The odd thing is, in Western culture the origin of gemstones is in the myth of Prometheus. Before cultures from the other sides of the Mediterranean encountered the ancient Greeks, they all used plain rings (often wooden ones, too). This includes old Jews - when Christianity and Islam developed, gemstones were already a common thing.
The Prometheus figure shortly: the demigod Prometheus was chained to a mountain, where a huge vulture pecked his liver off during daytime, and during the night the liver grew back. This was his punishment for sympathizing humankind and bringing fire down to them from the Olympus, against the will of the older gods. To show their gratefulness towards Prometheus, the Greeks wore rings first made of stone to carry their piece of Prometheus' mountain. But a solid stone ring is a heavy bugger indeed, so they soon began to favour planting small stones into bands of wood or metal. (Another explanation for planting precious stones in rings was that it used to be an effective way of smuggling bribes through toll lines between the city-states - rings were considered a most personal piece of property and only prisoners were stripped their rings: thus, a free man could always wear a ring when crossing borders, and hide some valuable property in his palm).
So. As it is apparent that a plain band has no effect on flooziness whatsoever, as men are not floozies if they don't wear their plain bands, the secret must be in the stone. The funny thing being - carrying a stone on a ring symbolizes gratitude towards rebelling against gods. Soooo, rebelling against gods = not being floozy. Obeying God's will (aka not carrying stones - 1 Timothy 2:9-10 "...women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire...") would then result in being floozy. Eh? Of course, it could be that this disturbing paradox is a result of a rather eclectic, or syncretistic, view on the god-kind. But, if our intention is not to stick to single religions but a wider picture on Western culture (which, apparently, has been the main influence on the thinking of the sweet old lady starring in the first post), we will have to accept that. And this does invoke heavy puzzlings of the head unto me.
But, what's best, I am quite sure that elaborately presenting this dilemma when someone expresses one's thoughts on rings and flooziness might prove to be quite an effective way of finishing the conversation!