Last night one of my friends announced that he was about to drop between 3 and 4 grand on an engagement ring for his fiancee. I bit my tongue for the first few minutes as he discussed it with my other friends, but eventually the SJW-side of me won out and I couldn’t hold back my thoughts any longer.
Let’s start with the basics of why it’s insane to spend that much money on an item that fits in your nostril:
-It’s smaller than your nose.
-You could lose it SO easily.
-What does something so small ADD to your life?
-You could have exponentially more fun/rich experiences for that much dinero.
-Read these all again because it really boggles my mind.
“Oh, but Ethan!” you may be protesting. “How will you show your wife how much she is WORTH to you if you don’t go all-out on a ring??”
Oh, I don’t know…loyalty, fidelity, time spent together, shared experiences, children, physical intimacy, encouragement toward spiritual maturation……
I knew a girl in college who told me that she wouldn’t marry someone without a diamond on her finger. As in, the center of her marriage was predicated on said small artifact which she could accidentally snort into her sinuses. THAT multi-thousand dollar artifact.
I hope that my wife-to-be will not be so myopic in her view of love and romance, and will see the value of a two-month trip to Asia which would cost about the same as a ring.
Here’s the wild thing: If every molecule inside you is revolting against the idea of a diamond-free wedding, get this. Diamonds were not so closely associated with marriage until a brilliant advertisement from De Beers Diamonds in 1947 which read “Diamonds are forever.”
NINETEEN FORTY-SEVEN!!
That’s when diamonds became associated with longevity and romance.
This is not some ancient tradition I am upending and protesting here. It is a practice younger than my my grandparents, and a reflection of Western capitalism conflating THINGS with love, meaning and care. Are you another victim of brilliant advertising?
I’m an incredibly romantic guy, and my boycott of the diamond trade is not ‘anti-romance’ in the least. In fact, I haven’t even gotten to my main point yet.
The conflict diamond trade
You knew I was going here, so let me lay it out.
Many countries have gotten better at ethically sourcing their diamonds, but many have not. Some have such abysmal accountability for the sources of their diamonds that Westerners cannot get an accurate estimate. It is estimated that at its peak in the 1990’s, 10-15% of diamonds were conflict diamonds. That means they used slaves to unearth the stones, OR that the funds from the purchase went to violent militias who regularly chopped up enemy tribes, amputated children’s limbs, and dominated neighboring states.
That number can be misleading, as it makes it seem as if 85-90% of diamonds are just fine and dandy. In reality, the stones coming from violent countries may fund the majority of that country’s economy, meaning that there is an outsized effect from the purchase of a blood diamond.
