Why are Diamonds a Girl's Best Friend?
So tomorrow is Valentine's day and everywhere you look, stores are pushing candy, flowers, and jewelry--especially diamonds. I have always been rather put off by the Kay Jewelers commercials that liken women to whores when they state, "Every kiss begins with Kay."
I never understood the whole concept of a woman wanting jewelry from a man, especially diamonds, until I read the book Why Beautiful People Have More Daughters.
In the book, two evolutionary psychologists explain why people do what they do. Why are diamonds a girl's best friend? The authors conclude that women have to discriminate between "dads" and "cads" among male suitors. In order to find the guy that will stay with her and help her with children, she looks for two qualities: "the ability to acquire and accumulate resources, and the willingness to invest them in her and her children."
A good way to screen for men who are both willing and able to invest is to demand an expensive gift--known as a courtship gift or nuptial gift in evolutionary biology. Not just any expensive gift will do. A Mercedes or house does not usually fill the bill--for these might have intrinsic value to the man if he likes European cars or is interested in real estate. A courtship gift, according to the book, must be costly and lack intrinsic value and be useless.
Diamonds and flowers are beautiful and their beauty lies in their inherent uselessness; "this is why Volvos and potatoes are not beautiful." So guys, apparently, gifts that are "costly but worthless"--facilitate courtship, according to a recent study mentioned in the book.
"The researchers note that such extravagant gifts have the added benefit for men of deterring 'gold diggers,' women who promise to mate in exchange for a gift but then desert without mating after receiving it."
So, it seems that diamonds serve as a litmus test for how a woman feels about you. I still have trouble with the idea of "demanding" expensive gifts but it all makes a bit more sense to me now.
I never understood the whole concept of a woman wanting jewelry from a man, especially diamonds, until I read the book Why Beautiful People Have More Daughters.
In the book, two evolutionary psychologists explain why people do what they do. Why are diamonds a girl's best friend? The authors conclude that women have to discriminate between "dads" and "cads" among male suitors. In order to find the guy that will stay with her and help her with children, she looks for two qualities: "the ability to acquire and accumulate resources, and the willingness to invest them in her and her children." A good way to screen for men who are both willing and able to invest is to demand an expensive gift--known as a courtship gift or nuptial gift in evolutionary biology. Not just any expensive gift will do. A Mercedes or house does not usually fill the bill--for these might have intrinsic value to the man if he likes European cars or is interested in real estate. A courtship gift, according to the book, must be costly and lack intrinsic value and be useless.
Diamonds and flowers are beautiful and their beauty lies in their inherent uselessness; "this is why Volvos and potatoes are not beautiful." So guys, apparently, gifts that are "costly but worthless"--facilitate courtship, according to a recent study mentioned in the book.
"The researchers note that such extravagant gifts have the added benefit for men of deterring 'gold diggers,' women who promise to mate in exchange for a gift but then desert without mating after receiving it."
So, it seems that diamonds serve as a litmus test for how a woman feels about you. I still have trouble with the idea of "demanding" expensive gifts but it all makes a bit more sense to me now.
Labels: interesting books
posted by Helen at 6:33 PM
100 Comments:
I've also heard that buying a diamond ring became a sort of "performance bond" in the 1920s or 1930s after the practice of suing for breach of a marriage promise started going out of fashion.
On top of that is the pressure and advertising from the DeBeers cartel. They were able to really manipulate public opinion into desiring more diamonds.
Well, I, for one, bought my wife ruby necklace for valentines. :o)
"... she looks for two qualities: "the ability to acquire and accumulate resources, and the willingness to invest them in her and her children." "
--------------------
This means, boiled down, that he has to have some bucks (or at least the potential) and be gullible enough for her to get the bucks out of him.
Pretty depressing - that's probably how a whole lot of women really think. Maybe men should start thinking about what the real intrinsic value of that type of woman is (my estimate: not much).
The whole diamond ring engagement thing always seemed like a "downpayment," to me. I didn't want to be put on layaway. So, I said no diamond, no engagement ring, just exchange of wedding rings at the ceremony.
Then, I happened to see a gorgeous, antique, art deco diamond ring I absolutely loved. So, I bought it for myself and now wear it as my wedding ring.
I'm usually more practical than that. My husband knows I'll be really upset if he buys me expensive baubles - I'd rather retire early.
I like the idea of the gift card. ;)
I don't doubt this is true for some, maybe even most. But in the circles I run in, diamonds aren't even on the table, and aren't particularly desired.
The best gifts my husband gives me? Good cookware. I am a cheapskate but he will buy quality. Hmmm, and he benefits too, eh?
"Every kiss begins with Kay."
I've always said that if you have to buy a woman expensive jewelry to motivate her to love you, you're dating a prostitute.
I just remembered something and had to come back. Long ago I used to read a newsgroup wherein people discussed various aspects of marriage. Periodically someone would ask for advice on how much to spend on the engagement ring. And someone would always respond: "I've heard that a good guideline is 2 months' salary." Silly people had no clue that the "guideline" came from DeBeers too.
Previous girlfriend: "And if you're ever trying to think of something to buy me, you work right near Tiffany's."
buh-bye.
Personally I find black pearls and platinum far more beautiful. Hardly appropriate for engagement rings though.
Jewelry on Valentine's Day is so typical. Me? I went with fair-trade chocolate from a local shop. I'm pretty sure it'll go over well...
...mostly because she already found it.
I s'pose if marriage is supposed to be based solely and truly on love alone, all the gifts and trinkets and rings etc look tacky. But if a marriage is seen as, at least partly, an economic union to raise kids, then rings and diamonds and dowries and 10 camels to the brides family start making more sense, along the lines of what Dr. Helen quoted in the post.
And of course, the true love and economic models don't have to be mutually exclusive - people meld together seemingly antagonistic ideas all the time, wittingly or not.
I just want to know what happened to dowries. All the stuff flowing towards the woman is still here, and then some.
Many of the ads also strongly imply it is the man's job to make the woman happy. I've found that no matter how hard you try, you can't make someone happy who doesn't want to be. Plus, the quasi-prostitution aspect, as already, mentioned bugs me too.
