As a teenager I learned that engagement rings are only worn during a couple’s engagement period. But times have changed. Because women make such a big deal about wanting an engagement ring that costs at least 15% of her fiance’s yearly salary (Zales said so), they’ve become reluctant to hide such precious jewelry just because a couple vows were exchanged.

Everywhere you look women have now settled on the retarded trend of wearing both the engagement ring and unglamorous wedding band at the same time, on the same finger. They do this because they want to continue advertising their life partner’s salary. How else will her peer group judge her worth as a woman? It takes way too much work to judge a person’s character and personality—but that shiny diamond is like a billboard that everyone can understand.

I’m so jealous and depressed—where’s the chocolate?!” I would love to see a man try to reason with his long-term girlfriend that an expensive engagement ring is a waste of money, that it’s better well spent towards a house or interesting vacations. I’d get the popcorn ready as she rails on him for being unromantic, selfish, and “out of touch,” because nothing says romance and generosity like a rock whose supply is artificially controlled by multinational entities.

If a woman finds it socially unacceptable to wear an engagement ring after the wedding, she will not push for something so costly to only wear for a year or less. Next time you see a double-ring wearer, all you have to do is ask the shallow woman why she wears both rings. Peel at the scab to get to her true shameful intentions. Since women are hyper-sensitive to mainstream opinion, once millions of people catch on to the idea I have written about today