9 ms·

Why do people want a diamond at all is a good question to ask (and research). Shame $5k to charity isn’t the convention.

hyperliner 3y ago
Not everybody has $5k to give away to charity, but they have $5k to give to De Beers.
kikokikokiko 3y ago
I don't know if it's just another example of my complete immunity towards advertising and marketing in all of it's forms, but one of the requirements I set early on when I started to think seriously about settling down was "she can't give any value, at all, to useless things like an idiotic ring with a dumb whisperer's rock on it". I found my girl thank God. Not being an american neither having lived in the US at any point in my life, it always amazed me that your society accepted as common knowledge that "you must spend X months of your salary on a dumb whisperer's rock to prove to your woman that you value her. The DeBeers corporation sure did a good job on you guys.
- hfuyf65 3y ago
  While we are likely aligned with regards to advertising, I would like you to consider a counter argument. The rock is a rock, but its exaorbitant price serves as a threshold for potential mate selection. We may consider it crass, but animal kingdom is full of examples of females considering males based on specific criteria.
  - kikokikokiko 3y ago
    Yes, it's perfectly expected for females (on average) to give a lot of value to "useless" demonstrations of fitness when selecting a mate. The peacock exists. But it's also perfectly expected for a male, if he's aware of these innate traits, when selecting a female partner, if he's looking for more important things other than looks and physical attractiveness, to give more "points" to different traits. In my case, intelligence was factor number 1. If she reaaally needs that stupid ring, she's out. In the end I got myself a PhD girlfriend, that is way smarter than me, and with whom I can have conversations way into my 80s. Mission accomplished. Thank you DeBeers for creating a standardized test to put potential wives through.
    - matisseverduyn 3y ago
      > But it's also perfectly expected for a male, if he's aware ... looking for more important things ... I wonder if any Bowerbirds have shared your revelation.
      - hfuyf65 3y ago
        This a fascinating wiki entry. Thank you for making HN a more interesting place for all. On a separate note, it seems the ornate courtship is offset with regular polygamy. I might be reading too much into it and try to extrapolate to human behavior, which is way more messy.
        matisseverduyn 3y ago
        Thanks! I thought those who hadn't heard about Bowerbirds yet might find their habits interesting :) There are a few good documentaries as well.
    - corethree 3y ago
      We like to tell ourselves intelligence is a factor. But really male attraction preferences are based on physical looks. Personality is a close second but males are very simple in this department too. Men just want someone chill and nice and not crazy. Intelligence and career come in next as mostly not considered at all. The young hot girl working at Starbucks does better than a older jaded PhD girl. Especially if that PhD girl is superficially fat. Good conversation isn't a factor here. This is how most men operate. There are clearly exceptions. But more than exceptions there are men who lie to themselves and claim their base nature is above that. Additionally I will say that intelligence doesn't wipe away a womens instinct. They still covet some sort of tribute from a romantic standpoint. Women can have high intelligence and still desire a ring. They can suppress this desire but this suppression isn't related to intelligence. Think about it, it doesn't take high IQ to understand what a blood diamond is. Anyway sometimes in rare cases a man is highly desirable and extremely high value. If a man has a bunch of options among hot young women to choose from that is the only situation where intelligence plays a big role. Why not? Every woman is hot and nice and the only differentiator is intelligence. Go for it. That's probably your case. I imagine you have a bunch of hot super model esque girls pining for you and you picked the one who didn't want a ring and had a PhD. Good for you! Seriously. But note you are the exception not the rule.
  - Roark66 3y ago
    >The rock is a rock, but its exaorbitant price serves as a threshold for potential mate selection. Indeed, but don't we already have much more practical things that serve the same purpose? For example a nice house/apartment or a car. Things we own, even what kind of furniture we have. All this communicates ones ability to provide for a family better than a rock. Gold itself is much better (preferably in bars or coins, not jewellery). The problem with diamonds isn't that they are only a token of value. The problem is that they are extremely overvalued during the first purchase in jewellery. If one could buy an engagement ring for $10k then 10 years later sell it and make profit with regards to inflation (like it was a gold coin/bar) I would have no problem with it.
