Diamond-Surplus Weblog

October 7, 2008

Picture time part 3!

Filed under: Bracelets,fashion — diamondsurplus @ 8:08 pm
Tags: , , , ,

…..and today we shall move on to bracelets ladies and gentlemen 🙂

came across some nice ones!

 

Bracelet #1

Bracelet #1

 

 

bracelet #2

bracelet #2

Bracelet #3

Bracelet #3

Bracelet #4

Bracelet #4

Bracelet #5

Bracelet #5

My personal favorites are #3, 4 & 5.
What’s yours? 🙂
Advertisements

September 30, 2008

What??? A Man Ring????

Filed under: fashion — diamondsurplus @ 9:12 pm
Tags: , , , , ,

A MAN RING????  Oh gosh, time has really changed hasn’t it? I was reading this article below and I couldn’t help laughing with amusement….a commitment ring or also knows as “with-this-ring-will-you-hurry-up-and-make-a-proper-commitment-to-me-and-if-you-won’t-anytime-soon-at-least-you’ll-appear-to-be-off-the-market-to-any-other-women-on-the-prowl”.

Read on! 

 

 Man rings – the latest accessory for a possessive woman???

 
 

 

 

There was a trend sweeping Manhattan a few years ago dubbed the Right-Hand Ring phenomenon in which high-earning independent women with money to spend raced to the Diamond District to splurge on digit jewellery for themselves – specifically their right hands – in an effort to display an “I deserve it” mentality.

Cynics scoffed that the right-hand rock was nothing more than a lady-in-waiting purchase, because a man had yet to buy them one, which was, of course, their desired wish.

The fact this trend was fostered by diamond conglomerate DeBeers in a sensational marketing scheme to invent a reason to buy more rings, seemed to be lost on various fashion mags and social observers who heavily promoted this sociological trend of independent-women-happily-buying-diamond-rings-for-themselves-for-no-real-occasion.

Celebrities Minnie Driver and Eve were seen flashing right-hand diamond rings. So too were other single gals around America whose right-hand rocks were heralded as a win for womankind.

Though, as far as I could see, instead of fostering true independence, it just seemed to enhance the concept of the traditional marriage shackle, albeit on the wrong hand. These women didn’t appear to be adhering to new a role of freedom. The fact that a diamond ring was the object of affection meant they were merely altering the role until the role they were waiting for came along on bended knee and said “marry me.”

Now a new cultural trend has surfaced in society: non-married men wearing rings on their wedding finger given to them by their girlfriends. We’ve Spy-ed the odd bloke brandishing them in our social page piccies.

Never before has the ring signified so much.

For men it’s not an engagement ring; it’s not a wedding ring; it’s not a friendship ring. It is, let’s be honest, a commitment ring… a ring that says in girlfriend speak: with-this-ring-will-you-hurry-up-and-make-a-proper-commitment-to-me-and-if-you-won’t-anytime-soon-at-least-you’ll-appear-to-be-off-the-market-to-any-other-women-on-the-prowl.

In other words, it’s a man ring that marks a woman’s territory.

But will a ring on a bloke’s wedding finger – married or not – stop prowling women from flirting? Will it make the girlfriend giver feel like her boyfriend has proven his commitment to her? Is it a sign of true love or a symbol of obsession? Who knows? Each relationship can only be judged by the people in it, but it does seem to me that a ring can say less about the person wearing it and more about the person giving it. What do you think?

 

 

 

 

*I think it’s gonna be interesting to see how that goes! hahaha! 🙂

 

 

Source: New Zealand Herald

Blog at WordPress.com.