katie79 Posted August 16, 2004 Share Posted August 16, 2004 I heard they can make diamonds. LAB CREATED DIAMONDS; THEY ARE REAL DIAMONDS, THEY ARE JUST LAB CREATED UNDER INTENSE HEAT AND PRESSURE. Does anyone know abou this> Link to post Share on other sites
Newly Engaged Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 Diamonds are not rare. Read that again - Diamonds are carbon, a very common element, and are found all over the world in various quantities and qualities. They are not rare. Before the late 1800's diamonds were not common in the world because the richest deposits of them were not yet discovered. After the large South African deposits were unearthed, DeBeers formed in order to control the diamond trade. They're a monopoly which artificially controls the supply of diamonds onto the world market, and has used the "A Diamond is Forever" advertising campaign since the 1930's to promote the idea that a diamond is an heirloom worth keeping, worth passing on to your children: a valuable and rare commodity. Why do they do this ? So you will never try to sell your diamonds on the open market. If diamonds became a trade item again (as they were when they really were rare), then DeBeers would lose their monopoly, and diamonds would become nearly worthless. (Only the actually rare 30+ carat diamonds would still be worth anything... ) After all, If diamonds were all that rare, why does every married woman in the western hemisphere have a diamond engagement ring on her hand ? How many other items of jewelry do you have that are studded with tiny diamonds ? Rare ? You've got to be kidding... Moissanite is silicon carbide. It's a manufactured stone (natural moissanite is extremely rare, and too small to use in jewelry). It's very hard (second only to Diamond on Mohs scale) and considered more durable than diamond because it has no natural fracture paths. A moissanite stone has more fire, luster and brilliance than diamond. It's very hard to distinguish moissanite from diamond. Trained jewelers often make that mistake, and there's a special machine that is used to be certain (although if someone of modest means suddenly sports a large "diamond", that could be a good indication as well). Oh - and if you're still feeling nice and fuzzy about Diamonds - read this : http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.09/diamond.html There's no rational reason to desire a diamond for an engagement ring center-piece. Your reasons come down to "everyone else has one" and "DeBeers' advertising told me to". My fiance and I have made a very concious decision to avoid diamonds in our jewelry for this very reason. Now my fiance would love a big stone, and if we can find a nice moissanite or other stone, we'll get to have a 5 or 6ct stone with more fire than a diamond, instead of a low quality 2ct or barely decent 1ct diamond for the same price. The money we save will go towards other expenses... And rather than telling people it's a "fake diamond" we'll be proud of the fact that we choose a superior looking stone and didn't succumb to the 75 year long hype of the most successful snow-job in modern history. Link to post Share on other sites
katie79 Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 Does that mean diamonds will soon loose their importance? Hey, if I can get a diamond for cheap, a real diamond that just so happens to be man-made, what do I care? I'll take it! It's still beautiful, maybe more! I must agree that an e-ring should be thousands. That's a bit much. If you are rich, fine. But average people who want to get engaged, I think the top price for a good ring should be no more than $600, a decent sized ring, maybe $300 or less. I mean, an e-ring should be the most important peice of jewlery on a woman's finger and special, but not to a point where the guy has to spend tons of money! Link to post Share on other sites
katie79 Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 I can see the link b/t the two notions. It just sounded bad on here. In some ways it's true. But at least with engagement, you are asking this person to become a permenant enhancement on your life, with hookers, you are asking the person to have a quick bang with you in the back seat. There's a link b/t the two but the end result in engagement is more promising. I'm thinking, this ring symbolizes a promise of marriage soon to come. It's more of the commitment behind it. I accomadated my man's salary when we looked for a ring. It fit his budget and didn't leave him tabbed out. It was appropiate. I think a gift, jewlery which can be worn everyday mostly, should be given as a token of his love and commitment. Yeah, you can write a 30-paged paper on this topic in school. It's an interesting subject. Some would see your point and find it challenging to compare/contrast the two. You are saying there is a fine line b/t the two. It's like when we say there is a fine line b/t insane and genius. But they both have different consequences and similar ones. I see it like this, my bf proposes marriage and gives me a ring as a token of his promise and commitment to our future. It's nasty for some women to drain the poor guy of every last dime he has so she can wear that perfect flawless 2 karat diamond solitare to flaunt. Some women feel this is a more of an "estrogen trip", like when a man wins a horse race; it's more the feeling of being adored, envied, and put on a pedestool. Link to post Share on other sites
binturong Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 That's funny. I didn't realize there were only two reasons a girl could possibly want a diamond engagement ring. Reasons don't have to be rational. My reason? I like diamonds. I like platinum. That's not necessarily rational, but what other reason does there need to be? I'm not in competition with anybody and I don't care what anybody else has. I do know that my fiance was just as happy to get me this ring as I am to wear it now. Yes, diamonds can be made nowadays, but I think there's something to be said about searching for a natural diamond with all the qualities you want in it (hey, it's kind of like dating, isn't it?) and my fiance has a great story about his experience buying my ring. That right there is worth just as much as the ring itself. Link to post Share on other sites
