Responding to the news that Prince William won’t be wearing a wedding band, Hugo Schwyzer argues that if you’re married, you should sport a ring.
With the royal wedding between Prince William and Kate Middleton just over a fortnight away, Buckingham Palace is carefully letting out daily updates of the impending nuptials. Few bits of news have proved as controversial as the announcement that the future king will forgo a wedding band after he’s married. As Zaneta Jung reported here last week, that decision hasn’t been well received by the press or the public. Even those who take no interest in royalty have been drawn into a debate about the larger issue: should men wear wedding rings?
We know—or we should know—that not everyone buys into the marriage ideal. (Many gay men and lesbians do buy into the ideal, but cannot have their commitments recognized by law.) People can be in enduring, loving monogamous relationships without getting married. People can also find happiness and fulfillment outside of monogamy itself: the experiences of many of my celibate, polyamorous, and proudly promiscuous friends have shown me that.
But at the same time, marriage remains an iconic institution. Lots of us still get married—though fewer than in earlier eras. Lots of young people I work with tell me that they want to get married someday, but only “if” they meet the right person. Most teens and 20-somethings have seen plenty of divorces and comparatively few happy and enduring marriages. These young people are no less romantic than their elders, but they are probably more fearful. They’ve seen that what can go wrong usually does. Plenty still believe in enduring love, but many aren’t at all sure it will “happen” for them.
So what about those guys who by luck or by choice have made happy marriages for ourselves? Do our wedding rings matter? Why should people care about our jewelry decisions—after all, are we really less married when we choose not to put on a ring?
♦◊♦
Wedding rings have been around for a long time, but men only started wearing them regularly in the 20th century. Cynics argue that “double ring” ceremonies were pushed by the jewelry industry, eager to maximize profits by encouraging men as well as women to wear something permanent and expensive on their left ring fingers. But it’s also true that the practice of men wearing rings tied in with increasing urbanization. In a small town, everyone knows who the married men are. In the big cities to which more and more Americans migrated, a wedding band became the only sure-fire way to know who was available and who wasn’t.
I don’t think that every man who doesn’t wear his wedding ring is necessarily “sleazy.” The refusal to put on a wedding band doesn’t prove an inclination to cheat any more than wearing a ring is a guarantor of fidelity. As Jung pointed out in her article, some men (and women) loathe jewelry, or have jobs that make wearing a ring impossible or even dangerous. There are plenty of reasons why someone might not want to wear his ring—and at least some of those reasons have nothing to do with wanting to feign singleness.
But weddings are still social events; few of us get hitched without at least some family or friends in attendance. Marriage has both a private and a public dimension. Many religious traditions implore the congregation to pledge to support the couple whose wedding they are witnessing. As a former First Lady and current Secretary of State Hillary Clinton once wrote, it takes a village to raise a child. She might have added that it sometimes takes a village to help sustain a marriage. Just maybe, the village has a right to expect married men to act differently than single men. And one of the most obvious ways that married men can mark themselves out as “off the market” is with a wedding ring.
♦◊♦
Since my wife and I were married six years ago, I only take my ring off to sleep, bathe, and work out. I travel a lot by myself, and often notice women (and, much less often, men) giving a quick glance at my left hand. I don’t flatter myself that all of those people would be interested if my hand were bare. Rather, many of them are looking to size me up quickly, sometimes as much to assess potential threat level as to determine whether I’m available. Though men with wedding rings still do hit on women, there’s at least a perception that a guy with a band on his finger is less likely to be on the prowl. (In my own purely personal experience, the stereotype that women are more likely to pursue a man who is wearing a ring has turned out to be a myth.)
It is not designed to ward other women off, or to remind me to be faithful. It symbolizes more than monogamy; it symbolizes partnership, it symbolizes that the decisions I make and the dreams I pursue are made and pursued in intimate concert with one other human being. It is a symbol that while there is always an autonomous and independent me, that me is inextricably linked to an “us.” The monogamous ideal we embrace is one vehicle for personal growth, it isn’t the only or even the best one. But it is mine, and it is ours.
The David Yurman band I wear has been a bit dinged over the years, but it still shines. My wife and I, like all married couples, have had our ups and our downs. Our bodies have aged a bit (mine far more visibly than hers), and have their nicks and scratches too. But our marriage still gleams, still empowering us to go out and serve in public and come home to the safe (but challenging) refuge of our shared private life.
