring down the drain while doing dishes! (No, they didn't recover it.)
- rhizome 10y ago
  Just to be clear, your benchmark for 'trendy' includes diamonds? That's like calling printed books a fad.
- joesb 10y ago
  So even without that "red neon warning sign" you marriage still didn't work. Or may be, just may be, wanting diamond is just normal for some women, and it doesn't indicate whether she is a good couple or not.
  - saiya-jin 10y ago
    it ain't normal to want to see the man you are supposed to love unconditionally, to financially bleed on impractical trinket that some people pay with almost proper enslavement, so you can brag about it with your friends (you = anybody, nothing personal here). if that's an US norm, so what, it's still wrong on many levels. it ain't like that here in europe. the last ex-gf that mentioned 3-salary rule for it was exactly the type you should never, ever marry, no matter what person you are. my fiancee on the other hand is happy with 70 euro ring since relationship is about everything else, but this. if woman sets this as non-negotiable standard to get married, there is no love from her in relationship, just pure calculation and she treats her counterpart like an idiot. simple as that.
  - 10y ago
beachstartup 10y ago
> diamonds being "non-negotiable" seems like a huge, glowing, neon warning sign uh... well, apparently it was negotiable, since all he had to do was find a suitable alternative and send her a link to a convincing article on the internet.
EpicEng 10y ago
I'm going to bet you have a hard time maintaining relationships with women.
- lacampbell 10y ago
  How much do you want to bet? $100? $1000? Let's exchange PayPal account info.
et-al 10y ago
> diamonds being "non-negotiable" seems like a huge, glowing, neon warning sign This is dependent on the relationship between the two people. If one party is strongly against the concept of diamonds and DeBeers, then yes, it'll be an issue. However, your parent commenter might be more moderate, or just doesn't care that much that their partner agrees with this particular societal pressure.
sliverstorm 10y ago
We can only read so much into that statement. Did she say "I must have a diamond that costs a minimum of $15k, or else I'm leaving you"? Or does she get kind of sad & blue & disengaged when he pitches alternatives, because she dreamed of a diamond ring as a kid? The later is quite understandable. Even if you think diamonds are silly, it's a matter of fact women in the USA grow up surrounded by diamond culture.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

Ironchefpython 10y ago

> diamonds being "non-negotiable" seems like a huge, glowing, neon warning sign It's deeply ingrained in Western culture. Think about it like eating dogs. There's no rational reason not to use dogs for meat, but most Westerners would throw a hissy fit rather than eat dog meat. So don't assume the prospective bride is unreasonable. In fact, assume the opposite, as she was able to read a rational explanation of the issues with diamonds, and change her mind.

