Guys and wedding rings

[San2]

I never get hit on, with or without a ring, so that makes no difference for me....*lol*

 

[clever_plant]

Hmm... I think it is a sort of self defeating commitment proof. I mean, if I was married and wanted to cheat on my spouse I would totally wear a ring and then take it off when I went out.

If I didn't want to cheat I'd just tell all the non-existing people that I pretend hit on me that I wasn't available.

I can see the sort of.. sentimental... gesture.. I guess... but I'd much rather do stuff to show my love than wear a ring.

 

[ecky1]

I've been happily married for 22 years and never take my ring off. My husband on the other hand wore his for a couple of weeks but hated the feel of it as he never wears jewellery and doesn't like to wear a watch either. It doesn't matter to me at all that he doesn't wear one.

 

[AnnaGail]

Daybehavior, before I was married I always looked at the guys ring finger when I was asked out for a date. If they were married there would be a ring on the ring finger or a light ring where a band used to be.

No, marriage doesn't mean a lot these days for some people. The ring nor the piece of paper makes the marriage. Its keeping the vow that counts.

 

[Daybehavior]

haha! that's awesome Anna ^_^

Thanks again all for your responses. Some very different viewpoints abound here.

 

[TrumpetGuy]

I am getting married next year and I can't wait to wear a ring. I have been shopping with my fiance for bands. I am a very sentimental, traditional type of person. I believe in the symbolism of it and everything. I plan on wearing it proudly all the time.

I am a teacher so it certainly won't be a problem with my work

 

[ChefChiTown]

Allow me to give my mega awesome thoughts on this subject matter...

If I was married, I would wear my wedding ring and I would wear it proudly. Yes, you can say that the ring is "just" a form of symbolism, but what it symbolizes is an incredibly huge and important thing in life - it symbolizes the unity between two people. And, if I were married, it would symbolize my unity with the love of my life. To each their own, but if I was married, I would proudly display that symbol - I would proudly shout to the world, "Hey, look at me...I'm married to the woman I love" - by wearing my wedding ring each and every day.

To each their own, but, to me, it's not "just a ring". It more than that. Much MUCH more.

I always find it funny when people say that it's "just a ring" or that wearing the wedding ring doesn't really mean anything in regards to their feelings on their marriage. Some people talk as if it's nothing more than an object - as if it doesn't mean anything to them, because it's just an object - as if it's the marriage itself - the experience - that matters. But, a lot of those same people probably have shoe boxes full of love letters, ticket stubs and photographs - all of which are nothing more than objects that they have kept from experiences they have had, right? So, why attach yourself emotionally to objects like that, but not your WEDDING RING? I mean, wouldn't you think that a wedding ring would mean a little bit more to you than the ticket stub from your first date or a napkin from your favorite restaurant? I'm just sayin'.

No, marriage doesn't mean a lot these days for some people. The ring nor the piece of paper makes the marriage. Its keeping the vow that counts.

Technically, it's that piece of paper that makes the marriage. Without that piece of paper, you aren't married. No matter how happy you are with each other and no matter how much love you have for one another, you aren't married without that piece of paper. No matter how unhappy you are with each other and no matter how much hate you have for one another, you are married with that piece of paper.

It's all about symbolism though. Yes, there are legally binding social contracts that you must abide by when you enter into marriage (marriage certificate), but it also serves as symbolism. Everybody has their own ideas as to what symbolism is served by certain objects - in this case, wedding rings or marriage certificates - but what people don't realize is that we use symbolism all the time...most of us are just too one-sided in our opinions to realize it.

You say that it's keeping the vows that matters, right? Well, what most people don't realize is that exchanging vows is nothing more than symbolism either. I mean, think of some of the cliche vows that people exchange with one another and look at how empty they are...

"I (insert name) take thee (insert spouse's name) to be my lawfully wedded (husband/wife); to have and to hold, for better or worse, for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health, from this day forward 'til death do us part."

