paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (11:15 AM):i have an allergy to metal
nickel
but thats not in gold or silver or platinum so wedding bands will be no probs
also assures i only get nice jewelry
brown says (11:18 AM):i have an allergy to diamonds ... which means I won't have to buy one for my spouse
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (11:22 AM):what spouse?
that allergy pretty much guarantees you will not have one to worry about
brown says (11:24 AM):when i get a spouse
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (11:24 AM):how?
no diamonds = no spouse
brown says (11:24 AM):you sound like my buddy's gf
so materialistic
who would want to marry a girl that won't even consider it until you pay her off
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (11:25 AM):well all materialism aside, engagement ring are diamonds
like.. common law spouse, sure thing, no ring
brown says (11:36 AM):i just don't like the air of entitlement from most women that marriage comes with a nice big diamond ring attached
it kind of cheapens the entire thing if you ask me
my buddy's gf made the argument that if a man is willing to go out and spend 30k on a car, 5k on a TV and another 5k on a computer, why should she get a 15k ring for marrying him
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (11:38 AM):well i think that she is a special case
and it should be for each relationship to decide what is appropriate to spend on a ring
why should she? or why she should?
brown says (11:39 AM):i think i may not buy an engagement ring just because I don't want to perpetuate this
she says that there's a formula for ring spending.
it's like 1/2 of a man's annual salary at the time of engagement or something
which is stupid
why would you want to start a marriage in more debt than you have to?
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (11:40 AM):what, she is wrong
brown says (11:40 AM):it'll just have more strain on the marriage
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (11:40 AM):its 3 months salary
brown says (11:41 AM):even still
3 mos is a lot
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (11:41 AM):but also, you shouldn't get married until you have the funds to support that
brown says (11:41 AM):so in your eyes, marriage is as much about money as it is about love?
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (11:41 AM):and i don't just mean a ring, i mean a wedding and starting a home together
no, but its a merging of two people
if the two people coming together are both in debt, then their ring and wedding will reflect that
and shouldn't be flashy nor elaborate
you should spend what your means are
and if you have the vision of a huge ring and dream wedding, then you need to be able to afford it
brown says (11:42 AM):diamonds are worthless
they have no usable traits
unless you're trying to cut something like solid rock and you need a diamond-tipped drill, they're worthless
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (11:44 AM):mmm...huh....
brown says (11:44 AM):it has to be the single best example of artificial inflation based on the success of a media-driven, commodity-based society
i agree with the cost of the wedding, and certainly if you plan on having children. You should not spend outside of your means
but with a diamond, it just seems pointless
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (11:45 AM):then don't get a big one!
don't do it, marry a girl who wants a band and nothing else
brown says (11:45 AM):i'll marry a girl that doesn't expect anything more than a band. That's my point
it's about expectations
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (11:46 AM):yes, the diamond is an idea made up of social conventions
but you know, when you're really in love and want everyone to know she's YOURS in the months and years between engagement and wedding
its a symbol of things to come
brown says (11:46 AM):haha
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (11:47 AM):and jackass at the bar will stop hitting on your lady if shes got a ring around her finger
brown says (11:47 AM):this is a Spence Diamond commercial
insert phony guitar solo here
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (11:47 AM):hah
brown says (11:47 AM):ideally, jackass wouldn't have a shot in hell anyways because you're actually in love enough to get married to one another
and, for the record, guys don't notice engagement rings
certainly not when they're working girls at a bar
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (11:48 AM):and the point is that its something she will wear every day for the rest of your lives together; it's supposed to be the most expensive piece of jewelry she has, because its being used every day
brown says (11:49 AM):i'm opposed to jewelry in principle
she doesn't "use" it at all
she wears it
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (11:49 AM):jewelry in principle?
why
brown says (11:49 AM):i'd buy her a 10k watch first
at least then it serves a function
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (11:51 AM):i cannot believe you are so anti-aesthetics
brown says (11:54 AM):it's not all aesthetics
i'm all for expensive clothes and functional adornments ... cars, etc.