I don’t judge men who choose not to wear their rings. But I’m proud to wear mine, and if you see me in public without it (and I’m not in workout gear), then I’ve either been robbed or something very unfortunate has happened. Feel free to ask.
And yeah, I wish Prince William would wear his, too.
♦◊♦
More From Our Special Marriage Section:
What Your Marriage Needs to Survive
My Exemplary, Everyday Marriage
A Guy’s Divorce Survival Guide
How Porn Can Ruin Your Sex Life—and Your Marriage
Are Men Natural-Born Cheaters?
—Photo spleeney/Flickr
If you are looking for that special wedding gown, then I must recommend the internationally renowned designer Caroline Castigliano. The beauty and passion behind her wedding dress designs really shines through. This site is a must to visit.
What an incredibly arrogant and misinformed article. I find jewelry of any sort poncy and effeminate as such i am simply not prepared to wear. this does not disract one iota from the love and commitment i know i have for my wife. in future keep your ignorant and myopic views to yourself.
I bought my husband a silver wedding band for Christmas,and knowing his line of work as a carpenter, wish I hadn;t but it still hurt that he won;t wear it when he isn;t working,and we have been married 34yrs,and it has been good,rings don;t make a marriage love and commitment make a marriage and that is what I told my husband, I believe in my vows and what God brought toghether, and I still love my husband very much, think I will take the ring back and get a watch,
I will never wear a ring. Ever. I hate jewelry and always find it uncomfortable and can’t stand wearing it. I have two college degrees and never bought a class ring. I don’t even wear a watch.
If she insists that I wear a ring or not get married, we won’t be getting married and I would be grateful that she showed me her true colors before marriage, that she expects to control me, even down to what I wear.
Wow catch. So you’re telling me when you meet a woman who’s compatible in every way possible, so much so that she understands your free-spirited nature- you’d not wear your wedding band or even marry her if she made ONE request for you to do so. Sounds like the controlling one is you, and the one who has to make a few sacrifices is your significant other, never you. What a mellow dramatic relationship I’m sure not many women have wanted to pursue. bottom line, you should love her more then you hate jewelry. I love my boyfriend and I… Read more »
Wow catch. So you’re telling me when you meet a woman who’s compatible in every way possible, so much so that she understands your free-spirited nature- you’d not wear your wedding band or even marry her if she made ONE request for you to do so. catch may not be too far off base. If this hypothetical woman is going to base a (hopefully) long term commitment on the acceptance of one condition then it does sound like she is controlling. …and the one who has to make a few sacrifices is your significant other, never you. And I don’t… Read more »
No, YOU should wear a wedding ring if you want to. Leave the rest of us alone to make our own decision. I don’t wear a wedding band, don’t ever plan to, and see no reason to. Everyone who is anyone knows that I’m married, even people who know who I am that I haven’t met or don’t remember meeting know that I’m married. The only people who don’t know are total strangers. I have no reason to inform strangers about my personal life. It’s kind of none of their business. It wouldn’t trouble me in the least if my… Read more »
Amen Eric! I got married young (23) and my husband was (25). For the first yr we both wore our rings faithfully but being the young vibrant outgoing couple that we used to be we both lost our rings about 3 times in 3 yrs! I finally decided not to keep spending unnecessary money on things we keep losing. 13 yrs and 4 children later my husband STILL doesn’t wear a wedding band although everyone knows we are married. I wear my engagement band sometimes (to church, weddings etc) but it makes us no less married to wear them or… Read more »
My ex refused to wear his wedding ring most of the time. He said it bothered him when he typed. I spent all day typing too, and my ring was designed the same as his. Mine never bothered me. He sometimes carried it in his pocket. It disappeared out of his pocket one evening when he visited a girl he had a major crush on. I later realized, that was the beginning of the end. Nevertheless, I think it’s an important symbol and tradition. The rings don’t have to be expensive. But since marriage is a legal contract, that has… Read more »
Kitti, sorry about your misfortune. However, most people do or should carry an emergency contact card in their purse or wallet. Further, there are no secrets anymore. Also, the police have access to public records so as to identify one’s spouse.