Wow, that is certainly deep and meaningful :rolls eyes:. And, what do those vows even mean? How do you "keep" those vows when they are so empty and meaningless? How do you keep the vow of "having and holding" your spouse? You can't. It's an empty, meaningless thing that is said between two people during their marriage ceremony as a way to symbolize their promise of marriage to each other. That's no different than a wedding ring.

A wedding ring is worn to symbolize those oh, so important vows you speak of. So, if you don't wear your wedding ring, you (in my opinion) don't really "get" the symbolism behind marriage and all of the little things that are done during marriage ceremonies.

That's another thing - the ceremony. The ceremony is nothing more than a show. It's a way to show the world that you are getting married. The marriage that is earned through a huge, expensive and classy wedding ceremony is no different than that of a Justice of the Peace. No difference. None. EXCEEEEEEPT - the symbolism. People have weddings to show their friends, family and entire world that they are going to spend the rest of their lives together. That is nothing more than symbolism at it's finest. Two people stand together at the top of a mountain (the altar) and shout down to the world (the guests) that they are in love and are going to spend the rest of their lives together (the exchanging of vows and wedding rings). NONE of those things makes a couple married - it's that tiny piece of paper that is signed and stamped in the back room of some office that makes it official.

So, if it's "just a ring" or "just a piece of paper", then the same can be said about the marriage ceremony itself - it's "just a wedding". But, we all know that's not true. It's not "JUST" a wedding - it never is.

To each their own, but it's more than just a ring. It's symbolism that shows the world that you are proud to be married. It's symbolism that shows the world that you are in love, that you are dedicated to the love of your life and that you are no longer looking for anybody to be with....because you already found him/her. It's that ring around your finger that shows your spouse that you aren't hiding them from the rest of the world, as if they are a dirty little secret of yours - as if you are ashamed to be with them.

It's ultimately your actions that make your marriage work, but it's the piece of paper that binds your marriage and it's that ring that tells the world you have your marriage.

Speaking of actions making your marriage work - dating, proposing, having a wedding ceremony, putting rings on each other's fingers, signing a marriage certificate, etc - those are all actions that make your marriage work.

That's my two cents on that.

Daybehavior, before I was married I always looked at the guys ring finger when I was asked out for a date. If they were married there would be a ring on the ring finger or a light ring where a band used to be.

I'm glad you said that, because you verify what I am trying to say - in regards to the ring showing the world that you are taken.

You looked for a ring to find out if that man was taken or not. Because, you know that if a man has a ring on his finger that he is married. If that man were to have a ring on his finger, you would want nothing to do with him...because you can't have him. And, he is telling the world that you can't have him by wearing that ring. With the exception of cheaters and scumbags, that man is wearing that ring to keep other women away from him...because he already has his woman...his wife.

So, no...to me, it's not just a ring. It's much, much more than that. When I get married, I'm going to wear my ring every day. Whether my wife is around or not - that wedding ring is going to be proudly displayed on my ring finger, shouting to the world that I'm taken...that I'm in love...that I'm married.

Anyway, that's just me.

 

[San2]

Does having a piece of paper and a piece of metal change your feelings about your partner? Does it give you a guarantee that things are going to last? Does it make anybody more or less likely to stray of they have their mind on being unfaithful already?
To me, the vows at the actual ceremony meant nothing. It was a formality, as was the whole getting married thing. It was for tax reasons, to make things easier with the kid and for me because I'm not a British Citizen. I didn't give a rat's behind what the person was saying. I didn't know them, they didn't know me, they read words from a piece of paper that they ask thousands of other people as well. None of that had any meaning to me other than making it 'official' and 'lawful'.

We made our vows though. Long before that ceremony. We made promises to each other which mean the world to me and which I fully intend to keep for the rest of my life. Do I need a piece of metal and a piece of paper to remind me of that?
No thanks. I know. He knows. And that is *all* that matters to me.

