Blahhhh . . . I have to say that I don't really buy the whole "I did it for myself" when it comes to boob jobs. I don't know anyone who decided that their boobs were too small, or that big boobs are sexy, or that big boobs = confidence in a vacuum.

That's kind of off topic, but I agree that this is gross on several levels.

Eh. She may have changed it legally but she'll probably continue to be SMG professionally.

I know a lot of women who have taken their husband's name upon marriage, but didn't bother to legally change it for years. I may be the actual paperwork/license and the not the change that's the surprise.

My insides always sag a little when I hear about women changing their surnames to their partners' upon marriage. It is practically the only 'choice' confronting women that I remain absolutely rigid on saying no to when it comes to calling one's self a feminist. I think it is a practice that needs to die and I have yet to hear/read a smart, solid argument about why a woman should or would choose to change her surname to her partner's upon marriage (or in this case, 5 years after marriage), even on this fabulous blog/forum.

While I honor everyone's right to make their own decisions about their own names, this was not something I even contemplated. I'm glad my husband didn't care, but the only way it would have made any difference would have been if he wanted to change his name too.

As a gift to her husband? It suggests to me that it was something he really cared about. I wonder about that. Why do so many men need women to change their names? It seems so controlling and... in the best possible reading it seems like an unexamined decision. Either it's an unreconstructed paternalistic control measure or I just don't get it.

The only half-way decent argument I've ever heard for a name change was the idea of forging a family identity. In that case though, I don't know why the couple doesn't pick an entirely new name. Barring that, I think the person who cares the most about forging a family identity should be the one to change his/her name. But too often the one who cares the most is him and the one who changes the name is her. Which means it's still a sexist thang.

See, I sort of lost any faith in her judgment when she starred in Scooby-Doo, so I can't be too upset about it.

I wonder if they've decided to have kids soon.

I'm a 51 yo white male and I'm in my second marriage. Both of were to women who were very, very feminist. Who corrected and correct me on any comment they find even slightly an issue (as do my two teenage daughters), who rail in conversation on slights to their gender, who let nothing within earshot slip by. Yet, they both changed their names. I was indifferent to even somewhat against. I figured my mistakes should be my own and I think that I've always been attracted to self confident, independent, women.Yet, they would NOT be deterred. Now, what's up with that?

The poll results related to that story are very interesting: currently at approximately 75:25 in favour of women changing "their names for their husbands".

I don't understand name-changing. I doubt I ever will. If it were gender-neutral I think I'd still be a bit baffled. I know people who've changed their names because of abuse--i.e. they didn't wish to be associated by name with an abusive father--and I can understand that, but the rest of it I don't get.

I must say, I feel a little cynical about this. Mightn't it just be a publicity stunt to drum up attention for Southland Tales, especially because SMG's career has tanked ever since Buffy? If so, I hasten to add, it's still worth analyzing vis-a-vis gender.

Like sgzax, I find myself wondering what kind of man cares so damn much. I also find myself wondering what the hell he got her.

Although I have no desire to change my name when I get married and hate the sexist assumption that all women will change their name, yet if a man wants to it's thought of as weird...still, I don't really want to judge someone on the basis of an anonymous report in a gossip magazine. Maybe she did do it as a "gift" to her husband, in which case that is kinda weird. Or maybe she sees it as representing a deepening of their marital bond, or they're planning on having kids and she wants them all to have the same name, or something.

I'm doing the hypenated name thing, but not "for" my husband. "Forging a family identify" sounds a bit intense, but I did change it because I wanted to mark a change in my life, and myself when I got married. My husband and I had been living together for awhile, and I had this fear that after we got married, it would be like nothing changed (and I think something did change in our relationship). I wanted to do something to mark the fact that my life would be different from then on.

I also added his name because I have a generic, common last name, which I've never liked very much (especially when combined with my generic, fairly common first name).

I worked in a writer's room where one of the women was getting married. She was debating whether or not to change her name and a majority of the men said that she should. She admitted it was really important to her husband that she take her last name and one of the other male writers admitted it was important for his wife to take his name, though no one ever said WHY. The male writer told her she could always keep her name for professional reasons, like a pseudonym, and just change it legally. I just sat their fascinated by the conversation. As the lowest on the totem pole it really wasn't in my best interest to challenge the other (higher) writers so I listened.

I think for a lot of men it's probably the last of their dominance, the men carry the family name remember, and it's an ego boost. Add to that that women are still expected to become "Mrs. John Smith" and your average woman really doesn't want to challenge that. There was a thread about this on Jezebel a while ago and I believe SarahMC was challenging the women there to give a reason as to why they felt the need to change their names that wasn't influenced by our culture and no one really could aside from "I want our family to have the same last name, etc." She pointed out that you could do that by having the husband change his name to the wife's and one commenter said that she wasn't going to use her children to make a "political statement". I thought that summed it up pretty well in that it was extremely telling about the commenter and how far society still has to go.

If I ever get married I am personally never changing my name, cause I like it.

Great post Ann. Writing about name changing is always, always an issue on feminist blogs because (like high heels and make-up) people have a very hard time seperating the societal issues from the personal, examined or unexamined, decisions. I don't know your relationship, I don't know your discussions, and I trust that you made the best decision for yourself at the time, even if it is not what I would have done.
But giving a name-change as a gift is undeniably weird. I was going to echo EG's sentiments and humourously wonder what he got her, but I literally cannot think of anything that compares. Not a pony, not a house, not anything that can be bought. Maybe surgery? A kidney?

I'll probably take my husband's name when I marry unless it's stupid, or sounds terrible with my first name. If I don't take his, I'll want him to take mine. I know everyone thinks it's so outdated, but I like the symbolism of being one family, not two-- and to answer a previous poster, I wouldn't just "pick an entirely new name" because what would it be? Why go to all the effort to make a new name when there are two perfectly good names with long histories and sentimental value to chose from?

I know I don't want to hyphen my kid's names or preferably not even my own because I've always felt that was a bit like saying "This is my name, that is yours, and we'll pull them apart into two names at the first opportunity" (and that's a personal feeling, so I don't expect others to feel the same, nor do I judge someone for a hyphenated last name, before you jump down my throat).

However, this surprises me because, as many people above have mentioned, female actors usually don't change their names at marriage because name recognition is so important. I can understand why she would want to take his name, and I can even imagine that she waited this long because she was pressured into keeping her own or something (mere speculation of course), but I don't understand why she did, ultimately, since this could potentially be problematic for her career...

Well, part of it, I think, Basiorana, is that at this point, one could conceivably ask "What career?" Back when she and FPjr got married, she was high-profile and looked to be going places. Now...well...damn, what has she been doing?

I used to be Ms. unpronounceable-name-1, and my website is still www.weirdly-spelled-first-nameunpronnouncable-name-1. because my legal name is weirdly-spelled-first-name unpronounceable-name-1 (middle) unpronounceable-name-2 (last). Hyphenating it, or having separate last names just means we correct people twice as much when we meet people or get awards at ceremonies. We were getting really tired of that.

People who know me or interact with me call me either name, and I'm fine with that. I've got the same feminist identity to go with both.

EG-- Heh. You may have a point. Maybe her agent finally said, "You know, I don't think having a new name will hurt you that much after all..."

Also, as for why it is important to men-- because it was important to their fathers, and important to their grandfathers. I've noticed that if you ask most guys why they want a son to carry on their name and want to keep their name they'll say, "Well, it means the world to my dad and he'd be crushed if I changed it/the line died out." When my dad said that was why he had wanted a boy I went and talked to my grandfather and he said, "Well, it would've meant the world to my father and I'd've hated to dishonor his memory," etc, etc. Seems to be a theme. Not the best reason, and probably not universal, but I can't fault people for not wanting to hurt their parent's feelings.

Just for the record Sarah Michelle Prinze dose not roll off the tongue as nicely as Sarah Michelle Gellar.
I know when i get married I'll take my husbands name solely for the fact that my last name is Smith, the single most generic name on the planet and I'm tired of appearing in math problems. However if i had a last name i actually liked, that would be a different story.

As someone else said, taking a critical look at these kinds of traditions, like "asking for someone's hand in marriage," doesn't mean you'll have your feminist card taken away if you follow the tradition. I can see the strong arguments that a woman changing her last name to her husband's has a very strong element of possession, and I don't disagree that SM(G)P's decision to give her identity as a gift to her husband is beyond weird.

Personally, though, I'm none too wild about my last name. It's easy to misspell, hard to pronounce, and an endless source of joke-fodder for the occasional morons I meet. I can't wait to ditch it when I get married.

Is it really any odder to change a name as a gift versus changing it upon getting married? And it appears that she has changed to Prinze (as opposed to Prince, though one of those could be a typo). Not that I would change my name for either reason, but of the two I think I prefer the gifting as opposed to the obligatory tradition.
I think it is interesting that if the difference in spelling is correct, and that she choose a unique but phonetical version of the name it could be a way of signifing association while maintaining independance.

Given the preponderance of screen names are we altering the whole "naming" as identity business anyways?

Not the best reason, and probably not universal, but I can't fault people for not wanting to hurt their parent's feelings.

I really long for the day in which little girls grow up not expecting to take their possible future husband's surnames. I also long for the day that little boys grow up not assuming that their possible future wives will change their surnames automatically upon marriage.

A few comments above have brought up the issue of "what about the children", but I'd like to complicate that a little. We tend to assume that it's somehow a trauma or a slight for kids not have the same name as one or both of their parents. What if the child's preferences are otherwise?

My mother took my father's name when she married him, and I got Dad's last name with Mom's maiden name as a middle. While my parents are not divorced, I am on much poorer terms with my father's side of family, and would frankly rather be overtly identified with my mother's family, if I absolutely must be overtly identified with any family.

I understand that people want to have a family identity, but sometimes that expectation leads to painful disjunct between reality and ideal.

Nah, Prinze is the correct spelling actually (of Freddie's name). So no subversive statement made.

I think it's important to note that other countries in the world have different traditions about how names are passed on through the generations. For instance, I have a friend from Bangladesh, where typically people name their kids whatever they want, usually something symbolic to them, and people don't change their names upon marriage. They will often also be given a 'nickname' that means something else entirely. Anyway, when she and her husband had kids, they gave them her husband's last name to fit in with North American tradition, but she retains her own name.

Also, as for why it is important to men-- because it was important to their fathers, and important to their grandfathers. I've noticed that if you ask most guys why they want a son to carry on their name

But if they opened it up to their daughters passing on their name, then they'd have twice as many chances (depending on how many children they have) to pass on their name and it would truly become a FAMILY name, instead of just the fathers. As it is women are just cyphers for the male lineage. The daughters are just as much apart of their fathers as the sons.

Without speaking to the specific example of Sarah Michelle Gellar... I completely agree with you about the squicky implications of a woman changing her name as a "gift" to her spouse, and I think that breast implants or liposuction makes a good comparison.

To me the peril lies in the fact that these are actions that, in their way, literally change the person she is, presumably in order to make her more acceptable to her husband or boyfriend. Your name and your body are both you in very literal if very different ways, and to change something that is so fundamentally yours and call it a gift, or a sacrifice... the name is his, obviously. Are the new boobs his? The new thighs? It's treating yourself like a commodity, basically, or at least big parts of yourself -- parts that can change hands, apparently, in exchange for love or approval or whatever it is -- and if that's a little bit iffy when we're talking about strippers and prostitutes, who do what they do for money, then it's a lot iffy for a supposedly equal partner in a supposedly equal marriage.

And every time I see it, I can't help but wonder: What else would she "give" him if she thought it would make him happier, or make him love her more? Her virginity? A kid? Would she convert to his religion? Would she get her tubes tied?

Of course any of these can be real, honest-to-God personal choices, and they happen all the time in real, honest-to-God equal and respectful and considerate relationships, and just because a woman cares how her husband/boyfriend feels about a decision that'll affect both of them doesn't mean she lives for his approval... but so help me, some of the language used sometimes, I swear to God I think of dowries and contracts and those awful personals that you still see all over the place: must not be taller than me, must not be fat, must know how to dress to look good with me on a formal occasion, must not be loud and obnoxious; I prefer brunettes, but blondes are not out of the running if they fit all the criteria. And on and on.

To put it in a nutshell, ignoring those four paragraphs... if you require, expect, or even hope really hard that the person you're with is going to earn your love at some future time by turning into somebody else -- then each of you is with the wrong person.