Bottom line, there’s no real reason to wear a ring unless one wants to. It only has as much symbolic importance as that assigned to it by the wearer. Wedding rings don’t keep marriages together or pull them apart, people do.
Symbols are public and private. It’s not about signifying that you’re “off the market”. It’s a small symbol between partners that signifies commitment. Weddings are always public, otherwise most people would get married in private. Obviously they don’t. They get married in public because it’s a public declaration as much as it is private. Wearing a wedding ring is not a big deal, either way. It doesn’t make you rebellious not to wear it. I can’t help but think that some men don’t wear it because they don’t want to commit fully and want some women to think they are… Read more »
Agree, If we got married we have to wear our wedding ring , first all it is a way of showing respect for our partner and it is the symbol of love.
It’s weird how this title isn’t actually what the article is really saying at all…It doesn’t sync up. The title is sensationalist, designed to elicit a reaction, and the article is much more nuanced, and has WAAAAY more shades of gray. Did the writer pick the title too? It’s weird how disjointed the two are.
Hugo, I agree with you our marriages are important. After 24 years mine certainly still is. But to me, the symbols of marriage are not. I don’t carry my marriage on my finger, and I don’t think it’s important to relay my state of marriage to others. At the end of the day, my marriage is between me and my wife. We never even got rings. As for the being marked “off the market”, well, anyone who would actually have a conversation with me (say, someone who met me in the hotel bar during one of my many business trip)… Read more »
There is a whole other spaect of Prince William not wearing a wedding ring and it’s surprising that a British citizen like Hugo passes over without even a word. The custom of the husband wearing a wedding ring is a recent middle-class innovation. Why would Prince William want to imitate such vulgarity, or even take notice of it?
Not to mention the fact that because William is a member of the English royal family, getting divorced is a much, much bigger taboo than for a commoner. It’s practically illegal, as his father and other ancestors can attest. Not totally impossible, but an even bigger headache than for the wee people of the realm.
Used to work with a guy who literally had his ring finger torn off when his ring caught on a shelf during an accident in a warehouse. After I told that story to my wife she didn’t have a problem with me taking my ring off whenever I think it’s unsafe to wear it.
I used to run on an EMS ambulance, I could tell you some horror stories about rings and watches getting caught on things.
I posed this scenario to a co-worker of mine…that wearing a ring can cause an accident like this to happen, and what would she say if her husband lost a finger due to her insistance that he NEVER under ANY circumstances take off his ring.
Her response….
“That’s the price of love”
Fucking hell
WellOkayThen said: “But, I have to point out that in most cases it would be the husband’s last name and the wife’s FATHER’s last name combined together. And, in most cases when a wife keeps her pre-marriage last name she is keeping her father or grandfather’s last name. Ironically, that is literally more patriarchal than taking the husband’s name.” If you’re going to get that technical about it, then lets at least be complete about it and go full circle. Using your rational, it’s not really the man (or father’s) name either but *his* father’s name and *his* father before… Read more »
Erin, I’m afraid I may have given the wrong impression. I didn’t mean to suggest that there is only one way to interpret choices about one’s last name. I also didn’t mean to suggest that my view of what people choose is more important than the reasons those people give. I think there is more than one way to look at a symbol like a family name. I also don’t mean to suggest that it makes no difference whether someone hyphenates or changes to a spouse’s last name. I’m not saying “well, hyphenated is still patriarchal, so you may as… Read more »
Welokaythen-
You seem to be grasping at straws trying to avoid an egalitarian marriage.
Dang it, you caught me. I am out to prevent any gender equality in marriage. I thought I could get away with it. How did you figure that out? I cannot figure out how you spotted me. I thought I kept my identity and motivations pretty well hidden. I thought I had a great disguise by avoiding ad hominem remarks, focusing on common sense and logic and math, looking at arguments played out to their full conclusions, and presenting myself as a dispassionate writer. It was the use of numbers, wasn’t it. I should have known that making the hyphenation… Read more »
My kids will get the more interesting half of my (double barrelled) surname, together with my partner’s (not double barrelled) surname. I’m hoping this will lead to them having the most interesting possible name for each generation. This also means that I get a part in their names, without changing mine.