 

[ChefChiTown]

Does having a piece of paper and a piece of metal change your feelings about your partner? Does it give you a guarantee that things are going to last? Does it make anybody more or less likely to stray of they have their mind on being unfaithful already?

No. But, it's that piece of paper that technically makes you married to that other person. Without that piece of paper, you are just dating. No matter what your feelings are toward your partner, no matter how faithful you remain - without that piece of paper, you are not married.

And, the opposite can be said as well. With that piece of paper, you are married. No matter what your feelings are toward your partner (even if you don't love them), no matter how unfaithful you are - with that piece of paper, you are married. With that piece of paper, no matter what, you are his wife and he is your husband. You could be a million miles away from each other, in the arms of another person that you love, but, the fact remains - you are his wife and he is your husband. That doesn't change until you that "piece of paper" is gone.

To me, the vows at the actual ceremony meant nothing. It was a formality, as was the whole getting married thing. It was for tax reasons, to make things easier with the kid and for me because I'm not a British Citizen. I didn't give a rat's behind what the person was saying. I didn't know them, they didn't know me, they read words from a piece of paper that they ask thousands of other people as well. None of that had any meaning to me other than making it 'official' and 'lawful'.

When you say 'ceremony', are you referring to a wedding? If not, then I assume you went to the Justice of the Peace and had your 'ceremony' there - which would show me that you, in deed, didn't care about the production of marriage - rather, the legal benefit.

But...

If so, then doesn't that kind of contradict the feelings you are trying to portray here? Why go through an entire wedding ceremony if you didn't care about it? If it didn't mean anything to you, then why put in the time, money and effort to make it happen?

We made our vows though. Long before that ceremony. We made promises to each other which mean the world to me and which I fully intend to keep for the rest of my life. Do I need a piece of metal and a piece of paper to remind me of that?
No thanks. I know. He knows. And that is *all* that matters to me.

No, but you need that piece of paper to be married to him. That's the point I was making. So, it's not "just a piece of paper" - it's the one thing in your life that binds you and your partner in marriage.

The piece of paper is a legal document that binds you together with your husband in the unity of marriage. The wedding ceremony is a symbolic way to inform the world that you are taken and that you are beginning a new life with the one you love. The wedding ring is a symbol of your commitment to your husband and wearing that ring displays your commitment to all who see you.

You don't have to wear your wedding ring if you don't want to - to each their own - but you and I both know that it's more than just a "piece of metal". If it was, then why bother exchanging rings during your marriage ceremony? "Because it's part of the ceremony?" "Because it's what people do when they get married?" Well, wearing that wedding ring after the ceremony is part of marriage. It's what people do when they get married. Sooooo...

Like I said, to each their own, but I just find it unbelievable when people claim that it's "just a ring" or "just a piece of paper". Not just you - but anybody who claims that.

Ask yourself this - would you throw your wedding ring into the garbage, right in front of your husband and tell him that it doesn't mean anything to you? If your answer is 'no' - or if you even have just a moment of hesitation to think about your answer - then no...it's not "just a piece of metal" to you.

And, something to think about - if you don't wear your wedding ring and your husband decides he wants to leave you, he can use the fact that you don't wear your wedding ring as grounds to divorce you. Why? Because (at least in the United States), our court system - the same court system that recognizes marriage as a legally binding contract between two people - recognizes the failure to wear a wedding ring as a sign that the person in question is not remaining faithful to their vows.

Food for thought.

 

[San2]

When you say 'ceremony', are you referring to a wedding? If not, then I assume you went to the Justice of the Peace and had your 'ceremony' there - which would show me that you, in deed, didn't care about the production of marriage - rather, the legal benefit.

I'm in Britain, so it's the registry office here. It's a little ceremony, peeps are there, you get the customary speech etc., then everybody goes home. And no, I didn't care about it at all. It was for the legal benefit only.