    - corethree 3y ago
      Those don't work. The sacrifice must have zero utility. It's unequivocally clear to a woman and to all other women who she shows the ring too that the ring was 100 percent a tribute to her and only to her and only for that purpose. Like peacocking the peacocks feather has zero utility. It is purely a mating ritual. A car or a house is not as clear because it has shared utility.
      - corethree 3y ago
        The keyword is "romance" any romantic gesture tends to have zero utility. Buying a car or a house for a woman is not romantic at all. in terms of "romance" women tend to be looking for a clear and unequivocal display of devotion.
- isykt 3y ago
  Companies are staffed by hundreds of people whose entire job, day and and day out, is to influence how you think about their products. You are not immune to advertising, and thinking that you are is naive. If your goal is reduce how influenced you are by people who sell things, understanding how they influence you and why is a better strategy.
- yencabulator 3y ago
  I'm married and neither of us has a ring of any kind. It is possible to find reasonable, non-materialistic, people, even in the US. The average mindset can be quite disappointing for sure -- but hey, we're aiming for above-average mates right? (Pro-tip: If you find yourself surrounded by people with incredibly old school value systems and no desire to think for themselves, move to one of the bigger melting pot cities on the coasts. You'll find others like you already did.)
  - friend_and_foe 3y ago
    For me it was the opposite: move to the middle of nowhere because big city girls are materialistic and more often than not unscrupulous in my experience. It worked.
- friend_and_foe 3y ago
  I'm an american but I found mine too. She gets the diamond thing, but I believe in real tradition and the power of some of these organic customs. A valuable gift upon engagement is a collateralized commitment. I told her I'd get her something valuable, not just expensive, because there's a difference. She gets it.
helsinkiandrew 3y ago
Advertising! https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/02/how-an-ad-campaign-invented-the-diamond-engagement-ring/385376/ https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/02/ho... > In 1938, amid the ravages of the Depression and the rumblings of war, Harry Oppenheimer, the De Beers founder’s son, recruited the New York–based ad agency N.W. Ayer to burnish the image of diamonds in the United States, where the practice of giving diamond engagement rings had been unevenly gaining traction for years, but where the diamonds sold were increasingly small and low-quality. > Meanwhile, the price of diamonds was falling around the world. The folks at Ayer set out to persuade young men that diamonds (and only diamonds) were synonymous with romance, and that the measure of a man’s love (and even his personal and professional success) was directly proportional to the size and quality of the diamond he purchased. Young women, in turn, had to be convinced that courtship concluded, invariably, in a diamond.
dalbasal 3y ago
Or how about a proper dowry... that is the point. A savings bond, or even a symbolic gold chain... provided that the price is reasonably represented in gold weight. Dowries are/were a symbolic and real proof of financial fortitude, intent. They often a represent real safety net. In some cases, increase the woman (or man's) ability to leave a marriage, a liberty and power balance function. So much of our modern culture is a corrupt cargo cult. We are completely removed from the meaning behind our symbolisms, both intellectually and culturally. China's adoption of Christmas and Christmas-like festivities for retail purposes is my favourite example. A copy of a copy with all meaning distilled to "winter shopping." Anyway... there's no inherent reason for engagement rings, gifts or donations. If we like the traditional/cultural aspects... use them. Otherwise, why so sheep?
- mrkeen 3y ago
  > China's adoption of Christmas and Christmas-like festivities for retail purposes is my favourite example Indeed. Bring back Saturnalia!
  - hutzlibu 3y ago
    Or Yule in the more northern parts.
    - dalbasal 3y ago
      Or any other winter festival that was practiced before christmas, and christianity superseded it.
      - yencabulator 3y ago
        Plot twist: Northern Europe happily kept doing several of its pre-Christian activities. Christianity was superficially conformed to, to avoid repression, but it didn't really supersede as much as add to and slightly change things. For example, while you don't see people actually worshiping the old gods[1], the local version of Easter is filled with the old symbols of fertility, witches, and evil spirits. [1]: If they ever were ever really "worshiped" in the modern sense, in an animistic belief system.