I fully intend to change my name when I marry because I HATE my last name. I hate being at the end of the alphabet and I really don't like being associated with that side of the family. Unless I marry a Mr. Hitler or worse, I'm changing my name. And I'm doing it for myself.

On a similar note, my boyfriend and I have been discussing engagement. I know a lot of people are against engagement rings, but I think they're lovely (especially when they're not white gold with diamonds - so unoriginal). However, I have one condition... if I get an engagement ring to wear on my left hand to tell the world "I'm taken!" so does he. Fair?

I didn't even think about changing my last name; I knew I was going to. It wasn't that I felt like I ought to or anything like that, I was just sick of having a last name that no one could pronounce or spell, and I was sick of the snarky comments about "was your mother drunk when she named you?" because my full name had an insane amount of alliteration.

Something kind of interesting here, that I think is a little important, is that if a woman keeps her last name (unless she was a hyphenation of both her parents) is still keeping her father's name, not her mother's. So, it is still the paternal line that is continuing. Frankly, I want to keep my last name in honor of my father, who died a few years ago, but was an excellent, kind, caring, and helpful man. It is something very important to me, and I would like my children to have my last name. My fiance's father is a giant asshole who doesn't care about his kids and cheated on my fiance's mom and his new step mom. Yet, my boyfriend's suggestion was, the girls can have your last name and then the boys can have my last name...meaning, when the next generation comes, they will probably lose the last name. Though, we did jokingly talk about adding our names together...but "Gonzeers" is just a little bit too ridiculous for me.

ahh, yes, another post on Feministing where freedom of choice only applies for those that choose to make the same decision you want them to.

This is interesting, and I was also interested in what everyone had to say about this because I am being faced with this dilemma right now... well, not really because I'm keeping my name... and my fiance had already known that. When I sat him down after we mutually decided to get married, I said "I need to talk to you about names." and he said: "I want you to keep your name." He knew already that I wouldn't want to change my name. I really like it and it's who I am. He talked it over with his family, we wanted to make sure that they understood my rationale behind keeping my name and that it was nothing against them and that I really do want to be a part of their family etc. and his family completely understands and is totally for it. Well, I guess I shouldn't say 'for' it, but they really don't care what name I choose. I feel really blessed by that actually, because I was worried... because I know how parents can be about those sorts of things. I have friends whose fathers still insist that if they want to get married, the guy has to ask permission from their father... and I also have friends who think that it's weird that I'm keeping my name, and all in all the 'situation' with my choice not to take my fiance's name seems to be a rather hard one for people to swallow. I'm 23, I graduated from an art school and have a lot of progressive friends as well as a lot of traditional friends, but it's interesting to think that after all the things that the second wave of feminism has done, it's still an 'odd' thing to KEEP your name! A lot of people ask me what we will do with our kids... and we aren't planning on having any actually... which is another TOTALLY WEIRD concept that we will 'change our minds about'. I don't think so. Both of our interests are in careers etc. and we need to be flexible and maybe even live apart at times (I totally got excited about that post about the married couple that live apart...even though they're only down the street) and having children in the midst of that is silly and terrible for the child anyway. Also, we said that eventually, IF (not likely) we ever want to have children, we will adopt (those children need homes more than our biological non existent ones do)... then people say that we won't because we will want the satisfaction or something... of having our own biological little children. I don't think so.... and I really identifiy to many of these responses because I'm living it, and I'm glad to be able to read them! I'm totally confident with my decision(s). But it's still frustrating to have to explain yourself over and over again to people that constantly seem to have a rebuttal... instead of understanding!

This is such a weird one. The taking of the guys name is intrinsically sexist, and yet a common name seems kind of important to the ceremony of union. Establishing a family name for the newly forged family. (I know I'm attaching the expectancy of children to marriage. Sue me.)

I'm one of those guys who feels the need to keep the family name going, especially since I'm actually the last with the name. Name ends with me, if I don't get to making boys, apparently. It does feel like it would be a slap in the face to ditch the name. But it's a slap in the face to impose it too. Whee.

Stil, one of my ex-girlfriends had a much better last name than me, and when we considered tossing rings at each other, I honestly entertained the idea of taking her name. She had a lot of pride in her last name, and really, it so much better rhythmically with me first name than my existing last name.

Hyphenation sounds fine in theory, but I can't get myself over the fact that it simply doesn't work logistically. After five or six generations of people sticking their names together, your last name would take two minutes to write out. We'd have to start abbreviating.

Maybe instead of hyphenation, you just merge the two names. Of course, then the most common last name in America would be Smohnson. Or Johith.

The only thing that seems honestly fair is to create a new name for the new family. Then again, I'm filled with abject terror as to what people would come up with. I'm a complete nerd/geek, but there would be thousands of couples with elvish last names and it terrifies me.

I make light, but honestly, this is a weird one. I've got no idea.

equityforbothgenders, I think if you actually read what is being said, you'll find that's not the case at all.

equityforbothgenders... ???

Could you try reading the responses before you have your knee-jerk response?

We're having a civil discussion about our individual choices and the reasons for them. I'm perhaps the strongest advocate against name change, and I specifically honored people's right to make their own decisions. Just because you feel all worked up for some reason doesn't mean everyone else is.

DrkEyedCajn: I think this part of the post from StringBeanJen:
"It is practically the only 'choice' confronting women that I remain absolutely rigid on saying no to when it comes to calling one's self a feminist."

Kind of seems like someone is saying you aren't a feminist if you want to change your last name.

What about a queer person taking their partners' last name? Is that just being homonormative, capitulating to heterosexual norms, or does it queer the act at all? I don't know anyone whose done that, but I suppose it's possible. I've joked about taking my girlfriend's last name because her last name is better than mine, but we're not ever going to marry, so I guess it's a non-issue.

I met my (male) best friend in a class because his first name is the same as my last name. So, the first time we spoke to one another, he announced excitedly, 'If we got married, I could take your name and be John John!' (not my real name, but ya know).

I have a very common (first and last) name that I don't love but don't dislike either. If I hated it, as some people do, then I would not wait for marriage, I would change it now.

I would never change my name if I get married. If it means that much, then he can take mine. I would consider blending names or choosing an entirely different one (I hate hyphenation just because I think it's a pain), but since I will have my PhD by then and will be publishing, I really wouldn't want to give mine up.

jonquill - Your comment cracks me up. Johith and elvish names? Sounds amazing.
A terrible dilemma if I decided to combine my name with my husbands? "Wood" would have to be in there somewhere... I can just imagine the jock-obscenities created!!!

It is practically the only 'choice' confronting women that I remain absolutely rigid on saying no to when it comes to calling one's self a feminist.

I guess I'll have to turn in my feminist card because I'm planning to take my fiance's last name when we marry. For the longest time, I didn't think I would but I eventually decided that, between my father's last name and my fiance's last name, I'd rather take the fiance's as an indicator of making my life with him. I understand that it's a sexist practice and I respect every woman's decision to do what's right for her. For me, this was the decision I made. I'm grateful that I get to make this choice in the first place.

FemiDancer - anyone - give me a good, feminist argument for why a wife-to-be should or would want to take her husband-to-be's surname! Do you think boys grow up into men (who aren't the feminists on this forum!) who have these thoughtful discussions on if they should or should not take their partner's surnames? Do you think many even think about it if they hate their surnames (and it bothers me how many of you do hate your surnames or even given names; it's been a part of you since birth) No.

Like I said, I long for a day when it is not a given that a wife will take her husband's surname upon marriage.

Well, this is definitely interesting!

When I was married, I took his name. Didn't really think about it, why I did, or even considered keeping mine. It just didn't occur to me. When we were finally divorced I changed my name back as quickly as I could because I didn't want a constant reminder of the physical abuse I endured.

Now, I am quite certain that I want to hang onto my last name because I love it.
Sham Payne - I understand your point of view completely, as my name is Smith too. But after years of hating it for being so "common and normal", I decided there were an awful lot of benefits to having a name like that. For example, it's a lot of fun checking into hotel rooms and such because a lot of people think you're giving a fake name for some clandestine reason. (My life isn't really all that exciting, so a little pretend cloak-and-dagger stuff gives me a giggle now and then.) Also, you never have to spell your name for anyone. WELL, I shouldn't say "never" - some people still ask me how to spell Smith, believe it or not. (And yes, I have seen it spelled "Smyth" but 99% of the time it's pronounced with a long 'I' sound so I still find it ridiculous when I am asked how to spell my name.)
Plus there is a certain amount of anonymity with a name like mine, which I find comes in handy a lot.

My fella and I have talked about the name thing, and he knows that I don't want to take his name if we ever legally marry, and he doesn't mind. He's even said that he's like to think about doing the pick-a-whole-new-name thing because then we could pick out something that "sounds REALLY cool!" LOL... That's when we came up with the name Stilletto (misspelled purposely) which we both use as internet handles, because we thought it sounded kinda bitchin'. :)

P.S. equityforbothgenders - I have no idea which thread you were reading, but I don't think it's this one.
So, um, *psst* I think your bitterness is showing; you might wanna, you know, like, go ahead and tuck that back in.

By the way, I just meant that I'm grateful to have the option in society at large, not that I'm grateful to my fiance for being benevolent or anything. He doesn't give a rat's ass what I do about my name.

Well, from reading all of these responses I can't say I've seen a specifically feminist good reason to change a name, but I certainly sympathize with people who hate their names and want to take advantage of an odd cultural tradition to shed them. Of course, I don't get why people who hate their names don't just choose new names for themselves independently of marriage. Probably because that's what I did. I picked my own name when I was 18 and then declined to change it again when I got married. I love my name.

Maybe there's a slight social stigma against random name change? I say fuck it though... if you hate your name change it. Waiting for an excuse that is based in patriarchal notions of ownership is a far worse excuse than "I just felt like it." For me, anyway.

im not married and when i do get married, i dont plan on taking my partner's last name. i like the way that my name sounds and i have a connection with it...always telling people how to pronounce it correctl has actually grown on me.

i was raised muslim, and in islam, women are actually encouraged to keep their last names. however, whether or not she actually does that is up to her. so thats pretty cool.

my parents have been married for twenty five years and my mom didn't take my dad's last name until my older brother was born (she felt that she wanted her children to have the same last name as both of their parents...and using her name was too radical of a notion for them i guess)...i just found out though that she never legally changed her last name until very recently, when she lost her social security card and had to get a new one.

it was weird because even though she went by my dad's last name for the past 25 years, she expressed a bit of sadness that she had actually made it legal.

When I got married I changed my last name to my husband's and I didn't really think about not doing it. I had converted to Judaism and had changed my first name at that time -- and the conversion really wasn't for my husband or for the marriage. And changing my last name just seemed to make sense. It doesn't make sense now, just because of the whole idea that my identity would be subordinate to his, and I think I would never do it again. To be fair to my ex-husband he might not have had a big problem with it if I had not wanted to do it.

My issue now is whether I should change my name back now that I'm getting divorced. I feel like having the name is part of my history, plus it's my daughter's last name. So really I doubt I will change it back or change to yet another name from my family history, though it doesn't seem like a very feminist decision

My dad's name definitely "died out", at least his "branch" of it, because I'm the last one and I'm not having any more kids to try to name after me or him. But as far as I can tell he really doesn't care a bit.

More on topic, I'm not sure what to say about Sarah Michelle Prinze or why this would be a gift to her husband. It just seems so creepily possessive to me, yet I'm not going to read a gossip magazine and then think I understand all about a person.

EG: I think this may be to create distance between her and Southland Tales, if the critical reaction I'm reading is correct.

Do you think boys grow up into men (who aren't the feminists on this forum!) who have these thoughtful discussions on if they should or should not take their partner's surnames?

I think boys can grow up into men who think about these matters. I think that's a goal of feminism. Some boys I know HAVE grown into men who discuss these matters... and they don't read feministing... they just have a great sense of what it means to be equal.

And for the record, we've discussed taking my name... but then my SO would have the exact same name as my father. Don't try to tell me that's not creepy.

ps. i was thinking about what the implications would be if women and men TRULY had freedom in choosing their last names...

think about female infanticide rates in some countries...think about how many people just want to have a son...why? to carry on the family name.

if we could all choose, and if names were not so politicized and gendered, things would be a lot different in our world...

just a thought.

jonquill -

double last names only becomes unwieldy if everyone keeps every last name. You could always go with the Spanish tradition of droping one of the hyphenates and taking one of the spouses. (if both partners do it and mothers pass on their names too it becomes pretty egalitarian)

as for SMG/SMP, maybe she wanted to change her name and was also too lazy to go shopping this year

When it comes to the topic of women taking their husbands' names and whether or not that is feminist, this blog by Amanda Marcotte says it all.