But...
If so, then doesn't that kind of contradict the feelings you are trying to portray here? Why go through an entire wedding ceremony if you didn't care about it? If it didn't mean anything to you, then why put in the time, money and effort to make it happen?

No, it doesn't. I went through the ceremony because I had to, because you can't get married in this country without it. To get the legal benefits, you have to go to the registry office and get married. And also to avoid getting nagged at by the in-laws.

No, but you need that piece of paper to be married to him. That's the point I was making. So, it's not "just a piece of paper" - it's the one thing in your life that binds you and your partner in marriage.

Nope. It's the piece of paper that makes it (in the respective country) legal. It's what we feel for each other that binds us, not the ceremony or some stupid piece of paper. You make it sound like buying a car 'It's not yours until you have the papers'. Getting married wasn't the beginning of a new life. We were already together before that. We got married because we had to, in order to make our life easier. If there was no legal benefit from it, I wouldn't have gotten married, simply because I don't see the point. A person I don't know quotes words that I don't believe to legalise a relationship that they know nothing about for a legal system that I despise. Great.

I don't need a ring to show that I'm married. I KNOW. I don't care about everybody else. Wearing a ring says NOTHING about my committment at all. And yes, it is just a piece of metal. No, I wouldn't throw it out though. I've pawned mine when we ran out of money on occasion. And I didn't throw a hissy fit when my husband couldn't find his, cause...well....it's just a piece of jewellery. He doesn't love me any less just because the shiny thing on his finger's gone.

As for the whole divorce and whatnot thing - I am sorry, but that is the most stupid, ridiculous thing I have ever read. I don't recall signing the piece of paper that said 'Oh, by the way, I'm gonna wear that ring, come hell or high water, cause, you know, if I don't that means I want to shag the milkman'. Give me a break. What a pile of rubbish.

That's what pisses me off. I don't wear a ring, so I don't want to be faithful? My relationship is worth less cause I don't believe in the piece of paper? I put my relationship, with or without seal of approval from the authorities, against any ring wearing, 'committment showing' (what a hypocritical thing to say by the way), old style white dress church marriage, any day of the week.

 

[ChefChiTown]

I'm in Britain, so it's the registry office here. It's a little ceremony, peeps are there, you get the customary speech etc., then everybody goes home. And no, I didn't care about it at all. It was for the legal benefit only.

No, it doesn't. I went through the ceremony because I had to, because you can't get married in this country without it. To get the legal benefits, you have to go to the registry office and get married. And also to avoid getting nagged at by the in-laws.

Question answered.

From what you're saying, it sounds like your "Registry Office" is exactly like the Justice of the Peace here. No wedding ceremony, but there is a small gathering of witnesses (that have to be there, I believe) as the authorized official swears you in as a legally married couple.

Nope. It's the piece of paper that makes it (in the respective country) legal. It's what we feel for each other that binds us, not the ceremony or some stupid piece of paper. You make it sound like buying a car 'It's not yours until you have the papers'.

You don't have a marriage until you have those papers though. It's unarguable. You could be together for 50 years and have a perfectly happy and loving relationship, but, if you don't have a marriage certificate, then you aren't married.

Now, there is such a thing in the United States called a "Common Law Marriage", which involves two people living together for a certain number of years and being recognized, not as a legally married couple, but as having a "Common Law Marriage". It's very confusing though, so I won't explain it. I don't know if Britain has that either. I don't know.

Getting married wasn't the beginning of a new life. We were already together before that. We got married because we had to, in order to make our life easier. If there was no legal benefit from it, I wouldn't have gotten married, simply because I don't see the point.

You do see the point though - the legal implications that effect your life, not only as a couple, but as individuals as well (including your child). It might not be the same point that others see (some see it from a legal standpoint, some see it from an emotional standpoint, some see it from a financial standpoint, some see it from a social standpoint, etc), but you still saw a point to having a legal marriage, which is why you got married.

