Mary Arline (queen_of_kithia) wrote,
Mary Arline

  • Mood:

Bloodless diamonds

A few years ago, I saw a news profile about a man in some African country (I think Botswana but I'm not absolutely certain) who was forced by the government to leave his home. I don't remember the reason that the government gave, but the government insisted that it wasn't because of diamonds; however, the man was pretty well convinced that it was because of diamonds, and so was I. This story sounded distressingly familiar; it's been played out many times all over the world, but for me it primarily evoked the troubled history of my beloved Black Hills. At that moment I decided that I would never wear a diamond unless I could be sure that no lives had been destroyed on account of it; I can't do anything to change the atrocities that were committed in past centuries, but I can refuse to be a party to atrocities committed in this century.

So I'm excited to find out that there's a jewelry company committed to providing conflict-free diamonds, and they also use recycled metals, which is a bonus because that would make me feel as though I were taking a step against validating the atrocities committed in past centuries in the Black Hills as well (although I don't know if anyone is still mining gold in the Black Hills anymore since Homestake closed, so it may be a moot point, but it still has symbolic significance to me). Now if anyone ever wants to give me an engagement ring I can say, "Great! Here's where I want you to buy it," and point him to the website.

It's all theoretical of course, but it is a tiny weight off my mind. I feel very strongly about this, but I'm also something of a traditionalist at heart, and it's nice to know that I could theoretically still accept a diamond ring, with all the attendant symbolism of everlasting devotion, without bearing guilt about where it came from.
Tags: ideas, miscellaneous
Comments for this post were disabled by the author