Thoughts on Singelringen, Anyone? January 12, 2009Posted by Onely in Dating, Food for Thought, Great Onely Activities.
Tags: engagement ring, engagement ring sexist, marriage, multiple translations, proud to be single, Singelringen, wedding ring, weddings
We are intriged by the idea of Singelringen, a ring that single people buy to support the mantra that,
“I am not alone. I am Single.”
We think it’s a great core concept. At first glance, Singelringen represents a healthy commitment to and acceptance of one’s self, even when single in a coupled world. The ring
“Reminds the single man or woman that they are already complete while open to possibilities.”
However (and there’s always a however, isn’t there?),
do we really need to model our ”proud to be single” message after a symbol used in the historically heteronormative tradition of weddings/marriages (and I’m even ignoring for now the the sexist implications of the engagement ring)? By creating “Singelringen” for singles, are we just further validating the too-prevalent concept of weddings and marriage as status-enhancers? Or, to think more optimistically, are we recrafting the role of the commitment ring in society, making it work in our favor?
On their home page, Singelringen says,
“There are engagement rings and wedding rings, but there was no such thing as a ring for single men and women. Why not? If anyone needs to signal one’s civil status, it’s a Single.”
Perhaps they mean that until society moves away from its fixation on civil status (by the year 2052, you think?), wearing a Singelring (wearing Singelringen? wearing a Singelringen? wearing Singelring?) might be a good way draw people’s attention to the fact that, “Hey, there are other commitment options beyond man-woman marriage.”
We here at Onely are all about that. However (oops, there’s another one!), we noticed that although on Singelringen’s home page they say,
We should stand up for what we are. . .
They follow it immediately with,
We are always more attractive to others when we are comfortable being single.
True, that. However (number three), here we are again, back to being happy so that we are more attractive to others: it’s ok to be happy and single, as long as you are striving toward eventual partnerhood. Is this what Singelringen wants to communicate? By “if anyone needs to signal their civil status, it’s a Single,” do they mean that Singles should be signalling to people that they are available for coupling (and, hence, imply that Single is a state implicitly requiring change)?
I’m afraid this might be the case. Singelringen posts in their “press” section this article from The Age, 7 October 2007, which describes Singelringen as:
A “single ring” for single people who want others to know at a quick glance they are unmarried and available for dating
However (four), this was the media talking, not Singelringen itself, and the overall vibe from the Singelringen site seems more positive and enlightened than all that. So we’re going to give them the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps some of this problematic rhetoric comes across better in the Swedish, Korean, Chinese, Polish, Italian, French, or Spanish.
Yes, you can read about Singelringen and join the Singelringen community in any of these languages! And that is very very freaking awesomely fabulous and progressive, no matter what one may think about the legacy of wedding rings, or any specific Singelringen rhetoric. Which is why Onely is adding Singelringen to our blogroll. Check it out, y’all–lots of singlehood experts wear it. (For all our Copious Chinese Readers, there’s even a choice between simplified and complex characters!)
Copious Readership, do any of you wear Singelringen? Why or why not? What do you think about the USD 69 / 45 Euro pricetag?
PS. I just can’t get away from the freaky spacing, sorry!