I just wanted to point out that you don’t have to continue adding names forever, just because you’ve put two of them together.
Safety statistics for men with rings are abysmal. Rings are much too dangerous for most men. Men should NOT wear rings.
I don’t wear a ring. It gives me calouses, and I believe if I took it on and off, I would eventually lose it, which would be a bigger symbolic issue than not wearing it at all. My wife doesn’t mind. I have never cheated on her in 20 years and am not inclined to. On the other hand (ha!), royalty is all about symbolism, so what’s with the Prince?
As a young (unmarried) woman, I would have no objection if my current boyfriend/unofficial fiance decided not to wear a ring, the same way that he has no objection to the fact that I absolutely refuse to change my last name. As much as a ring is a symbol of your love / commitment, it is also a symbol of your financial, legal, moral obligation / commitment, and while that may be appealing to some people, it’s a huge turnoff to others. Perhaps this view is a product of my parents’ extremely protracted and unhappy divorce, but I’d like to… Read more »
Hugo, your pieces are always well-written and you’re obviously intelligent in many ways. Yet I disagree with you on just about everything. I wear a wedding ring. I love it. But I have no problem with those who don’t and certainly would never actively advocate for it one way or the other. I understand people look at the left hand to quickly ascertain marital status, but even if you didn’t have a ring on and someone hit on you, you can just tell them you’re married. It’s pretty simple. Wearing a ring is a personal choice in a marriage that… Read more »
I’m still wearing a wedding ring after being seperated for almost 6 months. I can’t get the damn thing off, and despite no longer wanting to be married to my ex, I still have a little sentimental attachment to it and don’t want to cut it off. But arguing that men SHOULD wear their ring? That’s just silly. For many, many men, a ring is a serious job hazard. As a computer geek, I’ve seen two coworkers over the last 15 years lose a finger to degloving injuries – both while moving hardware between racks and both truly horrific. Guys… Read more »
This character Hugo also screeched to the high heavens in 2006 that the Duke lacrosse guys were guilty of rape, so….does he have any credibility?
Perhaps my priorities are completely screwed up, but as I see it, some people’s opinions count more than others in the decision of whether or not to wear a wedding ring. In order of importance, they are: 1. The person wearing the wedding ring. 2. The spouse of the person wearing the wedding ring. 3. Everyone else. If it doesn’t make much difference to you or your spouse, then let the third parties have their say. I hope this is obvious good advice to everyone, but I’ll say it anyway: a person without a wedding ring could be married. A… Read more »
I don’t follow celebrity/royalty gossip.
This article is extremely pointless. Here’s the tl;dr version. “I think you should wear a wedding ring, but I don’t judge you if you don’t. Except I think you’re sleazy, but I’m not judging you. Really.” I mean, Hell, stake out a position and frigging claim it already. The fact of the matter is you actually do think men who don’t wear a wedding ring are sleazy, but in your hyper-tolerant let’s all be friends mindset you can’t actually come out and SAY that, so you back peddle and wish-wash until your article basically says nothing. And an article that… Read more »
In contrast to Hugo’s experience…I don’t think, in my almost twenty years in the same marriage, that I’ve noticed anybody checking my left hand. Yes, I wear a ring. Yes, people consider me good-looking.
I tend to compare this situation with that of a woman deciding to keep her maiden name or not. For that is also another “symbol” of a married couples unity. I have recently read a couple of articles about women choosing to do so or not and have heard valid reasoning for both sides of the argument. I personally haven’t heard women get much flack for choosing not to take their husbands last name. However, I’ve not come across too many women other than celebrities and public figures not changing their names after marriage. I wonder if women who would… Read more »
How is the man wearing a wedding ring analogous to woman changing her name? I would think the correct analogy would be a woman wearing a wedding ring. I know many couples where neither the man or woman changes his/her name – and the children usually still have the man’s name unfortunately. I think I would probably want both me and my husband to change our names to something hyphenated or common – and then the children to have that combo name as well. I would probably wear a wedding ring just so as not to mislead others, and I… Read more »
Reader: “and the children usually still have the man’s name unfortunately.”
Why is that unfortunate?