dyermaker Posted August 25, 2004 Share Posted August 25, 2004 Originally posted by Newly Engaged Moissanite is silicon carbide. It's a manufactured stone (natural moissanite is extremely rare, and too small to use in jewelry). It's very hard (second only to Diamond on Mohs scale) and considered more durable than diamond because it has no natural fracture paths. The Mohs scale is exponential. Moissanites are hard, yes, but they aren't very hard compared to diamonds--it's not like they have practical laboratory uses like diamonds do. It's very hard to distinguish moissanite from diamond. Diamonds conduct electricity, Moissanites are poor electric conductors, the test isn't as complicated as 'alternative diamond' brokers would have you believe. There's no rational reason to desire a diamond for an engagement ring center-piece. Your reasons come down to "everyone else has one" and "DeBeers' advertising told me to". Agreed. Originally posted by katie79 I heard they can make diamonds. LAB CREATED DIAMONDS; THEY ARE REAL DIAMONDS, THEY ARE JUST LAB CREATED UNDER INTENSE HEAT AND PRESSURE. Does anyone know abou this> Lab-created jewelry is rare, because the size of lab-created diamonds are a lot smaller than ones used in jewelry. Originally posted by katie79 Does that mean diamonds will soon loose their importance? Hell no. The United States will fail before DeBeers does. It's the most powerful monopoly in the history of mankind. Originally posted by katie79 Some women feel this is a more of an "estrogen trip", like when a man wins a horse race; it's more the feeling of being adored, envied, and put on a pedestool. I think a man pledging to spend their entire life loving you would be more of a warm feeling. Link to post Share on other sites
StillChillinCookie Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 My fiance proposed to me almost a year ago. We both knew he couldn't afford a ring. I told him I didn't need one. I now have a bubble gum ring (25 cents). It became a joke. I'm not materialistic. I am American. and people that have to have something of material to show something that has absolutely NOTHING to do with materialism makes me sick. In a lot of countries, women are lucky to be loved by the one they are marrying, much more lucky to be able to have a ring. I say, get over it girl. If he got me an engagement ring, I'd ask him to go cash it so we could have more money to be able to do something nice for our honeymoon. Or even get 2 wedding bands. Link to post Share on other sites
tanbark813 Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 Originally posted by katie79 It's best for all men to shop with their gf's before they give her the ring, or propose first and then go shopping with her. Put it through a man's point of view: Would you like to spend the rest of your life wearing a Yankees T-shirt everyday of your life when your a passionate Mets fan? Do you get my drift? The ring not also compliments each woman's uniqueness as well as their love. Think about it. I always wondered if it was possible to make the absolute worst analogy imaginable. Now I know. Thanks, katie. Link to post Share on other sites
binturong Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 Forget all the BS. If the guy can afford what the girl wants, what's the big deal??? If not, the girl needs to be happy with what she has or find a rich guy. LOL. Link to post Share on other sites
Papillon Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 I seriously cannot believe the warped values of some people Link to post Share on other sites
katie79 Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 ...is getting quite a number of responses. I guess the level of importance of an e-ring can cause a great deal of commotion! A woman's ring and attitude behind it has such power on society. Whether it's a $13.00 or a $25,000 ring, there's still a thought on the matter. Link to post Share on other sites
zara Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 No one has ever wanted to marry me. If they did - and i wanted to marry them - i wouldn't care whether the ring cost ten bucks or ten thousand. It's not about the material it's about the love. Link to post Share on other sites
Papillon Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 Unfortunately not all women have the wisdom to see it that way... it's great actually, as a filtering mechanism. Link to post Share on other sites
binturong Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 If he got me an engagement ring, I'd ask him to go cash it Would you, really? I would think that a guy would be offended by that. I also think it's ridiculous to spend large amounts of money on a little ring, but if your fiance went to the store, picked out a pretty ring for you, scheduled payments, and presented it to you, you would really tell him that he just wasted his time and that you'd rather have the money instead of the ring? You guys make it sound like the ring is all the woman's thing. It isn't. I had strongly suggest to my fiance many times that I wanted a small diamond. He wanted to be able to tell people he got me a big one. I also had to talk him down on the wedding band. He wanted one that cost a lot of money and I wanted something simpler. When it comes down to it, yes, I'm the one wearing the rings, but he sees them as a symbol of his love and commitment to me and he wants to get me the best he can. If the best he could afford was a cubic zirconia, so be it, but he's the type who would go for a smaller, real diamond instead of a larger fake one...either one would have been fine with me. But like I said, he could afford to get me something that would satisfy both our wants and it's perfect. Zara, just playing devil's advocate here, but you said i wouldn't care whether the ring cost ten bucks or ten thousand. Would you care if he was out buying himself $25,000 TVs, brand new cars, video games, etc. and then spent 25 cents on a gumball machine ring for you (this would be assuming there's no history in the relationship of gumball machine rings having a significant meaning)? Link to post Share on other sites
