Weddings are expensive. Whether heterosexual or LGBT commitment ceremonies, they are a huge financial undertaking.
It's for this reason that so many of the younger generation don't even bother with the official rites any more.
Once society moved past the point where 'living in sin' was, well, a sin, many couples prioritized other demands on their hard-earned cash. Like finding a home and furnishing it.
Common sense dictated that mutual home-making was a greater demonstration of their commitment to each other, than funding a single day's knees up for their family and friends. The prospective costs of the reception alone could pay for an extension to the garage or double-glazing for the windows.
But same-sex couples may feel greater pressures to officially tie the knot, and do so as quickly as possible.
Decades long battles for marriage equality laws are only just coming to fruition in many places. It seems daft to campaign for so long, only to disdain the opportunity to benefit from the eventual victory. For hundreds of couples, their gay marriage ceremony represents more than a love commitment to each other. It's the grand finale in their joint battle to have that commitment officially acknowledged.
Moreover, the ink is still wet on too many same-sex marriage bills. Appeals against them are being lodged. Precedents are yet to be set in law. The imperative for gay couples to marry in those circumstances is huge.
While the pressure might be for a gay wedding ceremony to occur right now, weddings are still expensive.
Comments
I can see why that would be the case in a hospital. You wouldn't want to deliver a patient back to the ward, only to have to rush them back into surgery because you think your diamond ring might be lodged in his colon.
Working in a hospital adminstrative division gives me a whole new viewpoint on health and safety. My colleagues are all in clinical short sleeve whites or surgical greens. I can get away with long sleeves as long as I am not on front line reception duty with the patients. My husband has a short sleeved uniform in his job, which I am envious of. At least the rules for my role allow me to continue to wear my jewellery. Other colleagues aren't so lucky.
I've never considered wedding rings in terms of health and safety. Which shows the kind of jobs I've had to risk assess for!
Jethraw, the ONLY piece of jewellery my husband wears is his wedding ring. No necklaces, chains, earrings, watches, bracelets or other bling. I have my standard work safe gold and silver gold wear which is swapped out for safety at times or added to as necessary. My fingers don't like heat so I often have to leave my rings off when I'm on holiday or else the rings are stuck on for days...owie.
I always cite Emily Wilding Davison, when people ask me why I still vote. As soon as she went under that horse, I lost the right not to vote.
The Cubic Zirconia rainbow ring is very pretty.
I love that Cubic Zirconia rainbow ring channel setting. I doubt my parents would have approved though, so hence the white gold channel setting my husband bought for my engagement ring. I think you're right, at least some gay couples are getting married because they now have the right to, in much the same way as I always vote because the Suffragettes fought for that ability on my behalf. Oh, and don't mention paying for the rellies to have a knees up at our expense. It's a sore point among his vast family that we only invited two of his family to our wedding. I would also imagine that the rainbow would be a symbol of the day and maybe a ring to wear at a festival or other knees up weekend where losing your gold band would tear you apart. I have a purple initial necklace which I wear instead of my gold cross on such occasions.
I'd certainly want my ring for keeps to be slightly more upmarket too. I can't fault you on that one.
I should imagine that the majority of gay people getting married aren't looking to wear Gay Pride marriage bands. It would be the usual gold bands, signet rings and gemstones, exactly the same as heterosexual couples.
Or, indeed, platinum!
Whilst some of these rings are okay, I personally (as an open homosexual) wouldn't opt for any of them. Call me silly but for starters I want a bit more of a pricey ring. I'm not one for jewellery, and I know I'm definitely pro-marriage, so I'd like the one piece of bling I'm going to be wearing - especially one I'd intend to wear for life, to be a little more upmarket!
Second of all it's totally taste oriented. I personally wouldn't go for any of these rings as they're very much out-and-proud rings. I wouldn't want to brag about the fact I'm married to a man. I'm pro marriage equality because it means I'm going to be able to marry someone that I love. For me, the fact that would be a man is not important, so I wouldn't feel the need to let people know through my wedding ring.
A simple platinum ring is all I want, but that's obviously a matter for the individual.
That was really unique, wasn't it? As for casual jewelry, I could see them working well in Gay Pride parades or same-sex marriage protests - pro gay marriage, of course!
I like the rainbow laser finish the best. I'm not sure if I'd wear one of the rainbow gem rings as a wedding band but they'd be fun as casual jewellery for the price.