-Jut
Because it’s difficult for the mother – she has to go to the work of telling a school, doctor’s office, etc. that she’s mother even though she has a different last name. The practice of the woman being required to take the man’s name and giving the children the father’s name and not a combo of their names is thought to derive from the fact that maternity could be proven (as long as someone witnesses the birth) but paternity not so easily. The man needed to control the woman’s identity and restrict her economic and political autonomy and even her… Read more »
Reader: “Now that paternity can be proven – and disproven – genetically, I think it might be good to recognize both parents in the child’s name.”
You make it sound so easy. I might agree with you if mandatory paternity tests were perfomed at birth.
-Jut
I would think any man who wants a paternity test can get one. They aren’t that expensive; if you can’t afford one, you probably shouldn’t be having a child.
Reader: “I would think any man who wants a paternity test can get one. They aren’t that expensive; if you can’t afford one, you probably shouldn’t be having a child.” It does not matter if he can get one, if they do not carry the force of law. It is what is on the birth certificate that counts in the eyes of the law. If your name is not on there, it does not matter if it is your child, and if your name is not on there, it does not matter if you are. And, whether he can afford… Read more »
Thank you, sex/gender equality, for removing these “truthiness” types from the gene pool.
Go watch “Bella.” It will give you alternatives to moping about the biology that the fetus grows in, and taxes, the woman’s body.
allow me to translate Reader’s comments for everybody:
“I don’t have a rational response to the fact that a paternity test really doesn’t mean squat ( a man can still be forced to pay child support even if he produces a valid test stating that he is not the biological father) so I’m just going to throw around buzzwords (truthiness) and a few insults (removal from the gene pool) and make an obscure reference to an even more obscure movie (Just which “bella” were you refering to? The one made in 1970? 1998? 03? 04? 05? 06? 08?)
I was saying that paternity proves paternity and you can get equal parenting IF your marriage was originally set up that way and you meet abuse/neglect standards. Any man who doesn’t get equal parenting probably (a) set up his marriage with his job/career being more important and not learning parenting and not doing approx. half the unpaid work and/or (b) is unable to meet abuse/neglect standards. I suspect JuGory’s “poor me’ whining has to do with not knowing how to meet abuse/neglect standards and not having the courage and the work ethic to get in there and do half the… Read more »
“I suspect JuGory’s “poor me’ whining has to do with not knowing how to meet abuse/neglect standards”
Are you really suggesting that JutGory is abusive and neglectful? Based on what exactly?
How the hell is this NOT a character assassination?
Question: Are you FemaleFeedback, who was also fond of performing psychiatric evalutions based on nothing more than a handful of postings? I’m starting to suspect you are.
Frankly, I think you need to start posting some actual evidence (evidence like a court case) of your libel.
Reader: “I suspect JutGory’s “poor me’ whining has to do with not knowing how to meet abuse/neglect standards and not having the courage and the work ethic to get in there and do half the parenting, including half the unpaid work.” No, my “whining” was a response to your “poor me” whining that it would be so horrible and “unfortunate” that children would have their father’s name when the poor mother has a different name (by her choice). Then, let’s not forget the “don’t have children if you can’t afford them” meme. Not a very feminist thing to say. By… Read more »
My daughter has a hyphenated name. It wasn’t my idea. I’d have been perfectly happy to use her mother’s name.
“Because it’s difficult for the mother – she has to go to the work of telling a school, doctor’s office, etc. that she’s mother even though she has a different last name.”
How difficult do you think it is for a father to convince the doctor’s office that he’s the father even though he has a different last name than the kid?
If the children don’t have the father’s name, yes I imagine that’s difficult. The question I was asked, however, is why it is unfortunate that many children still have just the father’s name and not some name for both the mother and father, like the combo or hyphenated name I suggested.
Well, dear Reader, it is not quite as difficult as the lovely questions asked of a father by Emergency Rooms when they see a scar on a child’s face, or when you bring a child in with a broken arm: “So, can you tell me what Happppeennnneeddd???” (Almost always asked by a woman, since the medicos frown on hiring men as nurses, and almost always with an arched eyebrow. ) And when the answer is: “Pediatric surgery for removal of a nevus — Dr. Kim does good work, don’t you think?” or “She fell down on the school playground an… Read more »
A hyphenated last name would be a step towards symbolic equality.
