Page 3 of 5
Posted:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 12:17 pmby The Holy Therns
Kragholm Free States wrote:The Holy Therns wrote:To be fair, it'd stick out a bit on the bat costume.
So did rubber nipples, but that never stopped anyone.
Stopped Batgirl.
Posted:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 12:17 pmby Salus Maior
I think married people should wear their rings, but that's different from required as that implies a degree of coercion that I just don't think is warranted.
That being said, it sounds like you have a good reason for not wearing it at work. Although, you could have just told her you were married the first time she came on to you and that would have settled it. But hindsight, right?
She's not really entitled to an explanation behind your rejection either way.
Posted:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 2:18 pmby Albrenia
No, of course not.
Posted:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 3:17 pmby Labbos
I thought that forcing people to wear things to indicate their status went out of fashion with the fall of the Third Reich. We should not bring it back.
And the issue here is not that the OP is married. The issue is repeated unwanted romantic advances despite being told 'no'. That's sexual harassment. If the OP was single, would it ever have stopped?
Posted:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 3:32 pmby The Two Jerseys
Wait, you mean HR is actually letting her get away with this?
Posted:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 3:36 pmby UniversalCommons
If you are in a dangerous profession, it exposes your family to wear rings and identifiers.
Posted:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 4:32 pmby Heloin
Ifreann wrote:The Holy Therns wrote:No, you shouldn't be required to wear a wedding ring if you're married. You shouldn't even be required to
have one.
Wedding ring: Boring, plain, easily missed
Wedding sword: Magnificent, powerful, practical
I'd support being required to carry around different kinds of swords depending on you're relationship status.
Posted:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 4:40 pmby Galloism
Heloin wrote:Ifreann wrote:Wedding ring: Boring, plain, easily missed
Wedding sword: Magnificent, powerful, practical
I'd support being required to carry around different kinds of swords depending on you're relationship status.
I'll vote for that.
Posted:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 5:02 pmby Farnhamia
Galloism wrote:Heloin wrote:I'd support being required to carry around different kinds of swords depending on you're relationship status.
I'll vote for that.
You want your wife to carry around a sharp, pointy object?
Posted:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 5:09 pmby Ethel mermania
Farnhamia wrote:Galloism wrote:I'll vote for that.
You want your wife to carry around a sharp, pointy object?
Last time he puts the car in pet mode when nana doesn't feel like getting out.
Posted:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 6:24 pmby Galloism
Farnhamia wrote:Galloism wrote:I'll vote for that.
You want your wife to carry around a sharp, pointy object?
We're a team.
A team with cool swords if we can make this a societal norm.
Posted:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 6:24 pmby Ifreann
Heloin wrote:Ifreann wrote:Wedding ring: Boring, plain, easily missed
Wedding sword: Magnificent, powerful, practical
I'd support being required to carry around different kinds of swords depending on you're relationship status.
The more serious the relationship, the bigger the sword.
Posted:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 6:26 pmby Galloism
Ifreann wrote:Heloin wrote:I'd support being required to carry around different kinds of swords depending on you're relationship status.
The more serious the relationship, the bigger the sword.
Posted:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 6:29 pmby Heloin
Ifreann wrote:Heloin wrote:I'd support being required to carry around different kinds of swords depending on you're relationship status.
The more serious the relationship, the bigger the sword.
At what stage do I get a claymore?
Posted:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 6:35 pmby Odreria
wtf kind of question is that, of course not
Posted:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 6:36 pmby Ethel mermania
Galloism wrote:Ifreann wrote:The more serious the relationship, the bigger the sword.
Exactly what we are afraid of.
Posted:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 6:37 pmby Dangine
Make a poll. I wonder how many people will actually say yes.
Posted:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 6:37 pmby Ifreann
Heloin wrote:Ifreann wrote:The more serious the relationship, the bigger the sword.
At what stage do I get a claymore?
I think you'd start getting into the very big real swords after around 20 years of marriage, and into the nonsense anime swords after 40.
Posted:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 6:37 pmby Ethel mermania
Heloin wrote:Ifreann wrote:The more serious the relationship, the bigger the sword.
At what stage do I get a claymore?
15 years
Posted:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 6:45 pmby Idzequitch
A wedding ring is a symbol. Or it can be a tangible reminder of the commitment you made to another person. Or, it can act as a deterrent for unwanted flirting. However, mandatory ring wearing just seems silly. There's no onus on anyone to display that they're married if they don't want to. Some folks have jobs that don't lend themselves to the wearing of metal bands. Other people may have perfectly valid personal reasons for not wearing one.
But I don't think it's anyone's business to make a married person wear one. Short of a work uniform or dress code, (of which a personal article like a wedding ring is clearly not part) no one has any business telling anyone else what to wear, or not to wear.
Posted:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 6:55 pmby Intaglio
Your co-worker sounds like she needs to get a life. And no, obviously, nobody should be required to wear it.
Posted:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 7:01 pmby The Two Jerseys
Ifreann wrote:Heloin wrote:I'd support being required to carry around different kinds of swords depending on you're relationship status.
The more serious the relationship, the bigger the sword.
What do single people get?
Posted:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 7:02 pmby Ifreann
The Two Jerseys wrote:Ifreann wrote:The more serious the relationship, the bigger the sword.
What do single people get?
Spears.
Posted:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 7:07 pmby Exxosia
So this begs the following questions. Is a person owed a further explanation to a response of "NO", "Naw, I'm good" and "I'm not interested"?
No, but it usually makes the denial more solid if you do explain.
Why does it matter if a person is married or not, shouldn't no mean no?
It entirely should.
If the roles were reversed wouldn't holy hell rain down on the guy?
That and then some. In today's climate, I think it would destroy him.
Why do some women think they are entitled to a man's attention/time and NO just isn't an acceptable answer?
Because almost everyone is an entitled ass and almost no one has raised their kids to respect anyone or anything in decades. I know two people who are respectful, unentitled, and considerate. If I extend that out to everyone I have ever met, that goes up to five. I have never met anyone born between 1880 and 1985 that I think is/was even capable of it besides myself and that's only because I was raised in such a marinade of it that my act of rebellion was trying to be halfway decent.
Posted:
Wed Feb 10, 2021 2:26 amby Risottia
Grinning Dragon wrote:she has now proposed a change to the employee handbook that married personnel should wear their wedding rings/bands to avoid confusion and is trying to garner support for this change
What a cretin. As if an employee's marital status were the the company's or the other employee's business. Mind your own business.