katie79 Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 yeah, that's true sometimes! LOL! I know an older woman who told me how she gave her bf (now her husband of 20 years) an ultimatium. He kept using the excuse that he couldn't afford a ring, then he bought himself and expensive boat just for the sake of it! LOL...it was just that which triggered him to think twice about what he was really telling her. But I must agree w/ Bintrong. If he can't a fford a decent ring, that is fine, if that's really the case. I used to want at least a one karat. But now, I realize a good quality small diamond (not too expensive) is a nice catch too. When my bf and I went shopping, we saw some 2 karat diamonds that had black particles in it. Yuck. I would rather have that little danty sparkly e-ring than the big pricy crappy diamond one! Link to post Share on other sites
zara Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 binturong - i really wouldn't care. If i want something material then i will work for it and pay for it. An ex of mine once went ballistic when we were on holiday once and i bought myself a pair of diamond and sapphire earrings and pendant. He yelled at me that i oonly bought them to make him look bad "You just wanted to make me look bad for not buying you anything." when the thought never even entered my head, i saw them, thought they were pretty and bought them - end of story. I have never had a relationship based on material/ monetary gain - that is what i work for, my relationships should be about love. i want a man for the love they show me not the things they buy me. most of my boyfriends have had skateboards rather than cars and usually earn less than me. i don't care. it's just not important to me. An ex BF (same one who yelled at me for buying my own damned diamonds!) was terrible at buying gifts, he just didn't put much thought into it. However, he once bought me a dozen of my favourite pink roses when i came out of hospital and i was so bowled over i cried. A couple of months earlier at Christmas he bought me a footspa - he never chose it, he just called his mom from work and asked her to get me something. I was so upset i didn't even bother taking all the paper off it. The roses cost a couple of bucks, the footspa about 50, but i would much rather the roses because they were the product of genuine thought and knowledge of what is special to me. Link to post Share on other sites
Fayebelle Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 but it's a reverse situation. I'm allergic to gold so I think a silver ring would be just dandy- he says platinum. I think it is silly to pay that much $ when I don't care and there is no visible difference anyway. It's silly- but the ring will be his gesture so I will appreciate whatever he chooses. If he drops all his $ on a platinum band that has a quartz crystal on top b/c he couldn't afford a diamond too- so be it. I'm just glad he doesn't plan to subject me to a life of blisters w/a gold band I have scars from a ring my high school BF bought me for Xmas- it was gold but I tried to wear it anyway- NEVER AGAIN! I decided then and there that any guy that bought me gold jewelry had to go b/c either they ignored my allergy or they didn't know me well enough to be buying me such gifts. Link to post Share on other sites
Newly Engaged Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 Originally posted by dyermaker The Mohs scale is exponential. Moissanites are hard, yes, but they aren't very hard compared to diamonds--it's not like they have practical laboratory uses like diamonds do. Moissanites are considered as durable as diamonds since diamonds have a natural cleavage path and moissanites don't. 9.5 is also harder than any other gemstone, other than diamond. All that means is that moissanite is as resistant to everyday wear and tear as diamonds. They also have a higher combustion point than diamonds. Of course, unless you're in the habit of dropping your engagement ring in an industrial furnace, that's not going to make a difference either Diamonds conduct electricity, Moissanites are poor electric conductors, the test isn't as complicated as 'alternative diamond' brokers would have you believe. After more research, I have to concede this one to you. Also, I'll look at the following short article (http://www.tradeshop.com/gems/moissanite.html) Which tends to lend even more credence to your point. Not all jewelers will have electrical conductivity testing equipment (it's not that important, usually) but certainly they'll all have a decent loupe. Lab-created jewelry is rare, because the size of lab-created diamonds are a lot smaller than ones used in jewelry. Reading that Wired article I posted in my first post, there's someone who can churn out Jewelry Quality 3ct Yellow Diamonds in 24 hours at a miniscule cost. I wonder if he's still alive. In any case, DeBeers was lobbying the USA to ensure that his diamonds were labelled "synthetic", banking on humans love of getting a "natural" stone. As if it makes any real difference. Also, using a process of "carbon condensation", you can take a small diamond and adhere carbon onto it till it becomes a much larger diamond. I don't know if it's cheap, or what flaws (if any) might be introduced, but some of those diamonds they've produced are ridiculously large. Hell no. The United States will fail before DeBeers does. It's the most powerful monopoly in the history of mankind. I think a man pledging to spend their entire life loving you would be more of a warm feeling. It's interesting that they've made the coldest stone in the world represent that warm feeling to several generations of people. Whether or not Moissanite is a good enough substitute for diamond is irrelevant compared with sticking it to these people. Link to post Share on other sites
