Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Diamonds - Are They Really Worth the Cost?

Posted by Cliff on Tue Aug 13, 2002 06:07 PM
from the ethics-in-the-diamond-age dept.
hardDiamond asks: "I'm going to get engaged. I know my 4 C's. I know I'm going to get screwed by the jeweller, but that's okay: after all, a diamond engagement ring is a time-honoured tradition... NOT. Having checked out the goods, looked for the flaws, I found the biggest one of all. Diamond engagement rings are the creation of a well orchestrated advertising campaign for most of the last century - according to this article. Would you buy one for the love of your life? I know my girlfriend would love a diamond, but ethically I have my doubts. Diseased-miners, child slave labour, cartel inflated prices... and as if that wasn't enough, diamonds have no resale value. Naddah. Zilch. They'll sell you the shit, but damn it, they're not taking it back at any price. So what have my fellow slashdotters done with regards to engagement rings? What's a good substitute for diamonds? My girlfriend understands my thoughts regarding diamonds, but deep down, I'm sure she would like a diamond. Even a small one." I've never even thought about questioning such a time honored tradition, but now I'm curious. Have any of you looked at the issues surrounding diamonds and found them wanting? What alternatives have you found and were they acceptable?
After researching this a bit, one of the key facts to surface is that 2-4.5% of diamond sales will go to finance terrorism or forms of violence. Such diamonds, for want of a better term, have been named "conflict diamonds". For those of you interested in following up on this subject, here are a few more links:
Fatal Transactions
Conflict Diamonds: Sanctions and War
The Campaign to Eliminate Conflict Diamonds
The Kimberly Process, which will attempt to track diamonds to their origin. This is to begin in November.
For those of you who have a subscription to Science News, the cover story, this month, deals with this issue as well.
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by RaboKrabekian (461040) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:10PM (#4065457) Journal
    Slashdot readers?

    Girlfriends?

    Marriage?

    This has to be some sort of hoax. Is it April already?
  • Terrorism vs. Cars (Score:5, Insightful)

    by fishy jew (452414) <bigs@bCHICAGOigs18.com minus city> on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:12PM (#4065471)
    one of the key facts to surface is that 2-4.5% of diamond sales will go to finance terrorism or forms of violence

    What percentage of gas sales do you think finance terrorism? Money goes from our hands to the gas companies to oil companies in the Mid-East to (possibly) terrorist organizations. Probably true about many other products as well...
  • by stere0 (526823) <slashdotmail@ster e o . lu> on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:12PM (#4065473) Homepage
    Build up a geek website with a couple of friends, make it popular and propose on the front page a couple of years later.
  • by phr2 (545169) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:13PM (#4065481)
    If they have no resale value, they you could buy a used diamond very cheaply and get a jeweler to put it in a new setting for you, and that would kill the market for new diamonds. They don't wear out, of course. "Diamonds are forever" and all that.

    I agree with most of your other points about the disgusting practices used to produce diamonds and market them.

    • by Arandir (19206) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @07:40PM (#4066405) Homepage Journal
      Or the best alternative of all: "This is my Grandmother's engagement ring. My grandparents were married 58 years and were deeply in love every minute of it. I would be honored for you to have this."
    • by IntelliTubbie (29947) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @08:18PM (#4066684)
      If they have no resale value, they you could buy a used diamond very cheaply and get a jeweler to put it in a new setting for you, and that would kill the market for new diamonds. They don't wear out, of course. "Diamonds are forever" and all that.

      The used diamond market isn't like the used car market, where the resale value drops as soon as you drive your shiny new Mustang off the lot. That is, it's not that market prices are low -- it's that there is no market. Because De Beers has created the impression that diamonds are priceless (if not in monetary value, then in sentimental value), almost no one sells their used diamonds. And because no one sells them, no one expects to buy them either. This has completely eliminated the secondary market for diamonds -- outside of shady outfits like pawn shops, which can hardly be considered bastions of "fair market value".

      The total lack of liquidity in the used diamond market means that De Beers can continue to have complete control over prices. Why is stifling liquidity just as important as stifling competition? Look at what happened to hardware companies like Cisco when the Internet bubble burst. As if it weren't bad enough that Cisco lost customers, they found that prospective customers were buying cheap, lightly used hardware off the dot-bombs at fire sale prices instead of from Cisco. This is even more important for De Beers, since a diamond has a considerably longer usable life than a router. The moral of the story: if you want to sell your product to everyone at ridiculous prices, without screwing yourself in the future by saturating the market with resalable goods, then do exactly what De Beers has done.

      Cheers,
      IT
      • by JordoCrouse (178999) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:23PM (#4065644) Homepage Journal
        If you walk into a store with cash on hand its quite easy to walk out with a huge discount beyond their regular 50% off sales.

