…and this is a 
Sex for sale
Category:
Posted on: December 18, 2007 9:46 AM, by PZ Myers
'Tis the season for ridiculous commercialism: I've been seeing these unbelievable commercials that feature some smug guy surprising his wife by giving her a luxury car (with a bow on top) as a present, or popping open a box with a big honkin' diamond in it. The women always clap their hands with glee and lean in for a hot passionate kiss. I see these and I wonder…just how stupid do advertisers think men are?
I can tell you exactly what would happen if I spent a month's salary or more on jewelry (or worse, a year's income on a car). My wife would look aghast, and waver between calling the hospital for an immediate psychiatric consult and kicking me in the groin. I would spend that much on inessential frippery? Without consulting her? There sure wouldn't be any sexual arousal, unless these commercial makers easily confuse that sinking feeling in the pit of the stomach at the thought of budget-busting debt with "sexy."
Desirable women are too smart to be bought with flashy gee-gaws. My wife and I are talking about getting ourselves a snow-blower for Christmas…now that is romantic.
Don't delude yourself — you can't buy monogamy.
Comments
You may not be able to buy monogamy, but you can rent a reasonable facsimile for the night.
Posted by: Mars | December 18, 2007 9:57 AM
There's a word for women who can be bought for sex. Backrubs, hikes to a picnic under a secluded waterfall, watching the sun rise or set over the ocean = romantic. Crass commercialism and shiny, largely useless objects = romance only to shiny, largely useless people.
Posted by: Fnord Prefect | December 18, 2007 9:59 AM
My husband calls these "gaudy baubles" and refuses to participate.
I wanted a new storm door for Christmas but I think I'm getting a new saucepan.
Posted by: longsmith | December 18, 2007 10:00 AM
My wife and I bought each other new digital cameras, both Pentaxes, after a lot of deliberation, discussion and sitting at the computer together reading the user ratings of various models. She would have killed me if I just went out and spent all our money on something expensive and useless as a surprise.
Posted by: Coturnix | December 18, 2007 10:00 AM
Right on! I've always vetoed LotStreeWiz's suggestions that he could buy me a diamond--money down the drain and supporting exploitation of miners as well. This year, my present is a trip to the NC science blogging conference in January.
Posted by: Monado | December 18, 2007 10:01 AM
I told my wife I wanted a new vacuum for christmas. Our current one is rubbish, and we could really use a new one. Since I'm the one that does all the vacuuming, its really a gift for me. Nothing says "I love you" like upgraded appliances.
Posted by: Brian | December 18, 2007 10:01 AM
I've spent years arguing with my husband about how I'm not "easy to shop for" because I retch at the thought of spending so much on jewelry and other 'girly' things. But honestly, I really do want more insulation in the attic instead! Ok, if my arm is twisted, I'd settle for Doctor Who series 3 on DVD.
What really drives him bonkers is that I can't stand the thought of spending our household money for gifts for ourselves just because it's a holiday. Bah, humbug.
Posted by: Carlie | December 18, 2007 10:08 AM
If you need a snow-blower, you can have mine. Darn thing quit running on me in the midst of cleaning after our foot of snow last weekend. Grrrr....
Then again, even if it did run, it's not a lot of use. I have concluded that this particular snowblower (which was a hand-me-down from my folks because they had upgraded) is basically only suited for handling 3" of snow on the sidewalk. Anything more than that (more than 3" or a driveway) and it is out of its league. Who needs a snowblower to handle 3" of snow on a sidewalk? I could shovel that just as fast and get it cleaner.
So, PZ, when you get the snow-blower, be sure to get one that can actually throw snow (as opposed to just simple displacing it). I guarantee, the farther it can throw the snow, the better off you will be. A sizable front would help (I recommmend the auger over the paddles, especially for the northern border of Minnesota, but that is significantly more expensive). Oh, and get one that runs.
Posted by: Pablo | December 18, 2007 10:13 AM
#2
"There's a word for women who can be bought for sex. Backrubs, hikes to a picnic under a secluded waterfall, watching the sun rise or set over the ocean = romantic."
Funny - I always thought of backrubs, hikes, picnics, sunsets at the shore, not to mention walks in the rain as the PRICE for sex. C'mon - does anyone really like walking in the rain? ;D
Posted by: Gingerbaker | December 18, 2007 10:14 AM
The wife and I don't exchange big gifts. We usually spend a fair amount on a dinner and a number of nice bottles of wine for us and family and/or friends. Luckily my wife doesn't care for gaudy jewelry, and while I do care for Gaudy electronics or tools, I can do without.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | December 18, 2007 10:15 AM
The highest paid psychologists work in advertising. The whole point of advertising is to make you buy things that you don't want. If you wanted them, you would buy them without the advertising.
