![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
feldman I hate DeBeers. I hate them with the smoky burning nauseating passion of a deep fryer grease fire. I hate them because they deface the institution of marriage, mouthing a romantic line while casting it as some kind of bad economic exchange wherein the man pays in painfully overpriced jewelry and the woman offers the service of not being disappointed in him.
DeBeers would like you to believe that, as a married woman, I'm waiting around for my husband to finally come across with the diamonds. They want you to believe that I'm slowly dying inside, consumed with doubt about whether I made the right decision lo those years back, and that this angst can only be appeased by converting two months worth of Mr. F's paychecks into something sparkly for me to lose in a public restroom or state park. They would like you to believe that, while I may sleep with him on occasion, punctual gifts of jewelry on certain days and occasions are what foster true enthusiasm for the activity and for him.
DeBeers wants you to believe that the diamond-studded path to a woman's heart is an ancient tradition, and not a marketing ploy that began in the early 20th century. DeBeers feels that if you dress it up with WASPS and a string quartet, you're not really selling the idea of prostitution.
Fuck DeBeers.
I own two diamond rings. One is the wedding set of Mr. F's grandparents, who were together nearly fifty years. His grandfather died a few years after his grandmother, because it took that long for his broken heart to finally defeat his sturdy constitution. This had nothing to do with the lovely art nouveau style ring with the microscopic diamond chip that she wore. The other is my own grandmother's engagement ring--she gave it to me on the day I married Mr. F, and long story short, it means much more to Grandma and me in that context than in it's original use at her own long-dissolved marriage.
Love is expressed by the things people do for each other. Love is personal, individual, imbedded in context. As a married woman, I assure you, diamonds make me neither hot, nor bothered, nor sentimentally-predisposed toward my spouse. A gift of diamond jewelry would probably make me angry (cause dude, that's tuition) and concerned about possible overlooked head injuries.
You know what really turns my stomach? The one ad where, once she's been given the goods, she hugs her husband and caresses his head and whispers "I love this man, I love him." This makes me want to cry, because how can this gift of affection from her be worth anything if it has to be pried out like that? Has she never done that for him before--held him close and told him she loves him? How badly are some husbands faring in their marriages, that they're willing to fork over thousands of dollars for the chance that they'll be treated like someone who's loved?
I mean, I've gotten that emotional over Mr. F making dinner. You know why? Because I love the guy and we take care of each other, and that's a persistant miracle. It happens nearly every day that one of us lets the other know that they're appreciated and loved. And yeah, it's sappy. But it's born of two folks who realize they're lucky to have found each other, and who think that love is what you do.
And DeBeers can go to hell for trying to cheapen that just because we happen to be married.
DeBeers would like you to believe that, as a married woman, I'm waiting around for my husband to finally come across with the diamonds. They want you to believe that I'm slowly dying inside, consumed with doubt about whether I made the right decision lo those years back, and that this angst can only be appeased by converting two months worth of Mr. F's paychecks into something sparkly for me to lose in a public restroom or state park. They would like you to believe that, while I may sleep with him on occasion, punctual gifts of jewelry on certain days and occasions are what foster true enthusiasm for the activity and for him.
DeBeers wants you to believe that the diamond-studded path to a woman's heart is an ancient tradition, and not a marketing ploy that began in the early 20th century. DeBeers feels that if you dress it up with WASPS and a string quartet, you're not really selling the idea of prostitution.
Fuck DeBeers.
I own two diamond rings. One is the wedding set of Mr. F's grandparents, who were together nearly fifty years. His grandfather died a few years after his grandmother, because it took that long for his broken heart to finally defeat his sturdy constitution. This had nothing to do with the lovely art nouveau style ring with the microscopic diamond chip that she wore. The other is my own grandmother's engagement ring--she gave it to me on the day I married Mr. F, and long story short, it means much more to Grandma and me in that context than in it's original use at her own long-dissolved marriage.
Love is expressed by the things people do for each other. Love is personal, individual, imbedded in context. As a married woman, I assure you, diamonds make me neither hot, nor bothered, nor sentimentally-predisposed toward my spouse. A gift of diamond jewelry would probably make me angry (cause dude, that's tuition) and concerned about possible overlooked head injuries.
You know what really turns my stomach? The one ad where, once she's been given the goods, she hugs her husband and caresses his head and whispers "I love this man, I love him." This makes me want to cry, because how can this gift of affection from her be worth anything if it has to be pried out like that? Has she never done that for him before--held him close and told him she loves him? How badly are some husbands faring in their marriages, that they're willing to fork over thousands of dollars for the chance that they'll be treated like someone who's loved?
