A long story in the Wall Street Journal got us thinking about masculine jewelry today. A middle-aged guy is quoted on his recent purchase of a necklace, the first necklace he'd bought since the Larry-from-Three's Company open-shirt/medallion era.

"This time around, 'I just had to feel it on my skin,' he said, sounding primal.

His wife rolled her eyes.

But apparently manjewelry is a new trend, and in my limited contact with the male species I can attest that this is definitely true; my old manager at American Apparel was like totally obsessed with eBaying "masculine" turquoise pieces and the like. Everyone from Paul Wall to Pierce Brosnan to Charles Darwin are being blamed. ("Men are beginning to adorn themselves more because women are so much more self-sufficient and successful and far more picky, and now men need to compete in a more Darwinian fashion," says someone named Milton Pedrazza. "Just a theory.") But here's the thing, and I can't believe I am saying this: I sort of like most man jewelry. And even if it's hideous, I definitely don't mind it. Why? I think it just comes down to the fact that of all the numerous ways the celebrity-sartorial complex has sissified our dudes in recent years, it's really the least offensive. And then I thought: poll!

Gawker Media polls require Javascript; if you're viewing this in an RSS reader, click through to view in your Javascript-enabled web browser.

A Man's New Best Friend: Diamonds And Pearls [WSJ]