Opinion L.A.

Observations and provocations
from The Times' Opinion staff

« Previous Post | Opinion L.A. Home | Next Post »

Royal wedding: Prince William should put a ring on it

Royal Wedding The upcoming nuptials of Prince William and Kate Middleton have been full of ring surprises.  First, William made the stunning gesture of giving his fiancée the famous sapphire engagement ring that belonged to his late mother, Diana, the Princess of Wales.  Now, we learn that William himself will wear no wedding band.

Kate, however, in keeping with storied royal tradition, will wear a wedding band fashioned out of some rare Welsh gold from a closed mine  that Queen Elizabeth II still has a chunk of. 

William is not following any particular tradition. Royal men, it turns out, are all over the place on this issue. The Duke of Edinburgh (Queen Elizabeth’s husband -- the one who was  played by James Cromwell in “The Queen”) wears no wedding ring.  Prince Edward, the queen’s youngest son, does wear a wedding ring.  And Prince Charles, William’s father, did not take a ring at his wedding to Diana. But now that he’s married to Camilla, he wears a slender wedding band under the big signet ring on his left pinky.  It’s a look.

Apparently this was simply William’s choice. The couple talked about it and agreed -- according to unnamed palace sources in a British paper -- that William could go without.   William doesn’t wear any rings — even a signet ring — and he doesn’t want to start now, sources said.

Actually, a wedding is when most men start wearing a ring.

It’s nice that Kate and William are such a postmodern couple. They both got university degrees -- they met at school -- they lived together, they waited until they were both 29 to get engaged.   It’s even sophisticated that they, reportedly, decided together that it was OK if he didn’t wear a ring.

But how lame of him! We get it that wearing a ring is not going to stop a man from cheating, any more than not wearing a ring is going to encourage him to cheat. And it’s not like women are going to scope out his ring finger, assume he’s not married, and start flirting with him at, say, a polo match or a bar.  The whole world is going to watch his wedding.

But since the two of them are about to become one of the most famous married couples on Earth, it would be nice to see that, while she’s giddily flashing enough bling on her finger to make her hand fall off, he’s sporting  at least a simple band that telegraphs to the world his love for her and his pride in that love.

We’re not suggesting this is a deal breaker for Kate.  We’re just saying -- if you like her, then you shoulda put a ring on your own finger.   


A century of royal weddings

Interactive: Your guide to the royal wedding

Not-quite-so-royal wedding, circa 1937 -- thank you, Wallis Windsor!

Full coverage: The royal wedding

--Carla Hall

Photo: Prince William and Kate Middleton cuddle in one of their official engagement portraits. Inset: the winning cake, "Royal Blue Velvet." Credit: Mario Testino / Betty Crocker 


Comments () | Archives (12)

The comments to this entry are closed.


The writer of this opinion piece remains anonymous for a reason, since they'd be raked over the coals if they went public.

So why exactly should he wear a ring? Because it's "lame" not to. (OpEds always work when written in the language of 13 year olds.) Because it can't have something to do with cheating - even if by putting that out there they less-than-subtly imply that it does.

Oh, because it "telegraphs his love for her", because Kate is "giddy" flashing "bling to make her hand fall off." Maybe the writer doesn't get that most men don't give a rat's behind about bling on their own fingers and because most of us don't believe that wearing a ring indicates anything but a fashion choice unless one is an ordained religious leader.

Maybe what matters to Kate is that he shows her love to her in the way she likes him to show it - and -he- likes to show it - rather than the way some jealous teen-wannabe opinion writer did. And maybe most important is that they showed signs of being past 13 when they mutually agreed on this rather than doing what this writer did - giving an ultimatum based on sexist, outdated views of one gender.


First of all; it looks like the writer of this opinion piece is Carla Hall, not Anonymous.

And second; who peed in your Cheerios, Harry?


What is the Prince trying to hide? Is he not proud of being a married man? Is he ashamed? God help the Queen if he intends to follow his father's footsteps and fool around and ruin another young ladies life and take away her dignity.

Kerry Vincent

I have no idea why the fuss over Prince William not wanting to wear a wedding ring. If anyone bothered to do their homework about the British Commonwealth they would know it is rare for married men to wear rings -- only in America is it an institution. This conversation is a load of rubbish, it is our custom 'not to' as it is yours to do as you see fit. For us it is not subject for discussion, so stop trying to foist your customs on us.

Kerry Vincent
Australian citizen
British Commonwealth


Not sure where the story is here...my husband does not wear a wedding band...and we're going on 31 years together. A wedding band does not make or break a marriage. The people do.

Sandy Mcclain

I agree, this was lame of him! Its funny I found this app on my phone about it https://market.android.com/details?id=inpha.mous.putaring ;D

Myra Chack Fleischer

I am a family law attorney with offices and Los Angeles and San Diego and I can say with certainty that the ring does not make the marriage. It is a symbol nothing more. As long as a couple is ok with or without, it does not matter. From my experience handling divorces what makes a marriage fail has nothing to do with a piece of jewelry.


May be his TRUE love is someone else.
May be he is kind of forced to get married.


King is not supposed to wear a wedding ring. He is the King. The crown is his wedding ring.


Give me a break. He "should" wear one because this writer thinks it's "lame" not to? That's the lamest thing I've ever heard of.


The wedding ring is an ancient symbol, but not necessarily worn on the finger. The asymmetric ring exchange (and vows) are not an optional part of the Roman Catholic or Greek Orthodox ceremony, as far as I know.

Even though he won't wear it (for good reason actually, it's against military regs), in the ceremony itself there should have been an equal exchange of tokens.


This is my take on it.

I wish Will & Kate much happiness in the future!

However, things are a little scary to me. If a 28 and 29 yr. old have as much power to do their own thing as they wish regardless of tradition or out of respect for their elders or without considering what the people of England want them to represent, then maybe they should just tell the paparazzi to back off.

Then, go live a private life and do what they want. They have the power to do that. They are 30 yrs old and have no children yet. That is sad. Only because they may not live to see their great grandchildren. Especially if their children wait until they are 30 to have children.

Kids are what life is all about.

They want the publicity, want to be left alone, don't want to be told what to do,don't want to do things old school...

If you look at these characteristics, it represents tyranny.



In Case You Missed It...



Recent Posts
Reading Supreme Court tea leaves on 'Obamacare' |  March 27, 2012, 5:47 pm »
Candidates go PG-13 on the press |  March 27, 2012, 5:45 am »
Santorum's faulty premise on healthcare reform |  March 26, 2012, 5:20 pm »


About the Bloggers
The Opinion L.A. blog is the work of Los Angeles Times Editorial Board membersNicholas Goldberg, Robert Greene, Carla Hall, Jon Healey, Sandra Hernandez, Karin Klein, Michael McGough, Jim Newton and Dan Turner. Columnists Patt Morrison and Doyle McManus also write for the blog, as do Letters editor Paul Thornton, copy chief Paul Whitefield and senior web producer Alexandra Le Tellier.

In Case You Missed It...