I mean, I've gotten that emotional over Mr. F making dinner. You know why? Because I love the guy and we take care of each other, and that's a persistant miracle. It happens nearly every day that one of us lets the other know that they're appreciated and loved. And yeah, it's sappy. But it's born of two folks who realize they're lucky to have found each other, and who think that love is what you do.
And DeBeers can go to hell for trying to cheapen that just because we happen to be married.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-02-14 07:51 pm (UTC)And watch out, Robin may profer sexual favours as a thank you for that particular rant—she hates DeBeers with the passion of a 1,000 fiery suns (and that is merely on principle hate). You have, brilliantly, nailed down my own admittedly single-chick disdain for Valentine's Day. Because, dude, if your relationship boils down to getting flowers and/or chocolate etc. on a specific day once a year, it's not much of a relationship, is it?
no subject
Date: 2005-02-14 09:12 pm (UTC)I loathe the holiday, in part because I think we really need is a holiday that celebrates all forms of love, platonic as well as romantic, and all expressions thereof. We could call it St. Theresa's Day or Good Turn Day; detail your friend's car, cook your mom dinner, send a thank-you letter to the teacher who taught you how to read, send a care package to an Afghani girls' school, anyone is fair game for Good Turn Day.
Because, dude, if your relationship boils down to getting flowers and/or chocolate etc. on a specific day once a year, it's not much of a relationship, is it?
No, it's not. Because a relationship isn't a series of standard-issue hoops for one person to jump through while the other person grades his performance.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-14 07:52 pm (UTC)Oh God. YES. I want to punch that woman in her greedy face each time I see that commercial. Very good impression of "I'll only love you if you give me pretty things" there.
I actually felt terrible for the husband, first being silenced from proclaiming his love for her because of shame? Embarassment? And then, only being given a return of that love after forking over a ring that cost him a small fortune.
Nice portrayal of marriage there: women are gold diggers and men are passive idiots who give into their dominant wives.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-14 09:15 pm (UTC)I forgot about that part! She blows him off in the first part, doesn't she? I think he should give that walking piece of excrement a divorce instead and save the ring for a decent woman who actually likes him.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-14 08:09 pm (UTC)Now, I am not married (surprise! hee)but I was in a long relationship and the best thing, the greatest gift I had gotten from him was a stuffed panda bear (ironically named "Bear" as that was all I was able to say when I saw it) of roundish proportions. The two of us were out together one day, saw this silly stuffed animals and were gooing over them. Weeks later I was having a BAD TIME. Murphy's Laws were in full force and life blew. She showed up late at my room and had me shut my eyes. He placed this fuzzy thing in my hand and when I opened my eyes, my heart melted and the world wasn't so bad. The thing cost $7 with tax and it meant and means more to me than anything else he ever gave me.
So yeah, love doesn't have price tags and anyone who tries to tell you different should be arrested for pimping.
*loves you muchly*
{{{Pookie}}}
no subject
Date: 2005-02-14 09:19 pm (UTC)I love this story, because that's it, that's what I'm talking about.
So yeah, love doesn't have price tags and anyone who tries to tell you different should be arrested for pimping.
AMEN. Seriously, this needs to be made into a Public Service Announcement.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-14 08:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-14 09:38 pm (UTC)I've heard about this recently "into Romance" or "Romantic" as code words for folks who buy into a kind of pre-packaged consumer-based gender-role game wherein the man does "little things" to show the woman she's loved. Sometimes the woman even reciprocates or pre-ciprocates these gestures (flowers, notes, blahblahblah) but if the guy doesn't 'get it' and come across with the paraphenalia the woman thinks she's not appreciated. It's so off-the-shelf and it totally disregards any kind of personal getsures the guy might do out of real affection.
My sample size is small, hence my conclusions might be biased.
She doesn't get that we don't celebrate Valentine's Day and that I specifically don't want him to buy me jewelry or flowers or candy.
Some of the women Mr. F works with have the same disbelief. Yesterday he came home with a 3-pack of my favorite kind of pens--this is far more touching than flowers because it means he not only thought of me (all on his own, not at the prompting of Hallmark), he also knows my favorite type of pens.
And more often? He knows me well enough that he can make me feel better without spending any money at all (imagine!).
He's going to go to school all day and then come home and watch Farscape with me and make me dinner. And he does that every day. I don't really need more than that. I also don't like diamonds, but that's beside the point.
I think diamonds are okay but way overpriced. I think deep colored jewels like garnets are much prettier, but I don't wear much jewelry because it feels weird. My wedding ring is the exception, a plain band that's become part of my finger.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-14 08:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-14 09:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-14 08:23 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-14 09:41 pm (UTC)* I'd make an exception for Selma Hayak.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-16 04:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-14 08:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-14 09:41 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-14 08:43 pm (UTC)Also? DeBeers is generally evol and treats their (mostly black) South African employees like shite. They also hold the monopoly on diamonds, and god forbid if you find any on your property--you won't be able to do a damn thing about it.
