Diamonds are evil
Yes I said it, diamonds are evil! Do not get your spouse-to-be a wedding ring.
This short rant has been brought on by three major things:
1. Diamonds are a dirty, dirty business. If you don't know this, read books. We, especially we Christians, should think long and hard before supporting such an industry.
2. I detest the expensive and meaningless pomp that goes into most weddings. I detest it more in communities where it's 10x bigger. We've replaced marriage with weddings. barf.
3. This article on Slate today. The author is clearly arguing from a feminist standpoint, and as such glosses over many key points (including my #1). She also assumes the semi-Marxist position that rings are just one part of "retrograde fantasies about gender roles." I obviously take issue with that rationale. Also, I find it funny that she refers with disgust to a social movement wherein rings replaced old contractual severance laws with regard to engaged persons, since people used to "need" virginity for marriage, but often slept together while engaged. Thus, bemoans the author:
Although I sympathize with her point, and in my own worldview a woman's extra-marital virginity is priceless (a notion that the author would doubtless disagree with me on), I can say with confidence that most women I know lost their virginity for far less than $3,200, be that direct prostitution, or just the total price for general girlfriend upkeep during their virginity-losing relationship. After all, the average age of first sexual experience in the US is 16.3... how much money do you think the boy has at 16.3?
Nevertheless, the author gives an excellent overview of how recent the tradition really is, how it developed socially, and why we might want to take a second look at it. As a bonus she gives a more cost-efficient and humane-sensitive way for people who really want to say "forever" to express themselves in today's world: tatoos!
This short rant has been brought on by three major things:
1. Diamonds are a dirty, dirty business. If you don't know this, read books. We, especially we Christians, should think long and hard before supporting such an industry.
2. I detest the expensive and meaningless pomp that goes into most weddings. I detest it more in communities where it's 10x bigger. We've replaced marriage with weddings. barf.
3. This article on Slate today. The author is clearly arguing from a feminist standpoint, and as such glosses over many key points (including my #1). She also assumes the semi-Marxist position that rings are just one part of "retrograde fantasies about gender roles." I obviously take issue with that rationale. Also, I find it funny that she refers with disgust to a social movement wherein rings replaced old contractual severance laws with regard to engaged persons, since people used to "need" virginity for marriage, but often slept together while engaged. Thus, bemoans the author:
Implicitly, it would seem, a woman's virginity was worth the price of a ring,
and varied according to the status of her groom-to-be.
Although I sympathize with her point, and in my own worldview a woman's extra-marital virginity is priceless (a notion that the author would doubtless disagree with me on), I can say with confidence that most women I know lost their virginity for far less than $3,200, be that direct prostitution, or just the total price for general girlfriend upkeep during their virginity-losing relationship. After all, the average age of first sexual experience in the US is 16.3... how much money do you think the boy has at 16.3?
Nevertheless, the author gives an excellent overview of how recent the tradition really is, how it developed socially, and why we might want to take a second look at it. As a bonus she gives a more cost-efficient and humane-sensitive way for people who really want to say "forever" to express themselves in today's world: tatoos!
posted by Roland at 7:11 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home