I suspect that in the case of these ads the target audience is not a demographic PZ fits into (no offence intended), but for young working males, the cars are seen as a symbol of their success in life and that the advertising is probably successful. They don't buy the car so that they can be the guy in the ad, they buy the car so that other people will think that they're the guy in the ad (metaphorically).
Posted by: Jeremy O'Wheel | December 18, 2007 10:15 AM
Whats so great about monogamy anyway? It is a social construct and denies natural human sexuality.
Posted by: Alex | December 18, 2007 10:18 AM
Brian: Get a Dyson. They are absolutely fantastic. And hey, they look cool.
Posted by: LM | December 18, 2007 10:19 AM
I think it demeans women more. Unless some women like that stuff. In which case they are stupid. Problem is, some men do like those stupid women. So I don't blame anyone for anything.
I love that Demetri Martin bit:
These people have us trapped in intellectual glass houses!
Posted by: andyo | December 18, 2007 10:20 AM
PZ wrote:
That's because she knows your financial limits. But if you wrote the next big atheist book and made a few million more bucks -- then you could give her shiny baubles with no damage to your scrotum.
Posted by: Norman Doering | December 18, 2007 10:21 AM
I agree. The luxury item commercials are appalling.
Posted by: John | December 18, 2007 10:22 AM
PZ, you just want to make us all jealous of your trophy wife don't you?
Posted by: Keith Sader | December 18, 2007 10:23 AM
How many people believe in creationism, and you ask a question like this?
Posted by: TomS | December 18, 2007 10:26 AM
As a woman, I've never understood the jewelry thing. The "You're buying me a rock?" question would be immediately followed by "You spent HOW much?!?!?!?"
Well said.
Posted by: gex | December 18, 2007 10:27 AM
My wife got me a dozen 15-oz grass-feed ribeye steaks for Christmas. Yum!
Haven't decided on hers yet. Probably a new microwave oven.
Posted by: CHL Instructor | December 18, 2007 10:30 AM
Couple things:
First, PZ should write the next big atheist book, I would buy it, but then again it wouldn't atheist as much as cephalatheist.
Also, as a grad student, a month or a year worth of spending on my girlfriend actually isn't that much. Come to think of it, minus food and other necessities, the $70.00 I did spend is about a month's free cash.
I got here a new portable hard drive, so she has somewhere to store all the pictures she uses in her research, which will be good if her parents get her the new camera to use for it. I guess we're basically going for funding further study this Christmas.
Posted by: thadd | December 18, 2007 10:30 AM
My youngest daughter wants to be an MD/PhD-all my money is going in the 529 plan. I asked for an enameled cast iron casserole for Xmas, and a copy of The Federalist Papers. Useful things for the long winter.
Posted by: Ruth | December 18, 2007 10:32 AM
I agree that practical things can be much more romantic gifts than the jewelry or other expensive items. My dentist was once telling me of his upcoming 20th wedding anniversary and asking for ideas on what to get her. I told him I thought the most romantic thing would be to finish some project around the house that he started or to do one that he had talked about. And that he did, and she loved it. Of course they also had the romantic dinner, though.
Posted by: Mrs. Peach | December 18, 2007 10:35 AM
The other day on Manolo's Shoeblog (when was THAT last mentioned here?) there was a discussion on being 'That guy.'
The ad, from Hertz diamonds I think, shows a couple sitting on a couch. The man is painting her toenails. She is sipping tea and reading a book. He pauses, asks for her opinion of them, and at her assertion that they look great suggests they 'need another coat.' The ad then proclaims something like 'Don't be THAT GUY this holiday season, get her diamonds!' or something to that effect.
It pretty much asserted an 'either/or' scenario, and neither of the options appealed to me: useless bauble or fawning houseboy. I didn't like the assumption that if 'your man' isn't willing to buy you diamonds then he's not a man. I said as much, and then went back later and saw that a startling amount of women said they would rather have the diamonds, making such claims as 'When you're done with him, you can sell the diamonds and buy shoes!' and other such things which I have too much hope in humanity to believe were real statements. But it's also a fashion blog so who knows what kind people are reading and commenting.
I was going to get my boyfriend a CO2 system from the local homebrew shop so when we make our own beer we wouldn't have to fool with bottling anymore, but our finances didn't allow it. I made him a gift instead, and I think he's going to love it. I don't know if he's getting me anything this year and I don't really care. If he had the money I'd ask him for a Peugeot salt grinder, a really good cast-iron skillet, and perhaps a staple gun. NOT a shiny rock that's more about communicating my value as a monetary quantity to friends and family.
