Poll: Diamonds! Are Worthless Little Chunks Of Worthless Rock...

[Troublesome Lagomorph]

I'm not getting diamonds. There are nicer rocks out there. Nicer, cheaper rocks. Like amethyst. I don't like gold jewelry either. So tacky. Steel and silver are much better. Also less likely to get you stabbed. I don't even like diamonds in rings. Let them be where they belong: giant drills that will some day pierce the heavens!

 

[AmayaOnnaOtaku]

Personally As a female I think diamonds are overpriced and blah. If a man were to propose to me I rather have something that speaks of his love for me not how much his wallet took a hit. Maybe with a silver ring with his birthstone. I am also allergic to gold, and yes I can turn even the good quality gold green, even white gold.

 

[disgruntledgamer]

If a man were to propose to me I rather have something that speaks of his love for me not how much his wallet took a hit.

Well for guys wallet = love for you. If he proposes with something that can be bought at Walmart, odds are you're going to McDonald's for your honeymoon dinner.

 

[Insanity72]

Honestly, I've never seen the allure of diamonds, they are just clear/white, why would you want something boring when you can have so many better colours?

 

[LiftYourSkinnyFists]

-SNIP-

Escapist gold, Only here would someone question something as trivial as the emotional//traditional value of the diamond wedding ring.

Go away, You're stupid it's an old dated tradition other people value things differently to you go back to your pseudo intellect and question something else that might actually rise to a discussion of any value perhaps more so than the chunk of carbon in which you eagerly believe is a waste when used cosmetically other people like different things go back to losing faith in humanity because I'm sure it has no faith in you either.

 

[Xrysthos]

There seems to be a misconception here that diamonds are relatively common. As someone who has worked with diamond prospecting, I can guarantee you that this is not entirely truthful. Sure, there are other gemstones that are rarer, such as rubies, but diamonds aren't common by any measure.

Diamonds are hosted in a breccia (fractured rock that's been re-semtented) consisting primarily of kimberlite, a volcanic rock that forms large pipes which bring the diamonds from the mantle to the surface (or surface near regions). Though disputed, it is thought that diamonds form from methane gases in the mantle. Diamonds can only be found in such volcanic pipes due to how they are the only way to bring them to the surface fast enough and at moderate temperatures (diamonds oxidize over time, and cannot withstand temperatures in excess of 550 degrees Celsius). About 1/100 kimberlites are diamond hosting, and 1/10 of said diamond hosting kimberlites contain economic deposits (in which only a fraction of the diamonds are gemstone quality). So in short - one in a thousand kimberlites contains diamonds that can potentially end up on someones finger. And as far as kimberlites go, they aren't exactly common occurrences, and also require specific geological settings. So, diamonds are rare.

Now, on to the mining of diamonds... A decent grade, i.e. the amount of diamond per ton of host rock, is approximately 4 carats per ton. 1 carat for diamonds is 0.2 grams (not the same carat as e.g. gold), so less than one gram per ton. Of which only a small amount is of gemstone quality.

There is however no doubt that the price of diamonds is artificially inflated by the companies who sell them, which is done by stockpiling the surplus to create an false drop in supply.

So, diamonds - rare, but overpriced. If you're opposed to the use of diamonds on account of there being a chance of them being "conflict diamonds", you shouldn't worry. The diamonds you can get in your local jewelery shop are most likely Canadian or Russian, or a non conflict African diamond. Even if the companies that sold them had no sense of right and wrong, the risk outweighs the profits in terms of conflict diamonds.

Artificial diamonds are also incredibly useful. Diamonds with boron inclusions (blue diamonds) are semiconductors, with greatly beneficial properties compared to the silicone used in most computers today, mostly because of greater heat resistance (i.e. less need for cooling).

Personally, I prefer sapphires or diamondites (which are garnets with an equal lustre), because I think it looks nicer, but I have no objections against diamonds.

 

[Ieyke]

Diamonds when used for industrial purposes are pretty valuable iirc.