rjzzleep 3y ago
For most people those 40k(or a lot more than that depending on where you are) that go into a wedding would be better served with a dinner at a nice restaurant and a down payment for an appartment/house.
- bafe 3y ago
  40k sounds insane. I will spend around 2k for suit+shoes and around 5k for a restaurant dinner for 30 people. My fiancé spend around 2k for dress and accessories. And we didn't go cheap on anything
corethree 3y ago
You don't need research. It's common sense. You're human so it's easy to figure out. It's possible that our modern woke culture makes this harder analyze because it's very one sided in terms of gender. It's completely obvious why diamonds are coveted, but you'll still see a lot of attempts by to rationalize a different reason. What I'm about to describe is something that is completely obvious to everyone and something you likely already know but find hard to articulate: Desire for diamonds is centered around women. It's part of human mating rituals. A lot of women demand sacrifice or some sort of proof that the man loves her and is willing to sacrifice resources to take care of her. Romance is 100 percent what this is. It's always a man putting in a romantic gesture and a woman making a practical decision based on that gesture(s). Society often gets these roles reversed but in actuality: men are the romantic sex, women are the practical sex. I like to note here that a woman is not consciously thinking this is a practical choice, but rather her instincts drive her in this direction as much as a man's instincts drive him to make irrational tributes to her. One form of this sacrifice comes in the form of material jewelery. First the sacrifice needs to be a literal "sacrifice" or basically useless in terms of utility. Second it needs to be "showable" meaning the woman can use the thing and "show" other people that a man sacrificed a huge amount of money just for her. Diamonds fulfill the above request more than anything else. If a woman has a house it's not clear whether the house was a sacrifice just for her or for him as well, but if she has a diamond it is 100 percent clear it was for her and nothing else. This is why the zero utility aspect is important. It is the ultimate way to communicate the nature of the "sacrifice". It is not a coincidence why a bouquet flowers also fills this role of "tribute". Cut Flowers are both useless and ephemeral communicating the act of "sacrifice" unequivocally. So that's where it comes from. Human mating rituals. Diamonds are pleasing to the eye but there plenty of cheap forms of gemstones that are pleasing to the eye too and you don't see women coveting that stuff. The rarity and mostly zero utility nature of a diamond ring makes it an object ideal for tribute. It is a shame, but you can't deny human nature. Women want tribute from men and they want to put that tribute on display to show off their status. Men will as a result fight tooth and nail for the status and the ability to provide a high value woman with that tribute. Entire businesses will spawn and form around this human behavioral quirk and one of these industries is the diamond industry. That's the way the world works. Let me be clear though. If diamonds didn't exist... something else would fill this role of tribute. There will be an entire industry spawned around some other useless thing and women will highly covet that thing as tribute. It's not purely the fault of the diamond industry as many people seem to think. The diamond industry is simply filling a niche that if they didn't fill, would've been filled by something else.
Mizoguchi 3y ago
The way some diamonds (say a 2 carat round VSS1) refract light is pretty damn spectacular, no other rock or material can match it, so that may be a reason why some people want them.
- adrian_b 3y ago
  There are a few other minerals that have both higher refractive index and higher dispersion than diamonds, so they could be used to make more spectacular gems than the diamonds. However the cheaper of them (e.g. rutile, i.e. titanium dioxide) are not suitable for rings, because they have lower hardness so they would be scratched by dust. Among those hard enough, moissanite could be used for more spectacular optical effects than diamond, though normally it is used in such a way as to mimic diamond, instead of trying to use its superior optical characteristics, to make it stand out.
wodenokoto 3y ago
My mom is absolutely certain her wedding ring has appreciated. And it’s my “I read it online” vs hers “I talked with a jeweler” Which to be honest I’d call a draw.
- bluGill 3y ago
  Well given the likely amount of inflation between when your mom got married and now it probably has appreciated. It hasn't kept pace with inflation though.

