This is one of those American things that just doesn't make sense at all from an European perspective.

I wanted to check because I wasn't sure, but you are very right: http://www.diamondshades.com/files/3614/0966/2121/Consumptio...

I did not expect that much difference!

Where I'm from, engagement rings are a matching pair of plain gold bands. You get them together as a couple after someone has proposed. Also, marriage is something most people do in their 30's, not their 20's.

(The whole concept of the guy spending a fortune on a piece of jewelry before confirming that the girl actually wants to marry him is sexist bullshit, why does he have to make the effort and take the risk to prove his "commitment", but not her?)

Did your link still work when you posted it? Now it's returning a "This Account has been suspended" message.

It was working, HN probably killed the site.

or any other developed nation's for that matter

Personally I'm very glad that we are moving away from that culture. Most of my friends (late 20s, early 30s) opted to skip the "big rock in a setting" for just a shiny enough ring that looks good.

Lots of things are status symbols.

Not having a fancy engagement ring is a status symbol for certain circles too, or having an engagement ring that is fair trade, not diamond, self made, or some other set of adjectives. A lot of people are really preoccupied with signaling objects, what those things are changes but the drive doesn't really.

That is quite high on my "I shall never marry anyone who ..." list

Why anyone sane would marry such people is beyond me.

Sometimes it's not a rational belief, but rather an insecurity brought about by a culture that always took this belief for granted.

It's complicated precisely because it's signalling, so in context insecurity over the size of the diamond might not be an actual red flag. You might decide to take a principled stand on the matter, and I agree that insistence on a large diamond is a deal breaker, but not everyone has the same upbringing, cultural belief system, or social environment.

I've met plenty of people who've married a woman (or man) that they don't truely love. It's a lot more common than you might think.

There's a whole variety of reasons why that might happen. Societal expectations, economic reasons, insecurity, etc.

What about people showing off their car, perfect pictures of their vacations on social media, some set of achievements or trophies, their perfect "battlestation" computer setup, etc. etc. etc.

People are generally obsessed with status symbols, jewelry isn't really any worse than anything else.

> "What about people showing off their car, perfect pictures of their vacations on social media, some set of achievements or trophies, their perfect "battlestation" computer setup, etc. etc. etc."

You know plenty of people don't do any of this stuff, right? I get the feeling you meant that to be a broad list that would have virtually everybody covered in one respect or another, but if that was your intention you failed.

Everyone demonstrates their status-seeking in different ways. A really common one is to emphatically state how little such things that commonly motivate others also interest you. I guess its ok if that is your thing.

Status seeking, sure. Materialistic approaches to that? No, that is far from universal. Me snearing down my nose at people with materialist obsessions is certainly a form of status seeking, but not of the materialist variety.

I did say and mean generally, not virtually everyone.

I do think people who are not particularly interested in status signaling are somewhat rare.

I think that opinion probably reflects your immediate environment more than anything else.

Noticeable economic status differences (read: status symbols) are one of the most motivating forces in social behavior.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-psychology-of...

>...apart from economic payoffs, social status seems to be the most important incentive and motivating force of social behavior.” The more noticeable status disparities are, the more concerned with status people become, and the differences between the haves and have-nots have been extremely pronounced during the economic recession of recent years.

You’re not looking close enough. Most people signal status, even if subtle.

Talk about a book you read? Talk about how a certain restaurant is terrible? Talk about where you went on vacation? Talk about your job? Talk about music you like?

All those things signal status.

Yes, but this discussion is specifically about materialist signaling.

These aren't always equal, someone showing off their car because it's their hobby and they've spent months on it or someone spending a heap of time building and customizing their perfect battle station is very different to buying a rock. Within those communities someone buying their way in is often a negative signal.

My wife would have broken off our relationship if I'd even whispered the suggestion of buying her a diamond, I think.

I want to be clear I'm not talking about your wife, because I don't know her obviously. But the women who "don't care" or would be against buying a diamond tend to fall into two categories. The first is relatively privileged women whose avoidance of diamonds is a status symbol in and of itself, often accompanied with some woke virtue signaling. And the second group is low status and she secretly wants a big rock but knows she won't get it, so she attempts to send the same signals as the privileged woman.

Everyone cares about status symbols. And engagement rings is one of the most prolific. It goes right next to fancy vacations, fancy cars, and fancy coffee.

I disagree with this. I don't think my wife falls into either of these categories and we consciously chose moissanite instead of diamond.

Our choice was mostly founded in finance, but because we thought it was a waste of money not because we couldn't afford it. She also had no interest in walking around with a $5k+ insurance liability on her finger, but she enjoyed the aesthetic of a clear centre stone. The small stones in both her engagement and wedding bands are diamonds because they are cheaper due to being more readily available.

We don't use it as a status symbol or for virtue signalling. Neither of us are active on social media, and I don't even think there is a photo of it online. She normally doesn't even wear the engagement ring, just the wedding band (which is very thin and basic). Our friends are aware it isn't a diamond, but because they asked not because we forced it on them. People who don't ask can think it's whatever they want, neither of us derive our self worth from whether her ring is perceived to be a particular type of stone.

Do you disagree with this Nobel Laureate Economist?

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-psychology-of....

>...apart from economic payoffs, social status seems to be the most important incentive and motivating force of social behavior.” The more noticeable status disparities are, the more concerned with status people become, and the differences between the haves and have-nots have been extremely pronounced during the economic recession of recent years.

It's important to recognize we're talking about generalities here. But status symbols are one of the most important motivating factors in social behavior. Sure, maybe for your wife that's not a status symbol she particularly cares about, but do you really believe that's the majority case?

This might be hard to accept if you're a status-game player, but some people don't play, or if they do play, they know it is silly and try to minimize it. I could give examples, but you'd mistake them for some sort of signalling.

I'm curious about your thoughts on the remarks by this Nobel Laureate Economist on status and behaviors:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-psychology-of...

>...apart from economic payoffs, social status seems to be the most important incentive and motivating force of social behavior.” The more noticeable status disparities are, the more concerned with status people become, and the differences between the haves and have-nots have been extremely pronounced during the economic recession of recent years.

I'm not claiming there are no status games. I'm claiming that it is possible to see them for the empty thing they are and opt out, and that some do to an extent, without that opting-out really being just another status signalling game.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

I provided a citation that clearly explains status symbols are the second biggest motivator for social activity. Can you provide a citation around what percentage of the population consistently opts out of status symbol behaviors?

I claimed some people don't play status games and their opting out is not some other type of signalling.

If we can agree that one hermit, living alone in the woods, exists somewhere in the world, then we can agree that my claim is true: Some percentage (percentages do not imply whole numbers) of people opt out of status games.

You are being very condescending.