        Better yet, see if you can somebody to refer you to a diamond wholesaler. They save you a bundle, and the person who refered you will get a small kickback as a referer's fee. I got my diamond for wholesale, and because the jeweler recommended me, he ended up applying the referer's fee to the price of the ring. Result? The ring appraised the next day for almost double what I paid for it.

  • Two Words: (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Null_Packet (15946) <{nullpacket} {at} {doscher.net}> on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:13PM (#4065482)
    Antique Ring.

    I gave my wife a pretty cool engagement ring from an antique jewelry outfit. Sure, it's 2nd hand, but it has the personality and it doesn't get crazy as far as prices go either.
  • Canadian diamonds (Score:5, Informative)

    by simetra (155655) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:13PM (#4065484) Homepage Journal
    They're really expensive, but are guaranteed not to have the ethical overhead of others. Plus, they have a cool little polar bear laser-etched into the side (very tiny, you have to use a loupe to see it).

    They're called Polar Bear Diamonds.
  • Fuck tradition (Score:5, Insightful)

    by nicfit (25347) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:13PM (#4065490) Homepage

    My girlfriend told me not to WASTE our money and instead we spent three crazy weeks in Hawaii AND had money in the bank.

    God I love her!

  • by Snuffub (173401) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:14PM (#4065498) Homepage
    Great, i fully expect the bush administration to put out new commercials linking diamond sales to terrorism and urging all "true" americans to stay clear of them. I mean they did the same thing with pot without one proven link between marijuana sales and terrorist organizations.

  • by Telastyn (206146) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:16PM (#4065533)
    About manufactured diamonds and their history.

    currently Gemesis [gemesis.com] is America's primary manufacturer. They are building a $25m factory for making better/ different colored diamonds. Currently they can make yellow ones, though the show showed clear, and fanciful colored ones (in testing it seems).

    They are "real" diamonds, pretty much seeded carbon crystal. Any gemologist can likely tell you they are real diamond, albeit manufactured. AFAIK the cost is a little higher, if not compriable for now.
  • by A nonymous Coward (7548) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:17PM (#4065546)
    Seriously. If you can't talk to each other about this, then you are fools to even consider marriage. If you would rather get /. opinions on this than talk it over with the gf, then you aren't ready.
  • by Phronesis (175966) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:20PM (#4065588)
    Progress in large gem-quality synthetic diamonds is proceeding so fast that DeBeers is developing quite sophisticated techniques (ultraviolet phosphorescence) to allow jewelers to tell synthetic from natural stones. Perhaps it will not be too long before the "conflict diamond" problem disappears because synthetics displace natural diamonds for most of the market.

    A good account of the state of the art two years ago can be found in the transcript of a NOVA show on diamond synthesis: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/2703diamo nd.html [pbs.org]

    When you send one of our diamonds to De Beers, right, the only way they can detect that this is not a natural diamond is really through phosphorescence. They take this, and they put in, they hit it with a UV light, and after the UV light goes off, this thing will phosphoresce for about three to five seconds. That is typical of a synthetic diamond versus a natural diamond.
    ...
    NARRATOR:Faced with the future threat of synthetic diamonds being imperceptible to the trade, De Beers is already preparing its bottom line - one low-tech way to guarantee detection. They are putting minute logos on their diamonds.

    STEPHEN LUSSIER: If we can give the consumer a little bit more help in telling him what's a good diamond, that regardless of what they know or what their jeweler knows, De Beers has told them that this diamond is natural from - as it came out of the ground, created by nature billions of years ago and not one that popped out of a machine last Wednesday in Kansas City.

  • by Will_Malverson (105796) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:23PM (#4065648) Journal
    In his book "Hidden Order: The Economics of Everyday Life", David D. Friedman [daviddfriedman.com] says that there is another reason for the growth in engagement rings over the past century. In a nutshell:


    Premarital sex was not invented in the 1960s, and has in fact been around ever since just before the first marriage. Of course, back in the good old days, a good girl would never have sex before wedlock. However, some were willing to bend the rules once they were engaged. So, men quickly discovered that you could ask a woman to marry you, have sex with her, and then break off the engagement.


    Up until 1935, this was considered an actionable tort in 47 of the 48 states. A woman who was deceived in this way could sue for the value of her lost virginity and subsequent difficulty in acquiring a husband. State legislatures passed laws against these suits in the 1930s and 1940s.


    So, after this ability was removed, women needed a new way to ensure that a man proposing marriage really meant it. It became social custom that a man asking for marriage would post a performance bond equivalent to about twice his monthly salary. This bond would be forfeitable upon his breaking off of the engagement, but returnable if she broke off the engagement. This 'bond' was implemented as a diamond ring, because it was an easy way to, er, 'crystalize' two months of his salary in an easy-to-handle package.