I also hate those 'He went to Jerod's!' commercials where the family all sit around and whisper to each other when the young man comes a-courtin' with a bag from a jewelry store and gives the girl a jeweled bracelet. Barf. Way to warp today's impressionable youth by convincing them that's the way to a woman's heart and parts beyond.
Posted by: Jenbug | December 18, 2007 10:38 AM
What's really sad is I'm sure they have mountains of research documenting exactly how stupid men (and women) are. On cars in particular. I don't know anyone barely getting by because of their jewelry, but I know plenty of people who could live to be 1000 and never get ahead financially because of the way they purchase cars. I mean, wasting money on pretty sparklies is silly frippery, but millions of people happily turning themselves into wage slaves so they can get a slightly nicer vehicle is completely insane.
Posted by: SeanH | December 18, 2007 10:40 AM
Hey, Paul. Now don't you think that it's much more romantic to shovel snow with Mary than fire up a noisy machine? I have a great idea: Buy her a matching snow shovel for Xmas! His and Hers shovels. I am sure she would give you a big kiss and tell you where to ... never mind.
Posted by: Don Kane | December 18, 2007 10:44 AM
That's the truest thing I've read today. I have met women who do expect the aforementioned flashy gee-gaws, and I shy away from them as if they had the plague. Their personalities generally leave a great deal to be desired.
That said I did buy a bracelet for a certain Female Friend (tm) of mine this Cthulhumas. But an inexpensive one (she quite firmly doesn't believe in expensive presents, and I agree), and mostly to have some variation since I usually get her books, books and more books. She's also getting a little Ninja Turtle action figure. I expect the latter will reaffirm her opinion of me as insane.
Posted by: Ted D | December 18, 2007 10:47 AM
New microwave and a video projector for us. Seems like we'll get more use out of them than my wife would a small hunk of rock. Cheaper too. Plus, of course, I don't have to wonder how much blood has been spilled over my video projector (and I can write it off on my taxes!)
Posted by: Dahan | December 18, 2007 10:48 AM
Books trump rocks in our house any day. I can well remember the first Christmas of my first marriage - quite expensive gold and diamond earrings that we couldn't afford and then he didn't even pay cash from his check but put them on the credit card and guess who had to pay that. I still hate the sight of the things over 20 years later. I should have taken them back then and there. Needless to say - that marriage didn't last.
Attention is the most romantic gift of all and most of us have so little of it to give these days. But I'd settle for a new pair of insulated riding boots. Toasty toes make the heart warmer.
Posted by: SJN | December 18, 2007 10:49 AM
I'm sure I wouldn't be too popular if I spent that much on a present. But, on the other hand, if I bought a snow blower (doubly useless in southern England where we rarely see snow), or something equally as boring and practical, I'd be on my way to casualty to get my testicles either reattached, or extracted from wherever they'd been kicked. [*]
We always buy "luxuries" for presents - affordable ones. If we need a new iron, stove, cookware, or whatever, that's what the household budget is for. If we have to increase that and decrease the luxury budget to cover necessary expenses, so be it.
[*] I'm exaggerating for comic effect. She's not really violent.
Posted by: Andy Cunningham | December 18, 2007 10:50 AM
A gift from Agent Provacateur doesn't hurt...
if it's her kinda thing.
Posted by: Stevie_C | December 18, 2007 10:51 AM
@CHL Instructor:
"My wife got me a dozen 15-oz grass-feed ribeye steaks for Christmas. Yum! Haven't decided on hers yet. Probably a new microwave oven."
Just reassure me here: you're not going to microwave the steaks, are you?
Posted by: Andy Cunningham | December 18, 2007 10:53 AM
While I'm inclined to agree with PZ on this, is anyone going to deny that some women are attracted by ostentatious displays of wealth and power by men?
Not all women, certainly, but enough to make it a very effective reproductive strategy. That's not to advocate it either, but I'm just sayin', it works.
What's more the guys making the ads know it works, otherwise they wouldn't be trying to exploit it to make money (no doubt so they can make ostentatious displays of wealth and power of their own).
Posted by: NC Paul | December 18, 2007 10:55 AM
But wait just one minute there. Back on the savannah, it must surely have been adaptive for women to reward with sex those men who could proffer ostentatious evidence of their fitness as providers. Over the countless millennia since that time, the inexorable winnowing of natural selection will have inescapably moulded men into givers of diamonds and cars, and women into ooh-ers and aah-ers (and, at least off-camera, jumpers into the sack). It's all in our genes, man.
