Why didn't men wear wedding bands?

• Mar 9, 2015

• #1

F

FedoraFan112390

Practically Family

Messages

646

Location

Brooklyn, NY

Looking at a lot of old family photos from the 1930s/1940s it seems the general rule was for men not to wear their wedding band. I've looked at photos from both sides of my family and all of the men pictured were happily married men, in some cases religious men who dearly loved their wives--but no ring on their finger to be found.

I've noticed that it also might've been a generational thing. A photo of my maternal grandfather (born 1920) shows him without a wedding band, whereas a photo of my paternal grandfather (b. 1929) from roughly the same era shows him wearing a wedding band. It seems like men born before a certain point in the late '20s or early '30s didn't wear their wedding bands...Why is this?

 

• Mar 9, 2015

• #2

Frunobulax

Messages

19,124

Location

Funkytown, USA

Speaking on behalf of my father, who rarely if at all wore his, it was a matter of practicality. If you were a laborer (and this is true still), you didn't wear it for safety reasons. Get that thing caught in something and crushed, it can take your finger off. My father was a laborer at NCR, and never wore his. When he retired, he started wearing it.

To this day, construction workers, electricians, and others who physically labor on the job don't wear theirs.

 

• Mar 9, 2015

• #3

Hat Dandy

One of the Regulars

Messages

239

Location

Maple, ON

As stated by Frunobulax, it was a safety issue. Many of my forbearers did heavy manual labor and, consequently, eschewed wearing their wedding ring.

 

• Mar 9, 2015

• #4

Frunobulax

Messages

19,124

Location

Funkytown, USA

However, if you look closely at those old photographs, you may see the chain attached to the ankle. :ballchain:

 

• Mar 9, 2015

• #5

casechopper

My Mail is Forwarded Here

Messages

3,783

Location

Northern NJ

My Grandfather didn't wear a ring. He'd been a medic in WW2 and then worked at a factory. Due to his experience he was in charge of first aid and running guys to the hospital when there were accidents. Rings getting caught in machinery or your finger getting hit and then swelling (with the ring cutting off circulation) were a good reason for factory workers to not wear them.

 

• Mar 9, 2015

• #6

Edward

Bartender

Messages

24,789

Location

London, UK

I remember one of my male grandparents wearing one; I don't think the other did. I suspect in part it might also have been a marketing invention, like diamond engagement rings (and nevermind the vile trade behind it), or stag/hen parties.

 

• Mar 9, 2015

• #7

jamespowers

Messages

54,308

Location

Near the World's Largest Outdoor Insane Asylum

My grandfather had an experience that explains why for sure. He was working on a car and had inadvertently placed his hand on top of the battery----the hot post hitting his ring. In minutes the ring was just about glowing. He ran and placed his hand in a bucket of cold water. He never wore it---outside of special occassions---again.

 

• Mar 9, 2015

• #8

kaiser

A-List Customer

Messages

401

Location

Germany, NRW, HSK

Frunobulax said:

Speaking on behalf of my father, who rarely if at all wore his, it was a matter of practicality. If you were a laborer (and this is true still), you didn't wear it for safety reasons. Get that thing caught in something and crushed, it can take your finger off. My father was a laborer at NCR, and never wore his. When he retired, he started wearing it.

To this day, construction workers, electricians, and others who physically labor on the job don't wear theirs.

Click to expand...

Same with my Dad, worked heavy construction, the ring was a risk for him at work, did wear it though on vacation, and after he retired.

 

• Mar 9, 2015

• #9

C

Cobden

Practically Family

Messages

788

Location

Oxford, UK

In the UK, men didn't wear wedding rings really until the 1940s, and the Church of England didn't have marriage vows that allowed for two rings to be exchanged until, I believe, the 80s (maybe more recently). It just wasn't a "thing".

 

• Mar 9, 2015

• #10

Edward

Bartender

Messages

24,789

Location

London, UK

I do tend to the view that it had more to do with cultural fa tors thsn manual labour. Not to say that the latter wasn't an isdue, but there were a fair number of men back when who didn't do manual labour, so I'd have been surprised if that was the only reason.

 

• Mar 9, 2015

• #11

HudsonHawk

I'll Lock Up

Messages

4,381

Location

Heaven for men and dogs, Hell for women and horses

Edward said:

I do tend to the view that it had more to do with cultural fa tors thsn manual labour. Not to say that the latter wasn't an isdue, but there were a fair number of men back when who didn't do manual labour, so I'd have been surprised if that was the only reason.

Click to expand...

One theory is that men simply didn't wear wedding rings prior to WWI. It was wartime which inspired men to start wearing rings to remind them of their wives and families back home. By the 1950s, it began to be part of the whole wedding tradition.

 

• Mar 13, 2015

• #12

Corky

Practically Family

Messages

507

Location

West Los Angeles

I told my wife "Wearing a wedding ring cuts off my circulation."

She replied "That's the whole idea."

 

• Mar 13, 2015

• #13

Stanley Doble

Call Me a Cab

Messages

2,808

Location

Cobourg

The jewellery industry hadn't gotten around to pushing them yet.

 

• Mar 14, 2015

• #14

jamespowers

Messages

54,308

Location

Near the World's Largest Outdoor Insane Asylum

Corky said:

I told my wife "Wearing a wedding ring cuts off my circulation."

She replied "That's the whole idea."

Click to expand...

Where does this cut of the circulation?