Tag Archives: product: jewelry

Valentine’s Day Gifts

While Americans began celebrating Valentine’s Day in the early 1700s, it wasn’t until the 1840s that it became a commercial holiday complete with mass-produced Valentine’s-themed goods.

Greeting cards, candy, flowers, and jewelry are Valentine’s-Day-Approved gifts and are among the most frequently gifted items (along with stuffed animals and perfume/cologne):

Contrary to stereotypes, the majority of men say they would love to receive flowers for Valentine’s Day:

Alas, 21% of them have never been so blessed:

This may upset primarily the young:

But, of course, they have the greatest chance of one day having their dreams come true.

What I’m saying is:  “Go ahead! Buy your man some daisies!”

For more on Valentine’s Day, visit this fun graphic (via Chart Porn).

—————————

Lisa Wade is a professor of sociology at Occidental College. You can follow her on Twitter and Facebook.

Sarah Haskins on a Heterosexual Gift Giving Imperative

Sarah Haskins, always entertaining, mocks the imperative that men buy women jewelry to show them they love them:

I’ve always wondered how women who share bank accounts with their partners feel about this.

—————————

Lisa Wade is a professor of sociology at Occidental College. You can follow her on Twitter and Facebook.

J.C. Penney’s “Doghouse” Ad: Defining Romantic Gifts


Andi M. sent in a video created by J.C. Penney called “The Doghouse.” The ad tells the story of men sent to the doghouse by their wives for various bad behaviors, but mostly for giving bad Christmas gifts. A bad gift is a non-romantic gift, or a gift that is related to housework, or that implies a woman needs to lose weight or change her appearance:

As Andi points out, the ad portrays men as idiots or even actively mean-spirited. But I’m also interested in the way we define what are appropriate gifts for women. We often see “practical” gifts as perfectly acceptable to give to men. But increasingly, gifts for women are supposed to be essentially romantic, a symbol of love, not usefulness, a cultural trend the jewelry industry, in particular, has encouraged and benefited from.

In this ad, we have several “bad” gifts — more computer memory, a vacuum cleaner, facial hair remover, and a work-out accessory. All are presented as equally idiotic choices for men to make. So getting a woman something that might significantly improve her computer is just the same as giving her something to work out with, while actively mocking her body and eating habits. Any non-romantic gift is risky, even if accompanied by an attempt to be sweet (see the poor computer memory guy).

I’ve discussed before research on low-income women who complain when they feel that men waste money on romantic but non-essential gifts rather than stuff they actually need. On the other hand, I asked one of my classes about what they would consider an acceptable gifts, and I was (probably stupidly) surprised that many of the women in the class were adamant that useful or helpful items were nice to get, but only in addition to a romantic gift, never as the “main” gift itself. A couple said they’d feel bad if their female friends were showing off jewelry they got for Valentine’s Day or Christmas and they didn’t have anything to show, because their friends would assume their boyfriends/husbands weren’t romantic or didn’t love them very much. So it was less about whether they wanted jewelry than that they knew other women did, and thus feared their friends would judge their relationships if they didn’t get the right gift to “prove” they had good partners.

I think ads like this both reflect and reinforce this social pressure to buy the “right” kind of gifts for women. J.C. Penney tapped into an existing cultural norm about what kinds of gifts women want, and then reinforces it by presenting jewelry as the only means available to men to get out of the doghouse, and shows all women as being in complete agreement about what an acceptable gift is.

UPDATE: Reader Josh Leo pointed out that the ad also portrays the doghouse as a place men are tortured by having to do feminine things:

…all they are fed in “the doghouse” is Quiche and Chai Latte’s. This is clearly a statement that these foods are feminine an almost a form of torture for “Real Men.”

Stigmatizing Single People

In a fantastic example of the way being single is stigmatized, Rachel K. took a photo of this ad she saw at a bus stop in Toronto:

I’m afraid this is the last post you will get from me. You see, I’m single, and it’s just occurred to me how very much my life sucks, with no one to give me sparkly things. I am going to drop everything and dedicate myself full-time to finding a mate.

I mean, really. It’s an interesting assumption that being unmarried (I presume that’s an engagement ring) means you are “alone.” And I’d say that what sucks isn’t being “alone,” it’s being told constantly that you must be sad and miserable since you aren’t coupled up.

Modern Goldmining

American school children learn all about the U.S. gold rush in the Western part of the country. Goldmining was a speculative, but potentially highly rewarding endeavor and attracted, almost exclusively, adult men. But the entrepreneurship of gold mining (though not mining as wage work) is long gone in the U.S.  Still, gold is in high demand:  “The price of gold, which stood at $271 an ounce on September 10, 2001, hit $1,023 in March 2008, and it may surpass that threshold again” (source).  Who are the gold entrepreneurs today?  Where?  Under what economic conditions do they work?  And with what environmental impact?