But, I have to point out that in most cases it would be the husband’s last name and the wife’s FATHER’s last name combined together. And, in most cases when a wife keeps her pre-marriage last name she is keeping her father or grandfather’s last name. Ironically, that is literally more patriarchal than taking the husband’s name.
There’s no perfect solution, of course. I was just noticing the irony.
True – but in one generation the “irony” would be fixed.
It’s not her father’s last name any more than it is her very own. Once she is born she is an equal name-bearing member of society, and the name is hers, though she got it from her father. To me, the only way to push the point that a woman’s name is her father’s name is if one believes that a woman is her father’s property.
Thank you. My surname is as much my brother’s as it is my own.
“It’s not her father’s last name any more than it is her very own.” I see your point that it is a choice and she carries her name with her and can change it as she sees fit. If being named after someone is not a symbol of ownership (and I don’t think it is), then what’s the problem with naming oneself after one’s spouse? Continuing to name oneself the same name as one’s father is by definition patrilineal at least, and is often understood as a patriarchal practice. (I know patrilineal and patriarchal are not the same thing, but… Read more »
I couldn’t resist joining in an argument about the symbolism of having a wife change her name to her husband’s upon marriage. I think we can agree that the practice stems from the days when marriage literally entailed transferring ownership of the woman from her father to her husband. In the USA, this is no longer literally the case. You can argue that as a result, you would like to alter the symbolism of the practice such that it no longer represents something demeaning. It sounds like several people are making the argument that since the nature of marriage has… Read more »
Hell, here’s a fun idea: How about everybody who is not the bride or groom in question mind their own damned business? I’m really sick of people trying to shove their politics where they aren’t wanted. Take her name, take his name, change both, change neither, I don’t care, and neither should ANYBODY ELSE!
Question: Why aren’t any of you concerned about the man having to get down on one knee (i.e. lowering himself) and asking the woman to marry him?
“I think we can agree that the practice stems from the days when marriage literally entailed transferring ownership of the woman from her father to her husband.” Uh, no, on several points: 1) Wardship is not ownership. Women were considered minors, not property. They could not be sold or bought. That’s the histoprica background. Furhter there is the very nasty business of appropriation going on if we liken white women’s marriage conditions to black slavery by using the word “ownership.” The victim/oppression discourse of feminsm already relies quite heavily on this appropriation, so we might try to avoid perpetuating it… Read more »
To Jim: fair enough. It sounds like you know a lot about this topic, so I’ll trust you. I’m still sticking with the rest of my post, though! To Paul: I was pretty careful to make it clear that I was stating my own opinion (obviously I was arguing in favor of it, too)- I’m not going to make any claims of spouting Absolute Truth or anything of the sort. As for the validity of me doing so, I would point out that marriage is partially public in nature. Marriage is not entirely a private thing, although many aspects of… Read more »
I’m curious as to what part of a marriage, beyond the actual ceremony, you think is actually “public” because I honestly can’t think of any.
The concept of “marriage” perhaps, but thats why people actually do have the freedom to choose to name themselves whatever they want.
“I’m still sticking with the rest of my post, though!”
Me too! I thought the rest of it was pretty solid. And I said so, way down in my comment.
It’s analogous because (generally speaking) most women have a good idea and maybe even fantasize about what their ideal engagement ring/wedding band will look like (before even getting engaged). Also, in MY PERSONAL experience I’ve never heard of a woman objecting to wearing a ring. So in my experience it is much more likely that a woman would be reluctant to change her name as opposed to her not wanting wear a ring. Additionally I am coming from the standpoint of traditional marriage where a woman takes her husbands name (And yes, there is still a number of us who… Read more »
“Additionally I am coming from the standpoint of traditional marriage where a woman takes her husbands name (And yes, there is still a number of us who prescribe to that traditional ideal without perceiving it as an “oppressive” institute of patriarchy).” Yes, you would not perceive it as “oppressive” because you are the man in the patriarchal marriage, not the woman. Please stop making generalizations about both men and women and stating your wishes about what women would want as what women actually want. You do that when you say “So in my experience it is much more likely that… Read more »
Reader: “Yes, you would not perceive it as “oppressive” because you are the man in the patriarchal marriage, not the woman.” Boy, talk about making generalizations! Men in this situation would not see it as oppressive because he is the man in a patriarchal marriage? How do you know what men in a “patriarchal marriage” are going to think. If I can speak for Clark Kent (and correct me if I am wrong, Clark Kent), perhaps he does not see it as oppressive because he sees it as a very touching gesture that a wife makes for him. When a… Read more »
“That was my wife’s thought: she took my name because she was telling me that she was going to be with me for the rest of our lives; I was honored by her decision.”