Oh, and PZ: a snowblower? The most seductively adaptive gift of all in that vast frozen wasteland you inhabit. You hunka hunka burnin' love, you.
Posted by: Mrs Tilton | December 18, 2007 10:57 AM
I highly recommend a BBC documentary called Century of the Self (I think you can find it on YouTube). It's all about how advertising co-opted (the willing) psychiatric profession, and all the weird repercussions of that through the next century.
Astonishingly, it took a psychiatrist to suggest that if you show celebrities doing something (like smoking), other people will think it's cool.
Posted by: mothworm | December 18, 2007 10:57 AM
That would have to depend on your definition of "reasonable".
Posted by: noncarborundum | December 18, 2007 10:59 AM
Eh, you're missing the point, PZ! The special extra-expensive diamonds are like a peacock's tail. The point is to prove that you're so damn wealthy that you can afford to waste resources on utterly useless items. Basic instinct and whatnot.
Posted by: Maronan | December 18, 2007 10:59 AM
Funny. I just posted on Denialism and when I come back here, PZ linked to it. Just read that Atlantic article. Enough people buy into it. The marketing campaign does work, even if we "elites" here do mock it.
Posted by: Janine | December 18, 2007 11:00 AM
Since our wedding anniversary is three days before Christmas, we combine those two celebrations. This year my wife bought me some boots so my feet will stay warm and dry when I'm outside shoveling snow off the driveway, and a small table for our library. I bought her a floor lamp and a comfortable chair to go with her desk. All of this was worked out weeks ago - the surprise will be a nice bottle of her favorite Pinot Noir to go with the steaks I fix for dinner.
I'm glad to see that there are plenty of other practical couples out there!
Posted by: Mike | December 18, 2007 11:05 AM
In fact, The Economist had an article on a paper looking at conspicuous consumption as a sexual display for men and "blatant benevolence" as the corresponding display for women.
It's evolutionary psych - so add salt to flavour as you will.
Posted by: NC Paul | December 18, 2007 11:07 AM
I wonder if that's really true. I mean, do wealthy men and poor men have equal marital fidelity?
Posted by: Doug | December 18, 2007 11:08 AM
I am not sure if my wife would start with the eye stabbing or go straight for her swords.
Posted by: Galbinus_Caeli | December 18, 2007 11:10 AM
My wife and I have long since given up big gifts for Xmas. We do stocking stuffers instead. My wife likes earrings, but doesn't wear a lot of jewelry otherwise, so I often include a pair. It's amazing, actually, how many really interesting and beautiful earrings are available for under $50, sometimes under $30 or even $20. Occasionally I'll buy a pendant or broach instead, but likewise, while you certainly can spend a fortune for that kind of thing, you can find really lovely pieces, often by local artisans (in fact I never buy at the big chain jewelry stores), at very reasonable prices. Also, there must be a couple of kinds of chocolate in her stocking.
We save our serious money for travel, which we both love, and for occasional nice meals at restaurants, instead of blowing through a small fortune at Xmas. Certainly neither of us would spend the kind of money PZ is talking about above without consulting the other.
We don't have kids, our nieces and nephews are grown, and our adult friends and relatives are all pretty much settled and have the stuff they need. While no one is rich, we are all reasonably comfortable, so instead of gifts we increase our charitable contributions this time of year, making donations to an appropriate non-profit in someone's name and letting that serve as a gift, and they do the same for us.
It works out great. The time spent shopping for the stocking stuffers is minimal, and doesn't involve any malls. Much of the charitable giving can be done on-line, and that which can't involves simply mailing a check. We save time, energy, wear and tear on the nerves, and expend no additional fossil fuels driving to places just to shop. All this is especially good for us, as we are both college professors, so right before Xmas is one of the busiest, most stressful times of the year anyway (finals, term papers, anxious students, grading which MUST be done by a certain time, etc.). Getting rid of all the extra agita has made our lives much better.
Posted by: MS | December 18, 2007 11:14 AM
I know a lot of women who like jewelry, and they all will usually claim that they don't care about what an item costs. It's that the craftsmanship of some jewelry really is exquisite, like little works of art. Then I say, "Oh, so if it's all about the aesthetics and not the cost, then you must not have a problem with receiving cubic zirconium." They usually look at me like I just crapped in their lap.
The lesson? Of course it's about the monetary value. Jewelry is all about wearing your bank account around your neck and advertising your biological value to your social peers.