I don't see why we can't keep the choice of changing vs. keeping one's last name as an open one. Why does it have to be one way (patriarchy) or the other (feminism)? It's less limiting. Frankly, I don't like either side arguing over what my last name should be. Were I to take my husband's name, it's no-one else's concern; same as if I chose to keep my maiden name.

As it is, I hyphenated my last name and now have a delightfully unpronounceable one that forces people to call me by my preferred name: Jen.

I have to agree with FemiDancer. When I contemplated what I'd do about the last name thing.. I just thought.. "Well I'd just be keeping my father's last name." It's still not really "mine." I just see it as being a big pain in the ass if I hyphenate my name, and I don't want any confusion.

As an independent contractor, I do some work with the company my husband works for. It's in an area entirely independent of Mr. SoM's work; he's not even in the office when I'm there, since he takes care of the kids while I'm working.

When I started working with the company, there was much confusion on the part of Mr. SoM's coworkers. My marketing materials display my name very prominently, and with my unusual first name, they were pretty sure that I was "Mr. SoM's wife", but... "You don't have the same last name? Y'all are married, right?" (Neither of us wears wedding rings. It's pretty much impossible in our lines of work.)

I feel that in business, at least in my dealings with Mr. SoM's company, I'm taken more seriously with my own last name. I'm not "Mr. SoM's wife." I'm me, with my own business, separate from his work entirely. It's not the reason I kept my name when we married - I wasn't even dreaming of owning my own business at that point - but it has been an unexpected benefit. I've never regretted keeping my name.

Just for a slight change in perspective...

Does anyone here consider that before she changed her surname to her husband's, she had her father's surname?

From a patriarchal standpoint, women are screwed. I think there are a few cases for single mothers that have their children carry their maiden names, but for the large part, children carry paternal names.

So if SMG wants to become SMP, what's the deal? She's got a man tacked on the end anyway?

(Disclaimer: Re: above... not sure how much of that I believe or not, but it does offer something new, don't you think? Personally, I'm thinking about getting a name change all on my own just to make my name more acceptable across the ocean where it might be considered offensive. Since I'm never going to marry a man...)

And for the record, we've discussed taking my name... but then my SO would have the exact same name as my father. Don't try to tell me that's not creepy.

bubble, I'm going to assume your SO has the same first name as your father, but it's creepy(ier) if has your last name? Why isn't the first name alone creepy to you? It is your father's name.

And I know I'm nitpicking:)

Clever quip at the end of the main post about Romijn, but I think when she married Stamos he was the better known name. Her star eclipsed his before they split.

My wife kept her last name and it didn't bother me a bit. We were about 30 at the time and she was already established in her career with her name (and her father's as others have pointed out). Even if we had been younger I didn't expect her to change her identity just because we chose each other as mates. But I don't judge folks either way. I find the hyphenated solution cumbersome, but to each his/her own.

Lunalelle... I made my name up. Now there's a completely non-patriarchal solution open to any man or woman who wants to use it.

TrailerPark... thanks for that Amanda Marcotte link. A brilliant summation of the issue.

"Well I'd just be keeping my father's last name." It's still not really "mine."

I don't get this, would it be any more "yours" it it were your mothers?

"Well I'd just be keeping my father's last name." It's still not really "mine."

I don't get this, would it be any more "yours" it it were your mothers?

This seems so completely bizarre to me. My mother didn't change her name when she married, and while my brothers and I have our dad's name, our mom's last name is a second middle name for each of us -- the two would have been hyphenated if it wouldn't have been uber-German and impossible to fit on any official forms. So for a long time as a kid I didn't even realize it was more or less the norm for women to change their names upon marriage, and when the subject comes up I still tend to have a ". . . wait, people still -do- that?" reaction. I can't imagine changing my name.

That said? It made me kind of sad to read this, because my automatic association with Sarah Michelle Gellar is Buffy the Vampire Slayer. And while it wasn't perfect, damned if that show didn't have a lot of kickass female characters, including Buffy herself -- I mean, come on, the girl rose from the dead to save the world -twice-. While I can't blame anyone for living in the world we've got, it's disappointing to hear.

What I always dislike most about this discussion is that somehow keeping your name always=feminism. If we're *really* talking about subverting patriarchal structures and forging identity here, then isn't the truly feminist position to create your own name, on your own, whether or not you get married? I haven't done this, but I bet a lot of others haven't either. I don't usually have a problem saying one thing is "more feminist" than another, but if we're doing that here then I would say that keeping your father's name is *not* the most feminist option available -- creating your own, on your own, is.

Do you think boys grow up into men (who aren't the feminists on this forum!) who have these thoughtful discussions on if they should or should not take their partner's surnames?

Indeed. I have nothing against the choice changing or carrying on the family names, etc. but the pressure is never there for the menfolk to do the same. What about MY family line? Is it any less important than HIS?

From a patriarchal standpoint, women are screwed. I think there are a few cases for single mothers that have their children carry their maiden names, but for the large part, children carry paternal names.

This is true, but it never hurts to start now. I'm really into researching my family tree, and marvel at all the "maiden" (shudder) names that have been lost through the years...Pommier, Tousignant, Fifarek just to name a few. But I guess those all originated with men somewhere as well. This is even more of a reason to really THINK about why you're changing your name at marriage.

My rule: only change your name if he is just as willing to do so. If he is, then maybe you guys should examine both names and pick that which is more awesome (though I do understand the bad association reasoning - they get a pass).

Also, what's the harm in not legally changing your name, but using each other's last names for informal occasions? This way you can get it out of your system!

Ultramagnus - You're right on with your assumption. My SO and my father share the same first name... and yes, that's totally weird. My extended family enjoys throwing Freud at me.

However, I don't call my father by his first name, so in my thoughts, Dad and SO have different names... but if SO had Dad's first AND last name, I don't think I'd be able to shake it.

Another example of actresses that name-changed and then the marriage went wonky: Jamie-Lynn whatsherface from The Sopranos. Changed her name and the marriage was over what, within a year?

Some actresses take the husband's name on private stuff, but still keep their public identity as it was. Sounds reasonable.

Frankly, I think it makes more sense to have your father's last name, or your mother's, or both (some parent, period), than some guy you married. Unless you really loathe the parent that gave you the name, anyway. *shrug*

My sister in law changed her name to her husband's name for a Christmas present. This was after several years of marriage. Blarf.

My good friend changed her name she she got pregnant, also after several years of marriage. Not that I care so much, but she told me that she "had" to now that she was pregnant, even though she knows that I have kids and never did. "Had" too? Huh?

I don't really understand the whole "you just have your father's last name anyway" meme. It sounds to me like what that's saying is that women are incapable of having their own names. I received my first, middle, and last names at the same time: my parents gave them to me on my birth. And when you give something to somebody, it becomes theirs. So my last name is as much mine as my first name and middle name are. Why would "E" be mine but "G" somehow still my dad's? I share a last name with my dad, certainly--but it's no more his than it is mine. He got it at his birth, just like I got it at mine.

Plus, that concept seems to willfully ignore the number of kids born to unmarried women who do, in fact, have their mothers' last names. To say nothing of matronymics. My last name, as I've mentioned on this site before, is a matronymic. What that means is that if you were able to trace it back far enough, it would most likely originate with a woman. It's not wildly unusual in matrilineal cultures for names to be matronymic.

To everyone complaining about it being a "gift"-- I imagine it's a lot like buying oneself sexy underwear for one's partner's birthday. Something both partners want. If I were her I might do that just to get out of gift-shopping for a year.

Many people are not as attached to their surname as they are, say, their virginity or their religion. I for one don't care one whit what follows my last name as long as it's not embarrassing. I do know I would not want to have a different name from my children, especially if that different name was my husband's. And people are going to call me "Mrs So-and-So" anyway.

String_Bean_Jen: If you wish to have a lineage (and many people do) why not do a paternal one? And I've found most parents don't make those requests of their daughters because they did not have such a request made of women in their own generation. If a father has no sons and is really hurt that his name will not continue, maybe then his daughter might push for her children to carry on her family name. This is the kind of thing that should be decided by couples, based on their own and their families' wishes, and most people simply default to the old standard because the husband cares and the wife does not, or wants to take his name.

thenakedcat: Why can't you or any other child change your/their name? A friend of mine had an estranged father and changed his name to his mother's. In that situation, there is no longer any concern for the parent's feelings in the matter, so who cares what their name is?

UltraMagnus: I would predict that if a man expected both genders of his children to keep their name, and their spouses' parents expected the same thing, SOMEONE would get their feelings hurt... Not that someone couldn't do that, just that it would not solve the problem of hurt feelings form name-changes.

sgzax: Most people consider it a bit of a hassle to change a name when people don't expect it, because everyone assumes something terrible happened-- the guy I knew who took his mother's name after a falling out with his father was constantly fending off stupid questions like "Are you hiding from the mob?" Maybe someday this will change, but for now, the only time people can "get away with" changing their names without everyone assuming something terrible happened is at marriage.

If it was really free choice, maybe the majority of society would acknowledge that I even have a choice. Most just started calling me Mrs. Hislast without even asking me what I would prefer. Those that did know, ignored me, insulted me, or started making asstastic assumptions such as I am an uncommitted slut, controlling bitch, or just plain don't love/respect my husband.

And the idea that a family can have only one "family name" needs to die. I'm incredibly proud to be the Mylast & Hislast family. I think it's so beautiful to see both of us coming together symbolically to form a new family, not me leaving mine and joining his.

Yes women have a choice. By law. But in fact, the patriarchy places so much pressure on women to make one particular choice, so in fact 90% of them do even when it hurts their careers, or is something they don't even want to do but feel pressured by a man who has been taught he is whipped if the family isn't all named after him.

so when i got married, i wanted to keep my name. i was very close to my dad, and my daughter had it, so i wanted to keep it. my (now ex) husband was so upset, and said it emasculated him...except he wouldn't use that word...but i am digressing...when we divorced it was such a pain in the ass trying to get it back to my maiden name. plus, i joined the military w/ his name...so that was an added pain. but i finally got it back, and my daughter and i have the same name again...live and learn.

the man i am w/ now is awesome...and we have discussed marriage, but we just don't know. we did, however, talk about names. he doesn't have a dad (ok well of course he has one...but has never in his life met him) so the father's last name thing doesn't matter, since he has his mother's name. we both have short last names, and i offered up hyphenation...on the condition that we both do it...and he really liked the idea. we will share both names, i get to keep the name my daughter has, and it still gets to show solidarity as a couple, if that is what we are going for. and if we never get married, we might do it anyway. married or not, we are still a family.

IF i get hitched, i want to change my name just to mark a change in my life. I've decided to take my mom's maiden name, which is also my grandma's maiden name- grandma was a harlot. (I figure it'll eventually fuck with some future great grand-nephew who is into geneology).

quick sidenote- i think the theory that a family needs one name to become a family unit is bothersome. if your family bond isn't strong enough to uphold different names, you're probably in trouble anyway.

azliza - You kick ass. That is all. Great comment.

azliza: It's symbolism. Which is all names usually are anyway. By having one name people are symbolizing that they are all one family. They would be a family without it, but that symbolism is very important to some people, because it tells the WORLD they are a family.

If names are not symbolic and family members shouldn't have to all have the same name, why bother with surnames at all?

I think for me, the biggest thing is (as string_bean_jen said) is that, regardless of our individual choices, there is still a HUGE societal expectation that women will automatically change their last name to their (male) spouse's.

I got hitched this summer, and I actually did waffle on the name question. I decided to keep my last name. While most people had the foresight to ask before assuming that I was Mrs. Spousename, I actually got quite a bit of mail from family (even my own f*cking family!) and friends addressed to Spouse and Johanna Spousename, or worst of all, Mr. and Mrs. Spouse Spousename. ACK! None of these people even bothered to ASK me about MY name! When spouse and I put our wedding announcement on the class notes of our alma mater's website, the announcement widget not only changed my last name in the announcement, it also changed my last name in my profile. Automatically! I had to log in and change everything. Twice.

