Sales of engagement rings, at least in America, have declined significantly compared to the same time last year. De Beers, the world’s largest diamond seller, says sales of rough diamonds, which account for 85 percent of the US engagement ring market, remain weak, and Pandora is seeing “increased consumer hesitancy” in the United States for its products.
Some interpret this drop in sales of engagement rings as a consequence of the pandemic, while others think that it is an inevitable drop after the very successful previous two years.
A columnist TimeBelinda Lascombe, author of the book Marriageology: the Art and Science of Staying Together however, he thinks that giving away engagement rings is a shabby custom and that people have finally come to their senses.
The tradition that the wedding decision is followed by a big shiny crystal, which the guy presents to the girl, with all the overtones of ownership and status and the transfer of family wealth, is ancient, and also, according to Lascombova, a somewhat “sleazy” custom.
Marriage has changed in recent decades. About three-quarters of people who will marry in the next few years will first live together. They will probably be in their late twenties or early thirties. It is likely that both will have a job or will try to get one, and both will contribute financially to the household. Ideally, it will be an equal partnership, so why should only one person buy the ring? And why is it only worn by one person?
Old opinions say that if a person can save a few monthly salaries, then he is certainly serious and capable of marriage. But today it just means that that person got a credit card, and after the engagement, that debt is practically, if not legally, transferred to both of them. Why burden a married union with debts from the very beginning, when it has been proven that quarrels over money are the most common and most difficult to solve issue of all that couples argue about, asks the columnist Time.
An engagement ring can, in fact, be seen as a disincentive for marriage. The purchase puts additional pressure on the proposer – always a man in heterosexual relationships – regarding commitment. There is financial pressure. There is a pressure of taste. Every week on Come back a woman writes about how she hates her engagement ring and doesn’t know how to tell her future life partner.
According to tradition, the point of an engagement ring is twofold. One is to indicate that this woman was taken; the original engagement ring in ancient Rome came complete with small keys. The second is that if the guy changes his mind and doesn’t want to marry his fiancee, she can sell the ring and thus compensate for the damage to her reputation.
Both ideas are absurd and send a terrifying message about women’s autonomy and men’s reliability. In addition, as it turned out, it turned out that keeping the ring after a broken engagement is often unenforceable by law, and it is not a big loss because as soon as the engagement ring leaves the jewelry store, its price drops by at least 25 percent, and if it has an increasingly popular diamond created in a laboratory, and more.
According to the survey, the average engagement ring in the US costs $6,000, three times more than the average wedding band, even though engagement is supposed to be temporary and marriage is supposed to be forever. Merchants came up with the idea, about 100 years ago, to connect diamonds with the promise of lasting love – “Diamonds are eternal”.
In the 1990s, the diamond industry tried, less successfully, to sell the idea of giving a diamond as a gift for a 25th wedding anniversary, which did not catch on, although it would actually make more sense. Getting engaged is easy, but staying married requires much more.
Of course, the engagement should be celebrated. It’s a beautiful moment when two people decide to spend their lives trying to love each other. But there are all kinds of crazy romantic things a guy can offer by getting down on one knee. And most of them are more exciting than a diamond ring, especially considering how hard it is to be 100 percent sure that your token of love hasn’t ruined someone else’s life.
Belinda Luscombe suggests that it might be a good idea to bring back the custom from the Renaissance when the boy and girl both started wearing one ring after announcing their engagement, and on the day of the big event, both rings were combined into one big one for the bride. In the modern version of this custom, each of the partners could give half of their ring and thus make two mixed wedding rings. This would surely be a hit on Instagram, Laskombova believes.
Many women still dream of that moment when some guy will get down on one knee and open a box with a sparkling stone inside as proof of his eternal adoration. If a diamond ring is what they want, let them. If nothing else, in case things go wrong, they’ll be able to scratch their spouse’s car with it. But you should still be aware that this dream was invented mainly to buy expensive things. And there are much better, more original and less limiting dreams that we should be pursuing.
Belinda Lascombe received engagement earrings from her future husband, which she lost. She admits that she loved them, but she didn’t need them to feel loved. But she saved her husband, because he was a true jewel for her.
Source: www.sitoireseto.com