I don't need a ring to show that I'm married. I KNOW. I don't care about everybody else. Wearing a ring says NOTHING about my committment at all. And yes, it is just a piece of metal. No, I wouldn't throw it out though. I've pawned mine when we ran out of money on occasion. And I didn't throw a hissy fit when my husband couldn't find his, cause...well....it's just a piece of jewellery. He doesn't love me any less just because the shiny thing on his finger's gone.

I'm not saying you love each other less just because you don't wear your rings. I never said that at all - nothing even close. I was making a point - it's not "just a ring".

As for the whole divorce and whatnot thing - I am sorry, but that is the most stupid, ridiculous thing I have ever read. I don't recall signing the piece of paper that said 'Oh, by the way, I'm gonna wear that ring, come hell or high water, cause, you know, if I don't that means I want to shag the milkman'. Give me a break. What a pile of rubbish.

Where did I say anything about you (personally) being unfaithful to your husband just because you don't wear a ring? I told you that, in this country (which we live in different countries, so it might be different over there - I don't know), not wearing your wedding ring is recognized as a grounds for divorce, as it shows that the person involved is not staying true to their vows. That's not my opinion and nowhere did I imply that you, personally, are being unfaithful - it's the American law.

That's what pisses me off. I don't wear a ring, so I don't want to be faithful? My relationship is worth less cause I don't believe in the piece of paper? I put my relationship, with or without seal of approval from the authorities, against any ring wearing, 'committment showing' (what a hypocritical thing to say by the way), old style white dress church marriage, any day of the week.

What's hypocritical, exactly? I don't get it.

And, once again, nobody said anything about you being unfaithful. You're looking way too far into things and taking things entirely way too personal.

If you don't want to wear a ring - fine. Nobody is going to make you. And, I'm not saying you're a bad person because you choose to go ringless. Nowhere did I say anything close to that. All I'm saying is that it's not "just a ring". It's more than "just a piece of metal" - otherwise you wouldn't have exchanged rings during your marriage.

 

[San2]

Yes, sounds the same. And we have the common law thing as well, even though it is still not the same as being married when it comes to legal side of things. I think they are working on changing that though.

I know you weren't saying anything about me personally, but this is one of those topics that irks me to no end. It was little things, like saying 'as long as you don't have the piece of paper, you're just dating' . I know it probably wasn't meant like that, but the little word 'just' makes it sound as if a relationship is worth 'less' because a couple isn't married. 'Oh, he's just your boyfriend'. 'Oh, you're not married, you're just dating'.

Also the notion that somebody who wears their ring as a sign of their commitment t their marriage strongly implies that somebody who does not wear their ring or does not place as much importance on formalities is not as committed as somebody who wears the ring.

As for the legal bit, yes, it is different. Fortunately, because I still find that utterly ridiculous. It's in the same category as women are only allowed to drive a car if they have a man with a lantern walking in front of them clearing the road. It's....erh, whatever. It makes NO sense whatsoever.

I find it hypocritical that people (not you, personally) have a tendency to pass judgement on people who live together as common law, unmarried, or not taking marriage as 'seriously' as they should by not wearing their ring for example, while most people who go out and cheat and put it around are usually happily flashing their wedding rings and not giving a damn about their 'commitment' and the piece of paper they signed.

And I guess we just have to agree on the fact that we have entirely different views on this - to me, it is really just a piece of metal. We exchanged them as part of the ceremony because my mother in law bought them and would have been miffed if we hadn't used them.

I do have a bracelet though which my now husband gave me at some point, long before we got married. That is something I wear and cherish, because it has a special meaning for me. So you see, I am not a completely lost cause when it comes to romance.

 

[ChefChiTown]

Yes, sounds the same. And we have the common law thing as well, even though it is still not the same as being married when it comes to legal side of things. I think they are working on changing that though.

