My problem with diamonds

1st: De beers. They sat on a stockpile of diamonds creating the illusion of rarity. As of 2000 they had a stockpile of $5 Billion worth of rough diamonds. From what I've read, they encouraged sellers to keep this fact quiet earlier on. However, I've heard that at some point in 2000 they released half of their stock to market, which is better, but still not good.

They also control who is able to sell the diamonds, what quality of diamonds, and how many they get. Considering they sell 70% of the rough diamonds in the world... that's pretty significant.

As technology gets better and better, synthetic diamonds are becoming a reality. As of some time last year, Wired Magazine was reporting that a company called Gemesis could creat flawless, identical yellow diamonds every three days at $100 per stone (natural stones of this type are worth $10-15k). Analogy time... Finding three identical yellow diamonds in nature is like flipping a coin 10,000 times and it never landing on tails.

What does De Beers do? They introduce technology (most likely for free) to sellers to make sure diamonds they buy are "natural". Diamonds can also now be "branded" to ensure that they are real, and that they're associated with a certain company. I understand people being competitive, but treating synthetic diamonds like they're the plague, and trying to convince consumers as much is ridiculous.

2nd: I'm not sure how much of this goes on anymore... but diamond wars. People getting arms chopped off... people getting killed for control of diamonds that will fuel rebel groups. Here's a link to the UN website talking about the problem.

3rd: I'm not sure exactly what it is about the whole theory that bothers me... Maybe it's that I hear so many women say that diamonds are a must when getting engaged. Maybe it's that I just don't understand paying 1200 dollars for a shiny rock.

Women are constantly fighting for equality in our society. They have jobs that pay as well as men's, though most would argue that they don't have these jobs in as great a number as men. Why should men be expected to buy an overpriced gem to show that they're committed to a woman? If it's just a symbol of love, and eternity, and other such things, why does it have to be something that doesn't really represent either of those? More importantly, why aren't women expected to do the same?

A girl in my Speech class gave her informative speech on diamonds today, just like I did the day before. She talked about what diamonds were, their history, origins, and the origin of the tradition. It apparently comes from count chocula (arch duke maximilian of austria) who had to bribe his wife with a diamond to marry him... she seemed fine with this tradition. I personally think it was hollywood and de beers together, but this theory seems to fit my view better. Lastly, she said "it can be said that dogs are man's best friend. Well, diamonds are a girl's best friend".

I hope I get a dog when I get engaged.

Anyways, this isn't to say I don't like engagement rings, just that I don't like diamonds, and have some cultural issues with women and old traditions. I'll probably get an engagement ring for the woman I propose to, but I'll go for a stone that has a little more character and color than a diamond.