Let's Call The Whole Thing Off Analysis

An Engagement With a Change of Mind Meanings of engagement rings have largely changed from ideas of medieval times to present day. The authors of the two articles, “The Strange Economics of Engagement Rings” by Matthew O’Brien and “Let’s Call the Whole Thing off” by Douglas J. Johnston, discuss possible meanings behind the engagement ring. Both articles claim that marriage is more about gaining social and economic benefits as opposed to love. In creating this claim both authors use different means of support, while both use the “Breach of Promise” law. O’Brien’s article compares to Johnston’s through the mutual discussion of the “Breach of Promise” law. In the article, “The Strange Economics of Engagement Rings”, author Matthew O’Brien discusses that historically men do not only buy engagement rings as a way to show their undying love for someone; instead to insure that women were still virgins prior to the engagement, increasing market
First, the author examines the ideas of marriage through medieval times, which was rarely focused around love and actually focused more on gaining land or money. Men simply lost payment for ending an engagement while the woman lost social credibility. In this event the man would be sued and forced to verify the women’s virtue, allowing the event of another engagement to occur. This law was then adopted by Canada but with more detailed reasons where the man is able to verify that the woman slept with other men before the engagement, allowing the man to end the engagement. Throughout years this law has since faded during the sexual revolution of the 60s and also social growth in which women no longer require a marriage to be successful. Johnston concludes the article by stating that Canada has since demolished allowing lawsuit to occur due to a “Breach of Promise”