    In essence, the engagement ring is a private reimplementation of a canceled government policy.

  • by Brightest Light (552357) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:28PM (#4065713) Journal
    Alright. Let's review. You post on Slashdot. You have a girl you are going to marry.
    You are a nerd with a girlfriend.
    Most of the people here rarely talk to girls (no, its not flamebait; im one of them), let alone marry them! Buy her a diamond ring you idiot!
  • Wrong Question (Score:5, Insightful)

    by philipsblows (180703) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:42PM (#4065890) Homepage

    Much like the megahertz myth, the need for a diamond engagement ring has been cultivated through careful marketing and peer pressure.

    But.

    The cost of NOT getting this diamond ring may be the relationship itself. It may not occur right away (she might still accept your proposal) but this will be a major disappointment to a woman who has had an engagement ring (or a rock as my ex-girlfriend called it), and it just might set the tone for the rest of your time together.

    As has been pointed out elsehwhere in this very thread, gasoline, diamonds, honey, opium, and a whole bunch of other products all contribute to terrorism or cruel treatment of our fellow humans or various other badnesses in the world.

    In the end, though, it will be infinitely easier to get a fuel-efficient car and switch away from various other products than it will be to alter the mindset of the woman (and ALL of her friends) who considers not where it came from or how it got there, but merely that it is on her finger.

    So, if you want to get married and start of on the right foot with her, you should of course shop for the best value you can find in your budget and so on, but yes, the diamond is worth it.

    [save your energy... cede her victory on this one, fight the good fight when she wants to know why you are "wasting" so much money on a cable modem/DSL, fast graphics cards, etc.]

    • Re:Wrong Question (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Artificer (186606) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @09:06PM (#4067008)
      The cost of NOT getting this diamond ring may be the relationship itself.

      If someone is SO materialistic so as to BREAK OFF a relationship that is leading to marriage just because they don't get a diamond ring, then there's a decent chance that they're probably not worth the relationship in the first place.

      I happen to really believe in commitment, and someone who would break off a relationship that is that serious for a reason such as this, just doesn't seem like they are committed to the relationship themselves.
  • by Eagle7 (111475) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:42PM (#4065891) Homepage
    YES!! Unless she told you no, then you ought to get one for her. Perhaps you can find an heirlom diamond in your family that you would be able to use, thus saving on cost and ethical issues.

    But basically, unless you pass the following test, I suspect that deep down you are looking for an excuse to be cheap:
    • Do you only buy ethically OK clothing, and be very careful to make sure of it?
    • Do you make sure that your coffee is grown under ethical conditions?
    • Do you ensure that all your computer products and other electronics haven't been made for cheap in Mexico, thereby polluting the environment there even worse?
    • Do you ensure that all your tech products are disposed of properly, and not polluting some third world country?
    • Do you avoid buying things "Made in China" or elsewhere where you cannot be sure of the conditions/ages of the workers?

    Unless you do all of those things, I would posit that you are already contributing to unethical behavior with your participation in commerce. If you do do all those things, and your g/f isn't open to the no diamond idea although she will jump through those hoops, then she is being hypocritical.

    I say buy her the diamond and have a wonderful life together. Coming from a happily engaged man (who both bought and used inheritted diamonds)
    • by dbretton (242493) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:51PM (#4065975) Homepage
      But basically, unless you pass the following test, I suspect that deep down you are looking for an excuse to be cheap:
      (snip snip)

      If you answer 'yes' to any one of the following questions, you must also be cheap:

      - I like to pay extraordinary amounts of money for products of inferior quality.

      - I enjoy pissing away thousands of dollars on a piece of jewelry that is kept artificially overvalued.

      - I love being at the mercy of international jewel cartels.

      - I like getting ripped off.

  • by Zapdos (70654) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:50PM (#4065961)
    It is planted in one of our city parks, is professionally cared for, and has a sign that declares My Love to Her. A ring would have been cheaper. The tree cost $6000.00 which would have bought a very nice rock.
    Our wedding was under the tree. We are planning to buy a bench to place under the tree as soon as the city allows.

  • by MsGeek (162936) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @07:23PM (#4066266) Homepage Journal
    How interesting that this subject comes up just a few days shy of my 15th wedding anniversary.

    When Richie and I got engaged, it was back in the day when South Africa was ruled by the Apartheid regime and Nelson Mandela had been doing time for longer than I had been alive. I told him "no diamonds." We went to a local lapidary shop where they had many different options for stones and picked out a sterling silver setting for it. I chose a diamond-cut quartz crystal. It was beautiful, the ring didn't cost much at all, and after someone assembled it Richie proposed to me in front of everyone in the store. Got on one knee and everything. Priceless. Everyone applauded.

