| Once again, we are at the (almost) halfway mark of February. I say almost, because with this being a leap year, won't hit that until probably sometime in the wee hours of tomorrow morning. And, as it is traditionally difficult for me to let this day pass by without some snarky commentary brought on by an overdose of sickly-sweet commercials proclaiming that yes, money can buy you love—especially on internet dating sites! (as well as, most likely, a prolonged lack of decently warm weather), it's time once again for the Annual Singles Awareness Day Blog Rant…post…thing. But since I've already laid out my reasons for my strong dislike of this supposed holiday, as well as the historic reasons why this day is really not about love at all, I'm going to attempt a more light-hearted approach to it this year and take a look at two of the traditional symbols of this holiday. So without further ado... Why chocolate (and not diamonds) is really a girl's best friend. (Disclaimer: I know that some of you reading this probably either own or have purchased diamonds. This is not intended to offend you in any way. Also, as I'm attempting to keep my rant a little more toned down this year, I'm not going to be getting into any of the humanitarian or environmental problems with either industry--though there's likely more of them in the diamond industry, since it's a lot easier to get fair trade and/or organic chocolate. I would recommend watching "Blood Diamond" though, if you can stomach it as it's a rather gritty, violent movie. But it really makes you think, and I don't think I'll be able to look at the diamond industry the same ever again. But anyway.) Reason #1: The cost. The old cliche, as stated so lyrically by Marilyn Monroe (and Nicole Kidman, if you're watching Moulin Rouge), is that "diamonds are a girl's best friend." I can't deny that a lot of girls in long-term dating relationships certainly seem to think so--after all, since they often come in the form of engagement rings, possession of this little chunk of rock is pretty much the dividing line between the haves and the have-nots (in this case, those that have men that, in theory, will be around for the long haul, and those of us still living in Singlesville.) More recently, probably due to more people getting married later or not at all, the diamond industry's decided to take the approach of "empowering" single women by encouraging them not to wait for a man and to buy their own shiny chunk of rock. The message? We don't need a man to spend a lot of money on us-- we're independent enough to buy our own bling! Which isn't bad, in theory. The problem with that is, diamonds are expensive. Especially now that a "good" diamond ring these days seems to need a rather large rock that can be proudly showed off to everyone within flashing distance. Or, if it's smaller diamonds, the piece of jewelry has to be absolutely coated with it-- heaven forbid anyone just wear one tiny little chip of diamond. At least, that's what the jewelry industry tries to convince us. Not that it helps them, because based on the single women I know, we're having to use that money that they think we should be using to treat ourselves to diamonds on trifling things like gas, rent and groceries. So this leads to my first reason why chocolate is really a girl's best friend...unlike diamonds, it's financially accessible to everyone. Even the poorest American can afford to buy a bar of chocolate in most cases. You have to pay a little more for a really good bar of chocolate, but it's a luxury that can be enjoyed without having to skip your next car payment. On a sort of related note, it’s also socially available to everyone—marital status doesn’t matter. Neither does age. Especially with diamond rings—they always come with the assumption that one is either married or engaged to be, and so a single girl who buys her own bling is then subjected to all sorts of awkward questions. No one asks questions about buying chocolate. Except for maybe if there’s enough for them to have some, too. Reason #2: Nourishment Chocolate tastes good, as most people would agree. I know there's a handful of people who don't like chocolate, but they're few and far between. Even diabetics can have chocolate now, in the right form—the only people who can’t partake are those who are allergic, and they are truly to be pitied. And, as study after study has pointed out recently, it can be really good for you. Dark chocolate has antioxidants that help fight cancer. Milk chocolate has calcium that helps strengthen bones and teeth. I'm not sure what white chocolate has, as there's not really any actual cocoa in them, but it's still pretty darn good tasting. If you want to expand into chocolate combined with nuts, such as Reeses’ peanut butter cups or Snickers bars, then you can also add needed protein into the mix. Chocolate also helps to boost endorphins that make people happy. This is why, when faced with a breakup or a stressful situation at work or certain times of the month, women crave chocolate. It makes you feel better. I've never heard of a woman craving diamonds in these situations. Plus it's absolutely the best snack to have when you're hanging out with the girls. Yes, it’s true that an excess of chocolate can also contribute to things like weight gain. But that’s what moderation is for, as is true in the case of many foods that taste good. As far as I know, trying to bite into a diamond would only result in higher dental bills. And possibly some expensive surgery, if one was dumb enough to actually swallow it. Reason #3: Aesthetics Yes, they’re shiny. But the fact of the matter is, a diamond is a rock. Rocks can be very pretty. So can jewelry with rocks. In fact, as I write this, I’m wearing a ring with a rock in it (my usual amethyst ring.) So I am not opposed to jewelry containing rocks. The thing is, diamonds really aren’t the most interesting rock. While it is true that there are some diamonds that come in colors, like blue, generally when people go shopping for diamonds, they want a “white” diamond. Now, if we want to be perfectly literal, a white diamond isn’t white. It’s clear. And technically, clear is not a color. It is true that there are some things that can be described in terms of diamonds—take, for instance, “Twinkle Twinkle Little Star” (excepting Lewis Carroll’s version in Alice in Wonderland), or saying the sunlight on the water “sparkles like diamonds”. But, again, diamonds do not always sparkle. They have to be in the right light, and that only applies when they are actually cut well in the first place. Otherwise, they’re just boring, clear rocks. I’d take a more interesting rock with color any day. Also, there’s the usual alternate description of diamonds, which is “ice”. Ice can be pretty, on trees and when it sparkles in the sunlight. But it’s also cold, and causes a lot of problems on the roads like those of us in my area were forced to remember just two days ago. Not to mention bringing down trees and power lines, and giving people hypothermia, and by this point in the winter everyone’s generally sick of it and wants warm weather again. Also, being compared to ice is an undesirable thing. Generally, it’s considered bad when women get labels such as “ice queen”, “cold as ice”, etc. Chocolate, on the other hand, comes in all sorts of rich shades of brown. Which is actually a color. Not to mention the saving grace of brown-eyed girls like me when it comes to descriptions—since our eyes can’t be described in terms of skies or olives or limpid pools of anything (except maybe melted chocolate), we are graced with the description of “chocolate”. Which isn’t really a bad thing—chocolate can be warm (or cold, if you prefer it in ice cream or something), and is generally quite tasty as stated before, and quite often a thing to be desired. Not a bad comparison at all. Not to mention it beats the tar out of the alternate brown descriptive item which would likely be used, which is “dirt”. Chocolate can be molded or shaped into virtually anything, and looks good in any lighting. And, if I want to draw a parallel with the end of the previous paragraph, since chocolate is the color of dirt (or earth, as I’ll call it now), it’s the color of a very important substance that produces life—you can’t have plants without dirt. And without plants, we wouldn’t have food. Including chocolate, since it comes from a plant. By that (perhaps twisted) logic, one can conclude that chocolate is the color of life and diamonds are the color of icy death.  So, there you have it. Chocolate is really a better friend to a girl than diamonds. So with that, I wish you all a pleasant Thursday, and to my fellow single female friends, I raise a mug of hot chocolate to you. |
