Natural Vs. Synthetic Gemstones.

[Masark]

I don’t really see why people will spend thousands more fora “natural” gem when their “grown” counterparts are indistinguishable from thereal thing.

Because De Beers and friends have waged a highly successful, decades-long, campaign to portray synthetic gemstones, diamonds in particular, as inferior to natural ones.

- - - Updated - - -

De Beers popularised diamond engagement rings, as opposed to other types - which was hardly surprising considering what De Beers are famous for - they didn't invent them, nor did they invent the idea that diamond rings were the ultimate symbol of engagement.

They did invent the "3 months pay" standard.

[Sunseeker]

Pretty rocks are pretty rocks. The gem market is generally artificially inflated. Put these two things together and anyone who wastes huge amounts of cash on things the average person couldn't tell real from fake are generally idiots. But then I guess the old adage applies: "A fool and his money are soon parted."

[Tulune]

As a loose gemstone collector, I prefer natural, flawed gemstones myself. They have more character, imho. Plus not all gemstones can be lab grown.
Here is some lower grade cut tourmaline from my personal collection. Imperfect but beautiful (and cheap!).

[7seti]

The point is, people willingly pay more for something that is rare and costly because it's a way of displaying their wealth. The cost has far more to do with that than the actual quality of the stone.

You see the same thing throughout history, and not just in jewelry.

[Yunru]

The point is, people willingly pay more for something that is rare and costly because it's a way of displaying their wealth. The cost has far more to do with that than the actual quality of the stone.

You see the same thing throughout history, and not just in jewelry.

You cant remake everything tho:
http://listverse.com/2007/12/02/top-10-rarest-gems/

$3 + Million/Carat is a fun price

[Cosmic Janitor]

I personally like the novelty of artificial gems in that they were made by science and engineering, instead of dug up by a 9 year old brazillian kid. I'd also place the novelty of tungsten above gold as well, though :P.

[Yunru]

I personally like the novelty of artificial gems in that they were made by science and engineering, instead of dug up by a 9 year old brazillian kid. I'd also place the novelty of tungsten above gold as well, though :P.

Even for a gold rod with fake plating that has wolfram inside?

[Cosmic Janitor]

Even for a gold rod with fake plating that has wolfram inside?

Well not sure what I would do with a rod of either of those. Tungsten is just one of the most dense materials with one of the highest melting points in the periodic table iirc. Kinda like the symbolic of that. Gold has a few nice properties as well, it doesn't oxidate and can be formed to be extremly thin, to be almost a single atomic layer (relativly speaking). Not sure what message gold sends in that regard though. If I had a rod of either, well I'd sell them, at least the gold one should fetch a nice price .

Edit: Ah misread, about the rod thing. Well frankly I like the stuff you make with tungestencarbid (do you call it that in english or do you use the proper name for a change and call it wolfram(ium)cardbid?).

[Tulune]

Thanks the gods that me and my girlfriend both agree that money spent on rings/big wedding would be money better spent elsewhere.

Also the price for diamonds is artificially high, why would I pay extra just for something that is purely symbolic? I've toyed with the idea of buying her a ruby ring though, looks way cooler than diamonds.

Don't even go that expensive, try garnet. It comes in almost every color! Including various shades of orange, a quite rare color for a gemstone.

[ladylin]

Don't even go that expensive, try garnet. It comes in almost every color! Including various shades of orange, a quite rare color for a gemstone.

The Chinese use Ruby rings as engagement rings. The red is for love and passion.

OT: I have my diamond ring and a bunch of other pieces. I really don't care about this whole "but it's commercial!" Stuff. I like what I like. It's personal taste

[Puupi]

As a loose gemstone collector, I prefer natural, flawed gemstones myself. They have more character, imho. Plus not all gemstones can be lab grown.
Here is some lower grade cut tourmaline from my personal collection. Imperfect but beautiful (and cheap!).

How much is that pile worth?

Awesome looking stones.

[Stir]

I watched the video.

When a smiley fat bloke in an ill fitting suit tells you that the ring you're wearing is due to an advertising campaign, and not an ancient tradition with strong romantic associations, the chances are that he is just a cheapskate.

So when your boyfriend tries to palm you off with an apple by claiming that a ring is just a symbol of cynical marketing by De Beers, tell him to go fuck himself and get his arse to the jewellers.

Of how about you offer HIM an engagement ring, if you're so stuck in such traditions?
The idea of an engagement ring is ancient, sure. The idea of an engagement ring having a high cost is also pretty old (though not exactly ancient), and is a symbol of marriage being a business deal. It has no romantic significance; it shows the father of the prospective bride that the father of the prospective groom is rich, and so he would benefit by pretty much selling his daughter into marriage with the young man who's pretty much being sold off into marriage by his father.

If you want to be romantic about it, make your own rings (pretty easy, too), with things like horn, stainless steel and other pretty materials. Or get wrist-band tattoos. Or something. Something that is really a symbol of love. Don't just demand the man to be an archaic sacrificial moneybag, or the woman to be bought goods.

"A monkey with a golden ring is still a pretty ugly thing."

[ladylin]

Of how about you offer HIM an engagement ring, if you're so stuck in such traditions?
The idea of an engagement ring is ancient, sure. The idea of an engagement ring having a high cost is also pretty old (though not exactly ancient), and is a symbol of marriage being a business deal. It has no romantic significance; it shows the father of the prospective bride that the father of the prospective groom is rich, and so he would benefit by pretty much selling his daughter into marriage with the young man who's pretty much being sold off into marriage by his father.