hyperliner 3y ago

Not everybody has $5k to give away to charity, but they have $5k to give to De Beers.

kikokikokiko 3y ago

I don't know if it's just another example of my complete immunity towards advertising and marketing in all of it's forms, but one of the requirements I set early on when I started to think seriously about settling down was "she can't give any value, at all, to useless things like an idiotic ring with a dumb whisperer's rock on it". I found my girl thank God. Not being an american neither having lived in the US at any point in my life, it always amazed me that your society accepted as common knowledge that "you must spend X months of your salary on a dumb whisperer's rock to prove to your woman that you value her. The DeBeers corporation sure did a good job on you guys.

hfuyf65 3y ago
While we are likely aligned with regards to advertising, I would like you to consider a counter argument. The rock is a rock, but its exaorbitant price serves as a threshold for potential mate selection. We may consider it crass, but animal kingdom is full of examples of females considering males based on specific criteria.
- kikokikokiko 3y ago
  Yes, it's perfectly expected for females (on average) to give a lot of value to "useless" demonstrations of fitness when selecting a mate. The peacock exists. But it's also perfectly expected for a male, if he's aware of these innate traits, when selecting a female partner, if he's looking for more important things other than looks and physical attractiveness, to give more "points" to different traits. In my case, intelligence was factor number 1. If she reaaally needs that stupid ring, she's out. In the end I got myself a PhD girlfriend, that is way smarter than me, and with whom I can have conversations way into my 80s. Mission accomplished. Thank you DeBeers for creating a standardized test to put potential wives through.
  - matisseverduyn 3y ago
    > But it's also perfectly expected for a male, if he's aware ... looking for more important things ... I wonder if any Bowerbirds have shared your revelation.
    - hfuyf65 3y ago
      This a fascinating wiki entry. Thank you for making HN a more interesting place for all. On a separate note, it seems the ornate courtship is offset with regular polygamy. I might be reading too much into it and try to extrapolate to human behavior, which is way more messy.
      - matisseverduyn 3y ago
        Thanks! I thought those who hadn't heard about Bowerbirds yet might find their habits interesting :) There are a few good documentaries as well.
  - corethree 3y ago
    We like to tell ourselves intelligence is a factor. But really male attraction preferences are based on physical looks. Personality is a close second but males are very simple in this department too. Men just want someone chill and nice and not crazy. Intelligence and career come in next as mostly not considered at all. The young hot girl working at Starbucks does better than a older jaded PhD girl. Especially if that PhD girl is superficially fat. Good conversation isn't a factor here. This is how most men operate. There are clearly exceptions. But more than exceptions there are men who lie to themselves and claim their base nature is above that. Additionally I will say that intelligence doesn't wipe away a womens instinct. They still covet some sort of tribute from a romantic standpoint. Women can have high intelligence and still desire a ring. They can suppress this desire but this suppression isn't related to intelligence. Think about it, it doesn't take high IQ to understand what a blood diamond is. Anyway sometimes in rare cases a man is highly desirable and extremely high value. If a man has a bunch of options among hot young women to choose from that is the only situation where intelligence plays a big role. Why not? Every woman is hot and nice and the only differentiator is intelligence. Go for it. That's probably your case. I imagine you have a bunch of hot super model esque girls pining for you and you picked the one who didn't want a ring and had a PhD. Good for you! Seriously. But note you are the exception not the rule.
- Roark66 3y ago
  >The rock is a rock, but its exaorbitant price serves as a threshold for potential mate selection. Indeed, but don't we already have much more practical things that serve the same purpose? For example a nice house/apartment or a car. Things we own, even what kind of furniture we have. All this communicates ones ability to provide for a family better than a rock. Gold itself is much better (preferably in bars or coins, not jewellery). The problem with diamonds isn't that they are only a token of value. The problem is that they are extremely overvalued during the first purchase in jewellery. If one could buy an engagement ring for $10k then 10 years later sell it and make profit with regards to inflation (like it was a gold coin/bar) I would have no problem with it.
  - corethree 3y ago
    Those don't work. The sacrifice must have zero utility. It's unequivocally clear to a woman and to all other women who she shows the ring too that the ring was 100 percent a tribute to her and only to her and only for that purpose. Like peacocking the peacocks feather has zero utility. It is purely a mating ritual. A car or a house is not as clear because it has shared utility.
    - corethree 3y ago
      The keyword is "romance" any romantic gesture tends to have zero utility. Buying a car or a house for a woman is not romantic at all. in terms of "romance" women tend to be looking for a clear and unequivocal display of devotion.
isykt 3y ago
Companies are staffed by hundreds of people whose entire job, day and and day out, is to influence how you think about their products. You are not immune to advertising, and thinking that you are is naive. If your goal is reduce how influenced you are by people who sell things, understanding how they influence you and why is a better strategy.
yencabulator 3y ago
I'm married and neither of us has a ring of any kind. It is possible to find reasonable, non-materialistic, people, even in the US. The average mindset can be quite disappointing for sure -- but hey, we're aiming for above-average mates right? (Pro-tip: If you find yourself surrounded by people with incredibly old school value systems and no desire to think for themselves, move to one of the bigger melting pot cities on the coasts. You'll find others like you already did.)
- friend_and_foe 3y ago
  For me it was the opposite: move to the middle of nowhere because big city girls are materialistic and more often than not unscrupulous in my experience. It worked.
friend_and_foe 3y ago
I'm an american but I found mine too. She gets the diamond thing, but I believe in real tradition and the power of some of these organic customs. A valuable gift upon engagement is a collateralized commitment. I told her I'd get her something valuable, not just expensive, because there's a difference. She gets it.