    However, that ring was short lived. I don't remember exactly how I did it, but the ring's setting got bent and I lost the stone. It lasted only a few months.

    Next, sometime around Christmas that year, there were several small jewelry carts that set up in the local mall. One had a ring with a great-looking amethyst point mounted on it. Not too expensive, looked cool. We grabbed it. The ring lasted for about a year before the amethyst point worked its way loose. I Krazy-glued it in and it stayed in for a few weeks more before I lost it for good.

    Richie was upset, I was bummed. Two rings given, two down. I decided the next replacement for the engagement ring would not have a stone, tradition be damned.

    That next summer I found a sterling silver Claddagh ring. Traditional Irish love token. Symbol from pre-Christian times. Very appropriate. Very cool. I've had it ever since.

    Anyway, even with Apartheid over, I wouldn't touch diamonds if they were...well, diamonds. For one thing, I'm not crazy about them aesthetically. I'd rather have a blue topaz or a sapphire or a ruby or emerald or even better, a fire opal. For another thing, unless you can make darn sure where you are getting them from, you could get them from terrorists or Russian mafiosos or any number of other unsavory folks.

    And most importantly...I would rather spend my money on geeky stuff. Save that money and get something I really want...like a DVD-RW or a Radeon AIW 8500 video card.

    If your intended is a geek grrl, get her something she'll really want. If she isn't...well...maybe that diamond is kinda mandatory. Check up on the provenance of that rock...there are Canadian stones from the Yukon Territory strike that have a polar bear etched next to the laser-inscribed ID. There's nothing morally reprehensible about the Canadians, last time I checked.
  • by orthogonal (588627) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @07:56PM (#4066533) Journal
    "Honey, some loveless geek on Slashdot told me not to get you a diamond. So, really, it's not my fault, ok?"

    "BTW, I re-partioned your PC, got rid of Windows, and set you up with free BSD and a Tesla coil."

    "Honey? Honey?"
  • by xeno (2667) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @07:59PM (#4066553)

    Some personal perspective on the issue:
    • What my grandfather did: He worked as a chemist for a big-name laboratory, and took a the first chunk of a metal alloy that he invented, and had it forged into a three-metal set of intertwined bands. The result looked similar to those silver-gold-copper ringsets that are pretty common, except that it was silver, gold, and this high-strength alloy he invented. No stone. His wife loved that it was (a) unique, (b) symbolized his effort and thought, (c) had high value but didn't make her feel like a target for muggers in 1920's NYC. They were still diggin' each other when they died in their 90's.
    • What my father did: Bought a gold ring with a run-o-the-mill diamond. Matching plain band. Divorced. Ugly, ugly divorce. Lots of money issues. Fought over the return of the ring.
    • What I did: I took my wife-to-be to a local place that did platinum casting through the lost-wax method. We created a design, checked out the wax models before casting, and let the metal artist do his thing. They're both a honeycomb design with no stone, which worked fine as engagement & wedding ring. My wife digs it because (a) our rings are unique/only similar to each other, (b) we designed them together, (c) they're *very* durable, and (d) there's a lot less guilt associated with a valuable metal than in an overpriced colorless stone. I still dig this chick after 15 years.

    That isn't very many data points, but I think the lesson is that if the ring selection is more of a personal investment than a shopping effort, it's a good sign. Sure, the ring should have some durable value, but anyone who says only diamonds have value as a symbol of love needs to ponder on the primary practical use of diamonds: an abrasive.

    Jon
  • by phr2 (545169) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @08:05PM (#4066594)
    I may blow some /. karma by saying this, but that Atlantic article is one of the best pieces I've seen linked from /. in quite a while. It has nothing to do with tech or software and can't really be called news for nerds, but it's an eye-opener about how businesses manipulate public perception out there in the real world. If you skipped the article and went straight to the comments like I did, it's worth going back to read the article.
  • by starX (306011) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @08:06PM (#4066598) Homepage
    If you think diamonds are forever, you're going to love the new One Ring model at Sauron's Jewelers (with 1 convenient locataion in the Barad-dur shopping mall, located right in the shadow of Mount Doom).

    This ring is guaranteed to last for all eternity, and will grant countless powers as well as being a pledge of your ever lasting and eternal love. When my grandfather first forged this ring in ages past, he made it to last, and it has certainly stood the test of time. What better way of telling that special someone "This is going to last forever?"

    Supplies are EXTREMELY limited, so hurry on in, or email DarkLord@mordor.org for this and other wonderful items.
  • by D. Mann (86819) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @08:10PM (#4066624) Homepage
    This wasn't written by me; I copied it off of the somethingawful.com forums.