It's a friggin' rock. A garnet is a prettier one, in my opinion. Any woman who demands useless gifts is useless herself, as she is a waste of income, which is a waste of my time, which is a waste of my life. "Go run around the block for two months so I'll be impressed."
But, to play devil's advocate. What, besides the pleasure of her company -- which is a push, is the woman giving the man?
I agree with most of what JG said. And there are too many reports of women that are only interested in men for the money. One aspect of a male rebellion is splitting the check on an evening out; if she balks, she's after the money. In my own life, if the money dries up, the affection is gone as well.
Kay Jewelers has nasty salespeople.
Unless you make it clear that you absolutely intend to drop beaucoup bucks, they consider you trash, and tacitly try to get you out of the store.
Not so in Cartier, Tiffany, Van Cleef etc. ....in the better Jewelers you can browse and try-on to your heart's content, all-day even, without spending a dime. They don't care.
Kay is Krud !!!
It's just another form of sexual selection, as practiced by many species. Makes perfect sense when you consider that females have much more at stake than males, especially in a species that matures as slowly as ours. You can call it a form of prostitution, but relationships have costs, especially when there are children involved. If you're already determined to give up your time and energy, does it really matter if some of it comes in the form of a trinket?
What you really have to look out for is not the people who pay, it's the people who don't.
What bugs the crap out of me, is that could be money better spent or better invested, in providing for her and our children.
The expensive shiny baubles seem like they are less for her then it is for her to show off to her friends.
It is *not* money well spent.
(and yes, I did in the end)
Call me dense, but how do extravagant gifts have the added benefit for men of deterring gold diggers?
urbancenturion,
I thought the same thing, but I think the author meant that expensive USELESS gifts deter golddiggers. For example, if you buy her flowers.
Diamonds are NOT useless because they can be resold, flowers and candy can't.
However, golddiggers will leech off a guy for the ego boost and sense of accomplishment, not just the raw monetary income, so the fact is, spending ANY significant amount of money on girls will draw them in.
Golddiggers are just prostitutes anyway.
Valentine's Day put me off for years. Then one Valentine's Day came and I found it wasn't bugging me, and I wondered where my change in attitude came from. I realized it was because I hadn't been watching any TV lately, and had missed all of those grating diamond ads.
I'm female. I don't get the attraction to the shiny little trinkets. And I especially don't get wanting to make some guy spend two months' salary on them for me. Guess I'm an evolutionary misfit.
Evolutionary psychology seems plausible in general -- but it tends to sound like pseudo-science whenever its applied to a specific behavior. Take something in the current culture, cook up some justification for it on evolutionary grounds (and in most cases, you could probably do that for almost any behavior as well as its opposite), and presto!
For example, the notion here that
the bestowed gift must be particularly USELESS if its to show fitness in a mate -- couldn't you argue the exact reverse?
cinderkeys, you sound perfectly marriagable. But before I propose I have one question. Will you get upset at me if I work long hours to pay the bills or, if I do as you ask and not work long hours will you get upset if we don't have the money to pay the bills? Answer this correctly and you just may be the most perfect women in the world.
i only buy rowan jewellery as she has a qualification in it, she can cut stones. she likes all the different cuts, all substances. but she doesnt pressure, she is happy with a cz and silver or steel as she would gold or platinum and diamonds.
it wouldnt deter gold diggers. True story, a woman i know who has 4 kids from 4 different men, expects another man to look after her and those children, now she asked HIM to marry her and in the same sentence said 2 things, 1 " you will buy me a good engagement ring", and 2, a woman always controls the money in the household doesnt she.
needless to say he ran a mile, partly because she had told him 6 months before that she found him physically repulsive. but now she changed her mind, when she was under threat of losing her house.
Diamonds are worse than useless. The odds are very good that many of the African diamonds on the market at jewelers in the US and elsewhere are "blood diamonds" from hot spots such as Sierra Leone where wars were fought over diamond mines. The movie by that name represented real events in that part of the world. That shiny bauble at Kay or other jewelers might well have been the cause of someone's arms—or head—being hacked off. De Beers claims that it isn't selling any blood diamonds, but there's no way to know for sure...
Adrian, hope she loves it.
So, there are women who just like jewelry because, you know, it's pretty. No subtext, no gold-digging, they just like it. Aren't there any men here who buy it just for the joy of pleasing their wives or girlfriends?
evolutionary psychologists
what's next evolutionary sociologists....I know: I am going to call myself an "evolutionary" artist. You see, the color blue met an Darwinian need during an human genetic bottleneck, soon after the first human migration out of Africa. Millenia later, the progenitors of the European hegemonic gene pool corrupted this evolutionary drive by adding yellow, a color pertaining to their ignorant sun worship, and reduced the royal blue of Africa to green.
There. Where can I publish that?
Maybe if the two "evolutionary psychologists" read history, they would discover that the tradition of giving a diamond engagement ring began when a king, English I think, gave a ring to his betrothed. Henry VII, began the tradition of returning such rings.
Marbel: I'm delighted to purchase anything for a woman if I get to see it light up her face when she opens it. I'm happy to go to truly excessive lengths of effort and expenditure to get that irrepressible smile and little gasp as the wrapping comes off.
Frankly I couldn't care less what it costs. It could be something from Build-A-Bear or Tiffany's.
There's just so damn much WEIGHT attached to everything that it seems impossible to just give a gift.
I can't seem to buy someone something without watching the knot in their stomach at thinking how they're going to repay me or take someone out to dinner someplace nice without having the "can I give you something for this?" conversation.
It really takes the wind out of a guy's sails.
...Furthermore:
the genetic or evolutionary hegemony of the European was perceived as total when in the 19th century, when colonialism, especially over Africa, was at its height. At this time, the European, believing himself to be at the Darwinian apex, in order to supplant humanity's true roots and royal blue. developed Prussian Blue: a blue-green. Here was also an attempt to interject into the evolutinary matrix the European, genetic, militerism.
Fortunately, with the ending of the 20th century and the start or the 21st, we now see this European "hegemony" as merely an evolutionary hiatus: for the African, even people of color, are engaged in a unprecedented migration into European dominated continents; and, in the course of time will overthrow the hegemony and re-establish not only the African genetic lineage but also the dominance of African Blue.
