Diamonds Are A Tradition That Gay Marriages Can Do Without
I’ve been giving a lot of thought to how I want to propose to my partner. Do I want to do something simple and romantic? Something dramatic and public? It’s not something I ever really thought I’d need to consider, but lately I’ve been searching around on the web to see what other gay couples are doing. As more and more same-sex couples have weddings or commitment ceremonies, it is tempting to adopt much of the ritual that heterosexual couples have long used, but there is one part of that ritual that will not be making it into any of my own plans – diamonds as a symbol of love.
The demand for diamonds is the result of what has probably been the most successful marketing campaign in history. De Beers has controlled the majority of the world’s diamond supply since about 1880. As people became aware that diamonds were really as common as cheaper gems, demand fell through the 1920’s, 1930’s, and the Great Depression. Then, in 1947, De Beers launched their “Diamonds Are Forever” campaign. Ultimately, De Beers marketing was shockingly effective at convincing people that diamonds were the proper way to express love. They also managed to convince families to hold onto their diamonds as heirlooms, keeping used diamonds off the market. Hollywood helped out by enshrining the idea in films such as the hit musical “Gentlemen Prefer Blondes”, which included the now-classic number “Diamonds Are A Girl’s Best Friend”. You can’t buy advertising that good. As demand rose and De Beers purposely restricted supply, diamonds commanded a premium, all because of good marketing. The recent movement against blood diamonds has helped by further restricting supply.
Even more impressive is how De Beers has managed to create new “traditions” to suit their needs. In his book Myths, Lies, and Downright Stupidity, John Stossel writes, “Russia increased the mining of small diamonds. Since De Beers had to fulfill a purchase contract with Russia, it suddenly had more small diamonds than it could sell. So De Beers started promoting the idea that, after years of marriage, if a man really loved his wife, he would show his devotion by giving her an ‘eternity ring’ – a ring with lots of small diamonds on it. It worked. Today thousands of American women wear eternity rings because of a South African company’s need to accommodate Russia.” The latest example of this is the “right-hand ring“. If De Beers can convince women to adorn their right hands with diamonds as a symbol of independence, I wonder where this will stop. I just hope diamond mouth grills never truly go mainstream.
But what really takes this to a whole new level of absurdity is the availability of synthetic diamonds. Cubic zirconia has been used as a diamond simulant for decades, and now real diamonds can be grown in labs. De Beers created the “Gem Defensive Programme” to raise awareness of manufactured diamonds and convince people that they really want the mined variety. Sophisticated equipment is provided to gem labs to help distinguish manufactured diamonds from mined diamonds. It seems De Beers has been largely successful in this regard as well. In an article for ABC News, John Stossel writes, “Yet women told us, even if they had preferred the look of the imitation, they’d still rather be given the diamond. ‘It just makes you feel like you’re special’, said one woman. ‘I know what I want on my finger, and it has to be the real thing.’ We’ll spend more for a rock because a South African cartel has run a great ad campaign? Apparently we will.”
Consider OPEC for a moment. The organization purposely restricts the supply of oil to inflate prices, just like De Beers does with diamonds. Now imagine if someone figured out how to manufacture oil far more cheaply than it can be extracted from the earth, but OPEC pulled off a marketing campaign that convinced people to pay a huge premium for natural oil even though the synthetic oil was basically indistinguishable. Imagine people going around proudly declaring that they only bought gasoline made from real, natural oil, even though it cost ten times as much and the synthetic was just as good. That sounds ridiculous, but it’s exactly what De Beers has managed to do with the diamond market.
So as we move into an age where same-sex commitment ceremonies become ever more common, let’s take the good parts of the heterosexual rituals and leave the bad ones behind. Diamonds as a symbol of love should be viewed as an artifact of 20th-century pop culture. There are not only better uses for the money, but much more meaningful ways to feel special.
I can’t stand it when coworkers flail their hands when they get new diamonds for the holidays. Over the years, I have learned to bite my tongue about diamond history and blood diamonds.
My partner knows how I feel- and my big Xmas jewelry present was years ago before kids- when she got me a gorgeous pearl necklace- much more my style. (Although PETA might have something to say about cultured pearls and oysters…)
Bill: I’m busted. Guilty as charged. Typically, I’m the last person to be influenced by advertising and consumerism culture, but there’s a bit of the traditional girl in me with wanting the diamond ring… not the Tiffany style engagement variety, but the more arty eternity band with diamonds. Jeanine’s reasons are even more bizarre: once she’s pregnant, she doesn’t want to walk around looking like an unwed mother. I’m sure the bra-burners could have a field day with that one.
So what’s the alternative? A ring with less-precious gem stones? Your post is thought provoking – I guess we need to think twice about our diamond fantasy if / when it ever becomes a reality.
I concur entirely. And as an added note, when calculating how many months’ wages one should relinquish for that ‘perfect’ diamond, remember that the individual, person, human being who back-breakingly mined that diamond into existence from across the Atlantic earned little more than $0.25 per day to do so. Arguably the market is what it is, and the cost of living in their homeland is recognizably different whereby twenty-five cents may be reasonable (although I doubt it), however, in the grand scheme of things, does it make sense to forfeit thousands of dollar upon thousands of dollars for something that has cost the conglomerate marketing giant less than $0.25 per day to discover? If diamonds are so rare, if diamonds are so valuable, if diamonds are so priceless, then why does their harvesting value equate to the cost of a piece of gum or toy-surprise harvested from one of those fancy quarter machines located in every megastore nationwide?