I know you weren't saying anything about me personally, but this is one of those topics that irks me to no end. It was little things, like saying 'as long as you don't have the piece of paper, you're just dating' . I know it probably wasn't meant like that, but the little word 'just' makes it sound as if a relationship is worth 'less' because a couple isn't married. 'Oh, he's just your boyfriend'. 'Oh, you're not married, you're just dating'.

That's not how I meant it. I meant it as...I'm not married to my girlfriend, we're just dating. It doesn't mean that I think dating her is nothing, as if "PFFT, it's just dating. That doesn't mean anything." It means that we're only dating, not married. That's the sense I meant it in.

Also the notion that somebody who wears their ring as a sign of their commitment t their marriage strongly implies that somebody who does not wear their ring or does not place as much importance on formalities is not as committed as somebody who wears the ring.

That's not what I'm saying or implying at all. People can wear their wedding ring for the their entire marriage, but be completely unloving and unfaithful to their spouse. And, the opposite can be said. People can never wear their ring during their marriage and be the most faithful, loving and dedicated spouse there is.

You can't tie the two together - the wearing of the ring and the quality of marriage. It would be ignorant for anybody to even to try to do so. And, I wasn't tying the two together, so if you think I was, then you misinterpreted what I was saying. I was just saying that, in the eyes of the law (here in the US anyway), not wearing your wedding ring is taken as a sign that the person in question is breaking their vows. Because, technically, the exchanging of wedding rings is part of a couple's vows. You don't have to exchange rings - it's a choice. Just as the words you say to each other during your vows are a choice - you can say whatever you want to one another. You can exchange whatever words or objects you want, including rings. And, if you choose to exchange rings, it is legally considered part of your wedding vows (as it was something that was exchanged with the intention of symbolizing your marriage to one another).

That's all I was saying.

As for the legal bit, yes, it is different. Fortunately, because I still find that utterly ridiculous. It's in the same category as women are only allowed to drive a car if they have a man with a lantern walking in front of them clearing the road. It's....erh, whatever. It makes NO sense whatsoever.

HAHAHAHA, what? Did we just travel back in time to the 1927?

I find it hypocritical that people (not you, personally) have a tendency to pass judgement on people who live together as common law, unmarried, or not taking marriage as 'seriously' as they should by not wearing their ring for example, while most people who go out and cheat and put it around are usually happily flashing their wedding rings and not giving a damn about their 'commitment' and the piece of paper they signed.

I don't find that hypocritical. It would be hypocritical if someone were to say "It's a shame that you don't wear your wedding ring. How dare you!!!"...and then not wear their own wedding ring themselves. That would be hypocritical.

I do understand what you're saying though. And, yes, I agree...it's ridiculous when people do that. Wearing your wedding ring doesn't give you permission to do whatever you want, just as long as you keep the ring on your finger. I'm not comparing the two scenarios (not wearing your wedding ring and cheating), but it is pretty ridiculous when a person claims one is bad, while ignoring the other.

And I guess we just have to agree on the fact that we have entirely different views on this - to me, it is really just a piece of metal. We exchanged them as part of the ceremony because my mother in law bought them and would have been miffed if we hadn't used them.

Allow me to rephrase what I said earlier...

It might not mean anything to YOU personally, but that doesn't mean that your wedding ring doesn't mean anything to anybody else.

You just said that your Mother-in-Law bought the rings for you, right? And, you said that she would be upset if you didn't use them during your marriage ceremony, correct? Well, you exchanged the rings because they mean something to her. And, her feelings and emotions obviously mean something to you, otherwise you wouldn't have used the rings during your ceremony.

So, the rings themselves might just be a piece of metal to you and they might not mean something to you in regards to your feelings toward your husband and/or marriage, but...they do mean something. Maybe not to you, but to somebody else (IE - your Mother in Law).

I do have a bracelet though which my now husband gave me at some point, long before we got married. That is something I wear and cherish, because it has a special meaning for me. So you see, I am not a completely lost cause when it comes to romance.