    Actual conversation between me and my girlfriend:

    Me: If we get engaged, don't expect much in the way of a ring. I'm pretty broke.
    Her: It's OK. I don't need a very expensive ring.
    Me [uneasy at the qualifier "very"]: ... because your brother just got engaged, and that ring he gave her was pretty impressive...
    Her: Yes, it was beautiful! I'd love to have a ring like that!
    Me: ... and I'm worried that anything I could give you wouldn't measure up to that.
    Her: Don't be silly. I wouldn't want more than you could afford.
    Me: Define "afford."
    Her: Two months' salary is normal.
    Me [calculating]: Um... wow. That would be, like, $4000. That's a lot.
    Her: Gross, dear, not net. It would be more like $6000.
    Me: Who makes up these rules?
    Her: That's just the custom, honey.
    Me: You know that's just a marketing gimmick started by the diamond cartels around the turn of the century, don't you?
    Her: Silly. I don't need an expensive ring.
    Me: The conversation up to this point notwithstanding?
    Her: Two months' salary is normal. It's not expensive.
    Me: So if you found, say, $6000 worth of computer hardware on our joint credit card, I could say "Hey, that's not expensive; it's just what computers cost!"
    Her: That's different. That would be just for you. The ring is for both of us.
    Me: So I get to wear this ring part of the time?
    Her: Silly. The ring shows everyone how much you love me.
    Me: And what shows everyone how much you love me?
    Her: The ring.
    Me: Do you see a certain asymmetry in this arrangement?
    Her: You should be proud that everyone sees me wearing your ring. It tells the world how much you value me.
    Me: Approximately $6000 worth, apparently. Does this mean that rich men value their wives more than poor men?
    Her: No. It's two months' salary for everyone.
    Me: Ah, so wives are priced on a sliding scale, then, like low-income housing?
    Her: I wouldn't put it that way.
    Me: How would you put it?
    Her: A little money is a small price to pay for something that lasts forever.
    Me: You lifted that directly from a jewelery commercial.
    Her: That doesn't make it untrue.
    Me: Touché.
    Her: Look, if you live to be 80...
    Me: I don't like that "if."
    Her [ignoring me]: ... and you're 33 now, that's $6000 divided by 47 years of marriage. That's like, $130 a year. You spend more than that on video games.
    Me: I'm alarmed at how quickly you arrived at that number.
    Her [ignoring me]: $130 a year isn't so much for my love, is it?
    Me: Well, it's a good deal cheaper than escort services.... OW! OW! Quit hitting; I'm driving here!
    Her: You get a lot more from this relationship than sex.
    Me: Yeah, the contusions make it all worthwhile.
    Her: Baby.
    Me: Y'know, this actually works out better for you if I die early. Your yearly value increases inversely to the length of my life. If I only live to 50....
    Her: I'm tired of talking about this.
    Me: That's because you're losing.
    Her: I'm not losing. We're not competing. You told me you couldn't afford an expensive ring, and I said that was OK.
    Me: Ah, so it's the "affording" part that's irrelevant.
    Her: Stop being so silly. I've bought jewelry on credit before; it's no big deal.
    Me: That's the solution!
    Her: What is?
    Me: You buy the ring.
    Her: That's not how it works, honey.
    Me: If people look at the ring to see how much I love you, wouldn't it make sense to get the most expensive ring available? You've got better credit than me, so....
    Her: But the point is for you to buy it, so people can see how much you value me.
    Me: How are people going to know who bought it? Do the salespeople engrave the credit card holder's name on the band?
    Her: I'll know.
    Me: Well, yes, that's a given.
    Her: I'll know you didn't want to pay for my ring.
    Me: I thought we'd established that.
    Her: I'm tired of talking about this. Forget it.
    Me: I'm trying to understand, really. We're supposed to have a token of our love, right?
    Her: Whatever. Right.
    Me: This token is something you would want anyway, a piece of jewelry.
    Her: Honey...
    Me: Bear with me. The token is sized for you, presumably styled the way I think you'd like it...
    Her: Actually, I get to pick it out.
    Me: Even better for my purposes. So the token is styled just for you, sized so only you can wear it. You keep it with you always. Do we both own it?
    Her: No, the bride owns the ring always.
    Me: OK. So you get a ring that may or may not be expensive, depending on your definition, which is your exclusive property to do with as you please. I get to pay for it. Remember what I said about asymmetry?
    Her: So you want a ring?
    Me: No. To be symmetrical, it would have to be something I want. A laptop, for instance.
    Her: You want an engagement laptop?
    Me: That's just an example.
    Her: That's not parallel. Computers depreciate; good jewelry doesn't.
    Me: Good point. I guess there's no such thing as a ring upgrade.
    Her: Actually, they make these things called "sleeves" which you buy for major anniversaries....
    Me: Dude, I'm gettin' a Dell!
    • by suffocate (90016) <<4atm4> <at> <slashdot.com>> on Tuesday August 13 2002, @09:10PM (#4067030)
      plastickiwi wrote that. Here's a follow up of sorts. Why he went and got married to that chick is beyond me. eh.