I, personally, am totally cool with everyone figuring out how to navigate the name question in their own lives. However, I am pissed as hell that society-at-large thinks it can make that decision for everyone. Without asking our permission. And that something is wrong or defective or less true about our marriage because I don't want to be Mrs. anything.

PS-When spouse and I moved into our new digs at my grad school, everyone (hilariously) assumed that since we were married, we must have the same last name, so we had to run around and correct a bunch of stuff that listed him as Spouse Mylastname. Ha! ;)

For what it's worth... I agree with the commenters who ask, why is it more feminist to keep your father's name than to take your SO's father's name? Besides, from what I'm aware of, the tradition is to take one's maiden name as one's middle name... ie, Mary Sue Smith marrying a Mr Scott would become Mary Smith Scott. That is what was expected in my family, anyway, to the point where it only just now occurred to me that other families might not do it that way.

When I got married, I gave my name some serious thought. I had a serious falling-out with my parents for not conforming and embarassing the family all through my teenage years and, when the chance came to change my name, I decided I would much rather belong to my husband's family than my parents'. So I dropped my parents' family name altogether and took his.

If his family had been as unpleasant, I probably would have pushed for us to just take a new one altogether rather than let myself still belong to my parents' family.

If names are not symbolic and family members shouldn't have to all have the same name, why bother with surnames at all?

You're assuming that "names have symbolism" is the same thing as "families should all have to have the same last name." But that's wrong. Names have an amazing amount of meaning. Surnames can symbolize family unity, as you suggest, and as seems most important to you. Surnames can signify membership in various ethnic communities and traditions. Surnames, like first names, can symbolize individual identity; that's important to me. Surnames can mark membership in families of origin, and not everybody wants to trade that in.

Why does your judgment of what the most important meaning/element of symbolism in a surname is trump everybody else's? Of course names have symbolism, and that's why many women want to keep them. Are you really arguing that family members should have to have the same surname? Or what? What, exactly, are you going to do about it if I marry a man, keep my name, and have children with varying surnames? Check your prescriptive language.

In any case, none of that really explains why, if family unity is all that important, men are queuing up to drop their last names.

I will never understand the whole "I want us to be one family!" thing. I have one last name, my husband and daughter have another, and we feel pretty damn much like one family to me.

When I was a child, I found out that many women changed their names when they got married. I asked why this was done and the best answer I have gotten is to pass on the family name.
When I got married, my wife wanted to change her name to mine and I asked her the same thing. I have no interest in passing on a family name: it is pretty nonsensical to me. She still has some small desire to change her name even though she has not after a few years.
While I do not understand the desire to change one's name or someone else's, I also do not understand the opposition to it.
The idea that your identity=your name or your body (as someone previously mentioned) is equally unjustifiable.

If names are not symbolic and family members shouldn't have to all have the same name, why bother with surnames at all?

I believe, Basiorara, and maybe someone can back me up here, that surnames came around in popularity when people started keeping property and tax records. And women and children were considered "property"

UltraMagnus: I would predict that if a man expected both genders of his children to keep their name, and their spouses' parents expected the same thing, SOMEONE would get their feelings hurt... Not that someone couldn't do that, just that it would not solve the problem of hurt feelings form name-changes.

Forgive me if I roll my eyes and go "boo hoo" for those poor men who get their feelings hurt.

The question is still why is it that women are the ones who have to acquiesce to their husband's wishes and change their names when it's not expected of men to? What I'm saying is that if we ever had a society where, once you were married, it was a valid choice for either the husband to change his last name to the wife's or vice versa, then there's wouldn't be so many "hurt" feelings unless one partner was trying to dominate the other, which for a lot of men, it is a show of domination, as in this is now "my" family because they have "my" last name.

It's okay for a woman to essentially lose her identity and "become" her husband, (i.e. when people say Mrs. John Smith, not even Mrs. Jane Smith) but it's not okay for the husbands feelings to be hurt?

In most states, like CA, it is extremely difficult for a husband to change his name to his wife's, (there was even a post about this earlier this year I think) where as for women not so much. One has to sit back and question why that is.

The idea that your identity=your name or your body (as someone previously mentioned) is equally unjustifiable.

Actually, it's pretty justifiable. If I'm at a party, and someone says to a friend of mine, "Hey, who's that?" and that friend says "That's EG," then they've just identified me. If you want to find out what I'm doing, you can google my name--that'll lead you right to me, which is one of the reasons I don't use it on this board. If somebody writes about me, in a blog or a letter or something, the way that the person they're writing to knows it's me is because that person uses my name. My name identifies me. It is inextricably bound up with identity. That's...why we have names. In order to identify ourselves.

As to bodies--I don't even understand your point. What else would I be if not my body? If somebody punches me in the shoulder, I say that he or she hit me. When I have an asthma attack, I say that I can't breathe. How is my body not my identity?

Hi everyone, I'm new here. I've been reading for a while though.

The name taking thing is always interesting to me because of the "think of the children!" issue. I've gotten in a lot of conversations with people that have told me how much trouble and confusion it would cause the kids to have a different last name from their parents. And then I tell them I have a different last name, and then they feel silly.

I have the name from my dad's side of the family (I don't consider it "my dad's name", as it's everyone's). My parents were (are) both in their second marriage, and my mom did not want to go through the hassel of changing her name for a third time, after taking her first husband's name, and then going back to her maiden name post-divorce. When I was born, I am told, they wanted to pick the name that was least likely to be made fun of in school, which they deemed to be my dad's last name. I personally beg to differ on that point, but whatev's.

It didn't cleave my family in two, and it never left me or my family with identity issues, and as a result, I never really understood the concept of changing your name. I definitely don't ge the "think of the children!" bit. For me, I feel like changing my name would be turning my back on my family and particularly my parents, because it's the name they gave me, and THAT symbolism is just more important to me. I understand that it's not for other people.

I doubt I will ever change my name, unless, maybe maybe maybe I hyphenate it. Although I've liked the blending idea, because my name ends with "ers" and can make some pretty sweet blends.

"If I'm at a party, and someone says to a friend of mine, "Hey, who's that?" and that friend says "That's EG," then they've just identified me."

That, of course, is not what I meant by identity. That is what you are called, not your identity. I someone else has the same name they are not the same person. By identity I mean your life, your personality, who you actually are regardless of what name someone slaps on you. No one, I hope, can have their identity encompasses by their name.

Just the same, your body is not you: if you lose some part of your body are you less of a person? Perhaps your abilities are not what they once were, but the same could be said for aging.

So, EG, it is my view that you are identified by a name, it is not your identity.

I have this fight with my boyfriend all of the time. I asked him to give me one legitimate reason why I should keep his last name if we got married. His response?

"It's tradition."
Not good enough, I said, give me another one. He said, "Wouldn't you take my last name just because you love me? It feels like you're rejecting me by not taking my name." He knows I love him. I don't need to take his name to prove that to him, and he knows that. It just goes to show you that even the most egalitarian and liberal of folks can get really weird about stuff like this.

By the way, does anyone know where the tradition of taking the husband's last name came from? Does it have anything to do with that passage from 1 Corinthians in the bible that says "the head of the man is god and the head of woman is man?" (that's roughly what it says anyway...)

And in regards to the whole argument about your maiden name being your dad's name and therefore still connected to a man, etc. You weren't given the choice to take or not take the last name your parents gave you, but you have a choice to decide whether or not to keep your husband's last name when you get married.

You're splitting hairs. Naming is indeed how we identify each other. Indeed, my name is the only way to encompass all my life and personality, because it is the only group of words that actually means me. It can, of course, mean other people as well. But that doesn't make it mean me any less.

Just the same, your body is not you: if you lose some part of your body are you less of a person?

I'm not less of a person, no. But would it alter my sense of self? I bet it would. Being diagnosed with asthma altered my sense of self and identity. I'd be very surprised if another major bodily alteration didn't do the same. Think about people who are aging. My mother has been dealing with the major changes in her own identity and sense of self that come from accepting the changes that age is making in her body. Every something as alterable as hair--I dye my hair specifrically because doing so provides me with an important aspect of my sense of self and identity. I don't feel like myself when the dye fades. And that's just hair.

So I completely disagree with you. You don't have to agree, but to say that the argument is "unjustifiable" is just absurd.

If it was really free choice, maybe the majority of society would acknowledge that I even have a choice... Yes women have a choice. By law. But in fact, the patriarchy places so much pressure on women to make one particular choice...

You are awesome, antigone. If it was truly a choice, wouldn't people choose things at about the same rate? But they don't, suggesting something else is going on.

This reminds me of the argument I've had a bazillion times about marriage with my mother (I'm not keen on participating). By all means, 'technically' I have a choice about that... but then why do 95% of people still do the same thing? I mean, wouldn't it be like 50/50 if it was a real choice?

EG: I was responding to the comment "if your family bond isn't strong enough to uphold different names, you're probably in trouble anyway." My point was explaining WHY people would want to have such names. Rereading my comment, I suppose it does sound a bit abrasive-- I apologize, that wasn't my intent. If you want to name your child something completely different, that is your choice. I really do apologize for my poorly-thought out wording.

To me, my identity has nothing to do with my given name. It has a tiny bit to do with my nickname, but more to do with how I think and feel. So it surprises me when people say how attached they are to their name. The concept is so foreign to me. My surname right now means that I am a child of my parents. My surname after I marry will mean I am a wife of my husband and a mother of my children, if any. But it's not actually who I am. So I'll change my name because my parents won't particularly care/want me to continue referring to myself as their child, while my husband might actually want me to refer to myself as his wife and my children as their mother. I don't see anything wrong with that, for myself. I will still be myself regardless of what my surname says.

Besides, many names (first AND last AND combinations) are common enough that I barely turn my head when I hear my name unless it's accompanied by some kind of direct physical cue or description ("Hey [Basiorana], yes, you, over by the punch bowl" etc).

But I respect that not everyone feels that way. For example, I never assume someone took their husband's name unless they specifically tell me so-- I ask them their full name even if I know their husband's name. And I encourage others to do the same. So while I may wind up following the societal norm, I will not impose it on others, which I presume is ultimately what most people in this thread want.

I appreciate what you're saying, Basiorana--thanks for clearing up what you meant by your wording.

I wonder if my perspective is different at least in part because I have a radically unusual name. Not only does nobody else, judging from google, have that name, but my surname is unusual enough that if you google just it, nobody comes up who isn't in my immediate family. I've always strongly associated myself with my name.

Mr. KMP originally wanted to come up with a new last name for the both of us, and I was on board with that for a while, but...I'm a Doherty. I've always been a Doherty. I'll always be a Doherty. So I'm keeping mine. If we have kids, we'll hyphenate, and leave it up to them to figure out what they want to do later.

You know, I ran into a couple of friends of mine the other day who had gotten married, and they decided to both change their last name and adopt a new one they felt symbolized their relationship together.

I thought that was pretty cool.

I wonder if maybe she thinks it could be a career-booster for him... I don't know, I'm disturbed by that on multiple levels. I can't imagine something so important as one's name should be given so seemingly flippantly as a gift.

I don't remember how it came up but I was talking to my dad about marriage and name changing. He asked what I would do and I said in an ideal world me and the man would agree to combine our names creatively or come up with a completely new name. Dad thought that was pretty great. The mayor of L.A. has a combined name. It's Villaraigosa. He was Villar, his wife was Raigosa. Cute, huh?

to me - the last name is an issue of faith. in christianity, we are supposed to leave our families behind and consider mankind our family. it's a test of faith how important this issue of property is to a man. is he and his family name more important than his love for his wife? is the marriage an acquisition? Does the man truly leave his family behind and create another? Or just acquire? Think about it.

If names aren't important, why is it still a shame for a man to change his name? If acquisition of property is not the point, what is this thing about the man's name? Couldn't he pick out his kid from a line up? Is there a dudely commission plan in heaven for having tons of kids with your name like the Mormons believe?

This is a faith issue. What do you think about God, family, and marriage? Is the union and love the main point or is it not?

It's better to create something new. How romantic to say, we are creating something new here. this is the name of our union, let's celebrate it. If you get married to be a mrs, then the union is not the most important thing to you, but some sort of tribal team joining is more important than just your husband and you.

Everyone that puts up some lame excuse for what they were going to do anyway about "I hated my name anyway" "combining names is awkward" or "gee I'm a guy, I thought about changing my name, but ah, gee, I didn't." so you...want admiration for not doing what you thought about? if you disagree with male sovereignry over family names... then don't follow the practice.