We, artists and amateurs alike, in the West will need to adjust our color wheel accordingly.
Uselessness is everywhere in society, and seems to be specially desirable when coupled with expense. The engagement ring is one example. But so is the necktie.
We must suffer to show respect.
A dim mind is a girl's best friend. At least when it comes to getting gifts. The smart ones have their own money.
Locomotive breath, I disagree. I know a lady who makes $200K per year and is smart as a whip. Yet men buy her lots gifts and cater to her every need. I don't think this lady has ever had to actually buy anything. How does she do it? She's the perpetual victim. According to her, somebody is always hurting her, attacking her and taking advantage of her. Every sentence out of her mouth starts with "I feel". And the men eat this up. She constantly needs protection, assistance, money, help, teaching, heavy lifting, rides and anything else she can get. The men are led to believe they are protecting and helping their abused misunderstood damsel in distress. Terri's going to clean up today, some of you men are easy marks for her type.
(...and guess who Terri points to as feeling-hurter enemy #1? ;) )
It sounds like the $200K girl should be fixed up with Mad William Flint.
Then she would be constantly squealing with delight at the gifts.
Despite her financial success she still has a dim mind. She's unwilling to be independent even thought she can be. How much better would relationships be if they could be not based on some pathological co-dependancy, but rather people who could be successful and complete on their own if they chose to be but instead, motivated by nothing else, freely choose to be with the other person?
"...the "can I give you something for this?" conversation."
Yes, I understand this. I know the feeling well. When I was single back in the '80s and '90s, there was usually an expectation of payback for a dinner, a gift given, even a drink bought at a bar. Of course the payback was to be in the form of sex. Some women didn't want to play that, so we quit dating. I didn't even try to date for many years. We had no problem with the notion of reciprocation, but not necessarily the way the men wanted it. I would have been happy to pick up the tab sometimes, cook a dinner, buy an impromptu gift if something caught my eye and seemed appropriate. But that wasn't what the guys wanted. Of course I am speaking in generalities here; not all men were/are like that.
Now, y'all can say this started with feminism, and maybe you are right. But it doesn't really matter anymore how it started, does it, when today every encounter is fraught with anxiety, whether the woman is a feminist or not. I knew women like those y'all describe with such contempt here, but I also knew women who were not feminists but were still treated with that contempt. I have always tried to be straightforward with men but was often treated very badly; so were many of my friends. (I know women treat men badly too; don't jump on me for male-bashing.)
Nowadays, most women I know are married, or are students who hope to be married some day, but despair of finding a man to connect with. None of them are feminists.
Actually, a little chocolate would be kind of nice today. I think I will stop over at Terri's house later on today. The UPS, FedEx and DHL drivers leave the deliveries of the front stoop. I'll check to see if there is anything good from Godiva over there.
Wait a minute wait a minute....
While I understand why I gave that impression a lot of things have to be in place first and it's got to be the thoughtfulness that brings the smile. If someone's perfect gift is something they're looking to get out of me then they can shove.
marbel: I do! Absolutely love giving my love pretty things. But I absolutely have to buy it on sale, because she shares doreen's wise view of the future.
cinderkeys: He's right - you seem dang near ideal!
Peregrine John,
"cinderkeys: He's right - you seem dang near ideal!"
Well, perhaps I should turn this blog into a dating site. It seems that many of the women like cinderkeys who claim to be "evolutionary misfits" might just be the perfect mate for some lucky guy here. Although I am kidding, I did work at a dating service once as a matchmaker so maybe that's not such a bad idea...
First time I went a-courtin', I tried making a pile with some leaves, animal fur, shiny bottle caps and empty tampon applicators, then getting on top and doing an enticing little dance. Didn't work so well. In the end, diamonds did the job.
A courtship gift, according to the book, must be costly and lack intrinsic value and be useless.
I always thought that it was because, at the end of the courtship, the man was also going to end up with something costly, that lacks intrinsic value and is useless...which would even things out.
Hey...I was just joking, put down that pitchfork...HEY!
AAAAHHHH!
Do a "thought experiment": Imagine a world where there is no sexual desire or attraction.
All of a sudden, women would seemingly become "small, weak men". A certain brand of woman would additionally complain all the time, not pull her own weight and expect preferential treatment.
Now take that new universe and think about whether men would be showering women with diamonds in that setting or legally agreeing to give her an unfair stake in all of his future earnings and assets with no apparent offset (i.e. "get married").
If you think about it that way, it becomes abundantly clear that dating and even marriage are a sex-for-money transaction at the root of it.
I must admit that I was somewhat of a sucker: at the end of one of my relationships, I gave the woman an old fashioned Singer sewing machine so that she could continue to do her quilting hobby when she married her new man.
So you're asking us to do a thought experiment then telling us what our conclusions are going to be and capping it off with an "it becomes abundantly clear"?
Kinda speaks for itself, just not necessarily for anybody else.
Do you shower men with presents (to also see their irrepressible grins), Mad William Flint, or just women?
I am also somewhat puzzled by the acceptance here of the doubly unscientific concept of "evolutionary psychologist". When I was going through college and grad school, psychology was a crib course. So was sociology which is why I made up the term "evolutionary sociologists".
I seem to remember Robert Heinlien commenting on psychology as a fake science.
So does that address my criticism of your comment in some way I don't see or is it just backlash?
njartist --
No, only some acceptance and only by some. I'm a biologist by degree and I think "evolutionary psychology" is total bull. It's built on the wishes of the researchers.
"A lot of smart men spent a lot of time to turn this waste of time into the science of psychiatry." - Linda
Dr. Helen wrote, So, it seems that diamonds serve as a litmus test for how a woman feels about you. I still have trouble with the idea of "demanding" expensive gifts but it all makes a bit more sense to me now.
I think you have the cart before the horse. It's a litmus test of how the man feels about the woman. Not the other way around.
He feels he can buy her. Lots of women can be bought. Lots of men want to buy them.
Dr. Helen, you're submerging an important point beneath an unwarranted assumption.
The point: mating strategies between men and women are not just cooperative, but also competitive. Men have different aims than women.
The author wrote, the ability to acquire and accumulate resources, and the willingness to invest them in her and her children.