Posted by: H. Humbert | December 18, 2007 11:18 AM
MS
Both of our families went the way of charities a few years back also. When we get together for the holidays we get to tell each other what we spent our money on instead of each other. We did a battered women's shelter last year. Makes you feel a lot better than buying a bunch of stuff for family members that could buy the same stuff if they really wanted it.
Posted by: Dahan | December 18, 2007 11:23 AM
"C'mon - does anyone really like walking in the rain? ;D"
Well, I do. But my girlfriend doesn't... Fortunatly she also doesn't like jewlery. For xmas this year she is getting a root canal and I think I am getting pajamas. Once our funds recover from dentistry we are going to buy each other games for the Nintendo DSs that we got each other last year (hers is pink and mine is black, we did it on purpose. it's amusing to us.) And then play them together. Now *that's* romance.
Posted by: jba | December 18, 2007 11:24 AM
You see, chidren, sometimes a man needs to be with a woman.
But sometimes, when the lovin' is over, the woman just wants to talk and talk and talk and talk.
[song]
But a prostitute is someone who would love you
No matter who you are, or what you look like.
Yes, it's true, children.
That's not why you pay a prostitute,
No, you don't pay her to stay, you pay her to leave afterwards.
~snip~
Posted by: True Bob | December 18, 2007 11:24 AM
Today's episode of Patriarchy Hurts Men Too has been brought to you by the letters X, M, A, and S, and by the number $. And remember kids, Patriarchy is an It, not a He.
Posted by: Interrobang | December 18, 2007 11:25 AM
Hey, hey, hey, now! I bought my wife a 6.27 carat diamond, and she loves it!
Of course, it's uncut in its original {111} form. And it's a (barely) translucent brown color, with multiple inclusions.
I told her a long time ago: If you marry a mineralogist, you'll get your gems in specimen form...
Posted by: NJ | December 18, 2007 11:26 AM
OH OH . I know what I'm asking for next x-mas!
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | December 18, 2007 11:37 AM
So true. My husband is smart enough to know I'd prefer financially responsible decisions that fit our budget. I wouldn't actually kick him in the groin for making such an error, but I wouldn't be happy.
I appreciate fun little minor indulgences that show some thought, though. Living in France, it's inconvenient and expensive to get books in English, so I was thrilled when for my birthday he sent away for exactly the book I wanted, and I hadn't even talked to him about it. I only felt bad because I'm terrible at shopping myself, so I never know what surprise would please him, even though he really likes celebrating birthdays...
Posted by: C. L. Hanson | December 18, 2007 11:39 AM
"I see these and I wonder...just how stupid do advertisers think men are?"
Well, PZ, how about this:
Eighty-four percent of women believe in angels, compared to 72 percent of men. Belief in the devil is about the same for both groups - 70 percent for women, and 69 percent for men.
'nuf said.
Posted by: Umilik | December 18, 2007 11:43 AM
Ladies and gentlemen, Mr. James Taylor!
(where were you, TrueBob, when I made an oblique reference to that South Park episode and confused everyone?)
Posted by: Rey Fox | December 18, 2007 11:43 AM
Tell that to a bower-bird. That's all I'm sayin'.
Posted by: Marcus Ranum | December 18, 2007 11:45 AM
Sadly, women are brainwashed into thinking that if a man gives them bling that it means he cares for her, so they exacerbate the problem by talking about such crap. Both sexes are being duped by commercialism into trying to reify something wonderful that cannot (and should not) be bought with money.
I bought every piece of jewelry I own and am proud of it. And the only reason I'd want a diamond ring would be if I could cut glass with it (like in cool spy movies).
Posted by: SabrinaW | December 18, 2007 11:46 AM
I think a snowblower is a very romantic gift. It allows one to not only avoid medical inconveniences caused by pulled back muscles, but permits one to graciously clear the snow from invalid neighbours' drives. Mine has heated handles! Luxury!
I think the most romantic gift my wife ever gave me was my first cordless drill. *sigh* I loved that drill, and eventually wore it right out. This year, she is getting a special hammer/multitool in her stocking! Well, and some chocolate, too.
Posted by: Chris | December 18, 2007 12:03 PM
I really don't want my wife to buy me a lot of stuff -- most of what I want is too expensive and/or too esoteric to expect as a gift anyway. (Anyone got a spare Bridgeport vertical milling machine they don't know what to do with, close enough to move to New England?) DVDs and books are always acceptable to both of us. Usually we end up setting up what we want from Amazon for ourselves, then making the other person click the "Buy" button -- doesn't count as a gift if we click the button ourselves.