helsinkiandrew 3y ago

Advertising! https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/02/how-an-ad-campaign-invented-the-diamond-engagement-ring/385376/ https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/02/ho... > In 1938, amid the ravages of the Depression and the rumblings of war, Harry Oppenheimer, the De Beers founder’s son, recruited the New York–based ad agency N.W. Ayer to burnish the image of diamonds in the United States, where the practice of giving diamond engagement rings had been unevenly gaining traction for years, but where the diamonds sold were increasingly small and low-quality. > Meanwhile, the price of diamonds was falling around the world. The folks at Ayer set out to persuade young men that diamonds (and only diamonds) were synonymous with romance, and that the measure of a man’s love (and even his personal and professional success) was directly proportional to the size and quality of the diamond he purchased. Young women, in turn, had to be convinced that courtship concluded, invariably, in a diamond.

dalbasal 3y ago

Or how about a proper dowry... that is the point. A savings bond, or even a symbolic gold chain... provided that the price is reasonably represented in gold weight. Dowries are/were a symbolic and real proof of financial fortitude, intent. They often a represent real safety net. In some cases, increase the woman (or man's) ability to leave a marriage, a liberty and power balance function. So much of our modern culture is a corrupt cargo cult. We are completely removed from the meaning behind our symbolisms, both intellectually and culturally. China's adoption of Christmas and Christmas-like festivities for retail purposes is my favourite example. A copy of a copy with all meaning distilled to "winter shopping." Anyway... there's no inherent reason for engagement rings, gifts or donations. If we like the traditional/cultural aspects... use them. Otherwise, why so sheep?

mrkeen 3y ago
> China's adoption of Christmas and Christmas-like festivities for retail purposes is my favourite example Indeed. Bring back Saturnalia!
- hutzlibu 3y ago
  Or Yule in the more northern parts.
  - dalbasal 3y ago
    Or any other winter festival that was practiced before christmas, and christianity superseded it.
    - yencabulator 3y ago
      Plot twist: Northern Europe happily kept doing several of its pre-Christian activities. Christianity was superficially conformed to, to avoid repression, but it didn't really supersede as much as add to and slightly change things. For example, while you don't see people actually worshiping the old gods[1], the local version of Easter is filled with the old symbols of fertility, witches, and evil spirits. [1]: If they ever were ever really "worshiped" in the modern sense, in an animistic belief system.

