Engagement rings

But why, easielouisie, does it typically only happen in one direction? Why do women outwardly show that they are taken where men do not?

It's not a huge issue, it's a simple discussion about a feature of our culture. I find it baffling that you think this would give feminism a bad name. How does that work exactly?

I think an engagement ring is a gesture, a proposition, will you be mine and symbolised with a ring. No other connotations. You can always say no, my fella wouldn't want a glitzy ring it's just tradition, but I would. And this whole "you belong to him" far as I'm concerned I do belong to him and him to me. No control or dictation over each other just a mutual partnership. Shit like this gives feminism a bad name

No engagement ring here. We were living together when we decided to get married and didn't really consider ourselves to be engaged or have entered some kind of engagement period. Plus, I don't much like jewellery so wouldn't have wanted one. We both do have wedding rings though.

We actually did both have engagement rings, but even so, looking back I don't think I'd want us to do the whole formal proposal and engagement thing. Was quite young at the time and hadn't really thought much about it, though I was a feminist and was working with trafficked women at the time. Now, I'm not so comfortable with the connotations.

I'd differentiate the engagement stuff from marriage in this respect, because as the legal contract that offers the best protection to the majority of women in our society, marriage is clearly capable of being a feminist act.

The choices we make aren't made in a vacuum; yes we are free/r to make choices as women now than in the past, but that doesn't mean what's on offer isn't still limited by patriarchal values, symbols and traditions.

I took my husband's name (happy to shed the name of my abusive father) and I was escorted down the aisle by my stepfather. At the time I saw it as a way to include him in the wedding, especially as he has no children of his own.

If I was making these choices now, they would likely be different ones, but I accept that I was living within a narrower paradigm at the time. I am, however, raising my daughters to recognise the patriarchal roots of these traditions and introduce an awareness that they can make choices outside of the social norms.

Feminism isn't just about having the choice between A or B, it's about breaking down the barriers that stop women from seeing all the other options from C to Z.

Iwannesee was your husband also escorted up the aisle by one of his parents?

I didn't view my dad as giving me away it will take more than a marriage for him to get shot of me , more like escorting me down the aisle. I carried my baby too, which is not exactly traditional.
These traditions can mean whatever you want them too really, regardless of their roots.

A bit like SilentCrow, I changed my name after my first marriage (even though first husband was a twat), but really for aesthetic reasons - my birth surname was an often ridiculed adjective, and I was completely sick of it. I didn't take my (lovely) second husband's name and he couldn't care less. I suspect the PIL's are a bit puzzled, though.
If you ever emigrate, trust me, you'll see the justification for being married. It simplifies many, many things.

What's the big deal. If you don't want one don't wear one, if you want equality go spend your money buying him one. I know plenty of couples who both wear engagement rings.
As for it being a symbol of being taken... Since when do wedding rings and engagement rings put people off... These boards are full of affairs.

Never seen the point of engagement rings, but then, both my wedding to a man and civil partnership to a woman involved only 2 and 3 'guests' respectively, the wearing of clothes already possessed and a quiet meal for the 4/5 of us afterwards. For the first one, we went to and from the register office on the bus.

I think you do what makes you happy, but with the caveat that spending utter shedloads of cash on one day is madness.

I don’t have an engagement ring because it felt like a mark of ownership while a wedding band didn’t as we both wear one.

I also give literally zero shits about other women choosing to wear one. Personal choice innit?

StUmbrage

I think because the name is passed down the male line. Obviously even my mother's maiden name is her fathers too.

I would like names to come down the female line

You know what, I was thinking, if I never got married, I would have probably bought myself a beautiful ring to wear regardless.
Even though I am actually married, i’m Still thinking about buying myself a ring.....

We had a long discussion about it, and our compromise was that I would have the traditional engagement ring, and he would have his ring of the matching wedding bands we chose at the same time. So in effect he wore a ring from the date we got engaged. Two years later we had both bands engraved with the wedding date and our initials. We were both uncomfortable with the "claiming" aspect, but it was also important for us to have a symbol that we were "in it together" for the long haul well before we could afford a wedding.

I did take his name, but purely because my family name is easy to ridicule and his is boring. It was a no-brainer to save our future kids from the crap I went through. I'm still proud of my forebears even if I don't carry the name. It would have been a harder choice if I'd had a less "interesting" surname, though, I'm not sure what we would have decided. I hope my girls keep theirs, really, having watched my sister try to figure out what to do during divorce.

Being "given away" grated much more. I subverted as much as I could wherever possible, though. I had a best man and no bridesmaids!

Although my husband has just read the BBC article of his own volition and brought it to show me with the suggestion that we take my ring for a refund

Engagement rings have a history that is something of a double edged sword

On the one hand, they were part of a contract whereby one man agreed with another man to transfer property into his ownership, and duly marked said property with a visible sign that such a transaction was to be completed.

However - the engagement ring is owned by the woman. Not her fiance, not her father / family, it's her's. It acts as a surety that the man will indeed turn up and marry her, and it gives her a small (or sometimes, huge) amount of personal wealth in the event of something going wrong

Yes, Tripping, I understand what you mean. And you're right that it isn't the objects themselves that are the issue, it's the sex based stereotypes surrounding them. That's why I think it's interesting and useful to discuss the history and the social attitudes towards things like engagement rings.

I agree with that 100% tripping.
I would only choose a man who was ok with me proposing and potentially willing to change his name (no need but I couldn't be with a man who wouldn't even consider it but expect me to change to his).
Like I said, I would get dp a ring, and I'd like one too. I think it would be a nice thing to have, that's all, plus I want a sparkly ring!

I wear a ring of great sentimental value given to me by my sister on my 'wedding finger' despite not being married, and never intending to marry, despite having been with DP for over 15 years. It's the only finger it fits. The thought of marriage makes me feel uncomfortable, but each to their own.

I don’t think whether or not you choose to adopt a symbolic piece of jewellery matters in the slightest. Not worth giving a thought to, it’s basically a fashion choice. There are plenty of less visible things within a marriage that are genuinely a question of feminism. Like whether you give up having your own separate finances. How you share domestic chores and childcare. Whether you take on doing his wifework. Whose career is taken seriously. Those things matter.

I stopped wearing my engagement and wedding rings a few years ago. I came to see them as symbols of being owned, not a feminist perspective just my own personal feelings.This doesn’t mean I see those who wear them in agreement with being owned, it is personal choice. But then I think marriage itself is pretty meaningless ( apart from any legal advantages) so not surprising I’m not keen on rings.

Laurie why is it your father's name but not your name? If your partner's name is his why isn't the surname you used from birth yours?

I use the same name as my father. If I were male apparently that would mean it was mine and I could give it to my wife and my children. As I am female, LOLWUT? I've behaved as if I were male and kept my surname, given it to my children and given my partner the option of taking my surname. He declined and it's all good.

Sorry I'm shit at explaining things in posts rather than talking; I usually avoid debates on FWR as I'm not as articulate as the regular crowd! .

I mean, it's not the acts (eg changing names, proposing) or the objects (eg engagement rings) that are the problem. It's the notion and expectation that these things are only appropriate for one sex. Doing away with these things and making them bad won't help. We need to tackle sex based stereotypes so that it is acceptable for everyone to partake in either/any without an attached stigma. So for example women can propose, men can change their name without being judged. Does that make sense?

I think I'd like one as a nice piece of jewellery. Though if he's buying me a diamond he's not the one!

I like that we can have a discussion about this from many sides. I'm a feminist & definitely see the trouble with marriage / the historical institution that has been carried over into a big party that you must spend lavishly for

Anyway, as a single woman, I would like rings but yes they cannot be divorced (lol) from the context they arose in

No engagement ring here, we both had wedding rings but both of us rapidly decided they were a nuisance.

He didn't take my name, I didn't take the name he used from his previous marriage and our kids have my surname.

We're hardcore. LOL