      Scene: a chalet bedroom, 3am.

      Her: Do you love me?
      Me: Wha? Who? Whassamatta?
      Her: Are you asleep?
      Me: Have we not already established the futility of asking that question?
      Her: So you don't love me?
      Me: What? Start over.
      Her: I asked if you love me and you said it was a futile question.
      Me: No, asking "Are you asleep?" is a futile question.
      Her: Why?
      Me: Either I am, in which case I can't hear you, or I'm not, in which case you can go ahead and talk to me without asking if I am. The question itself is pointless.
      Her: But if you answer it, I know you're awake.
      Me: But you want to know if I'm awake for a reason, right? You want to ask another question, right?
      Her: Right.
      Me: So why not just ask it? If I'm awake, I'll answer. If not, I won't. Same thing, fewer questions.
      Her: So asking if you're awake is inefficient?
      Me: Exactly.
      Her: I wasn't aware efficiency is a concern in conversation.
      Me: Efficiency is always a concern.
      Her: So why do you leave the seat up?
      Me: Clarify.
      Her: Why do you leave the toilet seat up? I always need it down, and you need it down 50% of the time. Efficiency would require leaving it down as a matter of practice.
      Me: True.
      Her: So why doesn't efficiency govern your behavior in the bathroom?
      Me: I'm a hypocrite.
      Her: That's a defense for anything.
      Me: Clarify.
      Her: Committing to a principle means abiding by its consequences. If you adopt rules in one situation, but ignore the implications of those rules in another...
      Me: I'm a hypocrite.
      Her: Exactly.
      Me: But I admitted that.
      Her: That obviates the utility of adopting rules in the first place. If you can wiggle out of anything by acknowledging hypocrisy, I could kill you and justify it by saying, "Well, I don't believe in killing people, but I'm a murderer."
      Me: That's interesting.
      Her: That's what you say when you can't think of anything else to say.
      Me: What?
      Her: "That's interesting." Then you say "What?" when I call you on it.
      Me: You wanted something when this conversation started, didn't you?
      Her: ...and then you change the subject.
      Me: Your critique is merely descriptive, and therefore trivial. I know what I do. Stating it as if you've caught me at something scores you no points.
      Her: I just wanted you to know I'm not fooled.
      Me: Noted. Now, was there some other question?
      Her: Do you love me?
      Me: I believe the fact we were just married should answer that question adequately.
      Her: Lots of married people don't love each other.
      Me: True. I do love you, as it happens.
      Her: Thank you.
      Me: Wanna have sex?
      Her: It's less fun now that it's legal.
      Me: Is that a "no"?
      Her: No.

  • by TrinSF (183901) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @09:39PM (#4067200)
    Yes, I'm one of those few mythic creatures, a ./ poster with no Y chromosome. Though I'm not that chick-identified, here's some advice from the girl point of view:

    1. Even the most progressive feminist can sometimes be profoundly cliche'd when thinking about marriage. Our society teaches and reinforces strong ideas and imagery around weddings and marriage from a very early age -- heterosexual women are steeped in cultural tradition around marriage. It's hard to fight decades of "this is every girl's dream".

    2. If she wants a diamond, get her a diamond. Don't make her spend the next 50 years of her life looking down at her hand and thinking, "Instead of a diamond ring, I got a symbol of his political and social stance."

    3. If you don't want to support new diamond sales, consider estate jewelry. For a reasonable price, you can buy a ring that has a sense of history to it, that is a beautiful thing, and is less charged with the modern baggage. For that matter, an estate jewelry specialist can also help you make the choice. Talk to a pro! Explain you want something beautiful and unique, that you want to spend X dollars, etc.

    4. If you decide not to go with the diamond, give your bride-to-be *positive* language around your choice. Don't get her a different kind of ring because you don't like the social ramifications of diamond mining -- get her a different kind of ring because you don't feel a run-of-the mill diamond ring accurately reflects the special and unique qualities in her and in your relationship.

    5. Don't use not getting a diamond as an excuse to skimp on the cost. Buying a 300.00 ring instead of a 3000.00 ring 'because diamonds are tainted with the blood of workers' says you were looking for an excuse to be cheap. It's not about the money, but it's not just the thought that counts, either.

