We're all pawns
Sometimes, marketing works really well. As mentioned in the last post (and in cadiz12's comment), there are a few products that have become known ONLY by their brand names. Frisbee, Kleenex, Band-Aid, Scotch Tape, Walkman, Chapstick, even Styrofoam and Velcro are all brand names that have become so common, they are now used to describe the product (what else would you call styrofoam or velcro, for god's sake?).
In short, marketers own you.
The worst case of this is something that few people know about. It's not about a brand name, it's about an idea. A made up tradition. I fell for it. Everyone falls for it. It's about the idea of diamond engagement rings.
1939. A mere 66 years ago. New diamond mines were being discovered in South Africa. Every Tom, Dick, and Harry was selling diamonds. Prices were falling. This made DeBeers Consoldiated Mines, Inc, the owner of many of those mines and the #1 diamond source in the world, angry. Harry Oppenheimer (not related to the Harry above, who is selling diamonds with his friends Tom and Dick), son of the DeBeers founder, traveled to New York City to meet with an ad agency.
The product of their meeting? Diamonds are Forever. This brilliant campaign made people want to keep their diamonds. So instead of Tom, Dick, and Harry selling diamonds, they were hoarding them. They would collect diamonds and stash them under their beds, pass them on to their kids. Just like that, the value of the diamonds in DeBeers' mines skyrocketed.
Diamonds = Forever, Marriage = Forever. Simple math says that Diamonds = Marriage. So as part of their campaign, they came up with this "tell her you'll love her forever" idea. Diamond engagement rings, though they had occasionally been used prior to this, were suddenly an EXPECTED component of a man's proposal to a woman. A "tradition" is born.
Unlike most of the posts on this blog, this is 100% true. Check with your grandparents, grandma probably wasn't given a diamond engagement ring when gramps proposed.
If it seems like this takes some of the romance out of it, well, good. I think people should know. Guys shouldn't have to spend one month's salary because DeBeers or some ad agency says so. Girls, don't be a pawn in their game. Take a stand.
Important Note: If any guy out there uses this argument successfully, you're my hero. Hook a brother up with some of the cash I just saved you.
Comments
Cate said:
I'm sure it's all true. But that doesn't mean I don't want a big fat ring - 1 carat princess-cut blue diamond set low in a wide platinum band - if I ever do get married.
'ka said:
that shows how powerful marketing, advertising and media these days... it's good.. but in a way... it's sad, too...
Sarah said:
I'll be a pawn, I don't mind. So long as it's at least 1 carat, that is.
Jon said:
My sister's fiancˇ is your hero then. He's gotten out of the diamond ring (and I thought tradition called for 2 months salary) with this argument, and also made my sister feel horribly guilty by explaining where diamonds come from these days... Post about that and see how many women still feel comfortable requesting that diamond ring. By the way, my sister's fiancˇ has also gotten out of ever having to buy roses for her by explaining that he doesn't think it's right that they "murder" so many flowers... I think he's some sort of genius because my sister is about to get her Doctorate in Psychology at age 29, so she's a little bit sharper than a marble, if you know what I mean.
omar said:
You are correct, jon. 2 months salary. Thanks for pointing that out to me, the married guy. Now my wife will wonder if I spent 1 or 2 month's salary. Just so you know, hon, I spent like three months salary on yours. Worth every penny.(and yes, that guy is my hero)
ScroobiousScrivener said:
I am the cheapest wife ever. I don't like diamonds. I don't even like gold. I have a simple silver wedding band, with Celtic knotwork romantically designed by Beloved himself, and no engagement ring. (Then again, the proposal consisted of a simple text message, so we're not exactly models of traditional romance.) (Hey, there were extenuating circumstances! It's not like we're *completely* unromantic! We're just romantic in our own, um, *special* way.)Flowers, however, are a must. But then Beloved gets them too.And how about the lovely tale of Santa's "traditional" Coca-Cola suit? Now that's marketing.
cadiz12 said:
i'm a sucker for those damn debeers commercials. the new year's eve one where the times square crowd continues to disappear as the ball drops, leaving the couple alone; it paralyzes me EVERY time.but i've learned the hard way. on date no. 1 i told the guy, 'what's the point of flowers? they just wilt and die. and then you just have to throw them out.'man, did i rue that comment -- constantly, until date no. 5,683, when he finally brought me flowers. to this day, irises are still my favorites, even if he isn't anymore.so as much as i disapprove of the diamond industry, i'm going to keep my mouth shut and just enjoy the commercials until the time is right.
1GloriousConundrum said:
I have been opposed to engagement rings since I learned the history. (I also don't like one-sided signs of ownership, but that's the feminist in me.) One of the funniest days of my life was when I announced to my mom that I didn't want a wedding dress or an engagement ring because they were marketing ploys. You'd have thought I had told her I was pregnant by Biker Bernie and we were off to farm cocaine in rural Belize. That's how ingrained the so-called 'tradition' has become.'course...I recognize the irony of being a marketing panelist when I hate marketing ploys. It's just another reason I love being me.
Histrionic said:
My friend Schnarway and his wife worked out an arrangement, not so much because of this, but because of how diamonds are mined, where the money from them ultimately goes, and what it supports. That's an even sadder story, when it comes down to it.