A diamond sitting in a ring (read: anywhere other than industrial purposes) is absolutely worthless. No?

Let's start with the diamond ring. We're going to assume a loving relationship that lasts until death. Whoever is wearing the diamond ring is walking around with anywhere from hundreds (poor folk) to hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars (rich folk) on their finger for absolutely no fucking reason!

The diamond serves absolutely no purpose apart from impressing other people (and honestly, if you care about the opinions of people who are impressed by a useless rock then we can't have a rational discussion). Sure this argument can be applied to a great many things in any given home but none of those things concentrate as much money in such a small package.

In any other form of jewelry I can maybe understand it if you plan on selling it later on for more than you paid, or even at a slight loss. Sure, they do look kinda pretty, whatever.

You can tell me that the diamond is a symbol of your never ending love but fuck all that jazz. If my partner doesn't get that I love them from the fact that I'm promising the rest of my life to them then we have issues that no pebble can solve.

So... TLDR version. A diamond that you plan on keeping forever is a worthless piece of rock that some people might have even died for. A diamond that you plan on reselling some day is a needlessly risky investment. Discuss?

The premise of your thread is inaccurate.

Diamond rings are not worthless chunks of rock.
The very value bestowed upon diamonds by their rarity and value in practical applications IS, ultimately, the same value they hold as an Engagement Ring.
Though it has not always been the purpose, and it is not a purpose that is widely understood, an Engagement Ring is intended to be sort of an emergency plan for a man to be able to provide temporary financial security for his wife/fiance and family in case something happens to him and he is no longer able to.
That's why the rule of how much an Engagement Ring should cost is traditionally "two months' salary" - in that a dire situation would leave the wife and family with two months worth of income to live as they're accustomed without worry, while she/they transition to deal with the loss of financial support from the man.

I'm sure there are plenty of ways you could poke holes in this logic in a modern era where women hold (mostly) equal status to men in how much money they make. This tradition appears to be somewhat of a relic of a time when women relied on men for all of the household income.
Nonetheless, I subscribe to it as an equally (if not more) noble notion nowadays. I'd want to be able to remove as much as I can from the things my wife has to worry about if something were to happen to me. Just because she has her own job doesn't mean an extra person's 2 month's worth of money wouldn't be massively helpful for her to have.

 

[AmayaOnnaOtaku]

If a man were to propose to me I rather have something that speaks of his love for me not how much his wallet took a hit.

Well for guys wallet = love for you. If he proposes with something that can be bought at Walmart, odds are you're going to McDonald's for your honeymoon dinner.

WRONG! I can see MUCH better ways of spending money. I also am known to lose jewelry and with my chosen line of work it gets in the way. I rather have the money invested in stocks or CISCO equipment.
Plus if I REALLY wanted a diamond engagement ring I would have the diamond from my grandmother's engagement ring which she gave me put into a silver ring.

 

[Adventurer2626]

Diamonds are for boring people. I'd like to get something more interesting, rare and meaningful. Unless she really digs diamonds then yes of course I will.

 

[Whitbane]

Depends how much you value "spontaneous gift" sex.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

I didn't use a diamond. I used a white sapphire. Largely because the symbolic connotations of white and sapphires. There were diamonds on the ring but they were small and simply accented the pair of leminscates that were on either side of the main stone.

Beyond that, the fact that there are plenty of synthetic stones for everything but diamond (that are chemically and structurally identical to what you'd find in the ground) is a huge bonus. The gem I chose was non synthetic but was 1/4 the price of the equivalent diamond. Had I gone synthetic it would have been ~ 1/25 the price.

Bottom line: the ring is a symbol. The colors of the stone and the shape of the ring are the most important bits of that symbol. You don't need to go bankrupt over a symbol.

Also, the fact that no one has ever pointed out to my fiancee that her ring has a white sapphire rather than a diamond save the jeweler who corrected the fitting is notable.

