Skip to main content

The Poundland engagement ring is perfect – I'm not surprised they've sold 20,000 | Zoe Williams

These days, no one can afford a ‘real’ ring, so what’s wrong about opting for a cheap ‘placeholder’?

I can remember exactly where I was (a pub) when I first discovered the economics of wedding and engagement rings, I was that astonished: the groom is supposed to spend three times his monthly salary on the item. The reason it should be so expensive is that the ring has many functions; a gesture of such great love it should cost more than a boiler; a symbol of individual wealth becoming irrelevant as two destinies are conjoined; and a signal to the rest of the world of the scale of the catch you have just landed. But if it seemed ridiculous in the 90s, it seems even more outlandish now. Savings are so last century.

Poundland recently came to the rescue with a £1 “placeholder” ring: the idea is that you choose your real ring together, but this is a myth, like “first-time buyer”. No one can afford a “real” ring, or a separate wedding ring, least of all when they have to get married. The 20,000 “bling rings” Poundland sold, in a week, will be the rings everyone says “I do” to.

Continue reading...

from The Guardian http://bit.ly/2SA8HEz

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

REPORT: Furious Spike Lee Paces Aisle, Turns Back To Stage...

REPORT: Furious Spike Lee Paces Aisle, Turns Back To Stage... (Top headline, 5th story, link ) Related stories: REVIEW: Hostless Show Starts With Rock & Rolls Off Rails... Actor knocks borders, walls during speech in Spanish... Stage designed to look like Trump hair? 'GREEN BOOK' OVERCOMES BACKLASH, NABS BEST PICTURE... Top Critics Fume... LIST: WINNERS... Advertise here from Drudge Report Feed https://ift.tt/2SUpIKy

Tiny Love Stories: ‘Who Was I to Deprive Him of Joy?’

By Unknown Author from NYT Style https://ift.tt/2UV7YAG

The Ugly History of Dual-Loyalty Charges

When Representative Ilhan Omar recently complained about “the political influence in this country that says it is okay to push for allegiance to a foreign country,” many noted accurately that she had deployed a trope—dual loyalty—that had been used against Jews for years. But this accusation has a broader history in the United States, having been used against several religious minorities—including Muslims like Omar. Indeed, many battles over religious freedom have revolved around dual-loyalty claims. [ Read: Ilhan Omar just made it harder to have a nuanced debate about Israel ] In the 19th century, many attacks on Catholics stressed that these immigrants were pawns of a foreign power. In the 1830s, Samuel Morse—then a prominent painter and later the inventor of the telegraph—urged Americans to build “walls” and “gates” to keep out Catholic immigrants, who would always be loyal to Rome. Because these Catholic immigrants were decrepit —“halt, and blind, and naked”—they were easy to co...