Please read this article and be all ready for discussion tomorrow. This is one that should be interesting.
Matthew
Engagement Rings Are Actually 'Insulting'
INSULTING 'TO NOTIONS OF
ACTUAL LOVE,' THAT IS: TAURIQ MOOSA
(NEWSER) – Diamonds have "little intrinsic
value," writes Tauriq Moosa in the Guardian, so when large South African
diamond mines were discovered in the late 1800s and De Beers Consolidates Mines
was formed, its investors realized they would need to conjure up demand. That
they were incredibly successful with their marketing is no surprise (who hasn't
heard the tagline, "A diamond is forever"?). And yet we've forgotten
that it's just that—marketing. Here's the truth, per Moosa: a diamond has
nothing to do with your relationship or its permanence.
Rather, it's a useless bauble, it's overpriced (it starts
decreasing in value the second you buy it, and prices continue to rise), and
it's "insulting to notions of actual love." One survey found that the
average engagement ring costs $5,200, and almost 12% of American couples
actually spend $8,000 or more. Wouldn't that money be better spent on something
else? If you think an engagement ring is a symbol of your love, consider this:
"Why can't a beautiful home be a symbol? Why can't long-term investments
be a symbol? Indeed, would it not be more impressive to show off a house than a
finger rock?"
By Evann
Gastaldo, Newser Staff - Posted Nov 4, 2013
Related articles and videos:
Song: Diamonds are forever Shirley
Bassey http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6kxcFcO6Y0
Song: Diamonds are a girl’s best friend Marilyn
Monroe http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCn4mTkxx2s
No comments:
Post a Comment