rjzzleep 3y ago

For most people those 40k(or a lot more than that depending on where you are) that go into a wedding would be better served with a dinner at a nice restaurant and a down payment for an appartment/house.

bafe 3y ago
40k sounds insane. I will spend around 2k for suit+shoes and around 5k for a restaurant dinner for 30 people. My fiancé spend around 2k for dress and accessories. And we didn't go cheap on anything

corethree 3y ago

You don't need research. It's common sense. You're human so it's easy to figure out. It's possible that our modern woke culture makes this harder analyze because it's very one sided in terms of gender. It's completely obvious why diamonds are coveted, but you'll still see a lot of attempts by to rationalize a different reason. What I'm about to describe is something that is completely obvious to everyone and something you likely already know but find hard to articulate: Desire for diamonds is centered around women. It's part of human mating rituals. A lot of women demand sacrifice or some sort of proof that the man loves her and is willing to sacrifice resources to take care of her. Romance is 100 percent what this is. It's always a man putting in a romantic gesture and a woman making a practical decision based on that gesture(s). Society often gets these roles reversed but in actuality: men are the romantic sex, women are the practical sex. I like to note here that a woman is not consciously thinking this is a practical choice, but rather her instincts drive her in this direction as much as a man's instincts drive him to make irrational tributes to her. One form of this sacrifice comes in the form of material jewelery. First the sacrifice needs to be a literal "sacrifice" or basically useless in terms of utility. Second it needs to be "showable" meaning the woman can use the thing and "show" other people that a man sacrificed a huge amount of money just for her. Diamonds fulfill the above request more than anything else. If a woman has a house it's not clear whether the house was a sacrifice just for her or for him as well, but if she has a diamond it is 100 percent clear it was for her and nothing else. This is why the zero utility aspect is important. It is the ultimate way to communicate the nature of the "sacrifice". It is not a coincidence why a bouquet flowers also fills this role of "tribute". Cut Flowers are both useless and ephemeral communicating the act of "sacrifice" unequivocally. So that's where it comes from. Human mating rituals. Diamonds are pleasing to the eye but there plenty of cheap forms of gemstones that are pleasing to the eye too and you don't see women coveting that stuff. The rarity and mostly zero utility nature of a diamond ring makes it an object ideal for tribute. It is a shame, but you can't deny human nature. Women want tribute from men and they want to put that tribute on display to show off their status. Men will as a result fight tooth and nail for the status and the ability to provide a high value woman with that tribute. Entire businesses will spawn and form around this human behavioral quirk and one of these industries is the diamond industry. That's the way the world works. Let me be clear though. If diamonds didn't exist... something else would fill this role of tribute. There will be an entire industry spawned around some other useless thing and women will highly covet that thing as tribute. It's not purely the fault of the diamond industry as many people seem to think. The diamond industry is simply filling a niche that if they didn't fill, would've been filled by something else.

Mizoguchi 3y ago

The way some diamonds (say a 2 carat round VSS1) refract light is pretty damn spectacular, no other rock or material can match it, so that may be a reason why some people want them.

adrian_b 3y ago
There are a few other minerals that have both higher refractive index and higher dispersion than diamonds, so they could be used to make more spectacular gems than the diamonds. However the cheaper of them (e.g. rutile, i.e. titanium dioxide) are not suitable for rings, because they have lower hardness so they would be scratched by dust. Among those hard enough, moissanite could be used for more spectacular optical effects than diamond, though normally it is used in such a way as to mimic diamond, instead of trying to use its superior optical characteristics, to make it stand out.

wodenokoto 3y ago

My mom is absolutely certain her wedding ring has appreciated. And it’s my “I read it online” vs hers “I talked with a jeweler” Which to be honest I’d call a draw.

bluGill 3y ago
Well given the likely amount of inflation between when your mom got married and now it probably has appreciated. It hasn't kept pace with inflation though.