I love jewelry and the symbolism of wedding rings. For me, having men assume I was straight, single, and available was old and tired! I was thrilled when we started wearing our rings.
My partner and I were “married” for a couple years before we found rings. We waited until we located ones that matched our personalities, lifestyle and budget. We chose stainless steel bands for the sturdiness and durability of the metal. Mine has a delicate band of small cubic zirconium stones around one edge. My partner is strongly against purchasing diamonds and I had to have shiny bling. We found a great compromise.
Two couples I know recently got engaged. One chose a ring that’d been in his family for a few generations, diamonds. The other chose beautiful stones, other than diamonds. In both instances the ring was far less important than the commitment. Best wishes to you Bill as you embark on this journey!
Cheers!
I’m straight and divorced and loathe the fact that I paid the princely sum I did for a rock now sitting in a jewelery box somewhere. I could have put that money towards my daughter’s college expenses (or mine for that matter). If I choose to marry again (and that’s a big if) I’m sure I’ll find it near impossible to avoid the pressure and temptation to purchase one of the god-forsaken things. Maybe she’ll prefer something else. Here’s to hope.
I remember living in Boston when the Goodridge decision came out. (Almost 4 years ago now)
The diamond resellers were all a flutter advertising to the gay community. Fortunatly, my partner and I are not interested in diamond rings, but you would think that De Beers would be lobbying for marriage equality.
I quite like the idea of a diamond. But actually having a platinum ring is more important to me. And the non-romance related ring that I do wear, is only silver and cubic zircona and I love it, probably more than I would a *real* one.
Nina: I’d go with either cubic zirconia or synthetic diamonds. Same look for far less money.
Allison: Thanks for the wishes!
Josh: Good luck. Maybe point the potential wife to this post? 🙂
plonkee: I do like the look of platinum, and of course no one has figured out how to make cheap synthetic platinum, so buying real platinum makes sense. Though personally, it’s still hard to wear that money on my finger when I could be investing it. But I haven’t totally decided yet. There are some very tempting platinum rings, and one of those just might end up on my finger.
My husband compromised by getting me a ring with both recycled stone and metal. We saw it as a kind of redemption process–I’d told him I didn’t need a diamond, but he knows I love things that sparkle.
It’s amazing how many things about weddings are new, but we treat them like they’re sacred traditions of our great great great great great ancestors. Diamond rings, white dresses—two centuries ago, a girl wore her best dress to her wedding, whatever color it was. Then someone (was it Victoria?) wore white and it became stylish and eventually symbolic.
It’s hard to buck your cultural traditions, but when you can and they’re stupid or exploitative or just not meaningful–go for it!
I have rings- don’t get me wrong from my original post- just nothing diamond. I have a nice amethyst- vintage, remounted– and we have simple gold bands from our ceremony 13+ years ago.
And I have to agree- its nice to automatically be visually counted as someone “paired off” and not have to deal with single, hetero guys.
My partner knows to never put me in the same room with a diamond! We’ll get classic platinum or titanium bands when the time comes.
I’m hoping for a vintage ring with diamonds. I do want a diamond because my other favorite jems (opal and pearl)are too soft to wear every day. They get scratched, smushed and ruined. Diamonds “are forever” if only because they can’t be easily damaged. A vintage ring that’s lasted fifty years will probably last fifty more. I would never, ever buy a new diamond.
I think it’s very unfair to dupe all diamond lovers as morons who just unthinkingly fall for good PR and advertising.
Diamonds were said to be a symbol of love because they, (and their sparkle), are beautiful and last forever. But you could just as easily use any other precious gem if you desire.
I love the colourless sparkle you get from a diamond. Yes, it is true you can get beautiful simulated diamonds- I wear those too. But over the years, I have discovered that no matter how good the quality of the simulated diamond is- it does eventually lose it’s sparkle and “life”, and you can throw it our and get another. That is fine for jewlery that has no sentimantal meaning- but for something special, I want my stone to last forever. And the sparkle from a natural diamond will still be there after we are all gone.
As for diamonds being kept as heirlooms- what’s wrong with that? People keep all sorts of things as heirlooms, not just diamonds. Sometimes they are valuable things, sometimes they are sentimental. What’s wrong with passing down your diamonds? I am sure the British monachy didn’t get the idea from De Beers!!!!
All I am trying to say is- if you don’t want to use diamonds as your token of love and commitment, then that’s fine, but don’t knock the rest of us just for loving them just for what they are- everlasting and beautiful to look at and to wear, and always will be. And that is why I would prefer a real diamond to a pretend one.
Just as I prefer real pearls to fake. and real designer clothing to fake etc.
I love that you wrote this post! I actually worked in the gem business for several years. I brokered mostly emeralds and sapphires but I had my fair share of business with diamonds. What my years in that industry taught me was that nothing is more over-priced, bloated and ridiculous than the pseudo need for diamonds. There are so many beautiful gems that I think are far more interesting and romantic than a diamond anyway. But if you really have to have your bling bling, I say go for a top quality CZ… then you can have several, one for every anniversary! 🙂
Anybody know a good jeweler who serves LGBT community for rings (not diamond) in NYC area?
I’m a lady, and I’m hetero, and me, when I find my heart’s true hero, I would love for him to propose to me with — wait for it — beautiful, sparkly — wait for it– AUSTRIAN CRYSTAL! It’s affordable and humane. And gorgeous. Yep, Austrian crystal.