Plus, that whole right hand ring thing? An aquaintance of mine who's a gem cutter and jewelry designer on the side said that came about because DeBeers was concerned that their profits were slipping because not as many people were getting married or buying diamonds when they did get married.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-14 09:06 pm (UTC)The political and economic realities of diamond production are even worse, yes. Sad part is, at least with DeBeers product you at least have a better chance of actual slave labor not being involved.
Plus, that whole right hand ring thing? An aquaintance of mine who's a gem cutter and jewelry designer on the side said that came about because DeBeers was concerned that their profits were slipping because not as many people were getting married or buying diamonds when they did get married.
I had to look up the "right hand ring"--the gist of the campaign is that a woman should buy herself a diamond ring for her right hand to symbolize her
gullibilitypersonal power and success--but it doesn't surprise me. It's the same diversification behind the five and ten year "anniversary bands" and the compelling push for husbands to buy jewelry for their wives when they give birth (yet another ploy with infuriating implications).no subject
Date: 2005-02-14 09:05 pm (UTC)(They are so horrid. If I ever buy a diamond, it won't be from them.)
no subject
Date: 2005-02-14 09:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-14 09:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-14 11:27 pm (UTC)i figure if i want jewelry i'll save up and get if for myself. which has caused some bizarre comments from co-workers about 6 years ago. they were horrified that i would buy myself something rather than waiting for a "man to buy it for me". *headdesk*
the adds are hideous and a depressing commentary about our culture that makes me want to hide under the desk.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-15 02:42 pm (UTC)Because if diamonds are to be used as an indicator of a man's willingness to invest cash in your femininity, buying your own diamonds is cheating the system. It devalues the diamonds that other women have worked hard to earn (on their knees, I guess).
no subject
Date: 2005-02-15 10:16 pm (UTC)righteous! {cough} that is, from the male perspective, I applaud your statements.
Date: 2005-02-14 11:58 pm (UTC)sounds like the boy may also know how lucky he is...
AFD
Re: righteous! {cough} that is, from the male perspective, I applaud your statements.
Date: 2005-02-15 06:26 am (UTC)I have never understood that, myself... or that some people actually expect their parents to pay for it? And that some parents actually DO pay that much, and MORE?
Re: righteous! {cough} that is, from the male perspective, I applaud your statements.
Date: 2005-02-15 02:58 pm (UTC)Mr. F's family paid for a lot of our wedding because we were just going to do a Justice of the Peace, cake and punch thing and they felt that would be, I don't know, shabby and furtive. But it was still small, we got married on the dancefloor of the hall, the cake tasted good (you have no idea how hard it is to find a good-tasting wedding cake--they all look amazing and taste like Crisco and sawdust) and for every "congratulations!" we also heard "this is a great party!". Most weddings now are stage productions and the guests don't have fun--our overriding concern was that the party be fun (good music, good food) and that our guests weren't a captive audience but celebrants.
So yeah, they did pay for mmore guests and better food, but it was still nowhere near the gawdawful "average" cost.
Re: righteous! {cough} that is, from the male perspective, I applaud your statements.
Date: 2005-02-15 02:52 pm (UTC)I think their shrill commercials could kill children and other small wildlife, and possibly cause mutations in adults and large dogs. There's another one, don't know if they're local; Kay Jewelers "every kiss begins with K" *excuses self to go break something*
and just about anything that has to do with the commercial bridal industry [let's drop 10K on a 20min ceremony and a 2hour party instead of buying a house...] but I digress ;)
"Weddings" are another industry where women's insecurities are fed and slaughtered like veal.
sounds like the boy may also know how lucky he is...
Aw shucks 8 ) Well, he is my best friend, so I'm lucky too.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-15 12:51 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-15 02:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-15 02:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-15 06:24 am (UTC)Oy. I was so mad I literally saw red.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-15 03:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-15 03:02 pm (UTC)That love can be bought, and blowjobs can be earned with diamonds. Bleh.
Love cannot be bought, only the lackluster facsimile thereof. Blowjobs doubly so.
Any more comments would be far too TMI, I think.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-15 12:08 pm (UTC)DeBeers be the skanky pimps of society, and we refuse to be the ho's!!
no subject
Date: 2005-02-15 02:45 pm (UTC)And caring can come in the form of a sparkly rock, if the woman is really into that kind of thing--but if she is, wouldn't she like to pick her own stuff out instead of the guy doing it for her?