If you wanted to do it, you would. It's simple. Go to court. Change your name if you don't like it. Don't wait for marriage to do it. But don't go for the neo-denial that it's not a political and faith issue that you take your husband's name.

While, in many cases, he'd divorce you if you insisted he take yours. What is that? What's it like to discover your intimate bond is not more important than maintenance of dudely name sovereignry.

I "kept my name" when we got married. We should have blended them, but now we are completely confused about what to do with the upcoming kid.

But on the original topic, I did about retch when seeing this story this morning (that was probably morning sickness, too).

claricedurdan: I do like that idea (not for me, but I think it's nice), but I do wonder what happens when you get two really long names, or like... a German name and a Japanese name that don't go together at all...

betty, if a man was so intent on making me take his name that he would divorce me over it, he's clearly not going to be a good husband and even though I plan to take my husband's name anyway, I wouldn't marry him. I hope most women would be able to see that such a man did not respect them, and would do the same.

"If I don't change my name I'll just be stuck with my father's name anyway, so what's the difference?"

If women don't actually have "their own names" then neither do men. By taking your fiance's name wouldn't you just be taking his dad's name? Since everyone's name is actually their dad's?

"Taking the man's name is symbolic. It represents the creation of a new family."

A family owned by the man? Even if this were the reason for name-changing, why is it always the woman who gives up her name to enter her new family? Is the man in the equation not entering a new family as well?

"My name is too common/unpronouncable/awkward/long/easily-misspelled." or "I want to distance myself from my father."

It's statistically unlikely that only women have last names they dislike for whatever reason.
And yet it's always women who claim they're changing their names upon marriage because they have a problem with their current last name. Are no hard-to-pronounce last names held by men? Why don't they want to shed their last names in favor of their wives'?
Are no men estranged from their fathers?
Hmph.

Like Amanda said on Pandagon, women will come up with the most illogical reasons in order to avoid admitting they changed their names because there's tremendous pressure to do so.

My boyfriend's last name is no more important than mine. If we married, I would not be joining his family any more than he'd be joining mine. I would not be absorbed into his life any more than he mine.
And lucky for me he doesn't suffer from anxious masculinity that compels him to demand something so sexist.

SarahMC: Men do change their names sometimes. Yes, there is pressure against it, because surnames more than almost anything else in Western society are about tradition. But rather that complain about the name-taking (which many non-sexist people do anyway just for the tradition) we should focus on the real problem-- the judgment and pressure on women who don't change their names, or men that do.

In an ideal world, women could still take their husbands' names. Or men could take their wives'. Or they could create something new or keep their old names or hyphenate them, but regardless, no one would think twice about any variation of the above. I believe THAT is what we should be striving for, not discouraging women from taking their husband's name.

Men do change their names sometimes.

The number who do is negligible. You simply cannot say "but men do it too!" in a society where the vast, vast majority of women take their husbands' names and an almost invisible number of men take their wives'.

But rather that complain about the name-taking (which many non-sexist people do anyway just for the tradition) we should focus on the real problem-- the judgment and pressure on women who don't change their names, or men that do.

The tradition is a sexist one. So nobody who isn't sexist should want to take part in it. I've already pointed out the silliness (and sexism) in the other "reasons" women give.

In an ideal world, women could still take their husbands' names. Or men could take their wives'. Or they could create something new or keep their old names or hyphenate them, but regardless, no one would think twice about any variation of the above. I believe THAT is what we should be striving for, not discouraging women from taking their husband's name.

And how do you expect that to happen? By *not* pointing out the sexism inherent in the current/accepted/expected model?

my surname really truly doesnt even feel like a part of me. i associate it with my incredibly (physically/sexually/emotionally)abusive father and a side of my "family" i dont ever talk to at all, who i haven't seen or spoken to in a decade. but, and maybe it's because my jobs thus far have been mostly as a food server, i never really have to say my last name. when i introduce myself to people i tell them my first name. if they ask for my last name i tend to tell them i don't have one. because to me, i really don't. when i write it on paperwork its like a nonsense word that has no meaning, but the rest of the time i don't even think about it. my name is jessi, named after my maternal grandfather, one of my very favorite relatives. i would never want to change my first name, but i simply don't care what my last name is, so long as it's not fuckface or something that might impeed on my ability to get a job.

my boyfriend's father was not the nicest guy either, and i kno he doesnt especially enjoy sharing a name with his father (although i do enjoy the name itself, its a nice name to say)so im not sure what would happen if we were to get married. weve talked about just hyphenating our mother's maiden names, as hes a mommas boy and im a mommas girl. i do kno that if we get married im going to convert to judaism for cultural reasons, as im not religious, nor is he, but i do respect his cultural heritage and i dont want to deprive my thus far hypothetical children of that part of their history, and as judaism is passed down from the mother, there you go. it doesnt erase my own cultural history (in heritage mostly irish and french, in culture 100% whitetrash), but it prevents his from being erased.

i like the idea of choosing a new last name, but i have the hardest time thinking of any name i would want. i mean, it would feel weird to just pick some random last name that already exists, but if i pick a word that isnt a last name it would feel weird too, what would i pick? jessi fork? jessi stardust? i could see taking the name of a writer or artist i love, but id feel like i was stealing from them and claiming an identity that might actually matter to their family in a way my last name doesnt matter to me.

so i guess for me, like i said, i dont place any weight on my surname, and ill probably take the future husbands if i get married, keep the one i have now if i dont. it doesnt matter to me at all. i do think if you love your family and your last name you should keep it, it doesnt make much sense to me to do anything else in that sort of circumstance.

For his birthday? That's... kind of creepy.

The number one answer I get when it comes to changing to a partner's last name is; "Because I think it shows how much I love him."

So... what's he doing for you, then?

In the long run, creating a new blended name may make sense (although if you're expecting all of your kids to make up new names if they couple up, the whole one family-one name thing doesn't mean much anyway - which btw also defeats the argument of taking a husband's name to all have one name - sure, until your daughters marry men...)

BUT

for now, in the current context, if a married couple have the same last name, people who didn't know them before they were married will overwhelmingly assume that she took his name, and thus although it may be a personally satisfying choice (which is super important) from the point of view of social change it's less helpful (still somewhat helpful to the extent that the husband's public name change does make a strong statement, but again, only to those who knew them before marriage).

And yeah, people, PLEASE, if you hate your name, CHANGE it. Don't wait for a great love affair to rescue you from your name. It's super easy and cheap, at least in the USA.

It saddens me that this topic is still such a hot debate point. It seems so obvious. Almost all men dismiss taking a woman's name in marriage. Maybe they've entertained a discussion about it - but how many actually do it? Men's rejection of changing their own name speaks VOLUMES about what they think it means to do so ...

I once read an analogy on this topic: Imagine historically there had been a very common social scenario where two companies merged and it was most commonly a merger between a company with a black CEO, and a white CEO. Whichever company with the white CEO was the company where the brand name was kept. It wasn't forced anymore, but the black CEOs generally went with the program, and the white CEOs were more than happy with the arrangement.

NO ONE would come to the defense that it was harmless tradition.

SarahMC: You can do it by pushing legislation that would make it equally easy for men and women to change their names at marriage (I believe CA had a problem with that?), by teaching your own children that where the name comes from (mom or dad or both) is not important and that they should do whatever they want when they are getting married, and by never making assumptions one way or another about what a person's name is/if they'll change it and encouraging (in a gentle way, not abrasively) others to do the same.

Most people will accept others saying "Please do not assume that all women will take their husband's names" but not "If you take your husband's name, you are supporting a sexist tradition and are sexist yourself." You believe it is sexist and that all sexist things are irredeemable and should be scrapped. I do not consider it in itself to be exceptionally sexist (though attitudes about it can be), and thus I have no problem with it. You will say that makes me sexist, I doubt I could convince you otherwise, but I do wish you could see that not everyone agrees with you on this, and that accepting that other people can disagree with you without being evil/uninformed/misogynistic/stupid etc etc will enable you to make a much bigger difference on the lives of those around you.

My mother told me that she tried to keep her last name when she got married (in the late 70s) but that people simply wouldn't believe she was married and eventually she gave up. I actually briefly pondered changing my last name to her maiden name but finally decided against it as I was always closer to my father.

Of course, Switaj is a prime example of one of those "unpronounceable" names. But I have to say that I'm really troubled by how that concept is going unexamined. There are no unpronounceable names; there are, however, non-anglo ones.

Basiorana, I'm pretty sure it's the same people who wouldn't change their names that will do the things you've described in your first paragraph anyway. The rest of the population, however...

And learning the definition of "sexist" may help you see that the tradition of women taking their husbands' names upon marriage IS SEXIST. It affects one sex differently than it affects the other. It's an expectation placed on one sex and not the other.

Different laws will have no effect on this tradition as long as men feel slighted when their wives don't change their names & as long as women don't feel like they have to change their names in order to prove their fucking love. Attitudes must change.

In my above comment: I said "I do not consider it in itself to be exceptionally sexist" but I meant "exceptionally misogynistic." In my opinion, something can be sexist but not misogynistic.

Sorry about that.

SarahMC - Exactly. Attitudes must change. I repeat: Men's rejection of changing their own name speaks VOLUMES about what they think it means to do so.

And as I mentioned, Ekswitaj, all these women with "unpronouncable" names have brothers, cousins, uncles, etc. with the very same last name! Are men just not as troubled by the awkwardness of their last names? Yeah right.

basiorana - why do you see nothing strange about wanting to identify yourself by your relationship to other people? if you want to be known as "basiorana wife-of-some-guy", why shouldn't said guy want to be "mr. basiorana'slastname"?

i really can't fathom that you are unaware of the history that comes with name-changing, whether you like it or not, and the fact that the practice is still (in this country) almost invariably performed by women. i'm not saying that an individual woman should or shouldn't change her name (for the record i completely agree with amanda of pandagon), but you're pretending that name-changing isn't or shouldn't be examined and discussed.

So do I need to send my feminist card to someone or can I be trusted to just tear it up myself?

I changed my name when I got married for a number of personal reasons that were important to me. No one asked me or expected me to change my name. In fact, the only person who mentioned it (my grandmother-in-law) assumed that I would not be changing it.

I thought I was capable of figuring out what to do for myself, and I had no idea that I was expected to make every personal decision based on what was best for feminism, but I guess when it comes to this one, as opposed to any other decision a woman can make, I'm just too stupid or incapable of fighting social pressure, to figure out what to do.

I didn't take my former husband's name when I married, and I'm glad. It saved me a big hassle 22 years ago, and saved me another big hassle when the divorce was final three years ago. No children, not that it would have made any difference to my decision - it's my name, my life, and my choice, and he was completely supportive of that.

Or so I thought...until I learned that new wife (19 years younger than he is, and engaged to him before we separated, used to call him "Daddy" in public) promptly took his name. I'm not even going to attempt to analyze *that*....

SarahMC: I intend to do those things and I will take my husband's name.

If you wish to change attitudes, there is little you can do except teach your own children/your sibling's children etc the more tolerant attitude, and possibly write children's books or TV shows that encourage it.

That, and encourage those women that you know who DO feel pressured to change their name (as in, they say they don't want to change their name but their husbands-to-be insist) to not give in if it means a lot to them.

But telling them that taking their husband's name is wrong or supporting a flawed system (even if you believe it is true) will not change any attitudes.

Manda, your grandmother-in-law was not the only one who expected you to change your name. ALL OF SOCIETY expects it from married women.
All this talk of personal decisions for changing one's name, which are made in a vacuum, is so disingenuous. WHY ARE MEN NOT CHANGING THEIR NAMES IN DROVES? Surely just as many men were abused by their fathers as children! Surely just as many men have common or funny last names! Surely men are willing to sacrifice their last names for the sake of "family unity!" Right? Right?

Why the resistance to discussing this sexist tradition? Why is it so off-limits?

rileyst.clair: I know it's done by women. I know it has a bad history. But I judge it based on what it is TODAY. Democracy doesn't exactly have a glorious egalitarian history, but TODAY it is okay.

I don't object to the discussion, I object to those who are saying that it is somehow "wrong" or "anti-feminist" to take the name of one's husband.

