Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by monocasa 2816 days ago
Nah, it's pretty much true, as someone from the bible belt even.

Hell, it was always true. The point of a diamond on the engagement ring was because it was assumed that you had kicked the tires on that part of the relationship, and the engagement fell through, then that woman had something she could sell as a nest egg for her new life as a forever alone spinster, being the 'broken woman' that she was.
1 comments
taeric 2816 days ago
I think this is assuming diamonds are a long held tradition. Pretty sure that is a rather heavy fabrication.
link
monocasa 2816 days ago
Well, all traditions are heavy fabrications.

As far as diamond engagement rings are concerned, it's about a century old tradition at this point, so four or five generations. That's a pretty long time for the purposes of this discussion.

And this comes form someone who didn't get their fiancée a diamond ring for various reasons.

link
taeric 2816 days ago
Agreed to an extent. I posit they probably aren't 4/5 generations of actual traditional usage yet. Most folks great grandparents probably did not have diamond rings.

I should also have said this was more a side comment. I don't think it detracted from the overall point made earlier.

link