True. But men want women who will demonstrate a willingness to use resources wisely and to keep faith with him. Women who demand expensive, useless gifts show neither.
The assumption: men should follow female mating strategies. Why?
"But men want women who will demonstrate a willingness to use resources wisely ..."
----------
Is that true? I know that it SOUNDS like it should be true, but is it? That sounds pretty low on the relative scale of things when I look around at what men really do and how they really act.
"So does that address my criticism of your comment in some way I don't see or is it just backlash?"
-------------------
It addresses your criticism. I wanted to find out of there is some sexual or gender component to your generous gift-giving, or whether you randomly give gifts to men and women.
If you only give gifts to women, why is that the case? Why not men as well.
Jeff,
Good points. However, I used to think that a woman wanting expensive diamonds was just a gold digger. However, I found by reading the book that perhaps I was wrong. That the diamonds perhaps symbolized a woman's desire to stay with that particular man and have a family etc. It made the whole thing seem a lot less sinister to me. I'm not saying I buy it hook, line and sinker or that I agree with it but it makes sense as to why women want diamonds, but men are free to reject this female mating strategy. If I was a man, I probably would.
JG wrote, That sounds pretty low on the relative scale of things when I look around at what men really do and how they really act.
How about complaining about and avoiding gold diggers? It is the main problem men face when courting. Gold digging says a lot about what a woman will be like under marriage and with children.
Men worry about it all the time.
The article explains why the custom of giving expensive, useless trinkets came about. That doesn't mean that men must do it or that women should demand it. Understanding our base instincts and drives is useful but as human beings, we can rise above them.
Assuming this is true:
Men, it wouldn't hurt to give useless romantic gifts even if they aren't terribly expensive. I know my wife likes useless, romantic gifts. They make her feel good. She doesn't demand them. But she likes them.
Women, understand where the urge may come from and learn to appreciate gifts without demanding them. Work with men on finding different ways to satisfy the urg.
If it's not true, then never mind...
First off, I've read a lot about evolutionary psychology and find that it leads to huge number of testable predictions. It's just Darwin applied to humans and treating humans as intelligent chimpanzees. The concept is that evolution creates behavioral biases which can be measured. "Evolutionary sociology" makes no sense because most sociologists attribute human behavior entirely to societal influences. The concept of "evolutionary anthropology" is causing anthropology to rip itself apart as a discipline. The two sides apparently have gotten to the point where they hate each other.
To JG and Helen:
There is a real difference between (1) a man providing resources to a woman to gain sexual access and (2) him providing these resources over the "long haul". According to Helen Fisher, in primitive tribes, the "long haul" is about four years, until the child enters the "multiage play group". The behavioral cues are different. (1) is straightfoward prostitution and is quite common in the animal kingdom. The resources associated with (2) can be smaller in value but more frequent and allow the female to predict with some confidence that the guy will be providing resources for a while. As far as I can tell, it is much more important to women than to men that they (women) are the ones to break off the relationship, but that's a prediction/conjecture, not a theory.
To Marbel:
Loved your comment about the cookware, assuming that you're a good cook. I know one woman who loves getting cookbooks and has a big collection of them but rarely uses them and is a lousy cook.
To whomever:
Dowries come from the bride's family and were their contribution to supporting the children resulting from the marriage. Remember that, in many societies, the bride went to live with the groom's family, primarily, I suppose, to reduce the likelihood of paternity fraud. Brideprice, where the groom's family or tribe pays the bride's family or tribe for her is much more common than dowries, but seems to be associated with less successful cultures.
I like the Helzberg diamond commercials where they show a guy bathing a little rat terrier and his wife/girlfriend comes home squealing, "Oooh! You bathed Fluffy for me!". Cue the announcer, "Because you're not "that" guy, there's Helzberg diamonds."
"In order to find the guy that will stay with her and help her with children, she looks for two qualities: "the ability to acquire and accumulate resources, and the willingness to invest them in her and her children."
That's certainly interesting and explains a lot, but how do women 'prove' they are willing in invest in us? The answer is: they don't. In fact, when you ask any woman nowadays what they are going to do for you in a marriage, they are dumb-struck, completely unable to give an answer & that tells you everything you need to know.. it means cut off the relationship and never call again or return her calls.. and this is all women today. Women have a long, long, long way to go in repairing all the damage they have done to the human race and it starts with looking in the mirror, but since women are mentally incapable of accountabilty, I don't see how it's going to happen.
The dozen or so previous comments (trollish excepted) remind me of The Five Love Languages, an excellent book with very useful information. One of the languages boils down to "gifts", and it has no small part to do with what our hostess has read. I mention this to point out that all 5 "languages" are ways of conveying meaning, and not inherently good or bad on their own. A greedy, needy or imbalanced person can abuse their partner with any of them.
"A greedy, needy or imbalanced person can abuse their partner with any of them."
Greedy & imbalanced? You just described 98.9% of all American women. Looks like you've got a lot of catching up to do- this isn't 1986. Your gay little book should be titled, "The Mangina's Guide To Being Alone With Your Right Hand."
Actually yeah, I do now that I think about it. I'm frequently sending things via Amazon.com to a friend's front porch or picking up something for someone if it's "just got their name written all over it."
Some people here are portraying women as blood sucking leeches. But I will have to tell you the story of the guy I dated for 3 months last summer. I treated him like a king. His birthday came and I gave him a nice camera, accessories for that camera and a book. John gave me no gifts at all during the time we were together. I took John out to eat a few times as well, nice restaurants. He bought me a $10 burger twice.
During the last month we were together I reformatted John's computer and straightened out some bills for him with several phone calls to customer service departments. Every time I talked to John he seemed to have some new ideas about how I could help out with this project or that. John enjoyed painting interiors. So when I finished reformatting his computer which took me a weekend, I asked him to help me with a small paint job at my house. His response, "I KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TRYNG TO DO, YOU ARE TRYING TO USE ME!!!"
I decided that was my last relationship. My dating days are done. I don't need a situation where it is all give and no take. So, hopefully, you may conclude that it isn't only women that are looking out for what other people can do for them, and how fast they are are going to do it.
Yeah, cultural roles make this mercenary approach to dating manifest differently but it seems pretty even handed, but I really don't think this is a "gender partisan" issue.