And I don't particularly care one way or another about how I identify myself. I could come up with a new name that was all mine but it would be a lot of effort considering that to me, my surname is just something to put on legal forms. I don't want to be known as "Basiorana Wifeofsomeguy" I want to be Basiorana, or more commonly, "you." And as a choice between "Basiorana wifeofsomeguy" and "Basiorana daughterofsomeguy," I, personally, would rather be the wife. And for the record-- my current boyfriend, in discussions on the topic, has said he similarly doesn't give a crap about his last name and might even change it if he wasn't the last of his family line, and such an action would cause a huge fight with his father and grandfather over something he doesn't actually feel strongly about.

SarahMC, she said her grandmother didn't expect her to change her name.

Seriously though, I am having a hard time using "men don't do it" as an argument that something is un-feminist, because for example...men don't usually have long hair, but I don't think wearing your hair long is necessarily an un-feminist decision. But seriously,when most men wouldn't even consider taking their wife's name and become offended that you wouldn't take his, how is that not a sexist tradition? One of my friend's recently got married and I asked her why she changed her name, and she said "I don't know, I like sharing a name with my husband." That was it. I was like...so...you didn't even consider asking him to take yours? That would still be sharing a name with your husband.
Additionally, I know some women say that they changed their names b/c they hated their fathers, but I still don't hear of any men changing their names when they get married b/c their dads were assholes. I hate my dad, but guess what, it's also my name, so if I ever get married (which I probably won't, because I have a whole other set of issues with marriage itself) I'm not changing it because I hate my dad. I already have a name. And as far as "what about the kids????" which is an argument I always receive, I say...you can fucking decide what name you want to give your kids. Christ, how is that even an issue?

The problem with hyphenation is that if everyone did it, we would have some really freakin long last names after a couple of generations.

Growing up, I used to always think that I would take my husband's name because I didn't want to put my kids through the same "embarassment" that I dealt with growing up. My mom never changed her name, and some teachers would ask me if my parents were divorced (they've been married for over 30 years), now I've learned that the problem was not my parents last names, but the fact that the teachers bothered to assume that two last names=not a happy marriage.

What my parents did is give me and my siblings my mom's last name as a middle name. I've thought about doing that as well, except that I feel that to really do so would be to give my kids three names, both of mine+my husband's, because I consider my middle name to be just as much part of my family identity as my last name.

I'm still quite a ways off from having any kids, so I don't really worry about it that much, I guess a lot of it will depend on what my husband's last name is because I would like for the names to flow together.

I have also entertained the idea of just making a new last name. Then we could make a name that is really cool!

it's not "ok" today because it's still nearly universally expected of women and not of men. just because men don't necessarily think of their wives as property doesn't mean the custom isn't still sexist, precisely because it is a sacrifice (even if you hate your surname, the paperwork to change it is a royal pain) that women are expected to make and men are not.

i appreciate that you don't particularly attach much importance to the name, but why do you still frame the issue in binary terms--e.g., "i am EITHER the daughter OR the wife"? sure, picking a new name might be a trying task, but i bet if you think about it, there are some names you could pick--a family name other than your surname, the name of someone you admire, a literary character, the list goes on. maybe this is just easier for me than for some people, but i have no shortage of made-up identities to choose from.

once again i'm not suggesting that you adopt an entirely new name, but just pointing out that it's something worth thinking about.

also, as has been said here numerous times, your birth name isn't a choice, at least not for the first 18 years of your life, but your married name is, so the "but my father's name is the patriarchy too!" argument doesn't really hold up.

I could come up with a new name that was all mine but it would be a lot of effort considering that to me, my surname is just something to put on legal forms.

Then why are you bothering to change it once you marry?

I want to have the same name as my husband. This is regardless of all other scenarios. It's something to put on legal forms, but it's also something I'll give my kids, put on the mailbox, etc, etc. It's easier for everyone if the whole family has one name, and since I don't feel attachment to my own, I might as well go with that.

Now, if his name was like, Hitler or something similarly atrocious, I would pressure him to change his name. I would probably still change my own as a way to mark the change in my life and to not force him to take MY name, which is... not so good. I don't mind it, but lots of people might.

If he wanted to change his name, I would change mine too, to the new name. But if his name matters to him or to his family, I'll just take his name.

Personal anecdote about the tremendous pressure women are under to change their names from someone who did not: For the whole seven years of my marriage I have been referred to as Mrs. Hislastname on an average of once a month, either by a medical professional, a telemarketer, or an older family member (which is galling). To my knowledge he has never never not once been referred to as Mr. Herlastname. Not once. Which is telling, whether people would like to admit it or not.

Change your name... fine. But why is it so difficult to admit that it is a decision affected by sexist expectations?

And Manda? Keep your damned card. We're not talking about you personally. Chill.

sgzax: And THAT sort of thing is what I think should be changed. Not the taking of names-- this business of "of course she took his name when they got married."

Basiorana,
Your hubby should only change his name if it's something as awful as Hitler, but you're gonna change yours no matter what?! Just admit how sexist this is!!
And for the millionth time - why don't men have to do anything special "to mark this transition in life?"

basiorana - seriously--no one is saying you aren't a feminist if you change your name, but why is it so hard to admit that you're changing your name for reasons rooted in sexist ideology?

read the pandagon article, please, for the love of god; she does a way better job of articulating this than i do.

SarahMC and EG - i adore your posts and i admire you from afar.

I also said he should change his name if he wants to. I want to change my name regardless because I want to mark the transition with a different name. Yes, this is based in societal expectations but I happen to like the social norm as well.

And honestly, with my boyfriend just getting him into a tux would be special enough. But the fact that I want to mark the transition in my life does not mean he wants to mark it, or you want to mark it, by anything more than a ceremony. If he does not want to change his name, he shouldn't have to, just like you shouldn't have to change your name if you don't want to.

Also, sgzax-- incidentally, my great-aunt's live-in boyfriend of 20 years gets "Mr. Herlastname" stuff all the time because she's so well known in the community. And they aren't even married. I'm just saying that it happens.

And Basiorana, you are perpetuating the "of course SHE took HIS name upon marriage" business.

I keep hearing women proclaim they have no attachment to their names, so they might as well take their husbands'. The fact that it's always WOMEN who are willing to shed their last names while MEN wouldn't dream of doing the same (not to mention, they have STRONG opinions re: their future wives' names) is an indication that there are very strong social forces influencing these attitudes.
As children, little girls doodle their first names + their crushes' last names. We *know* what's expected of us even as little girls. Boys learn this as well - that when they marry their wives will take THEIR last names. I'm sorry but you can't tell me this is all coincidence.

The answer to that is not attempting to shame women into not taking their husband's names, it's teaching your children that they can have whatever name they want, and encouraging them to doodle "Susie and Bobby Magnifico" or something random and creative instead.

I can teach my children that my way is not the only way, nor necessarily the best way.

I have several friends who have done this for varying reasons, friends I never thought would do so (one in fact inquired to one of my mailing lists today how to begin the procedure, and I think my eyes audibly squeaked from rolling). Choice is fine, but it still distresses me that you never hear men say, "oh, I think our family should be the same name so I'm taking hers" and "well I have no attachment" and then make a default decision like women are expected to. The thing is, many guys actually DON'T have an attachment, yet the girls still do it? Come on...at least have a compelling reason and as mentioned above, make him partake in something just as permanent to mark the rite of passage.

How about matching tattoos? that's way more foxy than changing your name.

I'm not suggesting that the discussion is off limits. I think all personal decisions are worthy of discussion. But for you (or anyone else), who has no knowledge of my personal history or the influences in my life that moved me toward my decision, to assume that I am just "making excuses" to justify something I know to be anti-feminist is just arrogant and rude.

Obviously society impacts personal decisions. Society pressures women to do lots of things, but social pressure is not the only reason women make decisions. Assuming one makes all their decisions in a vacuum is disingenuous, but so is assuming that women's personal histories or preferences don't factor in to their decisions as well.

You know, Basiorana, you are coming off as a real hypocrite. You acknowledge that this particular tradition is sexist, but you personally like it so it should stay around and not be criticized. Kind of like the concept of chivalry we discussed last week or so. Yeah, it's sexist and all but you like to be treated like a fragile princess so nobody should mess with it.
Either you're opposed to sexism or you're not.

I dealt with this a couple years ago around Valentine's Day. My boyfriend didn't send me flowers at work and I was the only attached woman there who didn't receive anything.
I was really pissed. If he really loved and appreciated me, I thought, he should have sent me flowers on Valentines Day!
Then I thought about it some more and realized that *that* is a sexist expectation.
Men shouldn't have to follow society's instructions for how to behave on Valentines Day (or Christmas - are you sick of jewelry store commercials yet?).
M and I are not into conspicuous consumption, so why should I expect that he'd blindly go along with Valentines Day "traditions" he's not in to?
It was difficult to deal with my own sexist expectations of my boyfriend (and all men), but I acknowledged the inconsistency and dealt with it. Because I am anti-sexism and I was uncomfortable being a hypocrite.

I love my name. I am the only one in the world with it. It's difficult to spell and pronounce, but it is throughly my own, even if it was given to me by my father. It tells the story of where my family on one side came from what happened when they hit Ellis Island, and it is wonderful because my first name is so popular.

I think we need to have in every post relating to last names ever answers to the following popular assertions:
1. I hated my last name
2. It was just easier
3. It's for the kids!
4. My last name is my father's
5. I make all my decisions in a bubble!
6. It doesn't matter

I get sick of seeing them, each time, in every thread like they are brand new ideas we dumb feminists never thought of before.

And Manda? Keep your damned card. We're not talking about you personally. Chill.

Well being one of those doormats who changed her name, comments like:

"It is practically the only 'choice' confronting women that I remain absolutely rigid on saying no to when it comes to calling one's self a feminist."

and others it's pretty hard not to take it personally.

I am opposed to sexism in the government and regarding employment.

I am opposed to misogyny (and misandry) and true oppression based on gender.

I am not, nor have I ever claimed to be, opposed to societal sexism that I do NOT consider to be misogynistic or misandric. I don't consider this particular practice to be misogynistic, so I do not oppose it. You are free to disagree as long as you do not accuse people of being "less of a feminist" somehow because they decide this isn't where they want their battleground to be.

And before you say that this makes me "not a feminist," the very fact that I oppose misogyny and make efforts to improve the lives of truly oppressed women is why I consider myself so.

Manda... Well, since we did officially elect StringBeanJen the High Arbiter of the Cards at the last meeting of all feminists you might have a point about that one comment carrying more weight than the other... oh, forty... comments on this topic. By all means, take personal offense.

And of course YOU are the one who gets to decide what counts as "true" oppression, right, Basiorana?

Very well, what I consider to be true oppression. I probably should have clarified that. My apologies.

Okay, I won't reply again tonight, but I will check back tomorrow morning.

I was about to say the same thing, B. Night, everyone.

"So do I need to send my feminist card to someone or can I be trusted to just tear it up myself?"

First of all, we have cards?

Second of all, let me do you a favor: Rip, rip. However, you do get the drama card. Somehow you want to make yourself as admirable as a woman who bucks "tradition."

It is true that in this choice, you didn't make the more difficult, the more society change-making decision. Recognize and honor those who had the strength to do so instead of pouting that somehow that other feminists don't think that taking your husband's name was a particularly couragous act.

Yes, I'd say in this instance, they are more admirable than you. We know it is still more difficult, but still, one of the last big, deep down ground signs of women being less than a man.

Will we be the generation that stands up to "tradition" and cause a tipping point?

Or will we shrug our shoulders, tell themselves it doesn't matter to them anyway, and rationalize some weird thing involving them hating their own name, needing separation, or having a too ordinary name like "Smith" that needs changing.

Then there are the too precious ones that write that if their husbands didn't offer to change their name (which, if you notice, they never do in this scenerio) or if their husband didn't demand it (oh so sweet not to demand) they would not have changed their name to their husbands.

It really is a remarkable architecture of denial.

It takes courage to actually stand up against sexism and do your part and moving the world down the path of recognizing equal worth. Don't think for a minute that the public choice that the name of your union will be your husband's, while you discard yours or otherwise shove it aside (while he does no such accomodation) is as brave, as world-improving, or as praise-worthy as those who work for change and a better solution than male sovereigny over family names.

This subject has always rather amused me, because I can remember being about 8 or so and being mortally offended that I would be expected to change my name when I married. I believe my first response was disbelief and I tried to convince my younger brother that it was a personal choice and that men would take the woman's name about half the time.

