Does this "ring" true?

I recently saw an ad for Simon G Jewelry
which had a ring and an attached tag that said,
"I'm much cheaper than a therapist."

I realize that I might be taking it a wee bit
seriously to comment on it, however, I believe
that the things that we don't question can all
too easily and all too often become a part of
what seems to be "natural" or "normal."

I am not going to "pick on" therapy or the
purchase of jewelry, but instead question
the things that we do.

Do we try to mask or cover up the things that
don't work by offering a diversionary tactic?
If so, I would suggest it likely has a minimal
effect and/or becomes a reinforcement for
behavior and/or future ways to interact with
someone.

If a ring means love, does that mean that if
a person doesn't give you a ring there is no
love? Does it mean it the person who owns it
loses it that love is lost?

In either case, the answer could conceivably
be true, however to attach the meanings to
the idea of love can diminish love itself.

A person could easily love someone but not
be able to afford a ring, or even have the
desire to express love in that way. A person
who loses a ring could be heartbroken over
its loss because of what it represents (consider
this story about a World Series Ring).

(On the other side of things, just because
someone gives you a ring, does that mean
that s/he loves you?)

The motivation of our actions (with the
recipient aware and understanding of the
actions) is the most important thing to
focus on, not the involved objects
themselves.

Now, if you feel like the way you want to
deal with conflict is to cover it up, that
is up to you. Just recognize that is what
you are doing, and realize that it could
potentially come back to bite you in the
butt, or conceivably up the future cost of
maintaining the peace/status quo.