The semiotics of ring-wearing women could fill a volume or two. It can be maddening if you spend too much time on it.
In my foray into the Dating 2.0 world, I sometimes notice a few women here and there who are wearing rings on their left fourth finger, which I’ll call the wedding ring finger or WRF. Here in the US and much of the Western world, if the ring has a stone in it, the woman is most likely either married or engaged. (And, the size of the stone is a clear sign of how much lucre she extracted from her hubby in purchasing it.) Men, as we know, wear a simple gold band. What I’ve found interesting over the years is how there are more and more men who wear wedding rings. My father has never worn his ring (as far as I can remember) because he, like me, has never liked wearing rings. The last time I tried to wear rings was in the 5th grade, and it drove me up the wall. As soon as I put it on, I was hopping around, trying to get it off. No way, Jose, was I ever going to wear another ring!
With women, the subject is muddled. Of course, if the woman is wearing a ring with a stone in it, it’s safe to assume that she’s engaged or married. If it’s something else, it’s hard to tell.
I once dated a woman who wore a gold ring with some filigree in it. I met her online, so that was a clear sign that she was available. Yet, she showed up on our first date wearing the ring. I wondered why. On our second date, I asked her outright why she wore the ring, and she told me that it was to ward off the “undesirables” while she rode the bus on her way to work. It made sense, but I found it peculiar. In any event, I scored bonus points with her because I was, according to her, the first guy who noticed and who asked about the ring. My natural curiosity drove me to ask about it.
Now, fast-forward several months later, and I’ve not dated any other woman who wore a ring on her WRF. But, I’ve seen several who fall into this category.
I’ve heard of the Claddagh ring, but don’t remember seeing it. At least with this ring, the semiotics are much clearer.
But, I don’t really give a shit as I’m not a sentimental guy and a ring is just an ordinary band of metal — some with a higher price tag than others.
Recently, I encountered an early 30s woman who was giving me strong eye contact and a flash of a smile here and there when I was patronizing my one local used bookstore. Now, Blue Pill Me wouldn’t have paid much attention to what this woman was doing. Red Pill Me was watching her. I returned the eye contact, but didn’t smile. (Alpha move, heh.) Finally, I asked her for some advice on books in fiction, when she was alone in the stacks and away from the register. She answered my questions and then I left. I was running late for an appointment and so didn’t have time to game her. But, I know she works there and will return.
Oh . . . something not-so-unique about this woman: she was wearing a ring on her WRF. But, no stone. One wonders.
adiaforon 
I’m here from Free Northerner’s blog where I read your comment
adiaforon
April 12th, 2013 at 07:07
“It’s all very confusing, to say the least. My brain reels.
I have something else to add. Some women have called me “patronizing” or “condescending” when I tried to explain something in a logical way, or described something that, I suppose implicitly, showed that I knew more about and had thought more about the subject than they did. In short, I made them feel stupid and/or inadequate, and so came out the shaming language. When they first started telling me this, I thought, for sure, that I had done something wrong. Now, I just laugh at them.”
I also commented over there about how its equally confusing for women, at least myself and those I’ve spoken with about it.
Anyway, the ring thing. I don’t wear rings and find any jewelry other than earrings to be cumbersome. I won’t wear a ring when I get married.
However I get why some unmarried women might wear a faux wedding ring. One lady who’s in her early 40s I know wears one and she says she’s treated with more respect by both men and women when she does vs when she doesn’t.
She says if one is middle aged and single, even if by choice, that is still seen as an oddity in our culture so to avoid that she wears a faux wedding ring.
You’re talking about an older woman, however. The thrust of my comment was more for the younger crowd: 20s and 30s. There, to me, it seems that they’re doing it more for deflecting unwanted attention. An easy way out from getting hit on.
I’ve not seen the same thing with foreigners. With them, if you’re not married, then there’s no point in wearing a ring.
“There, to me, it seems that they’re doing it more for deflecting unwanted attention. An easy way out from getting hit on.”
That makes sense. If someone is getting hit on regularly and doesn’t want to be bothered, for whatever reason; could be lesbian, could be asexual, could be celibate, not interested in dating, prefers to be the one doing the hitting, etc, etc, etc, could be a thousand reasons, and if wearing a ring deflects then, then I say go for it.
Makes it all the more confusing for the guy, then. Great if you’re the woman — sucks if you’re the guy.
Really, why? I’d think the overwhelming majority of men would avoid trying to hit on a woman with an engagement or wedding ring on. And even if she’s not married or engaged, if she’s wearing a ring that looks like it, she’s probably doing it on purpose because she does not want to get hit on.
So then you just avoided wasting your time only to get rejected in the end.