He was just as convinced that that was somehow illegal/impossible and that I would HAVE to change my name while he would be allowed to keep it. I thought that was most unfair and declared (I was 8, at that age I was really into declaring stuff) that when I married, I would keep my name and the husband could take MY name. Little brother seemed doubtful that that would even be allowed, but he let it drop since he recognized the signs that I was getting angry and that never bodes well for younger brothers. :)

(It's a moot point, though, since I am just as adamant now about remaining single as I was then about keeping my name. I like my name and I love being single.)

Looking back, I'm amused that even that young I thought it was silly that women were EXPECTED to change their names for no apparent reason and now, 20 years later, I still think it's silly. If someone wants to change their name, go for it, I don't care, but I sneer at the idea of being EXPECTED to do it to satisfy the faceless, gormless SOCIETY that seems to excert an undue influence over us all.

I have a pair of friends who have been married for 5 years now and to my shock, the female friend actually changed her name; shock because up until the wedding she had been fairly adamant about not changing it. Even now, 5 years later, I always have to stop and remind myself that she changed her name, to make sure I use the correct name when I ask for her at work. I'm pretty sure part of that is me being a snarky bitch, but that's just part of my charm. :)

I don't see the big deal. I think it's nice, if that's what she wanted to do. Being famous did make it something of a sacrifice for her. Though I agree I doubt her professional name will change.

I remember being a kid and feeling like I would probably want my husband to at least consider changing to my surname, especially because there are all of 10 of us in the US left, though at the time, I sort of knew that it was some kind of pipe dream and that it didn't happen all that often. So yes, I agree that it's a sexist practice and as long as men don't have to think twice about it, it will be.

On the other hand, right now I have no idea what to do with our names, should my boyfriend and I get married. I like the idea of having the same name, and he is as willing as I am to take my name or hyphenate or whatever, but because he has a Chinese last name and mine is Italian, whoever gets the other person's name is going to face a lot of mistaken racial identity (although, yay for sexism, once they see me they'll just realize I married an asian dude, if they saw him with an Italian name they'd just be confused, which is unfortunate). Hyphenating is messy with two such strong/ethnic/long names (well, mine) and I fear that whatever name the kids get will forever forge their racial identity in some way. What to do about this?

My mom didn't take my dad's name when they were married, but she didn't pass it on to my sister or me either. As it stands now, it'll die with her (at least in the United States; apparently there are a handful of distant relatives in France).

If I ever find myself engaged to be married, I think I'll float past my bride-to-be the idea of taking my mom's name (and, for my part, just shunting my current name over to become middle name #2). Since my mom is totally rad and my future fiancée will surely adore her, I trust it'll at least get some thoughtful consideration. I like to think both my mom and dad would like it too, and if anybody in the ol' extended family doesn't, well, they've got my five male cousins for consolation prizes, one of whom's already imposed my paternal surname on his wife.

Generally, I do like the idea of surnames having some of the weight and seriousness of tradition, a sense of family history -- people choosing their own all willy-nilly is bound to give us even more abominable appellations than ESPN or Audio Science or whatever insane given names babies are being cursed with these days -- but the whole patrilinear thing doesn't even really make sense, biologically or socially.

And yeah, the idea of doing it as a gift just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Hard to articulate; it just seems creepy.

SarahMC, i dont know what kind of men youre hanging out with. within my group of friends and my group of coworkers, i know only two women who took their husbands name upon marriage. some women kept their names. a few couples changed both their names to be hyphenated. it does happen.

changing names upon marriage is a choice. despite what you may say, i can still be a feminist if i wear makeup and high heels and have long hair and fake fingernails (although i dont do/have any of the above...) isnt a woman's right to choose the right to... choose? that includes choice that you dont necessarily agree with. it doesnt automatically mean "OMGZ yer feeding teh patriarchy!!1!!!" the world just isnt that black and white.

i will not be any less of a feminist if i personally choose to take my boyfriends name. (for the record, i plan on keeping mine legally, but using both mine and his "socially." in other words, ill respond to either one, but im not doing paperwork to change it "for real."

Um, betty, I never implied that I made a "courageous" decision, rather a personal one based on a lot of factors that go beyond societal expectations. I don't see where I was pouting or being dramatic, simply putting in my own two cents like everyone else.

What if historically there had been a very common social scenario where two companies merged and it was most commonly a merger between a company with a black CEO, and a white CEO. Whichever company with the white CEO was the company where the brand name was kept. It wasn't forced anymore, but the black CEOs generally went with the program, and the white CEOs were more than happy with the arrangement.

NO ONE would come to the defense that it was harmless tradition.

SarahMC, I'm not really sure how your comment is a response to mine. I was pointing out a personal story that was related and also pointing out that the concept of unpronounceable is highly unproblematic. How you got that I was advocating women changing their names is a mystery to me.

SarahMC, I'm not really sure how your comment is a response to mine. I was pointing out a personal story that was related and also pointing out that the concept of unpronounceable is highly problematic. How you got that I was advocating women changing their names is a mystery to me.

So Sarah is using her husbands name now...yawn...as a male fan of hers i will not be losing any sleep over this.

She will alwyas be Sarah Michelle Gellar to me..and that`s the way it will always be...period.

So Sarah is using her husbands name now...yawn...as a male fan of hers i will not be losing any sleep over this.

She will alwyas be Sarah Michelle Gellar to me..and that`s the way it will always be...period.

So Sarah is using her husbands name now...yawn...as a male fan of hers i will not be losing any sleep over this.

She will alwyas be Sarah Michelle Gellar to me..and that`s the way it will always be...period.

This is quite close to home for me as my partner and I have discussed marriage recently too. I LOVE my name and I'm really proud of it and my partner wants to keep his name and we are both happy for neither of us to make any changes.

His family think my name is really cool too and have said before that I would be mad to want to change it so it's surprising that the only real opposition I have had is from my own family. Now they love teasing me for being the 'loony lefty' of the family and i have sense of humour enough to laugh along with it, but they really thought I was being deliberately controversial.

It's no skin off my nose as it's my name not theirs and then they brought out the argument 'what about the kids names?' but we don't plan to have children so that is the last of our worries, not that I can say that to them because they think I'm wrong for that too.

The only real reason i could think of for wanting to change though is that when I was first using the web I was very naive about using my real name and now of course any prospective company can google all the silly conversations I had on discussion boards because my name is the only one out there, where as my partners name is quite common and would be lost in all the other hits. It isn't a big enough reason to sway me though

I don't really care either if it's my father's name as my mother chose it. That was her choice and she gave it to me. Sure she didn't do it in a vacuum but I love her for who she is and I respect her decision. I really don't think that decision would have been different today as she is just a fairly conservative person.

Does anyone really think one's worth as a feminist can be distilled down to this one topic? Because that's what I'm seeing. There seems to be this sentiment that you can march in rallies, volunteer at clinics and fight the good fight in every other area of your life, but if you change your name to your husband's you are no longer a good feminist. So many of these personal choice/patriarchy arguments seem to go down in flames because commenters get a real holier/more feminist than thou attitude about it. Name change? You're out. Heels? Nope! Make up? You lose! Engagement ring? Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Why are we so eager to kick people out of the club? Is it that important to become one name-keeping, flat wearing, adornment-less homogeneous mass? Feminism to me, is being able to make choices that are best, for me, regardless of what the world at large thinks I should do. While I agree that women should be making informed decisions, regardless of what they are, these threads seem to be more about compliance. More so, do you really think anyone hanging out here didn't put any thought into their name changing decision? That this is news? There's a whiff of concern trolling to that. What business is it of yours to get so indignant over a personal choice? If the issue is really about one personal choice supporting a the patriarchy, and that must be stopped at all costs why does that only come up in certain topics. No one is encouraging women to get abortions, so they don't appear to support the pro life agenda. No one is discouraging women into teaching because it's a traditionally feminine field. How do we demand that women be free to make personal choices that are no one else's business without pressure to conform, and then throw out that ideology when the choice isn't feminist enough?

When I got married I changed my name...ish. I intended to change it personally and keep it professionally because I wanted to keep my tiny bit of name recognition (art) but I wanted to form a new family with my husband (even though we're not particularly planning on having kids.) My husband didn't have a preference, no one else seems to care, and I'm always afraid of paperwork not matching up so I've defaulted to putting both our last names on everything not work related. No hyphens though, that creates an unpronounceable mess.

Personally, I don't think going by Mrs. Hislastname maybe 10% of the time trumps the rest of my sex positive, pro-choice escort, loudly political, adamantly feminist, body confident, combat boot wearing life.

Kissedadrunkgrlx, that's nice about the people you know. I don't hang out with "different" or "bizarre" men. It is a fact that most men want their wives to take their names and would never even consider taking hers. It is a fact that the vast majority of American women take their husbands' names upon marriage. That you know a couple who didn't means nothing, especially since they are not stories wherein the man took the wife's name.

Who said anything about make-up, high heels, etc? You won't see me advocating taking away anyone's "feminist card" (Ugh what an annoying meme) for liking or choosing those things. But I treat it the same way I treat name-changing: They are practices that should be EXAMINED and critiqued for the ways in which they are sexist.
I do not actually fault any woman for doing those things (I do myself), as it is much easier to get by in society if you practice femininity. Plus it can be fun, even if only because we were all encouraged to enjoy them from a young age. But don't deny that the practices are sexist. "I do it for me and only me with no influence from society!"

Ekswitaj, I didn't say you advocated name-changing. I was agreeing with and expanding upon your point about names and pronouncability.

Sarah MC, I know you're not replying to me directly as we posted about the same time.

Still, I don't see how you can dismiss personal preference because it isn't trying hard enough sufficiently buck the patriarchy, treat women who make that decision as ignorant and unable or unwilling to think through their positions, and chastise women for supporting a sexist practice then claim you're not faulting them.

That's like saying 'No offense, but you're a sexist, ignorant supporter of the patriarchy.' It's a little disingenuous.

Well Roni, what I'm kind of seeing is people getting so defensive about having made a not particularly progressive decision (which is your right) that they're seeing attacks where there are none.

The decision you made is not progressive. We make decisions for all kinds of reasons every day. Not every decision has to be a front-line feminist decision. Fine, you know? But why are so many people unable to get past their defensiveness to deal with the sexist underpinnings of the name change issue?

Do you agree that the expectation that women will be changing their names and the absence of an expectation of name change for men is sexist?

It is more than a personal preference, Roni. Wearing only blue clothing is a personal preference.

Women adopting their husbands' names upon marriage is practically compulsory in our society. If it were merely a personal preference, surely just as many men would prefer to drop their names in favor of their wives'? I know a lot of women who didn't change their names who are tormented by family and friends about it. It's like people make a point to annoy and offend the woman by calling her Jane Hislastname or Mrs. Joe Hislastname. In this society is it MUCH easier to just go along with the status quo and take the man's name. To not make any waves or draw any attention to onesself. To not invite accusations that you don't love him enough (AHHH!). THAT'S FINE. But I never hear women admit that they change their names to make life easier for themselves. There's always some "personal reason" that, hmph, men never seem to have!

The expectation that women will use artificial methods to beautify themselves (with make-up, for example) is sexist. There is a sexist underpinning to that expectation. It doesn't stop me from using make-up for my own complicated reasons, but I will freely admit that I'm engaging in an enterprise that has sexist underpinnings. And I can have a complicated conversation about what that means, even with my lipstick on.

The expectation that women will wear restrictive and, in some cases, potentially harmful clothing (like heels) is sexist. I still own a couple pairs of heels, but the fact that I've made a complicated decision about the way I'm going to dress does not mean that it wasn't informed, in some way, by society's sexist expectationts.

If I became defensive every time make-up and heels came up I would be unable to look critically at these practices. And there would never be any progress. The willingness to have the conversation is what has allowed women greater freedom, as in the freedom to make the choice that is not informed by sexist expectations. It doesn't mean that every woman has to all the time. The open conversation makes more people aware of issues that have been allowed to be invisible. It gives people the opportunity to think about why society asks us to do these things. It gives us the opportunity to make more complicated decisions for ourselves.

Defensiveness shuts that process down. Don't see the discussion as an attack. The sexism will exist whether you acknowledge it or not, but it will have more power if you pretend it isn't there.

The flippant condemnation in these comments is rather nauseating.

Manda, SHAME on you for wanting to shed your father's name! And the same applies to any other name changers! It doesn't matter if your father raped you, beat you, or killed your mother--you are a cowardly traitor to the feminist movement, a supporter of the patriarchy, a sexist despot! No, I don't care that you spend your time helping refugee women, lobbying for women's reproductive rights, or volunteering for Planned Parenthood--you have failed us on this, the one TRUE battle against the patriarchy.