Oh, and I had any advice for anyone searching for a ring it would be this: if you swipe a ring to have it sized, make sure it's a ring they wear on their ring finger. Otherwise you end up finding out your ring only fits on the middle finger of the wrong hand. Makes the planning and sneaking look a bit silly.

 

[mechashiva77]

I'd specifically ask for cubic zirconium, or even a silver ring for that matter. Part of it is blood diamonds, and yeah I know there are regulations to prevent that, but I still don't want that risk. Plus after years of being told it's a big friggin' deal, I got so sick of it and wanted something different. Besides, as much as I trust my boyfriend, I don't want to be guilt tripped over money and a diamond ring costs a lot of it.

 

[disgruntledgamer]

WRONG! I can see MUCH better ways of spending money. I also am known to lose jewelry and with my chosen line of work it gets in the way. I rather have the money invested in stocks or CISCO equipment.
Plus if I REALLY wanted a diamond engagement ring I would have the diamond from my grandmother's engagement ring which she gave me put into a silver ring.

It was more of a males perception on how he shows his affection for you, not that it was actually a good idea.

 

[Kathinka]

as someone who's main occupation is that of a gold- and silversmith that custom makes jewelry to client specifications (for horrid cost, of course ) i must say: i hate you all.

no, just kidding. actually, i'm posting this because as someone actively purchasing and selling rather large quantities of the stuff i wanted to tell you guys about 'nother angle to this that many people aren't even aware of.

diamonds used to be valuable mainly because they were incredibly rare. but as progres marched on and mining methods improved, at some point during the later 19th century, huge deposits were discovered, mostly in west and central africa. those deposits were so incredibly huge that the rarity of diamonds pretty much stopped being a thing. other gems and precious stones were thousands of times rarer all of the sudden.
now the diamond companies were sitting on huge stockpiles of those things that would be near worthles any day. seeing as that was, they had two options:

1: cut their losses and call it a day

2: band together to form an evil multinational monopoly that would inflate prices and earn them billions upon billions of dollars

guess which one they opted for.
thus the deBeers cartel came to be. to maintain the illusion that diamonds were rare, they severely limited how much of the things were being mined. diamonds of other traders were bought up and pretty much just stockpiled in huge depots. that and a very competent PR departement held up the impression that diamonds are rare and you need to drop thousands of dollars to prove your love to your spouse, hence putting food on my table every day. x)

personally, i find them pretty, purely from an academic/professional standpoint. but i fancy other gems more, especially emerald.


edit: holy shit, forming a grotesque monopoly by creting artificial scarcity of a product all while pretending to be likable and convinient? deBeers are the steam of the gem world! [/unneccessary low blow mode]

 

[Eclipse Dragon]

When I propose to the woman I love I will present her with the severed head of her most hated enemy. It's more romantic.

Instead I wanna hear you guy's opinion on this one: Engagement/Wedding broadswords!
Think about it, not only is it a symbol of nobility, chivalry and strength, but also symbolises your trust in her/him that they won't use this weapon on you, and states your wish to see them safe.

It also makes a nice addition to home security, if I were burgling in someones house and I'm confronted with some angry half-naked ************ with a sword, I bail.

Men after my heart, wedding gifts that aren't just impressive, but also benefit the quality of my life.
[sub]I'm not joking about that, an engagement broadsword would be awesome... the severed head is a little old fashioned.[/sub]

 

[CrazyJew]

Diamonds are the most dense transparent substance, thus the only ones which, with the correct cut, can "trap" a light beam inside and refract it in unexpected directions, that cut being the infamous Peruzzi cut.

 

[Fluffythepoo]

guys unhappy about having to buy a ring for their fiancees... moving on

 

[bandman232]

I'd get a diamond ring for my significant other, simply because it seems kinda traditional. This is, of course, implying that I would have anyone interested in me in the first place.

 

[bigfatcarp93]

Yeah, diamonds are worthless chunks of rock. And money is worthless painted paper. And coins are just metal things.

Dude, something is worthwhile once you assign value to it.