Holly and I have thoughts on diamonds. Apparently those views are very strong. And apparently we are unreserved at sharing them with you and others.
Here’s what we shared:
- An anecdote about, again, my vacation that maybe people are tired of hearing about
- Our views on diamond engagement rings
- Stuff You Should Know’s recent episode on diamonds
- Culture imperative and De Beers’ manufacturing thereof
- The bits De Beers’ ads have harped on in various cultures, like permanence (the U.S.) or tradition (Japan)
- The first known diamond engagement ring: 1477, Archduke Maximilian of Austria to Mary of Burgundy, allegedly
- The origin of De Beers and its namesake farm in South Africa, and Cecil Rhodes who bought up all the diamond claims there (and was also burned in effigy)
- Conflict diamonds and the Kimberley Process
- Commercial ire
- That one-, two- or three-month salary guideline for engagement rings and where it comes from
- De Beers ads during the counterculture revolution
- Dan Savage, Savage Love and “monogamish”
- You know that stereotype that women want the big rock? Data does not support. Men, not women, are more willing to sacrifice other stuff for a bigger ring.
- Buying a wedding ring as a rite of passage/entry into adulthood for men
- My primary source of research “The Heartless Stone: A Journey through the Worlds of Diamonds, Deceit and Desire“
- Breakup etiquette and who keeps the ring
- Cultured pearls are OK. But don’t tell people you bought a cultured diamond!
- Things that have loosened De Beers’ monopoply: avoidance of conflict diamonds, champagne diamonds and chocolate diamonds
- The cultures of various diamond mining communities
- De Beers’ focus on being a luxury brand rather than controlling all diamonds everywhere
- Listener mail: From Elizabeth. She writes about our Defending Disney Princesses? episode and our “Guilty Pleasures” episode
- How Diamonds Work and other articles on our site
Episode link: Diamonds are whose best friends?