If it meant so much to you, why didn’t you offer it to her in return?
How the hell is that any of your damned business? The two of them made a decision, one that clearly does not involve you.
Also, Reader, I have to wonder what your response would be to the reversal of that situation (he changing his name, and she keeping hers) would you still ask why SHE didn’t offer to do the same? I suspect not. I suspect, like most feminists I’ve encountered, that it’s not so much the system you object to, it’s who’s on top. I suspect that a reversal of the system (a Matriarchy) would not raise your hackles nearly so much, if at all. This is why feminists, on the whole, don’t seem to see a problem with a two-thirds female majority… Read more »
Reader: “If it meant so much to you, why didn’t you offer it to her in return?”
It would not have been as meaningful to her.
It is just like the wedding rings. The ring is more important to her than it is to me. But, I wear mine happily because, as Hugo says, it reminds me of my constant connection to her.
-Jut
“It would not have been as meaningful to her.”
How do you know if you didn’t try? Again, like “Clark Kent” you are claiming to know others thoughts, feelings, desires, and you are even doing with regard to something that never even happened.
Reader: “How do you know if you didn’t try? Again, like “Clark Kent” you are claiming to know others thoughts, feelings, desires, and you are even doing with regard to something that never even happened.” She told me. She said, “yeah, I don’t really care for my name. I want to be a Gory.” You see, that was the thing: before we got married, we actually had time to talk to each other and get to know each other and we shared our thoughts, feelings, point of views on life, religion, the world, etc. So, yeah, I did know her… Read more »
Thank you so very much Jut…
It’s good to see there are people who can appreciate another person’s opinion for what it is and not retort to juvenile insults and insinuations about that person.
Reader is just one of these unfortunate people who make it difficult for somebody (such as myself who honestly believes feminism can benefit society) to embrace some of the things in which feminism hopes to accomplish.
However, she would rather attack people because their personal views and beliefs differs from her.
I don’t know why you felt the need to hurl personal insults because I stated my opinion…
But since you decided to take it there I feel very sorry for your kids as well as your husband for having to be in the same household with a person such as yourself. I’ll definitely be keeping them in my prayers lol.
CK:
I don’t mind that you stated your opinion.
What I don’t like is that you presume to know other men’s or women’s opinions, thoughts, feelings, wants/needs. That’s not stating an opinion; that’s narcissistic projection, usually borne of a mind stuck in childhood and unable to stand on its own.
It’s quite hilarious that you can’t even see the irony in your repeated attempts to GENERALIZE my entire personality on a couple of posts made here on this site.
Honestly I feel sorry for you and whatever event that occurred in your life that makes your feel so oppressed and on the defensive of what other people have opinions on.
I hope you can find the peace in your life that you so dearly need. Good day.
“Reader” is not generalizing about your personality but about the evidence you’re providing yourself through your responses. You just can’t see the patriarchy because you’re soaking in it, as is much of this site. I don’t understand what the Good Men Project is, I guess. I just came over here from Hugo’s site and have been really surprised to see the lack of basic understanding of, and outright hostility to, feminist thought.
Right. People who disagree with feminism OBVIOUSLY just “misundertsand” it. There’s no possible way that feminism could actually be wrong about something, is there?
Oh really??? Please show many any part of my comments that warranted this sort of personal insult from Reader: “you are not finished with childhood yet and so perhaps it would be good to postpone marriage – and definitely postpone having a child?” How in the hell can anybody come to a conclusion such as that from anything I’ve posted regarding this article? I don’t know what else it could be called besides a generalization. ESPECIALLY from a person who knows not ONE DAMN THING about me. Also, PLEASE show many anyone of my comments that were anti-feminist. The disparaging… Read more »
I did not “generalize your personality.” Your words were a narcissistic projection in and of themselves. Maybe you never do this in other settings, but you did it here and that’s why I called it out.