I just hope that the ebb and flow of socially acceptable gender blaming slows down a bit at each swing.
cham, It's really only a pair of very vocal trolls slinging outright misogyny in here. They are beyond pathetic and I for one don't even respond to them any more, nor make direct reference to what they say. I wouldn't be too surprised to find that one of them is actually your unhinged and hypersensitive ex. My hope is the same as flint's.
I for one am going to get through a couple/few more hours of work (NYC) and go out to several local gin mills in which I may as well be known as "Norm" and spend a splendid amount of money on drinks for fellow singletons of either gender.
And if anyone's in the area and is interested to knock one back, I'd be delighted to have some company.
peregrine john,
"Absolutely love giving my love pretty things. But I absolutely have to buy it on sale, because she shares doreen's wise view of the future."
Indeed. Along with cookware, I like pretty things too. The silver earrings I received for Christmas are lovely and I wear them almost daily. I know they were reasonably priced. In fact, I had admired them while out with my daughter, and she led Daddy right back to them when they were out shopping at Target a few days later.
Still, the gift of a book, thoughtfully chosen, is the best of all, now that I'm thinking about it.
Some of my most treasured possessions are hardcover books received as gifts with notes written in the front cover.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Reality2007,
Come on--cut out the name calling. Make your points and move on without the attacks.
The assumption: men should follow female mating strategies. Why?
So they can get laid, bro. That was easy. :o)
k-man: I did a post on my blog about Blood Diamond.
njartist: I found an interesting article on the wedding ring which claims it goes back to the ancient Egpytians and Greeks.
Cham - What's a dim lady doing to make $200k?
Helen - I haven't used any dating sites, but it seems like a few of them are run by psychologists (Match.com and E-Harmony).
>First off, I've read a lot about
>evolutionary psychology and find
>that it leads to huge number of
>testable predictions. It's just
>Darwin applied to humans and
>treating humans as intelligent
>chimpanzees. The concept is that
>evolution creates behavioral biases
>which can be measured.
Wait -- you can test psychological predictions, sure -- and I've no problem considering human subjects as test subjects not much different from pigeons. It's the "evolutionary" part that's non-scientific -- specific speculations about how certain psychological traits came about through natural selection, etc, is NOT very testable, and subject to all sorts of bias.
The lady has been given a nickname by her fancy law firm, "Princess". Princess specializes in medical malpractice protecting doctors. Not only does she make $200K but also only works 3 days per week, 'because of the stress', her words not mine. Princess doesn't drive, because of the stress which is why she always needs a ride. While in your car Princess will talk about her feelings extensively but she doesn't feel money for gas, she doesn't carry cash. I've sent a friend today to do some reconnaissance for Godiva boxes, I'll take what she owes me in chocolate if I have to.
Cham, I don't know anyone - of either sex - who's dated around who doesn't have tales of bad dates and relationships. I'm sure we could all swap some stories.
For a lot of years I had a group of male friends who treated me as "one of the guys." I went to a lot of baseball games and concerts, had a lot of fun. It wasn't the most emotionally satisfying time of my life, but on the other hand, it was not as draining as trying to date.
but men are free to reject this female mating strategy. If I was a man, I probably would.
LOL. No -- if you were a man, you would sit down, shut up and do as you're told! (Or never get laid again for the rest of your life.) Why do people think men have any real power when it comes to dating?
I'm a woman (married 14 1/2 years) and I don't like diamonds (much). When my husband bought our engagement ring he originally had bought a "rock" and I asked him to take it back and get me something more modest. The only piece of diamond jewelry I have ever asked him for was our 10-year anniversary ring, and even then I told him I didn't care if it had real diamonds or CZ's, I just wanted a certain look. He opted for the diamonds.
This was a good thing. I got to show him that I am low-maintenance and I love him for him and not for his gifts, and he got to show me that he thinks I'm worth spending the bucks on.
Now if you'll excuse me, I need to open his Valentine's day gift to me. It looks like clothes. I am thrilled out of my mind! I need clothes; without clothes to cover up my glorious body, all the other men in the world to whom I am not married would die of jealousy. My wardrobe saves lives! ;)
Adrian,
"if you were a man, you would sit down, shut up and do as you're told! (Or never get laid again for the rest of your life)"
Or one could become a cad--women seem to sleep with them and don't expect them to stay quiet.
Helen,
I have rejected it. One of my major rules is that it has to be the women who says, "I Love You.", first.
Is that crickets I'm hearing?
http://rachellucas.com/?p=632
this is a great reply to this diamonds topic.
As I went about my scoffing, Derek grew increasingly dismayed. I noticed this and asked him why he was staring at me with that frown. He said, “If I ever propose to you, it’s going to be with a much bigger ring than that.” We’d never talked about getting married; we weren’t that serious. He was being hypothetical and we both understood that. It was a theoretical argument but still. I asked him, “How much more?”
He said at least $10,000.
I said, “I would never accept that. No way.” Derek said that he didn’t mean tomorrow, he meant some day when he was making more money. I said I didn’t care, there were no circumstances in which I would ever in my life accept a gift that cost $10,000 and that just sits on your finger. It doesn’t keep you warm, feed you, entertain you, or bring you any comfort or use whatsoever.
Derek explained to me that that wasn’t the point, and that the purpose of such a ring was symbolic. He actually said with a straight face, “An expensive ring on my woman’s finger tells the world that I have money and that I love my woman.”
I got a diamond on Valentines day. It was a small old mine cut stone in a simple gold band.
It's a long story; the diamond isn't worth much, but the ring of high sentimental value . It's useless, of course. But it made me feel valuable.
He put it in a tiffany blue chinese takeout box, and fabricated a ring holder within, covered in silk grograin ribbon
Don't be hating on my diamond. I love it and I love my husband.
Ah, now that is a lovely thing.
Or one could become a cad--women seem to sleep with them and don't expect them to stay quiet.
Yeah -- that is a good point. Maybe life is like a big game of Survivor -- it's all about finding out who is willing to behave the worst.
Pretty sweet, Sarah!
Sometimes a diamond, like a bunch of roses, is just a traditional symbol of love. No trade-offs involved, nothing complicated.
On the other hand, a diamond is also worth at least a six-month supply of "get out of the doghouse free" tickets.
A lot depends on the character and duration of the relationship.
"Don't be hating on my diamond"
Only a fool would indulge in that.
The wrapping sounds almost as nice as the ring!
My first husband spoke to my father and gave me my grandmother's ring for our engagement. My grandfather made it for my grandmother so that is why I wanted it for an engagement ring. I'm still best friends with him, even though, we just couldn't live together. The current man in my life knows that I'd rather have a book. The greatest present he ever got me was a first edition of "Dune" by Frank Herbert.
He actually said with a straight face, “An expensive ring on my woman’s finger tells the world that I have money and that I love my woman.”
Watch one episode of "The Real Housewives of Orange County" and it's obvious the men get as big a charge out of buying crazy expensive jewelry as the women do. They're obviously wanting to show off just what they can afford.
"Watch one episode of "The Real Housewives of Orange County" and it's obvious the men get as big a charge out of buying crazy expensive jewelry as the women do. They're obviously wanting to show off just what they can afford."
-----------------
What a deep and meaningful existence, for both the man and the woman.
I've got a boyfriend, so I wouldn't be able to avail myself of Dr. Helen's matchmaking services :) But to answer sanclemman's questions hypothetically ...
"Will you get upset at me if I work long hours to pay the bills or, if I do as you ask and not work long hours will you get upset if we don't have the money to pay the bills?"
I have a job my own self, so you wouldn't necessarily have to work long hours just to pay the bills. On the other hand, if you're working long hours because you're passionate about your job, that's fine. Just set aside one date night for me a week and we're cool.
Oh, and I actually do like Valentine's Day. I just prefer that my useless gifts be more along the lines of a bag of pink and red M&Ms ... and I'm happy to be the gift giver if I find something decent to give.
My former husband bought me a diamond ring for our 20th anniversay (also the year of my
40th birthday) to replace the very modest sapphire ring we had originally chosen together. He pushed me to get something much bigger than I thought practical or a wise use of money. He certainly seemed to derive great satisfaction from having people know he could afford such a beautiful rock. And it was gorgeous. Then I found the condoms in his coat pocket when I took it to the cleaners, and the emails to the other woman, and the airline ticket purchases...Needless to say, I feel no guilt whatsoever that I still have the ring and intend to sell it to pay the tuition for my MBA. In the future, I plan to be very wary of Greeks bearing useless gifts and instead look for men who are willing and able to thank me for making a nice meal and participating in stimulating conversation. Someone like that would be worth having sex with, gifts or no gifts.
I’m not understanding the whole “all women are prostitutes because they like diamonds” meme, and frankly, if this is what you think, you are a simpleton and a true misogynist and every bit as much a contributor to the problems plaguing the sexes that people complain of as any committed feminist. Just because a relationship has economic dimensions does not make the relationship one of a naked economic exchange.
I think that Dr. Helen’s description of what she read may shed light upon the diamond phenomenon, though I would venture to guess that the useless/useful distinction is only from the standpoint of the very modern mind. People today are much less religious/spiritual/superstitious than they used to be – so, perhaps as little as a few decades ago the diamond carried with it a certain talismanic significance that it may not any longer, or at least we may still have a mind for these talismans but lack the vocabulary to express their significance in terms that appeal to a modern ear. As a Catholic, we have a concept of sacred objects and sacramentals, some of which are bejeweled and ornate. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacramentals They don’t “store” spiritual energy or anything, but they are physical objects that “tune” into the spiritual reality of the thing to which they refer. For example, rosary beads which refer to the Joyful, Sorrowful, and Glorious mysteries of Christ, and to that end, each bead has spiritual significance. I think that a lot of women consider their engagement rings/wedding bands in a similar light and as having ‘spiritual’ or ‘transcendent’ significance (remember, there is significance in the ‘circle’ as symbolic of eternity, and the ‘band’ as a ‘binding’) although they lack the vocabulary to express it in those terms.
I kind of think of the diamond as an analog of erotic love in that it is beautiful and often frivolous, and on the man’s side, often his love for a woman will cause him to sacrifice things of practical value in order to give his lady frivolities. Perhaps the motives are now mixed and the size/expense of the diamond is an issue, but I don’t think that this totally diminishes the other ways in which the ring is significant, at least not for every woman who wants a diamond engagement ring.
Additionally, my perception is that those who are most likely to reject the engagement ring as a cultural necessity are probably disproportionately the aggressively secular or those who want to eschew the religious/spiritual dimension of marriage as well. If the engagement ring was solely a measure of commerce on a sex-for-money market, there would be no correlation between the secular and the lack of a significant diamond.
Also, I know that women aren’t alone in liking things of no practical value. I have friends with gun extensive gun collections – more guns than anyone would ever need for self defense or even in the event of an armed revolution, with some expensive “safe queens,” which are guns that will never once be shot. Yes, they are functional objects, but there is no intent to ever even use them as they are designed. I drive a car that is well above what I ‘need’ or is ‘functional,’ and I probably could have bought one decent car that meets my practical needs (say, a Ford) and three or four large ‘engagement ring’ diamonds for the price of my car, and none of you would remark about me being a silly, impractical woman. What about men who hunt exotic game, and spend tens of thousands of dollars to have mounted trophies? Men aren’t exclusively practical – it is just a matter of finding different useless or extravagant things to collect that appeal to some aspect of our psychology.
There is also the notion of a ‘peppercorn’ in the law as necessary to bind an agreement and give it legal effect. Those of you who are law-trained will remember the exchange of consideration may be in the form of a peppercorn. Is it not possible that the diamond engagement ring represents a cultural (not legal) form of consideration of a promise to marry? In this way, the woman who accepts the diamond has an article of ‘proof’ that she is betrothed in the form of something small but of high value that is outwardly visible, and it could also act as an acknowledgement of the man’s intentions in that he is not “stringing her along” in the hopes of finding someone “better,” lest he forfeit the diamond.* If the diamond was replaced with something of lesser economic value, a man could “cover all bets” and tie up several women at once only to follow through with one, and cause much social and romantic discord. In other words, the diamond is the mark of a “serious young man” who is vested in the young woman, and an indication that he intends to commit all his worldly goods to one woman, and to impose a penalty if he does not follow through. This latter part makes some sense in that a man can wait a bit longer to wed (and therefore break engagements), while a woman’s beauty and desirability peaks at a certain (relative to men, young) age, and therefore there is a higher cost for a woman to take herself out of the ‘courting’ market for a time. In the days of less stable relationships – or at least relationships where exclusivity is not necessarily a given – it stands to reason that the ‘penalty price’ would tend to become higher.