Artifact Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 Are you allergic to titanium? It has a look similar to silver, with the strength of platinum. It may even be stronger. PLUS, it costs a whole lot less. Take a Google look. Oh, and so it relates to the topic first asked... I am engaged, with no engagement ring. For me not only is it too much money for my honey to be spending (when we have such grand travel plans ) but I am clumsy- and he knows it. The fact that he was scared to buy something that stood up off my hand, and was worth something, shows how well he knows me! But, I will wear a wedding band. Link to post Share on other sites
dyermaker Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 Originally posted by binturong Would you care if he was out buying himself $25,000 TVs, brand new cars, video games, etc. and then spent 25 cents on a gumball machine ring for you (this would be assuming there's no history in the relationship of gumball machine rings having a significant meaning)? Well, if they're going to be married, it's not like he won't share. Now instead of a flashy trophy of subjugation, she can watch 25,000 dollar TV's and drive brand new cars. Originally posted by Newly Engaged 9.5 is also harder than any other gemstone, other than diamond. It is, you're correct. But throwing the 9.5 vs. 10 number out there is marginally deceptive, as people will immediately think the difference between 8.5 and 9 is the same as the difference between 9.5 and 10--which isn't the case. Which tends to lend even more credence to your point. Not all jewelers will have electrical conductivity testing equipment (it's not that important, usually) Sadly, it *is* becoming all that important to the consumer. Women who are victims of DeBeers are, in increasing numbers, going to jewelry stores and having their diamonds 'tested'. There's a jewelry store near my school that has a sign on the window : "Think your diamond is fake? Get what you deserve!" It's interesting that they've made the coldest stone in the world represent that warm feeling to several generations of people. Well said. I think it's sad that they've made a stone with a history of slavery and terrorism become a symbol of love. Whether or not Moissanite is a good enough substitute for diamond is irrelevant compared with sticking it to these people. This I disagree with. I don't think by buying a Moissanite you're exactly 'sticking it to them'. Economically you're not supporting them, provided you're not buying a DeBeers moissonaite, but you're still conforming to their ad campaign. You're buying, basically, something that was made to look like a diamond. People will still think you have a diamond, and people will still want a diamond themselves. I think the ultimate 'sticking it to them' will be people buying stones they find beautiful, at a reasonable price, until diamonds fall in price as well. Link to post Share on other sites
Unbiased Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 Katie79, I am refreshed at your ability to see my point. You are the exception to the rule. It seems that the critical, independent thinking required to question some of these social "norms" is all too rare. I actually have nothing against the idea of owning/wearing diamonds... it is the social maladies that are a result of the obsession with the $$$ behind it. Link to post Share on other sites
Papillon Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 Originally posted by dyermaker Sadly, it *is* becoming all that important to the consumer. Women who are victims of DeBeers are, in increasing numbers, going to jewelry stores and having their diamonds 'tested'. There's a jewelry store near my school that has a sign on the window : "Think your diamond is fake? Get what you deserve!" Yeah, it's the new "Intel Inside" logo. Link to post Share on other sites
katie79 Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 Who the hell really cares about any of this. The point to nonmaterialistic, the one who orginally posted this thread, is that there is a commitment behind the ring; a promise of marriage soon to come. Diamonds are good for who can afford it, which most people can in different sizes and qualities. With enough spending and shopping skills, anyone can get a diamond basically. However, if you can afford it, get a diamond, if you want something different, get moissanite, if price is the main concern, get a freakin' CZ. They all look the same and are very hard stones. Who the heak cares. Want the ring of your dreams? GO with you bf and pick out a setting. Or get a new setting with the same stone/ vice versa? Exchange, pawn, or buy a new one. Link to post Share on other sites
katie79 Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 who can really tell a difference? Even trained jewelers can't tell with a naked eye...or the right equipment to test the damn stone nowadays! Link to post Share on other sites
Fayebelle Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 Originally posted by Artifact Are you allergic to titanium? It has a look similar to silver, with the strength of platinum. It may even be stronger. PLUS, it costs a whole lot less. Take a Google look. Thanks, I'll have to share that w/my BF- personally I don't give a rat's a$$ - all my other jewelry is silver- but he does and it's his deal - so I'll make sure he knows all the options before he blows his paycheck on some crazy bling bling Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts