Prince William Will NOT Wear A Wedding Ring

Full Story at the Chicago Sun-Times

OK I have a few questions here.

First of all does this mean they will still exchange rings in the ceremony but he just won’t wear one? Or does this mean it won’t be a double ring ceremony?

Is there any protocol regarding this? I wonder ‘cause I’ve looked this up on the Internet and there are just so many views, one says "yes’ the other says “no.”

What do you all think about this? Does your husband wear a wedding ring? Would it bother you if he didn’t?

I’m putting this question in Cafe Society, as he is a celebrity and this seem like the place for it. But please move it if it’s not correct.

I’m not married, but my parents (married 40 years and counting) never wear their wedding rings in day-to-day life, so it seems perfectly normal to me to not bother with rings (at least after the ceremony). Devotion is what you do, not what you wear.

My guess is that he’ll put a ring on her finger, and that will be it. I sing at lots of weddings and that’s what usually happens in those ceremonies where the groom chooses not to wear a wedding ring. As far as I can tell, it’s a recent custom for the groom to be given a ring during the ceremony. When I first started singing at weddings (30 or so years ago), it was almost unheard of, and considered quite odd.

It all seems like a storm in a teacup to me. If he doesn’t want to wear a wedding ring, then so what?

Considering that he’ll be one of the most famous husbands in Britain, it really makes no difference.

A ring shouldn’t be what makes you married. I rarely wear mine and my husband never wears his. What does it matter?

Eh, I don’t care and he’ll probally just put a ring on Kate’s finger and that’ll be it for the ceremony. Of course IMHO it’d make for a much more interesting wedding if Kate put a “different kind of ring” on William (&* not *on his finger ;)).

Rings are cool. Being a guy, I’ve only ever had two, and I looked forward to wearing both of them. The first was a high-school class ring and the second was my wedding band. I’ve never been a jewelry guy, but there’s something cool about a ring. They needn’t be fancy or expensive either. My wedding band is a $90 titanium job with a single bead (the woodworking definition of bead, not an actual bead).

I like the reaction I occasionally get when someone spots my ring, arches an eyebrow, and says, “You’re married!?” Which clearly means, “Who’d marry you?” I like that.

Why does this thread exist? Why is it any of OUR concern whether he wears a ring or not??? Infact, why is this even NEWS?

But I bet he isn’t well known in Equatorial Guinea. I bet after the honeymoon wears thin, he’ll be making a lot of weekend trips to Equatorial Guinea, with no ring on his finger.

Because like it or not his wedding is news and it’s less than a month away now.

I bet it’s news to QEII. Do you want to hurt Queen Elizabeth’s feelings. I’m sure she participates in the Straight Dope Message board on some level :smiley:

I’ve been happily married for going on 13 years and have not worn my wedding ring for at least half of those years; although, my husband does wear his and it has only come off for surgery. Different strokes and all that.

I actually think it’s pretty interesting. Royal weddings do tend to be trend-setters; the white wedding dress is one royal-caused trend that became tradition. (Thank Queen Victoria and the fact that even in the 1800s royal weddings were of interest to those overseas.) I’ll be curious to see if no rings for men becomes more acceptable after this.

Personal choice. I don’t wear mine, my husband wears his constantly. Who cares?

I’ve always assumed that the reason it’s called a ‘Double ring ceremony’ is to distinguish it from…a single ring ceremony? I’m going to have to go look it up now, but I was always under the impression that the woman’s ring was a gift from the man so that she had something of her own, or a sign of ownership. That wouldn’t traditionally work both ways, so as long as we’re throwing tradition out the window, why bother with rings at all? :stuck_out_tongue:

What was interesting to me was learning that Prince William could not, in fact, marry any one not a Protestant. That might be a big ‘duh’ to anyone who follows the royalty, but I had no idea.

I’m confused too. I mean I can understand why the minutiae of an extremely public wedding might be examined in the news. But they have an obligation to explain why anomalies… are anomalous.

Since this is a forecast sort of news, I’m assuming someone in the Prince’s office must have thought it important to announce it. Which means the Prince made the choice not to wear a ring, and further made the decision that this would seem strange to the public and therefore must be announced.

What I haven’t been able to fathom is… what reason the Prince has to not wear a ring. I mean, if he hadn’t announced it beforehand, I wouldn’t have noticed. But since he has decided to make it an issue, I need to know why.

To summarize: I wouldn’t care, but the Prince says it’s important. But he won’t say why it’s important. Now I need to know!

In other news… on a personal level, I’m not married. And I don’t know what the protocols are for wearing rings. I imagine one might take them off as a practical measure during situation where they could easily be lost such as when in water. But, I imagine rings serve a useful symbolic purpose. If you bother to have them, especially if you bother to have ones made out of expensive materials such as gold, they can only have a symbolic purpose. I mean, if you want a symbol for just the wedding, but not the marriage, then you just get a handfasting - tie some rope around your wrists, and then it’s gone. But for marriage, and rings, the symbol is supposed to be ongoing.

Beyond pragmatic purposes for removal, I would think the absence of a ring to be somewhat suspect. In the same way that it would seem weird to me if the person I was married to suddenly stopped saying “I love you”. It’s not a direct slight, but it’s an odd and suspicious change in symbolic behavior.

Both me and my husband wear ours. I’d be sad if he didn’t want to wear his but it would be his choice. I’m happy that he does. But not to the point where I can answer your poll because I don’t think he SHOULD wear it.

O Kate, nice customs curtsy to great kings. Dear Kate, you and I cannot be confined within the weak list of a country’s fashion: we are the makers of manners, Kate; and the liberty that follows our places stops the mouth of all find-faults.

Sorry. It’s just a nice quote.

When I got married, the words we said to each other were “I give you this ring as a symbol of my love and faithfulness”. So if he’s not wearing a ring from his wife, my husband’s theory is that this mean Kate’s allowed to play the field. After all, her faithfulness is not being enforced!

:smiley:

I voted should…but, in fact, my husband does not wear his.

I excuse it because he works from home 90% of time.
When I’m at home my rings come off too, so I can’t really pester him about it.

The few times a year when we go to some formal and/or family event, I’ll take his ring to him and ask, “can we be married today?” Sometimes he smiles and concedes. Sometimes he grumbes and I accept the loss.

I get that it’s only a *symbol *of our love and devotion, but… I mean, come on, it’s a symbol of our *love *and devotion.

I’m proud to wear mine. He can’t be bothered to wear his. It really bugs me.

I really don’t have an opinion regarding whether or not William wears his. That’s between him and Kate and it’s none of my business.

My wife and I don’t wear our rings, but for different reasons. She works in a warehouse and isn’t allowed to wear rings because they’d be a safety hazard. I don’t wear mine because I had to go and lose twenty pounds after we got married and the danged thing is too big for me now. Getting it resized in a few weeks.

I think he could, however he would give up his place in the line of succession. He could raise his kids in the Church of England and keep them in line, though.