Posted by: Hairy Doctor Professor | December 18, 2007 12:03 PM
OK, a less funny answer is this:
Advertising is one field that is very closely monitored for effectiveness. When (for example) a beer manufacturer does a campaign, its impact on sales is very carefully tracked. Trial campaigns are tested in limited markets and are measured against eachother for effectiveness. In every sense of the word, large marketing campaigns are tackled as science - because there is a ton of money at stake on both the front-end and the back-end.
In other words, when you see those stupid ads with some hot chick driving a cheap import car to bangin' techno music - it's because that ad has been scientifically tuned to sell. It's been proven to work to some degree or other. Furthermore, since advertising is a highly darwinian field, it's probably the case that the survivors of Madison Ave are pretty damn good at what they do.
I used to sit around thinking "only idiots would fall for this stuff" and I was horrified to discover that apparently there are a lot of idiots who do. Classical marketing "branding" exercises (can you say "Victoria's Secret"?) pay off fantastic dividends. It's just underwear made in China like all the rest; it's never been near England, and there never was a "Victoria" - but the brand went from nothing to international recognition in about 15 years. That's a relatively short time. And, yes, I've encountered guys that consider "Victoria's Secret" is "classy" while "Fredericks of Hollywood" is "cheesy" even though they come from the same design and manufacturing processes.
Anyhow - I find it interesting that in a science blog, almost everyone (including PZ) appears to discredit the effect of marketing. How stupid do the advertisers think men are? They know exactly how stupid men are! One might argue that marketing is one area of "social science" that actually is a real science because it has predictive power.
Posted by: Marcus Ranum | December 18, 2007 12:07 PM
This is an interesting question to study. I have a theory that middle-class men are more monogamous than wealthy men.
Posted by: C. L. Hanson | December 18, 2007 12:07 PM
Hey, Rev. BigDumbChimp, she needs one and it will make her (eventually) feel good. Much better than a diamond. :P
Besides, it's funny telling people that that is what she is getting for xmas. Brings to mind Jack Nicholsons character in Little Shop of Horrors.
Posted by: jba | December 18, 2007 12:08 PM
Duped by commercialism?
Firstly, there does seem to be evidence that conspicuous consumption is a form of human sexual display. Not, of course, to say that everyone has to do it, but it seems to suggest that far from being brainwashing, it's a genuine human behaviour.
Secondly, there is no one on the street forcing people to buy stuff or consume conspicuously. Commercialism and commerce is all about fulfilling human desires. Advertising doesn't create needs so much as inflame, or in some cases subvert, needs that already exist.
Even so, advertising still doesn't force people to spend their money. People spend their money as they see fit. We might not always agree on the value of what they spend it on, but that's liberty and the pursuit of happiness for ya.
Posted by: NC Paul | December 18, 2007 12:12 PM
Don't tell me what's desirable in a woman. And who said I want to buy monogamy?
Posted by: apy | December 18, 2007 12:12 PM
Also - what Marcus said. :)
Posted by: NC Paul | December 18, 2007 12:15 PM
Hey, I like sparkly earrings. I liked the gorgeous sparkly holographic snowflake ones I'm wearing now so much that I splurged and bought them for myself last year for about $8. (Men, that does not mean that I am for sale for that price.) You can keep the stupid diamond earrings -- what a waste of money, and considering how often I've lost an earring, I'd be afraid to wear them.
Posted by: Margaret | December 18, 2007 12:16 PM
How many of you would buy a gift for your spouse to enjoy with FRIENDS, not said spouse? My DH got me a double piano bench so I could more easily play duets w/o one of us sitting on the floor! I got him an air compressor so he could connect to his pneumatic hammer and "finish" all those jobs around the house.
I should also note that we are a self-selected group of intelligent, parsimonious (also perhaps poor) thoughtful geeks (and/or nerds), who think first and spend later.
SG
Posted by: Science Goddess | December 18, 2007 12:18 PM
Mothworm (#35): There's a difference between psychology and psychiatry. Psychiatrists are MD's who specialize in the treatment of mental illness. Psychologists can be clinical therapists (like Psychiatrists, but can't prescribe drugs since are not MD's). The people who do the reasearch about things like advertising are generally psychologists.
Happy Holly Daze to all.
Posted by: Bureaucratus Minimis | December 18, 2007 12:22 PM
SG - I wonder if it's true that conspicuous consumption takes different forms depending on what the consumer values in a partner? If you value intelligence, your display behaviours will be slanted accordingly.
So instead of the bling that says "Look how rich I am!", it's the uncut diamond or the fossil or the stargazing and volcano-watching trip to Mauna Kea that says "Look how smart I am!".