*I know that the modern rule in most jurisdictions is now that the donor gets the ring back, even if he breaks the engagement, but again, this is the ‘modern’ rule, and perhaps our culture has not caught up to it.
This comment has been removed by the author.
'In order to find the guy that will stay with her and help her with children, she looks for two qualities: "the ability to acquire and accumulate resources, and the willingness to invest them in her and her children."'
So to put it simply, all women are prostitutes? That is not something I want to believe.
A bit of a tangent, I know, but intresting just the same. Google Answers has a terrific piece on long-term trends in diamond prices:
http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=495791
The Price of Diamonds Over Time
The trends are surprising, with dramatic increases a few decades ago, followed by a long period of nothing much happening in terms of price appreciation.
Is that diamond ring really the best engagement gift???
Worth a look.
I am just learning about all this diamond psychology...first hand.
I bought my wife a diamond ring when I proposed and she told me later she had been disappointed in the size of the diamond. Now she is dying to upgrade to "at least 150 points"...
I asked her why she wanted it so badly and she told me that it made her happy. I asked her why and she said all the other girls wouldn't look at her diamond and think that it was smaller than hers...
I then told her that if it was what she really wanted we would get it (actually that was the decision after a year of her asking). But just for conversation's sake I asked her what she thought the psychology behind that strong desire came from...She kept telling me it would just make her happy.
I couldn't get much further before she left the room upset, saying this was much more than a conversation and that I couldn't understand.
So I found this blog...
So more than just wanting the stone, why do you all think she desires so badly to have it bigger, more impressive? Also why do some women have such a hard time just waiting for a present or surprise...It's really more of a demand than a present given from the heart. that's my opinion anyway.
搬家
搬家
搬家公司
徵信社
徵信
彩妝造型
新娘秘書
票貼
室內設計
室內設計
徵信
徵信社
外遇
徵信
徵信社
外遇
搬家
搬家
花蓮民宿
花蓮民宿
免費a片
a片
免費av
色情影片
情色
情色網
色情網站
色情
成人網
成人圖片
成人影片
18成人
av
av女優
性
情慾
走光
做愛
sex
H漫
免費a片
a片
免費av
色情影片
情色
情色網
色情網站
色情
成人網
成人圖片
成人影片
18成人
av
av女優
性
情慾
走光
做愛
sex
H漫
a片
アダルト
アダルト
アダルトサイト
アダルトサイト
離婚
抓姦
外遇蒐證
外遇抓姦
外遇
侵權
仿冒
應收帳款
工商徵信
Shade sail
nike shoes
水泵
电动隔膜泵
自吸泵
离心泵
磁力泵
螺杆泵
化工泵
水泵
电动隔膜泵
自吸泵
离心泵
磁力泵
螺杆泵
化工泵
水泵
电动隔膜泵
自吸泵
离心泵
磁力泵
螺杆泵
化工泵
隔膜泵
气动隔膜泵
隔膜泵
气动隔膜泵
隔膜泵
气动隔膜泵
a片
成人網站
成人影片
寵物用品
情趣用品
情趣用品
MBA
在职研究生
在职博士
補習班
花店
花店
補正下着
中古車買賣
貸款
婚紗
婚紗攝影
補習班
留學
情色
情色
百家乐
轮盘
21点
德州扑克
百家乐系统
真人娱乐场
百家乐
足球
德州扑克
电子游戏
英格兰超级联赛
德国甲组联赛
意大利甲组联赛
西班牙甲组联赛
法国甲组联赛欧冠杯
英超
足球比分
足球彩票
体育彩票
即时比分
堆高機
婚禮佈置
宜蘭民宿推薦
寵物用品
情趣用品
情趣用品
坐月子
植牙
牙齒矯正
租屋
催眠
房屋出租
租房子
xo醬
牛軋糖
牛嘎糖
代償
房屋貸款
信用貸款
失眠
減肥
眼鏡
金門高梁酒
變頻洗衣機
票貼
借款
關鍵字廣告
租車
徵信社, 感情挽回, 挽回感情, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 捉姦, 徵信公司, 通姦, 通姦罪, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 捉姦, 監聽, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 外遇問題, 徵信, 捉姦, 女人徵信, 外遇問題, 女子徵信, 外遇, 徵信公司, 徵信網, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇蒐證, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 感情挽回, 挽回感情, 外遇沖開, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 外遇蒐證, 外遇, 通姦, 通姦罪, 贍養費, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信, 徵信社