    6. Size *does* matter, but it cuts both ways. Dicks *and* diamonds can both be tooooo big.

    • by RenHoek (101570) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:18PM (#4065557) Homepage
      *grin* I let my girlfriend read this article..

      To all the replies that say that diamonds should be bought she replied "Whipped!" "That one's whipped too!" :)
    • Re:The Answer (Score:5, Insightful)

      by JamesOfTheDesert (188356) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:25PM (#4065672) Journal
      Do you love her? If so, then they're worth the cost.
      They're only worth the cost if they make her happy.

      But then, the focus should be on what can you do to please the woman you love, not whether you can or should afford to buy things she may not even care about.

      Me, I think the whole diamond=love thing is bullshit. Want your woman/man to know you love her/him? Don't fuck around; don't lie; pay attention and listen; be free with the compliments and sparse with criticism.

      Oh, and because this is /.: Don't ridicule his/her choice of [OS|browser|PDA|ISP].
    • Re:The Answer WTF (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Camel Pilot (78781) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:27PM (#4065690) Homepage Journal
      So you can prove your love by giving in to some marketing hype sesssshhh.

      Further more, do you think there is some correlation between the relative size of the diamond to marital success - I think not. I would even guess there might be a negative correlation.

      When I got married I felt pressured (form others not my wife) to my a diamond. Recently after reading stories of chopped limbs, rape, child conscription, guerrilla warfare, etc. orginating in the major diamond producing areas of the world we decided to sell the diamond and donate the money to a charity working in Sierra Leone.

      Just do a google search on "Conflict Diamonds"
    • by The Dobber (576407) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:55PM (#4066021)
      Rules of the road my man. Doesn;t matter if litte orphan children are chiseling them from inside raging volcanoes with nothing but thier bare hands. The other ladies got em, so shes gotta have one.

      And some additional tips.

      -You better remember each and every anniversary. When you met, the first date, when you proposed and yeah, when you got committed (I got hitched on 50th anniversary of Pearl Harbor, so the news gives me a tip off, lest I forget)

      -Birthdays. Its ok to forget age. Or at least preface it with "well you don't look a day over".

      -Valentines day. A biggie. Plan ahead. They can spot last minute shopping efforts a mile away. A six pack and a candy bar don't cut it.

      -And practice your responses to the following: Do I look fat? Do you still love me? What are you thinking? Do you think she's good looking? A moments hesitation will land you in the dog house.

      Good luck on your incarceration.
      • by Skyshadow (508) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:32PM (#4065771) Homepage
        apparently, an ugly rock == proof of love.

        You've never had a girlfriend, have you?

        Look, women think differently than men on some issues, but you disregard that point of view only at your great peril. So fucking what if sending flowers is stupid? If it makes your girl feel loved, well, mission accomplished.

        Don't be a goon.

      • by SoSueMe (263478) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:56PM (#4066038) Homepage
        There are other, less oppressive, countries to obtain diamonds from.
        Where?
        Canada.
        What? Canada?
        There are only Igloos and Eskimos (Inuit) up there, right?

        Not so, there are also Polar Bears.
        http://www.siriusdiamonds.com/home.htm

        If you're Canadian, buy Canadian.
        If you're American, buy North American.

        Just a suggestion.
        • Re:The Answer (Score:5, Insightful)

          by LintMan (515149) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @08:44PM (#4066861)
          I agree. For a lot of women, they've wanted and dreamed of a nice engagement ring since they were kids. Getting that diamond ring is a sort of validation for some women.

          Is this misplaced desire, partly formed by marketing hype and peer pressure? Yes. But so is my lust for say, a new BMW 5-series, or even the latest 2.6 GHz Pentium.

          I spent a bunch on my wife's rock, which felt to me like 'wasted' money, but I have to say it's made her happy. Before you say she's all about the money though... she really isn't very materialistic at all, but getting that nice diamond really meant something to her. When the time came to spend money of other things, such as our wedding plans, or even when I ask her what she wants for a birthday gift, she is quite economical.

          Beyond that, though, I also guess that over the course of our marriage, I'll probably spend ten times more on computer upgrades and other "toys" for myself (that she could care less about) as I will on jewelry for her (that I could care less about), so I guess I can't really complain! Probably it'd be the same for many other people here...I think that's something most of the techno-geeks here should keep in mind.

    • Re:alternatives? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Gudlyf (544445) <gudlyf@rea l i s t e k .com> on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:22PM (#4065617) Homepage Journal
      Yes, you do need to understand that this is a gift for her, not you. The question is, what does she want? Does she agree with your concerns, or are you going to just pick an alternative and hope for the best?

