4 ms·
The problem with a bunch of gold or a house is that she can’t carry them around with her throughout her day. With a diamond ring, she can. Why is that importan
by chongli 7y ago
The problem with a bunch of gold or a house is that she can’t carry them around with her throughout her day. With a diamond ring, she can.
Why is that important? Maybe it’s less important today, but if you turn on her and she has to strike out on her own, then her engagement ring becomes a bit of wealth she has access to in an emergency. In that regard it may seem rather silly (why not a bank account?) but in the past, women didn’t have bank accounts or other easy ways to access wealth.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- saiya-jin 7y agoMind you, in the past there were no diamond rings. Diamond rings are an invention of DeBeers in 30s, because nobody was buying diamonds they keep digging out of earth.
- hombre_fatal 7y agochongli's posts really just seem like they are encoding their own superstitions about relationships in a backsplanation for why things are the way they are. It really sounds like someone coping with buyer's remorse for having wasted so much money on a ring. I've seen people do the same thing with their wedding that left them $30k in debt. I totally buy their reasoning for why they did it, but they lose me when they prescribe it to everyone else.
- theandrewbailey 7y agoDiamond engagement rings have terrible resale value.
- dmitrygr 7y agoNo part of that is true historically. See here. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/02/have-you-ever-tried-to-sell-a-diamond/304575/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/02/have-yo...