it's just jewelry really
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (11:55 AM):while jewelry is decorative, it serves a function as representing social attributes, family history, personal traits
i wear my Latvian ring to denote my status as a unmarried, Latvian woman
and its frequently recognized and commented on by women and MEN both Latvian and not
brown says (11:57 AM):you can't be honestly saying that is a rule and not the exception
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (11:58 AM):no, but you are assuming that all jewelry is interchangeable and disposable
brown says (11:58 AM):going to Spence Diamonds and picking out a diamond ring has absolutely no representation other than personal wealth
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (11:58 AM):hah, Spence Diamonds represents lack thereof..
brown says (11:58 AM):i'm generalizing it ... but i made the distinction between functionality and uselessness
EVERY jewelry store represents lack thereof
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (11:59 AM):do photographs serve a function?
brown says (12:00 PM):do photographs cost an exorbident amount of money?
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (12:00 PM):ahhhh so it is the cost you have more of an issue with than its lack of functionality
brown says (12:01 PM):it's the cost/functionality ratio
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (12:01 PM):so if your grandmother gave HER ring, a huge diamond, to give to your fiancee, you would or wouldn't have an issue with it?
brown says (12:01 PM):no issue because the cost and functionality were both low
a better route for your argument would be to ask me how i feel about pieces of art
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (12:03 PM):and?
brown says (12:03 PM):that's a tough one. It serves no purpose and yet it costs a lot of money. But i can derive enjoyment from it.
however, I would much rather buy a print of a famous artwork than spend money on the real thing
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (12:03 PM):this is assuming you do not view jewelry as pieces of art, of course, assuming you would never consider investing in a hand-crafted, personally designed piece of jewelry
brown says (12:04 PM):i would derive the same enjoyment from it as i would the real piece
no, i would not
unless i could find some personal value in it
like if it was made by my son/daughter
and by purchasing it, i would be supporting their goals, etc
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (12:06 PM):not, like it was designed by the woman you love?
or designed by you for the woman you love?
brown says (12:07 PM):no functionality
she should be able to design it and be happy with her accomplishment
stores that let you "design" rings based on a set number of options are just creating another argument for women who wish to possess rings for the sake of pomp and circumstance
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (12:09 PM):some things are sentimental and traditional
and serve no functionality other than to herald that
brown says (12:11 PM):a brand new diamond ring is neither sentimental nor traditional. It heralds only the fact that you are wealthy enough to throw away money on something that serves no other function
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (12:12 PM):traditional: the tradition of engagement is for a diamond ring. her mother, her aunts, her sisters, her grandmothers all have them
sentimental: the moment of proposal will always be remembered, and will be requested as a story by friends and family, as well and children the couple will one day have
and the ring is a key part of proposal
its a symbol of commitment
brown says (12:15 PM):that tradition is borne of nothing other than commodity culture and diamond companies. It holds no sway in my book.
as far as the moment of proposal is concerned. If she needs a ring to remember the moment i proposed marriage to her, she's not worth marrying anyways. The story should be about the love that is shared, not how much I spent on her ring.
if a ring is required as a symbol of commitment, it certainly doesn't have to be an expensive diamond ring
your commitment isn't measured in karats
paiiige... rabbit rabbit didnt work. says (12:26 PM):no no that is true
obvs we will never reach an agreement on this
DISCLAIMERS: brown: To my current girlfriend - My point of view is based on principle only and is only so fervently defended in this instance because I love to argue. You have the power to change my mind for me.
paige: To my current boyfriend - You know what to do.
Labels: ammo for my girlfriend in future arguments, diamond, engagement ring, entitlement, paige
I like how the article encourages reader participation. "What should you do if you get caught in one?" they ask. Well City, my first step is to determine if it's sufficiently shitty to turn around, drive home and take a nap. But I can guaran-fucking-tee I won't be pulling off the road and spending my morning in a Tim Hortons just 'riding it out.' Not unless I've somehow wandered off and become so disoriented I can't find my way back to the QEW that is.
