Bennifer's wedding band story fails to ring true
By Beth Teitell
Tuesday, August 26, 2003

As you've no doubt heard by now, Ben Affleck was wearing what looked ``suspiciously'' - at least to the New York Daily News - ``like a wedding band on the fourth finger of his left hand Saturday when he tossed the ceremonial first pitch at a Boston Red Sox game.''

          Immediately upon reading the news yesterday morning, a deep pit developed in my stomach. It was the same feeling I get when I'm out on the town enjoying myself, only to remember that I forgot to set my TiVo to record the final episode of ``Who Wants to Marry My Dad?'' or a particularly good ``Dawson's Creek'' rerun.
          Had I somehow fallen into a dream state and missed the wedding of the century? The one for which I've been dieting and outfit-shopping for months? Well, the good news is that if I did, so did everyone else, including all of the tabloids of record, so at least I won't have myself to blame.
          In the Daily News story, Affleck's publicist is described as laughing off the suggestion that the two were secretly married: ``I was thinking you were going to ask me something serious,'' Ken Sunshine told the New York Daily News reporter. `I can tell you authoritatively he didn't get married.''
          If it's indeed true that they're not married, I see a few other explanations for the ring:
          1) It simply wasn't there. The Daily News story was written by a man - Derek Rose - and you know how reliable those people are when it comes to ring-spotting. (For example: You ask your S.O. what the new woman in his office is like, is she married? And he says, ``I don't know. It didn't come up.'') This may have been a reverse case of ring blindness. Maybe the alleged wedding ring was on a different finger, or a different hand, or it was a bracelet or a necklace, or maybe a hat.
          2) The ring was on the wedding finger, but it was a joke, a passive-aggressive move by an actor who's been hurt by his fans in the wake of ``Gigli'' and is now striking out the only way he knows how (other than by releasing ``Jersey Girl,'' that is, the second in the Bennifer oeuvre). After all, this is the same man who recently told a prying BBC reporter, ``(The wedding) is in Namibia on Nov. 15. So you go ahead and fly on down and we'll see you there.''
          3) The ring was on the wedding finger, but it was not a wedding band; rather, as the New York Daily News has posited, it is a ``man-gagement ring from J. Lo, to go with the supposedly $1.2 million pink diamond Harry Winston stunner Ben bought for the Bronx bombshell.''
          Apparently employing the ``I'm just a guy'' defense, Affleck's spokesman, Sunshine, said he didn't know if that last theory is true or not. ``I've been with him a bit and never noticed it,'' he said.
          But I say, let's hope for the best. Let's hope that it is a man-gagement ring, and from now on, young blushing metrosexual grooms will come into the office on Monday morning holding out their hands so their friends can oooh and ahhh.