And you inability to recognize what it is about what you said is a narcissistic projection is why I suspect this is a broader problem. Even though I quoted the objectionable language, you still deny and/or or don’t grasp the concept of narcissistic projection, which is why I think you are not ready to be a parent.
If you grasp the concept so well, why can you not recognize the condition in yourself? That’s probably symptomatic too………
It is also ironic because some feminists (maybe not Hugo) object to wedding rings for women on the basis that it is a symbol of ownership by the male. So, while some feminists argue that men should wear wedding rings, others argue that women should not.
-Jut
Hugo is speaking within a still-somewhat-patriarchal culture where there are probably still floating around some subconscious meanings associated with wedding/engagement rings worn by men that may differ from when they are worn by women.
As an alternative, which Hugo alludes to, some people see marriage as an entity in and of itself and the two people are independent/autonomous and yet joined to it. It’s not a matter of either the wife or husband owning the other but more their agreement to function in tandem – yet with a rope between them that is long.
Also, in MY PERSONAL experience I’ve never heard of a woman objecting to wearing a ring. So in my experience it is much more likely that a woman would be reluctant to change her name as opposed to her not wanting wear a ring.
My wife and I never got rings. We agreed it felt like an empty symbol to us. Initially we didn’t change names, but eventually we decided we liked the idea of sharing a family name – and adopted mine.
Do you think Prince William is not wearing his ring to purposefully mislead others? I don’ think that is his intention and it doesn’t make it every other man’s intention either.
Part of functioning in the world is taking into account not just your perceptions, but those of others, no? Just being inside your own head and not seeing how you present yourself to others is not really that helpful, even to the self-absorbed person.
Good lord, we have a grade 5 irony alert.
I agree that the “perception” argument is silly in the case of a celebrity known worldwide like William. I guess then it just has the issue Hugo alludes to. Does this man see his marriage as a fundamental part of himself always there, if not at the forefront at a particular time, or something he is only in when he is in the presence of his wife.
Full disclosure: I’m not married and never have been. For me, the benefits of imploring men to wear wedding rings (celebrating the social aspect of marriage, “flagging” as not-available-for-romance) are outweighed by the normative enforcement that wearing a wedding ring can bring–I already get privilege for being a white guy in this culture, and am not interested in adding the privilege that comes from announcing that I’ve fulfilled the cultural norm of getting hitched: The heterosexual married couple continues to be the assumed, ideal family, and any option types of families and they are responsible for dealing with the consequences… Read more »
Can’t imagine that this confers any privilege.
My first knee-jerk reaction to this article is to get a little aggravated. I have a pretty automatic response to this idea that I should wear my wedding ring. I stopped and thought a minute and tried to look at it from multiple angles, and I do sympathize with the idea of using the ring as a handy loving symbol of a relationship, if that’s the symbol that the people in the relationship agree to. But, I still can’t shake my first reaction, as knee-jerk and almost cliché as it is. I can’t help but wonder, as I often do… Read more »
I felt the same sort of aggravation. The same rationale could be made for saying that the wife should take the husband’s last name because “me is inextricably linked to an ‘us.'” And, the same could be said for using the prefix “Mrs.”
-Jut
Lots of people are happy to facilitate the ease of dating for others. Too bad they’re married. That’s why good ethical sense should prompt the married to signify their status.
If all that’s standing between a person and infidelity is a ring, then I would argue that their ethical sense is pretty screwed up anyway. Regardless of whether they wear it or not.
Oh, absolutely. I’m thinking more of sparing the hapless who might up end up as unwitting cohorts of these folks. An oft-Quixotic hope, as a marriage counselor or divorce lawyer or bartender can tell you.
Do oyu think the hapless has some obligation to take steps not to be unwitting? How hard is it to ask and find out?
So, you want me to wear a symbol that says “taken” to make mate-searching easier for you? How about all the other instances where a person is not available to you? Should I also wear a symbol to signify the gender of a prospective partner? Or maybe a symbol that I’m really not interested in people who see me only as a date or sex partner and aren’t much interested in conversation? One can ask,you know. One can have a conversation and learn about people. And, weird as it may seem, one can wind up having a really interesting conversation… Read more »