tedunangst 10y ago
Horse may be a better example. Meat from carnivores tends to concentrate more toxins, which actually is a rational reason to avoid it.
- eyko 10y ago
  Horse meat is quite normal in western culture, unless if by western culture you mean anglophone countries.
  - stouset 10y ago
    And not eating it is for non-taste/texture/allergy reasons is just as absurd as wanting to have a "real" diamond. It's all nonsense. None of it makes sense.
    - khedoros1 10y ago
      Culture just tends to be arbitrary, in the details. If you don't care about potential social consequences, then feel free to ignore the parts that you find absurd.
    - alphazero_hn 10y ago
      OT aside: I sometimes like to play automatic reading (ala dada) with google. So at this moment a google search for "It's all nonsense. None of it makes sense." brings up your comment at the top of the page and a few items below this link [1] which has a section entitled "Making sense of nonsense. Conant and Diamond read Wittgenstein's Tractacus". Now I wonder if that Diamond is a chance event ("nonsense") or correlation artifact from the search algorithm ("sense"). [1]: http://philosophy.uchicago.edu/faculty/files/conant/costello%20-%20making%20sense%20of%20nonsense.pdf http://philosophy.uchicago.edu/faculty/files/conant/costello...
    - chris_7 10y ago
      Does horse meat not raise the risk of digestive system cancer, as other red meats do? (and notably unlike fish and vegetables)
  - Grishnakh 10y ago
    I can't reply to stouset for some stupid reason, but why is it "absurd" to not want to eat horse for texture reasons? My understanding is that horse meat generally does not taste that good and is very tough, because those animals get a lot of exercise; it's like deer meat. Some people like venison, and there's no stigma attached to eating it, but it's hard to buy because demand is low (and they're not raised as livestock), and the meat is generally considered "gamey" and difficult to cook properly so it's tender instead of tough and nasty. Cow and especially chicken is popular meat because it's both relatively cheap and rather easy (and fast) to cook. It's really hard to screw up cooking chicken in fact.
    - tomjakubowski 10y ago
      > I can't reply to stouset for some stupid reason On deeply nested comments, if it hasn't been long since the post was made you have to click the "permalink" ("XX minutes ago" or "XX hours ago") link to reply. I think the extra step is to help slow down flamewars ("do I really need to reply to this comment, right now?".
      - vxNsr 10y ago
        Hmmm... I didn't know that thanks for the heads up.
      - Grishnakh 10y ago
        Thanks for the info, that's very useful. If this is the intention, it seems like it'd make more sense to throw up roadblocks to only someone else who's in the comment chain, rather than to someone who hasn't been involved at all and is just chiming in. Usually, those flamewars are long chains of comments between two people.
        hueving 10y ago
        It's also useful to slowdown people dog-piling the 'obvious' response to new comments.
    - Spooky23 10y ago
woodman 10y ago
> There's no rational reason not to use dogs for meat... Yes there is, unless you would make the same argument for having sex with relatives - which philosophers have rationalized against for thousands of years (way before the genetic consequences were understood). Morality is a rationalization. Dogs are genetically predisposed to be man's best friend - friends don't get eaten. Diamonds don't even come close, there is no positive moral argument - just a fairly recent PR campaign.
- cmdrfred 10y ago
  "Dogs are genetically predisposed to be man's best friend - friends don't get eaten." I take it you've never met a cow, horse, pig, chicken or tame deer. Most animals will befriend humans if you are patient enough.
  - woodman 10y ago
    All those animals were domesticated for very different reasons. I've spent a lot of time with horses, my family had three, and they're great animals - but they don't come anywhere close to dogs when it comes to trust and the ability to read people. I've seen dogs trained with nothing more than praise - the desire to please is that strong for them. That doesn't work for horses.
    - cmdrfred 10y ago
      I've owned horses too. It depends on what you want them to do. If you want to jump on their back and ride them around, sure. I don't do that personally, and while they don't read you like a dog can I've taken unsocialized "mean" horses and turned them into friendly companion horses with nothing but patience and the occasional cookie or carrot.
- joesb 10y ago
  Unless your children keep having sex with their siblings as well, just pair of incest marriage doesn't actually have significant risk of genetic consequences.
coldtea 10y ago
>It's deeply ingrained in Western culture. It's only "deeply ingrained" in the US. In most of the Western Europe etc it's negligible. And from what I've read it wasn't some deep rooted tradition in the US either -- it took a lot of advertising from diamond companies to instill it... http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/02/how-an-ad-campaign-invented-the-diamond-engagement-ring/385376/ http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/02/how...
- tjalfi 10y ago
  http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/02/have-you-ever-tried-to-sell-a-diamond/304575/ http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/02/have-you... has some details on the ad campaigns.
- CalRobert 10y ago
  Eh, my wife got some flack in Ireland when she didn't have a diamond engagement ring. Yet somehow we're still together.

ejcx 10y ago

Wow. It's very difficult to respond to you civically. We've been together for a long long time. It is amazing what people you don't know on the internet will assume about you. There was no alternative before this article. Cubic is cheap and tacky. Diamonds are overpriced and awful. Lab diamonds not much better. This article has a real alternative. That's a huge contribution to all diamond haters everywhere.