Or indeed, the snowblower that says "Look at how considerate of our domestic needs I am!" :)
Posted by: NC Paul | December 18, 2007 12:26 PM
That's some women, and some men. I used to work in a grocery store with a few women who would describe a particularly good-looking man. What they actually described was his clothes and car. He could have looked like Alfred E. Newman, long as he had an expensive suit and a flashy expensive car.
But if those women are so easy to buy, they are easy to lose. There's always somebody with a bigger bankroll.
Posted by: BaldApe | December 18, 2007 12:30 PM
Not that I entirely agree with the "conspicuous consumption/sexual display" argument, but assuming it's true, shouldn't we expect gifts to be different between uncommitted couples and those who have, through partnership or marriage, acquired common resources like homes that need periodic use of saucepans/snow blowers/shovels/vacuum cleaners and so on. In which case, the ads that show long-married couples getting all gooey-eyed about ugly diamond jewelry (which is objectionable on so many levels) are going against some pretty powerful preferences. Now, if it were a wife's gorgeous bit-on-the-side giving her useless, pretty gifts, that might be different...
Posted by: Clare | December 18, 2007 12:32 PM
NC Paul: "If you value intelligence, your display behaviours will be slanted accordingly.
Well, I haven't done a study on it, but if a girls eyes glaze over at the sight of my wall of books and it isn't in appreciation then I'm not as interested. At least, since I stopped being a teenager...
Of course, I didn't set it up to impress girls either, I set it up so I don't have to dig through the floor of books anymore.
Posted by: jba | December 18, 2007 12:36 PM
Rey Fox @53, I wish I knew. Sorry I missed it.
James Taylor, what the hell are you doin' in here?!
Singing' about prostitutes to the children! Get out of here!
Posted by: True Bob | December 18, 2007 12:48 PM
So, are any of you science-loving single guys who object to commercialism in the NYC area?
Seriously, this stuff drives me crazy. I don't want diamonds (and I've never dreamt about my wedding day or being a princess either, thank-you-very-much), but if you can find a book I'll love (or certain non-ridiculously expensive pretty things), your chances of 'monogamy' (that's what we're calling it on this thread, isn't it?) have gone way up.
Posted by: MyaR | December 18, 2007 12:49 PM
I won my wife when we were courting and 1,000 miles apart for the summer when I managed (by fluke but don't tell her) to send her exactly 20 red roses on her 20th birthday. For the xmas (this was the southern hemisphere) I sent her a soft toy, a handmade one of a kind soft toy*. It sort of became our first child.
So useless things can win fair maiden, they just have to be carefully thought out useless things that say you have thought about the person and the occasion. Shiny rocks don't do that. For this xmas I am buying her some nice wooden picture frames so we can put up more nice photos of the (now departed) real children, when they were children.
We still have the first one ;-)
*I also wrote just about every day and rang once a week, I nearly gave my Father a heart attack when the phone bill came. I calmly asked him if a cheque was alright or did he want cash? I think he realised we were serious then. He really valued money.
Posted by: Peter Ashby | December 18, 2007 12:54 PM
Apparently I'm going to be the dissenter, sort of. I think spending that kind of money on jewelry is ridiculous, but every once in a while I walk into Tiffany's and see huge diamonds under full-spectrum lights and ooh and ahh a lot. If I were in the financial bracket that I could buy them for myself without pain, and I knew the giver was also, I'd be pleased by something like that. Of course, I'd also be pleased by a shiny ribbon. Ooh, shiny!
Also, to the person who said: 'Then I say, "Oh, so if it's all about the aesthetics and not the cost, then you must not have a problem with receiving cubic zirconium." They usually look at me like I just crapped in their lap.'
I won't wear fake gems that aren't either so exaggerated they're clearly fakes or so insignificant that they won't attract notice. There are beautiful semiprecious stones out there that are "real" to me, part of excellent workmanship, and non-bank-breaking.
Do I have any real diamonds? A chip in a pendant here, an heirloom ring there. But anything that might imply real wealth? If I'm not willing to shell out for it (and I'm not), I'm not interested in faking it either.
Posted by: Morfydd | December 18, 2007 12:56 PM
Peter nailed it. Guys, she wants to know you were thinking about her. About HER, not about Generic Woman. A gift that conveys that is a good gift. That's pretty much what you need to know about selecting a gift for your significant other.
Posted by: Steve LaBonne | December 18, 2007 12:58 PM
OK, gotta brag here.