080哈啦聊天室080哈啦聊天室080哈啦聊天室080哈啦聊天室080哈啦聊天室080哈啦聊天室080哈啦聊天室080哈啦聊天室080哈啦聊天室台北已婚聊天室台北已婚聊天室台北已婚聊天室台北已婚聊天室台北已婚聊天室台北已婚聊天室台北已婚聊天室台北已婚聊天室台北已婚聊天室台北已婚聊天室已婚廣場聊天室 已婚廣場聊天室 已婚廣場聊天室 已婚廣場聊天室 已婚廣場聊天室 已婚廣場聊天室 已婚廣場聊天室 已婚廣場聊天室 已婚廣場聊天室 已婚廣場聊天室 夢幻家族聊天室夢幻家族聊天室夢幻家族聊天室夢幻家族聊天室夢幻家族聊天室夢幻家族聊天室夢幻家族聊天室夢幻家族聊天室夢幻家族聊天室夢幻家族聊天室摸摸扣扣同學會聊天室摸摸扣扣同學會聊天室摸摸扣扣同學會聊天室摸摸扣扣同學會聊天室摸摸扣扣同學會聊天室摸摸扣扣同學會聊天室aa片免費看微風論壇080哈啦聊天室6k聊天室成人聊天室上班族捷克論壇大眾論壇plus論壇080視訊聊天室520視訊聊天室尋夢園上班族聊天室成人聊天室上班族 a片a片影片免費情色影片免費a片觀看小弟第貼影片區免費av影片免費h影片試看 H漫 - 卡通美女短片小魔女貼影片免費影片觀賞無碼a片網美女pc交友相簿美女交友-哈啦聊天室中文a片線上試看免費電影下載區免費試看a短片免費卡通aa片觀看女優影片無碼直播免費性感a片試看日本AV女優影音娛樂網日本av女優無碼dvd辣妹視訊 - 免費聊天室美女交友視訊聊天室080免費視訊聊天室尋夢園聊天室080苗栗人聊天室a片下載日本免費視訊美女免費視訊聊天
汽車旅館
消費券優惠
motel
消費券
薇閣
住宿券
廣交會
廣州飯店
廣州
广州
广交会
广州酒店
Canton Fair
Guangzhou Hotel
Guangzhou
広州
広州の交易会
広州のホテル
※aa片免費看影片※ 好站介紹1 免費視訊聊天區 辣妹視訊-男人國
※a片線上試看※sex520免費影片※ 好站介紹2 ☆♀ 888視訊聊天室 ☆♀ 免費色情 聊天室
※線上免費a片觀看※ 好站介紹3 免費色情 聊天室 微風成人-本土自拍
※免費a片下載※ 好站介紹4 成人動畫論壇 SEX 視訊聊天室
情色遊戲 好站介紹5 sex貼片,免費a,貼圖片區 情色貼圖網
※免費線上 a 電影直播※ 好站介紹6 微風成人-本土自拍 情色 後宮電影院
色情A片-線上免費 好站介紹7 彩虹hi視訊交友網 色情網站 SEX
金瓶影片交流區 好站介紹8 網愛俱樂部 辣妹視訊
免費A片線上下載 好站介紹9 激情網愛 0204視訊交友
情色貼圖小站 好站介紹10 免費情色影片觀賞 情色論壇
女優王國-18禁 好站介紹11 金瓶影片交流區 AVdvd 易遊網
愛情聊天室 好站介紹12 ♀ 找網愛聊天室 ☆ av女優 俱樂部
無碼A片天堂 好站介紹13 watchshow TV情色視訊交友 色情A片 免費下載
AV女優 天堂 好站介紹14 sogo 成人論壇 視訊美女 正妹牆
成人色情貼圖網 好站介紹15 ※Hotsee免費視訊交友聊天※ ※免費影片線上觀賞※
色情聊天室 sex 好站介紹16 ※免費檳榔西施摸奶影片※ 孤男寡女聊天室
SEX520 免費影片 好站介紹17 ※免費色咪咪影片網※ 激情網愛
SEX情色視訊 好站介紹18 ※線上 aa 片試看嘟嘟※ 視訊聊天
&甜心寶貝直播貼片& ※線上免費觀看小電影※ 色美媚部落格
成人交友網 日本女優色情自拍 情色貼圖網 情色電影小站
情人視訊聊天室 情色遊戲天堂 FF-FST免費視訊聊天網 ★外公外婆聊天室★
av女優 俱樂部 18禁 -女優王國 ※免費視訊聊天室※ ※免費視訊聊天室 AV線上影城※
美女視訊-聊天室 視訊聯誼聊天室 白虎美女圖庫 美女交友
成人視訊聊天室 成人情色貼圖區 網愛俱樂部 網友一夜情聊天室
※免費觀看視訊辣妹脫衣秀※ 辣妹視訊交友網 ★一夜激情影音聊天室★ 日本美女寫真集
辣妹妹視訊 成人交友網 1007 免費 視訊 聊天 秀 免費辣妹視訊聊天網
SEX 視訊聊天室 AV女優-無碼A片天堂 網友一夜情聊天室
色情貼圖 女優天堂 免費情色影片觀賞
情色論壇 免費AV女優-線上視訊 日本美女寫真集
※免費影音視訊聊天※ SEX情色 成人免費視訊聊天區 美女視訊-聊天室
ez網愛聊天室 辣妹妹視訊 辣妹視訊交友網 成人情色視訊聊天室
※視訊辣妹本人的精采照片※ 愛情聊天室 一夜情視訊聊天室 情人視訊聊天室
視訊聯誼聊天室 色情貼圖網 ※0509免費 視訊聊天秀※ 免費A片線上下載
※台灣辣妹貼圖區※ 交友聊天-線上免費
色情A片 免費下載 色情A片-線上免費
The latest hair style |
The most popular wedding |
The world's Wedding |
Popular wedding |
Personalized Wedding |
Personalized Wedding |
Miss World |
Fashion Daren |
Shoutui weight loss |
Shoutui weight loss |
Crosstraining, freeclimber legs by law |
Fashion Daren |
Hollywood film |
Hollywood film |
Hollywood star |
Hollywood star |
Hollywood star |
Hollywood star |
Hollywood star |
Hollywood star photos |
Slimming diet |
Slimming diet |
Popular hairstyle |
Popular hairstyle |
Slimming diet |
Fun games |
World luxury cars |
Hair design |
World luxury cars |
Fashion designer |
World model |
World model |
World model |
Popular wedding |
Popular wedding | . | . | . | . | . | . | . |. | . |
視訊做愛視訊美女無碼A片情色影劇kyo成人動漫tt1069同志交友網ut同志交友網微風成人論壇6k聊天室日本 avdvd 介紹免費觀賞UT視訊美女交友..........................
成人美乳系列成人美乳系列成人凌虐系列成人凌虐系列成人變態系列成人變態系列成人美腿系列成人美腿系列成人多P系列成人多P系列25xxx成人影城25xxx成人影城sod 藝能人sod 藝能人sod 藝能人女子校生女子校生女子校生成人近親相X癡女系‧若妻‧美臀‧激幹‧處女‧癡漢成人近親相X癡女系‧若妻‧美臀‧激幹‧處女‧癡漢成人近親相X癡女系‧若妻‧美臀‧激幹‧處女‧癡漢成人近親相X癡女系‧若妻‧美臀‧激幹‧處女‧癡漢成人近親相X癡女系‧若妻‧美臀‧激幹‧處女‧癡漢成人聊天室
Post a Comment
<< Home