      I may have plenty of ethical issues against the fine leather used in the new shoes my wife wants for her birthday, but it doesn't mean I'll try buying her a pair of canvas sneakers and hope she doesn't notice.

    • Re:alternatives? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:24PM (#4065658)
      BS!

      It depends on the girl. The wives of several friends INSISTED on something OTHER than a diamond. One liked rubies (and had the right skin tone to show it off). Another prefered emeralds (green-eyed redhed). A third wanted NO STONE - put the money towards their first house instead.

      BOTH of you have to be COMFORTABLE with the decision. Neither of you are marying HER friends.

      [In my case, I had an aunt "in the trade" in NYC, so we were able to cut out the middlemen. This was EONS ago, before any awareness of "conflict diamonds"]
    • by cube farmer (240151) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:42PM (#4065895) Homepage

      Just give her a gold band with a large piece of coal embedded in it and tell her that you're making a very long term investment in your future together.

    • Re:alternatives? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Ironica (124657) <pixel.boondock@org> on Tuesday August 13 2002, @07:27PM (#4066289) Journal
      BS, says the girl wearing a sapphire-and-white-gold engagement ring that she loves very much.

      I've never understood the point to diamonds. They're shiny, sure, but so are soap bubbles, sunlight, and tinsel. The "good" ones are perfectly clear. What's the point? And while we're at it, gold can take a hike; yellow doesn't look good on me.

      So you know what people say when they see my ring? "Oh, that's so pretty; is that a sapphire? How nice, and different." I have never had a single person, friend, family, or stranger on the street, imply that they thought there was something wrong with my ring, or that maybe he was being cheap. If they had, I would have explained to them that I *asked* for these materials, but it's never come up.

      When it comes down to it, if she wants a diamond because she thinks she's supposed to want a diamond, and you want to get her a diamond because you think you're supposed to get her a diamond, I don't know what to tell you except to find your own mind. Oh, and look into created diamonds. [bbc.co.uk]
        • Re:alternatives? (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Moofie (22272) <(lee) (at) (ringofsaturn.com)> on Tuesday August 13 2002, @07:03PM (#4066105) Homepage
          I'd take exactly the opposite tack. If either party in the relationship is REALLY that worried about what the Joneses think, to the point that they'll be psychologically scarred by not having what everybody else has, I'd say the relationship is doomed from the get-go. A lifetime commitment to honor and cherish another human being is infinitely more precious than a hunk of clear carbon.

          Talk it over with your intended. Express your feelings. Come to a consensus. Then, spit in the eye of anybody who disparages your (collective) choice.
        • Re:alternatives? (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Tackhead (54550) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @07:13PM (#4066196)
          > I dunno. Personally, I warez my diamonds.
          >
          > (The above was a joke. Reference to Wind..aw, screw it.)

          Actually, there are people warezing diamonds [pbs.org].

          The funniest thing was listening to the DeBeers drone talk about a "natural" diamond -- and that in order to ensure that their chunks of crystalline carbon retained a hold on the market, they're laser-inscribing "DeBeers" on the ones that come through their monopoly.

          He sounded like a RIAA executive, as he tried to advocate the position that someone selling a chunk of crystalline carbon that was atom-for-atom identical to the ones DeBeers sells is selling a produce that's somehow "a cheap copy" of the chunks of crystalline carbon that have the word "DeBeers" and a serial number etched into it with a big honking laser, which somehow qualify as "perfect".

          If I were female, I'd be far more impressed with the warezed diamond. "This 4-carat carbon crystal was the product of decades of research that allowed it to be fabricated by dissolving carbon in molten metal, and then precipitating the dissolved carbon for a month at high temperatures and pressures, and then any remaining nitrogen atoms lingering in the crystal lattice were shaken into invisible pockets inside the crystal in order to get rid of the icky yellow color" than "This 1-carat carbon crystal was dug out of the mud in a third-world shithole by a guy getting paid $0.01 per day."

          From the bottom page of the documentary transcript [pbs.org]

          DeBeers: "I always think it's a bit like a masterpiece from Picasso and a copy. In the end, one is worth $30 million and is a magnificent treasure of the world, and the other is a worthless copy."

          ...I'd like to add:

          Tackhead: "In the end, one is the product of the brilliance of man's intelligence, and the other is a product of man's capacity for brute drudgework and backbreaking labor."

          Fuck DeBeers. They're the RIAA of carbon.

    • Great idea (Score:5, Insightful)

      by drew_kime (303965) on Tuesday August 13 2002, @06:47PM (#4065943) Homepage Journal
      An engagement is a once-in-a-lifetime event; save your consumer ethics for more trivial occasions (anniversaries, Christmas, etc).

      Absolutely. Be proud of those ethics so long as they don't really interfere with anything you care about.