There's something classic and elegant about a diamond that makes it the picture perfect engagement ring. Or at least that's the image diamond companies have been feeding us all our lives, so maybe it's only because of good marketing that everyone feels like a diamond is the required jewel for the job. After all, a diamond is forever, right?
The thing that bothers me about diamonds is their association with conflicts in the past. For example, as we all should know now after the movie Blood Diamond, the sale of diamonds funded the brutal military regime in Sierra Leone, where people were forced like slaves to dig for them.
What the movie really didn't emphasize is the people wearing these diamonds had no idea about what they were supporting by buying them. And many were sold by reputable companies like De Beers. The risk is that as long as valuable jewels are to be found in areas of conflict, there will always be a risk that they will be used to fund such atrocities.
Anyway, off my soapbox, I do think they are beautiful and would love a diamond engagement ring. But I would also feel guilty. And cubic zirconia is almost indistinguishable and a lot cheaper. In fact there are a lot of jewels that are a lot cheaper - a couple could save more for a honeymoon or down-payment on a house.
But there's some element of cheapness that goes with it, right? Like if you don't get a diamond, he doesn't really love you. Is this stigma just a result of years of successful marketing? Does advertising have that deep an effect? I think I would wear a cubic, but then defensively emphasize the reason why it's not a real diamond.
Ladies, would you feel gypped if you didn't get a diamond? Guys, would you feel comfortable buying anything else?