lacampbell 10y ago
Right, I read that as your SO dictating to you that you must give her a diamond. My apologies.
- tukelully 10y ago
  I think you were in the right and didn't really assume as much as suggested. I got the same impression particularly because of the language chosen. "non-negotiable" implies that there was a second party to necessitate negotiation. Saying "no alternative" would come closer to describing a personal taste threshold.
  - ejcx 10y ago
    Non-negotiable was a bad choice of words. It's been very negotiable. She just really didn't want cubic because of the perception, like someone else had noted. It's just a little ridiculous to read 3 sentences a stranger types and tells them they are going to get a divorce. Bad form as far as unsolicited advice goes.
    - mythrwy 10y ago
      I think he was trying to help (even if misguided) and besides he apologized. You could be gracious about it.
      - nikatwork 10y ago
        Hey mythrwy are you pregnant, you're looking a lot bigger? And also you should dump your partner because they conform to mainstream social standards, total red flag. Oh and you're raising your kids wrong. Hey why are you offended? I was trying to help! You could be gracious about it.

Grishnakh 10y ago

I have to agree that it's not a great sign if she insists on this. What other trendy stuff is she going to demand just because "everyone else does it"? I'm somewhat recently divorced now, but one good thing about my ex is that she was never superficial like this. She was perfectly happy to get a $70 Titanium wedding band, and loved how lightweight it was, and never wanted a silly gemstone on her hand. We did get her a couple other rings with gemstones (much cheaper ones, and prettier too; I think one was Tanzanite?), for wearing at special occasions, but wearing a gemstone ring every day is impractical and dumb really; it's just going to get in your way, and worse it's easy to take it off and then lose it. I knew a guy once whose wife dropped her $10k diamond ring down the drain while doing dishes! (No, they didn't recover it.)

rhizome 10y ago
Just to be clear, your benchmark for 'trendy' includes diamonds? That's like calling printed books a fad.
joesb 10y ago
So even without that "red neon warning sign" you marriage still didn't work. Or may be, just may be, wanting diamond is just normal for some women, and it doesn't indicate whether she is a good couple or not.
- saiya-jin 10y ago
  it ain't normal to want to see the man you are supposed to love unconditionally, to financially bleed on impractical trinket that some people pay with almost proper enslavement, so you can brag about it with your friends (you = anybody, nothing personal here). if that's an US norm, so what, it's still wrong on many levels. it ain't like that here in europe. the last ex-gf that mentioned 3-salary rule for it was exactly the type you should never, ever marry, no matter what person you are. my fiancee on the other hand is happy with 70 euro ring since relationship is about everything else, but this. if woman sets this as non-negotiable standard to get married, there is no love from her in relationship, just pure calculation and she treats her counterpart like an idiot. simple as that.
- 10y ago

beachstartup 10y ago

> diamonds being "non-negotiable" seems like a huge, glowing, neon warning sign uh... well, apparently it was negotiable, since all he had to do was find a suitable alternative and send her a link to a convincing article on the internet.

EpicEng 10y ago

I'm going to bet you have a hard time maintaining relationships with women.

lacampbell 10y ago
How much do you want to bet? $100? $1000? Let's exchange PayPal account info.

et-al 10y ago

> diamonds being "non-negotiable" seems like a huge, glowing, neon warning sign This is dependent on the relationship between the two people. If one party is strongly against the concept of diamonds and DeBeers, then yes, it'll be an issue. However, your parent commenter might be more moderate, or just doesn't care that much that their partner agrees with this particular societal pressure.

sliverstorm 10y ago

We can only read so much into that statement. Did she say "I must have a diamond that costs a minimum of $15k, or else I'm leaving you"? Or does she get kind of sad & blue & disengaged when he pitches alternatives, because she dreamed of a diamond ring as a kid? The later is quite understandable. Even if you think diamonds are silly, it's a matter of fact women in the USA grow up surrounded by diamond culture.