When Matt the Cat got sick and we were in the middle of spending a couple hundred hard-to-spare bucks on diagnosis and starting a sort of combo diagnosis/treatment, and we didn't know how much more we'd have to spend or where we'd draw the line, Joe responded to the financial crisis by getting on the phone and ordering my Christmas present. This way I'd have it no matter what we had to do.
It's a pricey (by our standards, certainly) Nikon monocular, the advantage of which is it works for me; much clearer and easier to use than any other I've tried out. It's small so I can wear it around my neck whenever I go out. It's already let me make sure of a couple of iffy bird sightings I made when I wasn't schlepping my binocs around. A piece of bling that lowers the ambient frustration level is a very good thing.
I put it on every morning after my welding ring and before my earrings. (Faves are cascades of beetle elytra from The Bone Room.) This makes me smile every time. The perfect gift.
Oh, guys -- if you have to "buy" or even persuade sex, you're doing it wrong. The sex, I mean.
Posted by: Ron Sullivan | December 18, 2007 12:58 PM
Which isn't to say, however, that those commercials aren't revolting. Because they really are.
I wonder if my (our?) opinion of this jewelry and the commercials isn't a function of being middle class...
For the very wealthy, these are just nice things one buys for one another, like I might see a candy bar a friend's been reminiscing about and pick it up for her.
For the poor, real jewelry is/was a safe way of accumulating wealth, where banks were unavailable and other property difficult to purchase and safeguard.
For me it's an ornament, occasionally a signifier of economic status, and not much else.
Posted by: Morfydd | December 18, 2007 1:02 PM
@#70: Well, I haven't done a study on it, but if a girls eyes glaze over at the sight of my wall of books and it isn't in appreciation then I'm not as interested.
That's definitely one of the tests I use for potential suitors as well. I think that intellectual people have developed alternative mechanisms for courtship displays.
"Then there was that biogeek I dated, he had a huuuuge... collection of evo-devo books! It was sooo sexy!"
Posted by: SabrinaW | December 18, 2007 1:04 PM
Lewis Black had a great take on what to buy if you are among the filthy rich. He would hire a young lady at a good salary and benefits to wash his balls. Then when his rich friends asked, he could say "She's my ball-washer. What'd you buy, another car?
Posted by: True Bob | December 18, 2007 1:06 PM
I have told my husband many, many times - I am not a crow. I don't care for sparkly objects. And if you EVER go out and buy a vehicle that I will end up making the monthly payments on as a "gift" (without my input or guidance through the paperwork) I will kill you.
He understands perfectly. So I end up with goofy things, like plastic taco plates that cost 50 cents from the grocery store, or little useless things that cost maybe $10 - so at least I don't feel too bad throwing them out. He doesn't know what to buy, but he definitely knows what not to buy! I get what I want for myself, then I put it under the tree with a tag marked to:mom from:Max.
Max is the dog. He's been very good to me this year. Very, very good. My husband will certainly be surprised on Christmas morning to find out just how good. Nothing outlandish, but it's amazing how that dog knows exactly what I want. Maybe he's psychic or something.
Posted by: Heather | December 18, 2007 1:06 PM
got the appliances and snowblowers (10hp, electric start), so now we skip the Christmas things and take off to Jamaica or Cozumel during the cold part of winter. Scuba!
Posted by: bill r | December 18, 2007 1:15 PM
That's not helpful. I already know I'm not scoring.
Tips and pointers! We need tips and pointers!
Posted by: Brownian, OM | December 18, 2007 1:19 PM
(on goes the tinfoil hat)
You're all a bunch twisted sexual perverts. Imagine the effrontery--actually cultivating monogamy!
Look at the number of good, righteous folk whose marriages have failed, and imagine what you're doing to their feelings! There is no doubt that this is all some twisted plot to undermine family values nationwide!
But it doesn't stop there. No, you're also anti-business, and anti-industry! Why, the failure to invest large sums of cash on shiny meaningless baubles should be prohibited by Constitutional amendment! So, that makes you soft on the War on Terror, and I'll bet you all hate America, too!
Why I'll bet it's even totally narcissistic to act as though you're committed to someone else! And we all know that narcissism is basically Teh Gay!! Well, we've got marriage amendments to stop that sort of thing!!
(okay, I'll take the hat off, now)
Posted by: Farb | December 18, 2007 1:19 PM
Well, I haven't done a study on it, but if a girls eyes glaze over at the sight of my wall of books and it isn't in appreciation then I'm not as interested. At least, since I stopped being a teenager...
Say it loud: I read and I'm proud. If both of us weren't readers, the relationship wouldn't exist. She's a reference librarian, utterly brilliant, who can find answers like that...and my research skills are not shabby.