<$BlogRSDUrl$>

Dan Goodman's prediction and politics journal.

Sunday, July 11, 2004

Posts of Comment

Dan Goodman (dsgood) wrote,@ 2004-07-09 22:57:00

I began thinking about distinctive wedding rings for different types of marriages. I decided on rings which would display the number of people in the marriage. Non-restrictive marriages would also have plus signs.

touch_of_ink 2004-07-10 03:36
In the poly community, I've seen the "infinite heart" symbol used. But I've also seen wedding rings made out of several types of metal (or colors of gold), and "puzzle rings" used, too.

dsgood 2004-07-11 19:24 (from 209.98.3.203) (link) Select
I wonder if one of these will become the standard, or if different groups will settle on different standards?

mrissa 2004-07-10 06:55
What about people whose restrictive/non-restrictive status is not something they care to share with the casual observer? I wouldn't want to make a definitive statement either way to a casual observer. It's not information most people need to have from me. So if you were going to have a + sign for open, I'd want a definitive sign for "firmly closed," too, so that one could opt out of using either if one was ScanAm or otherwise big on privacy.

dsgood 2004-07-11 19:31
There's a button which says "Yes I do, but not with you" -- which is another message some people might want to convey.

Note: This could become very complicated, and if any symbol was also used for other purposes, very confusing. "You're wearing that symbol because you're willing to have sex outside your marriages with lefthanded Italian-Australians? I'm sorry -- I thought you were a fellow poison hobbyist!"
Comments: Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?