size opinion

[Matata]

Great causes are never tried on their merits; but the cause is reduced to particulars to suit the size of the partizans, and the contention is ever hottest on minor matters.
---Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803–1882)

 

[dbgaap]

Hey Matata-
Good One!
LOL

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 3/5/2004 2:22:52 PM Matata wrote:

Great causes are never tried on their merits; but the cause is reduced to particulars to suit the size of the partizans, and the contention is ever hottest on minor matters.
---Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803–1882)----------------

If I believe the the way this quote is interpreted, then I'll bite.

First, get the cry me a river - violin music out of the way......

But, my bigger picture goes to issue of why do people feel it o.k. to express their opinion so openly (even to the person's face) when the cards are stacked in the favor of the receiver.

ie. big diamonds (that I own - not considering for purchase) is easily bantered about as "tacky" etc.

big houses (which I do not own) - they built to impress their neighbors. It huge but has to be tacky.

granted - these are harmless things. But, I think these sentiments are just as hurtful as the "small" comments. It seems that it is more politically correct to attack the *perceived* haves. When said haves may even not mention that they live in *that* big house for the very reason they don't want to take that heat.

My bigger picture - why make value judgements either way. It's just unfair & many times wrong. That's my bigger issue.

Edited to add: My best friend's "friend" asked why I drive such a crappy car when I have this great jewelry & clothes? My friend was in tears laughing telling me this on several levels. I laughed also - but, baffled as to *why* someone would even think of that. The answer to her question was soooo clear to me. Why would that pop into someone's head?

 

[Matata]

Fire & Ice,
I posted the quote in response to a portion of Al's post wherein she states: "Hodne came here some time ago and said "I know the value/economy in buying lesser color/clarity, and I know the eye can't see the difference, but it matters to me what it says on paper, and I want a D/IF." People jumped all over that guy (and Ed) and made tons of assumptions about how frivolous he was with his money, how wasteful he was, how his desire for perfection in a diamond correlated to what he must want in his mate....if she was so perfect, why did he wait 6 years to propose....it was RELENTLESS."

My point, which I have equal right to express and will take liberty to do so, as you freely express yours, is that folks are getting worked up over a matter that -- while important to the individual in the moment -- ain't gonna make much of a difference to the world at large. (Do I hear violins in the background?)

Interpret it any way you wish. I meant no harm. It's interesting that you reacted so negatively.

 

[aljdewey]

----------------
On 3/5/2004 9:04:31 PM fire&ice wrote:




But, my bigger picture goes to issue of why do people feel it o.k. to express their opinion so openly (even to the person's face) when the cards are stacked in the favor of the receiver.

----------------

Because they were asked for them (their opinions). They were asked what they think.....in the context of a forum where a lot of folks have been here quite a while and know one another quite well.

If a stranger in the grocery store asked me that question, I might be a bit more "cloaked" in my response. But among a group of friends----people I've conversed with for more than a year now and know me well enough to know that I don't judge *them* by their possessions----I feel comfortable being candid.

On the flip side, if I ask others what they think, I expect the same.....I expect them to tell me how they really think and NOT what they *think* I want to hear. I'm a big girl......I can take it if someone doesn't like what I like.

Again, I feel it's much more egregious to take the liberty of telling someone how he should spend his money (when he never asked for anyone's opinion on that) than it is to honestly answer what should have been a harmless question.

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 3/5/2004 10:07:58 PM Matata wrote:

Fire & Ice,
while important to the individual in the moment -- ain't gonna make much of a difference to the world at large. (Do I hear violins in the background?)

Interpret it any way you wish. I meant no harm. It's interesting that you reacted so negatively.----------------

I didn't react negatively. I was making a comment as to why people view "things" as important. It's not. The value, whether negative or positive, one places on such is ridiculous. Why in the world would someone waste their breath wondering why I drive a crappy car? It goes to much more of a bigger issue than a comment in general.

There is a marked difference when someone asks an opinion about something they are considering & something one owns that is near and dear to them. And, no, it doesn't make a difference in the big scheme of life. I just find it arrogant & wasted breath to comment negatively on something someone owns. I am asked on a regular basis my opinion about items in my specialty. If someone is asking for an appraisal, I am honest. If someone is happily showing me their new great find, I think of something nice to say. That's life. That's how *I* was brought up. My opinion is just not that important (and not fact). I believe, it is arrogant to think so.

 

[maria]

Fire & Ice, I think what I meant to ask in this thread was not how big should one individual diamond be, but how big should a ring really get before it's over the top. I think I saw you post about how it's not really the ring size to consider with this, but more the finger length and hand size. I totally agree. I do have smaller hands and shorter fingers, with a ring size of 5.5. Maybe that's why if you're talking about an individual diamond, I prefer stones on the smaller side, on ME. NOT on someone with a larger hand or longer fingers. With longer fingers, there's more space that needs to be filled up! But really, in thinking about this cluster ring with multiple diamonds, it probably is as wide as my finger. OK, that's just too too much for me! But we'll see.
In general, I don't understand why everyone thinks just because someone says they actually prefer a smaller size than what you all would prefer, that means they are jealous or can't afford it. Don't project your feelings on other people! Maybe that's actually how they feel about it. Why do you assume that everyone has to want bigger, bigger, bigger and if they say they don't it's just jealousy. Hey, if people don't have the cash laying around, there's always a credit card, or you can always re-mortgage your house! Don't laugh, I bet you some people have done it. And if they have, to each his/her own, I'm not knocking you. I'm just saying, to me all it says is, hey that person's diamond is big. (and many times, beautiful). Period. I don't make judgments about the size of their bank accounts, because I don't think you can. Maybe they just inherited it (like me!)

 

[fire&ice]

Hey, I never put a judgement on people wearing large diamonds or small diamonds. If you read any recent comments, they were either in jest, tongue in cheek or something that has been said about people wearing large stones. It's absolutely ridiculous to equate someone who wears a big diamond as a prostitute (hoochie).

That said, my preference is for large *beautiful* jewelry. I have a ring that is a Cartier design from the 1920's. It's stunning in both craftmanship & juxtaposition of color, etc. Initially, I thought it huge (too big) for my fingers. I loved it so I didn't care. I'm not wearing a large piece of jewelry. I am wearing a work of art that stops people dead in their tracks. People who know what they are looking at certainly aren't thinking that looks too big on her hand.

My point, if your ring turns out to be a great piece of jewelry, IMHO, it doesn't matter whether it's too large for your hands. But, you are the one that has to wear it.

 

[maria]

Fire & Ice, top half of comment directed at you. The second part was to nobody in particular, which was why I prefaced it by saying "in general". Also, I never called anybody anything.

 

[innerkitten]

I feel the same way as Katbadness. I have actually been looking for rings with my boyfriend and I really like stones around .60 maybe even .50 . I tried a .73 on recently and it really did feel and look too big on my hand. But I am kinda small boned so maybe thats why or perhaps it's just a matter of taste.

I dunno.

 

[Mara]

maria..i know you noted 'in general' but since i am the one who noted 'jealousy' in my last post on this thread, 2 pages ago...let me clarify. if someone has a preference for small stones, that's great...it doesn't bother me. everyone has their own way of doing things.




i was speaking more towards those who may point at a larger stone wearer and say that if you wear a large stone that it's 'hootchie' or you are 'desperate for attention'. they are labeling and judging just by the size of a diamond without knowing a thing about the person wearing it. i think some of that stems from jealousy in some way, shape or form. i have admitted to it a time or two...not just related to diamonds.

i've got small stones and i've got bigger stones. i love all diamonds, and even though i love the larger stones, i would never turn away a free bauble if it was offered.