If you want to be romantic about it, make your own rings (pretty easy, too), with things like horn, stainless steel and other pretty materials. Or get wrist-band tattoos. Or something. Something that is really a symbol of love. Don't just demand the man to be an archaic sacrificial moneybag, or the woman to be bought goods.

"A monkey with a golden ring is still a pretty ugly thing."

A tattoo? No. That's just a no.

A ring doesn't have to be expensive. The ring IS the symbol of love. At least for some.

A tattoo is permanent, a ring can be removed if the marriage/relationship ends. A tattoo cannot be so easily removed.

[Puupi]

I've actually been thinking of getting a tattoo ring on my finger once I get married. I can always chop the finger off if it doesn't work out.

Now how's that for commitment?

I wonder what your finger thinks about this. But yeah, it's just a finger.... tattoo your dick and I recognize your commitment.

[Stir]

A tattoo? No. That's just a no.

A ring doesn't have to be expensive. The ring IS the symbol of love. At least for some.

A tattoo is permanent, a ring can be removed if the marriage/relationship ends. A tattoo cannot be so easily removed.

The whole point of the tattoo is that it doesn't come off.

If you're going for a symbol of commitment, and calculate the end as a very real, plausible possibility that you need to recognize and make plans for, then I'm wondering: 'What commitment..?'

[Vargur]

((Note, this is coming from a male who’s by no means ageologist, or a gemologist.))

I don’t really see why people will spend thousands more fora “natural” gem when their “grown” counterparts are indistinguishable from thereal thing. It’s like saying; “Hey, this car costs fifteen thousand dollarsmore, but it has cup holders!”

Frankly, if I’m looking for gems for any reason; and maybe I’mjust a bit new-fashion, but it seems a bit ridicules to dwell on where theycame from, and instead focus on what they look like.

Some have the exact same elements but are artificially manufactured, some don't and just look like the "originals". Unlike sport/luxury cars, watches, phones, rocks are indeed one thing I just don't get.

[ladylin]

The whole point of the tattoo is that it doesn't come off.

If you're going for a symbol of commitment, and calculate the end as a very real, plausible possibility that you need to recognize and make plans for, then I'm wondering: 'What commitment..?'

Because you can't see the future. I love my husband dearly and he loves me, but we cannot see 10+ years into the future. We would love to spend the rest of our lives together, but something could happen. We both are completely committed to each other, a ring does what it's supposed to. Symbolize the commitment we made.

(You are talking to someone who divorced an abusive jerk. The whole idea of "together forever" went out the window when he punched me. Not saying that every relationship would be like that, but it is possible people could end up divorced for any reason. I feel the same about names of lovers as tattoos as well.)

[Stir]

Because you can't see the future. I love my husband dearly and he loves me, but we cannot see 10+ years into the future. We would love to spend the rest of our lives together, but something could happen. We both are completely committed to each other, a ring does what it's supposed to. Symbolize the commitment we made.

(You are talking to someone who divorced an abusive jerk. The whole idea of "together forever" went out the window when he punched me. Not saying that every relationship would be like that, but it is possible people could end up divorced for any reason. I feel the same about names of lovers as tattoos as well.)

I do understand your argument. I really do. But my argument is that if you PLAN for when it goes bad, then you're not really committed. If your argument against tattoos is BECAUSE it might go wrong, then you're not really committed to it going right. Not fully. And if there is no 'fully,' then there is no 'commitment.'

I'm not judging you leaving an abusive partner. In fact, I believe that most people have, at some point, had one. Everyone has that bad ex. And some people have been married to their bad ex, or are still married to a person who should be their bad ex. And that's saddening, sure. But in such cases, tattoos can actually be removed, or altered to be a constant reminder of a 'never again' situation; a warning, if you will. Ideally, a person shouldn't marry their bad ex, or should get out of that situation, in any case. That doesn't mean we should be planning for it, assuming the relationship will fail just to be safe from an extra trip to the tattoo parlour.

Also note that my argument isn't that you should get tattoos. Just that 'not easily removed' shouldn't be an argument against it if you really are going for commitment. And I won't say I'm ever going to tattoo someone's name on my body (I at least imagine myself to have some style, and an imagination of having style is better than not having anything that even comes close to it); in that, I agree with you. Also: Don't go and tattoo a symbol of your love if you're not really sure, like the whole boy/grilfriend phase.
Marriage, however, is permanent. It's not a temporary deal. It's a promise you make, and every real promise is a promise you keep (unless you get to the point where you cannot keep it), so the decision to get married is the decision to stay married (even if you can get out if you need to).

[Puupi]

Natural vs Synthetic Gemstones thread derails into engagement tattoos and abusive partners. Thank you MMO-C.

[ladylin]

-snip-.

We got married because we plan on spending the rest of our lives together. However, I am an Army wife, so planning for the future is something I must do. When we married we committed fully to our marriage. But ignoring countless possibilities is poor planning. Many women stay with abusive jerks because of this"promise" They stay committed because they made a promise. "For better or worse" right? Couples who"s marriage ( the love, the fire, the passion) ended decades ago stay together because of the "promise." Should people divorce "just because" no, but staying in a loveless marriage is a torment I wish on no one.

I am being realistic. That however doesn't mean I am not fully committed. We spend everyday together as if it were our last, for we are not promise tomorrow. We love each other and our daughter. We plan on spending the rest of our lives together.

- - - Updated - - -

Natural vs Synthetic Gemstones thread derails into engagement tattoos and abusive partners. Thank you MMO-C.

Sorry I was making an argument of why a tattoo could be a very bad idea. My apologies. This will be my last one.