I found hints to answers in a recent Boston.com slide show and a National Geographic article (thanks to Allison for her tip in the comments).  While there is still some gold mining in the U.S., there is gold mining, also, in developing countries and all kinds of people participate:

According to the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), there are between 10 million and 15 million so-called artisanal miners around the world, from Mongolia to Brazil. Employing crude methods that have hardly changed in centuries, they produce about 25 percent of the world’s gold and support a total of 100 million people…

Environmentally, gold is especially destructive.  The ratio of gold to earth moved is larger than in any other mining endeavor.

It makes me rethink whether I really want to buy gold (because, you know, I do that constantly, darling, constantly).  In fact, jewelry accounts for two-thirds of the demand.  In the comments, HP reminds me:

Gold (along with even more problematic metals) is found in pretty much all consumer electronics. It’s in your computer, your cellphone, your .mp3 player, your TV/stereo, etc. You’re buying gold all the time already, whether you know it or not.

Below are images of gold prospecting around the world.

Near Lodwar, Kenyan children mine for gold to help support their families:

In Colombia, about 8,000 prospectors seek gold illegally on the Dagau river:

Miners in Abangares, Costa Rica, scrape tiny amounts of gold out of abandoned mines; the work is dangerous and potentially toxic:

An illegal gold mine in a national park, Paral, Brazil:

This woman, in Indonesia, is collecting mud to sift for gold:

Also in Indonesia, this illegal mine is opposed by villagers who argue that the waste is polluting:

Mining in Myanmar:

UPDATE! A reader, Heather Leila, linked to a picture she took of gold prospecting in Suriname (at her own blog).  She writes:

The gold mines aren’t what you are thinking. They aren’t underground, you don’t carry a pick axe and a helmet. The garimpos are where the miners have dammed a creek and created large mud pits. The mud is pumped through a long pipe lined with mercury. The mercury attaches itself to the specks of gold and gets filtered out as the mud is poured into a different pit. The mercury is then burned off, while the gold remains. This is how it was explained to me. From the plane, they are exposed patches of yellow earth dotting the endless forest.

See also our posts on post-oil boom life and gorgeous photos of resource extraction by Edward Burtynsky.

—————————

Lisa Wade is a professor of sociology at Occidental College. You can follow her on Twitter and Facebook.

Diamonds: For When You Love Her, But Are Sick of Her Talking

David F. sent in this photo of an ad on a wall outside of a fancy restaurant at Easton Town Center in suburban Columbus, Ohio.  It nicely reproduces the stereotype that women never shut up, and that men who love them find this wildly annoying.  So annoying, apparently, that they will buy her a diamond just for a moment of peace.

Title, by the way, totally adapted from David’s subject line.

NEW! (Feb. ’10): Turns out diamonds are also good if you love her but are a “regular” guy who doesn’t want to have to be all, you know, thoughtful and shit (sent in by Jamie Lynn C.):

More reasons for men to buy women diamonds: to get laid, to get out of the doghouse, so she isn’t disappointed in you,  and to prove you love her.  And, if you’re a woman, you need one, for your left right hand, to show how liberated you are.

—————————

Lisa Wade is a professor of sociology at Occidental College. You can follow her on Twitter and Facebook.

Jewelry Gets You Laid

Emily M. sent in this photo of a billboard she saw near Kingston, Ontario:

 

Ah, cause and effect.

Depicting “Starving African Kids”

Taylor D. of Thanks for Participating sent in Cat Walk Cat Fight’s image that claims to show us how many sub-Saharan African children could be fed for the price of various celebrities’ engagement rings:

engagement-ring-hunger

This is another one of those instances where I get what they’re doing, and I definitely support efforts to point out the choices we aren’t making, and what we aren’t spending on, when we decide to spend on luxury goods. And of course diamonds represent a wonderful example of marketing and monopolies; they aren’t rare and wouldn’t be worth much at all if the DeBeers and a handful of other companies didn’t carefully control their production to allow just a few onto the market each year, and if their campaign to turn diamond engagement rings into the ultimate sign of love hadn’t been so successful. And you can definitely make a larger argument about the effects of the diamond trade on many countries.

And yet, the caricature of a naked child, with features that are reminiscent of blackface, make me kind of…well, creeped out, I guess.

UPDATE: Several commenters have made another good point. I’ll quote Deb C. here:

Well, I want to point out that the featured celebs presumably *didn’t* spend that money on their rings…for most, it’s the man who spends the money… So why is it only the women who are being pictured as spendthrift airheads who care more about their vanity than the children dying in Africa?

For other examples of campaigns that maybe didn’t use the best methods, see high heels as activism, non-smokers get hot chicks, PETA, more PETA, Tila Tequila cares about human rights, pro-environment = anti-immigration, juxtaposing wealth and poverty, PETA again, and again, Spanish anti-gentical cutting ads, then back to PETA, showing domestic violence to oppose animal cruelty, hypersexualizing little girls, depicting aid recipients as pathetic, and then end with PETA.