Yes, shame. Shame on you all.

Ugh. Way to not read a thing people have really said, cest-la-vie. Deliberate obtuseness will get you so far in life.

I think she was being snarky.

I don't want to take away anyone's "feminist card" but I do think that feminists have a duty to make changes in their lives to spread the gospel of feminism. Something like that. If we don't start making changes, let's face it, the non-feminist women won't. Now, again, I realize that not everyone can afford to fight all the good fights. Still, by not only making the anti-feminist, but by pretending that it is easier, you are making the choice on other women harder. If I were to get married, it would be harder to keep my name when both tradition and current statistics are against me. It's harder to forgo lipstick when most of the women I work with wear it. Its harder to have an abortion when so many pro-choice women are of the "pro-choice but its a terrible murderous thing" school of thought.

I am counting the number of things in my wallet that would need to be changed if I changed my last name (not including my passport, property records, or diplomas) and I am coming up with at least 12. How the hell is it easier?

I don't really have any intention of ever getting married, but if I did I'd keep my name. I don't think I deserve any feminist pats on the back for it though, because my main reason for doing it would be to fuck with people. I'd really enjoy having assholes call me by my (hypothetical) spouse's last name by default, because then I could reply, "Actually, I chose to keep my father's name, because we were very close and he died when I was 10 years old, but thank you so much for dishonoring his memory with your moronic assumptions!"
And then watch them squirm and backpedal in involuntary spasms of social awkwardness. Ok, so I have a weird idea of fun.

oh vervain what a great idea, I totally want to do that too!

Changing her name as a "gift" is a little weird, but I don't have an issue with it, as long as it's done as a result of desire on her part and not a feeling of obligation.

I changed my name when I got married because I love my husband's name and it's meaning. It also flowed well with my first and middle names. I didn't have strong feelings about my maiden name, had no association with my father or his side of the family, so I saw no reason to keep it. It didn't mean anything to me.

It was a bit of a pain in the ass to change everything (I hear you JenLovesPonies!), but I just went thru it one piece at a time. Surprisingly, my passport was one of the easiest to change.

Roni, here's how I see it:

No, the decision to keep your name or change it doesn't necessarily say everything, or even all that much, about you as a feminist. There are women who kept their names for non-feminist reasons (one of mine was honoring my father, and while I don't think that's anti-feminist, it isn't a feminist reason, either), and there are women who changed theirs who do much more for feminism than I do, certainly.

However, that doesn't mean the choice is neutral, that it's not rooted in sexist tradition. You can criticize a choice without saying it's the sum total of a person. For example, as a writing teacher, I don't require rough drafts of all my classes. I am aware that pedagogically, requiring rough drafts and commenting on all of them would be ideal. I don't do it in some instances for a variety of reasons, and I'm comfortable with that even as I recognize that it is the less pedagogically ideal choice. Now, do I think this makes me a bad, or even non-awesome teacher? No. I think I'm a pretty kick-ass teacher. But this one choice is not part of that kick-assness, and it would be irrational of me to get defensive about it unless someone implied it was the one thing I should be judged on.

I don't think women who take their husbands' names are automatically less feminist than women who do, because there are many, many things that make a person a feminist. However, I do think that the choice to take your husband's name is not a feminist choice, and that the practice should be criticized.

I'll confess that I skipped most of this thread because I'm in a hurry. But I would just like to add that the (male) chancellor of my university hyphenated his name with his wife's. Which I think is amazing.

Personally, if I get married I think I'm going to make my "maiden" name become my middle name and take my husband's last name. Mainly because I'm not a fan of my middle name in the first place.

For the record, I prefer the phrase "intentionally obtuse".

Some of those opposed to name change seem a bit oblivious to the judgment that's been directed towards those who have changed their name. Personal reasons have been mocked or dismissed as trivial, character has been called into question, and there's also been the implication of cowardice.

As others have mentioned, this isn't a black and white issue. In fact, it's far more accurate to say that women are simply "stuck between a rock and a hard place"'.

If you keep your name, you are supporting a sexist tradition by maintaining your paternal line (even if you keep your mother's name, it's likely she inherited her name from her father). If you change your name, you are supporting a sexist tradition by adopting a new paternal line. Creating a new name between couples seems most ideal, but not everyone is comfortable with this idea (genealogical reasons, familial attachment, etc).

The most pro-active thing to do at this point is openly discuss the history and merits of name change (as opposed to broadly condemning those women who do/do not change their name). Every case, every couple, every woman is different. It's unrealistic to assume the best choice is the same for everyone.

Aw, poo.

I just started watching Buffy the Vampire Slayer and and SMG/P's comments are a real let down.

I'm jumping in late in the game and who knows if anyone is still scrolling to the end... But I wanted to say that regardless of weather Sarah Michelle is a feminist, Joss Whedon is. So, take heart, Roxie, the show itself is still quite feminist! Any time I'm having a bad day I like to watch his NOW speech:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYaczoJMRhs

I love Buffy. And Joss Whedon.

I had a teaher in high school who was an Anderson and married a Johnson. They changed their last name to AnderJohn. I thought it was cute.

"Does anyone really think one's worth as a feminist can be distilled down to this one topic? Because that's what I'm seeing. There seems to be this sentiment that you can march in rallies, volunteer at clinics and fight the good fight in every other area of your life, but if you change your name to your husband's you are no longer a good feminist."

Well, you aren't as admirable. You can't expect feminists to go into that denial that you do that it is not important, and can't we look the other way?

Yes, I think that women that decide to do something like Rosa Parks and sit in the front of the bus, declaring their equal worth with their name plate ARE more admirable than those that don't and twist themselves into a pretzel to make some rationalization that it is not important.

Bravery, living a life in alignment, bucking the prevailing belief that a woman shouldn't notice giving up your name (and isn't just the most precious silly thing to mind -- ok, sarcasm here) -- all of these things I give props to those that are blazing a better trail.

For those of you who can't, your decision is just not as admirable. Don't get defensive and rationalize that it is. If you march against nonequality, yet set aside your name for your husbands, the march is not some sort of bank account that you can pull from when people declare the trail blazers as more admirable and you don't want people to notice the difference.

You simply are not facing the front lines like these others. They deserve all the support, praise, and props; not you on this matter.

i can still be a feminist if i wear makeup and high heels and have long hair and fake fingernails (although i dont do/have any of the above...)

Of course you can, it's a costume. I've dated guys with eyeliner (and the sight of nail polish on male hands has always made me weak in the knees), so there's really no difference.

Using each other's last names temporarily, for catalog mailing lists, or some social occasions is also kind of a costume, and just as much fun (it's extra fun if your partner is a completely different ethnicity). But changing this on documents associated with my social security number?? Um, no thanks.

As mentioned above, the expectation of women to automatically change their names struck me as absurd when I was 9. It still is, 26 years later. What's interesting is how this like many other feminist ideas are also rooted in childhood logic. Maybe it's worth reverting once in a while to stay grounded and examine what society expects.

As far as the kids, flip a coin, use one of each, temporarily hyphenate and give them the option of picking one later, or say, "honey, if we use your last name I get to pick the first and middle names," and vice versa.

Hey - maybe we're missing something here about Sarah Michelle and Freddie Prinze. His father was famous too, and killed himself. Maybe that has some play in it? I know that if my significant other had some serious feelings around the death of parent and the passing on of the name I would totally change my name for him. That would just be a nice thing to do, and it has nothing to do with feminism or anti-feminism, it's just being nice to a partner because you love him.

You know, I can't help but think Mr. Prinze is perhaps an abussive partner if he would be pleased that Sarah Michelle changed her name when she is so well known for her name because of her career (regardless of where her career is now.)

Personally I am not into policing th choices of other women, especially when it is socially expected in the mainstream for women to change their names. But seriously, I cannot think of a single male who has changed his name. I know lots of women who have struggled over this, made their own personal decisions, but not known of a single male to do the same. I am sure they exist, but it's still so terrible to me that women are the only ones questioning a possible compromise of their identity. I wish it were a fair choice.

To me, my identity has nothing to do with my given name. It has a tiny bit to do with my nickname, but more to do with how I think and feel. So it surprises me when people say how attached they are to their name. The concept is so foreign to me. My surname right now means that I am a child of my parents. My surname after I marry will mean I am a wife of my husband and a mother of my children, if any.

Like Amanda said on Pandagon, women will come up with the most illogical reasons in order to avoid admitting they changed their names because there's tremendous pressure to do so.

sgzax: And THAT sort of thing is what I think should be changed. Not the taking of names-- this business of "of course she took his name when they got married."

I hope you don’t think I’m picking on you; you are simply the one giving the most arguments for the ‘other’ side of this name-taking issue!

Thanks also to whomever posted the Pandagon post. What a great overview of the issue.

Wow, just finished reading this whole thread and I was shocked by some of the nastiness directed at those who made the selfish, "anti-feminist" choice to change their last names in spite of the fact that doing so supposedly makes it that much harder on the rest of us. Who needs the media to manufacture stuff like "the mommy wars" when we are so busy kicking each other in the ass over surnames? Come on, people.

I kept my name during my first marriage. At that time, I shared the inability of many of the posters here to understand what on earth would possess a woman to change her name upon marriage. I couldn't imagine doing so myself. I experienced all the accompanying flack (mostly from family and [now-ex] husband, since most of my female friends kept their names as well), but hung in there with my decision.

I changed my name two years into my second marriage because (1) I was tired of being "Kat Mylastname, Johnny Hislastname's mother" when I called the preschool, (2) my second husband is in the military and we were about to be immersed in that very traditional community, where I didn't want to be constantly explaining the two different names (I don't get off on embarrassing well-meaning people who operate on assumptions that are correct 99% of the time), and (3) I was pregnant and living physically apart from my deployed husband and had an admittedly irrational but powerful need to take some symbolic action expressing family unity. (My husband had always assumed I would keep my last name as I did in my prior marriage.) I am happy with my decision and having done it both ways, can report that life is in fact a hell of a lot easier with Hislastname. (Incidentally, the additional administrative hassle is actually minimal, since whether or not you change your name you will be doing post-marital paperwork adding yourselves to each other's health insurance plans, bank accounts, alumni directory listings, employer next-of-kin records, etc. Not that that makes any difference as far as the sexist ramifications of the tradition.)

When I called my husband to tell him I had changed my name, there was a long, surprised pause before he slowly asked, "To what?" :)

I recognize that the choice I made was informed by sexist cultural expectations. I chose to change my name because it made my life easier and removed a source of minor but constant emotional stress. However, I find it shocking that this course of action, while admittedly not "courageous," has been labeled "ANTI-feminist" in this forum. Are you serious? How is it any different than wearing lipstick and high heels? Doing so makes it harder on those of us who'd prefer to skip the mascara and wear our Birkenstocks, but I don't go so far as to call it "ANTI-feminist." "Pragmatic" seems more apropos. As Pandagon notes, we all make "Bad Liberal" choices at some point.

And yes, such labeling makes us defensive. I was marching on Washington, running campus NOW, staffing the rape crisis hotline, and organizing abortion clinic escorts while many of the people on this thread were still in diapers - so go ahead, I double-dog-dare you to judge my feminist cred.

Bottom line - while it is easy to grasp the theoretical ramifications of such choices, you just may not understand the personal ramifications of them until you have made and lived with them yourselves. And don't waste time and energy judging those of us who have done so but still support your right to make different choices. Go volunteer at a battered women's shelter or something instead.

katwoman7 I think that there is a lot of people not agreeing with the decision to change your name on marriage but nothing much directed towards the person. I know I'd respect you just as much for your decision but I have the right not to think that your choice was not feminist. I also think that there is a different between 'anti' feminist and not feminist.

Really sorry you had a hard time when you kept your name though. I think the point that it would have been easier for you, if keeping your name been the norm, is quite relevant as there would have been a lot less explaining on your part. A lot of parents don't marry and also would have similar problems to you too.

To all of those folks who have changed their names and taking the comments here personally, I urge you to actually read some of the posts calling for us (as a whole) to examine why it is so easy/no big deal/expected for women (as a whole) to change their names, but it's not for men. This is not a personal attack on YOU; it is, however, an attack on a sexist tradition.

It has been pointed out the if it were truly a personal choice, then men would drop their names in favor of wife's about 50% of the time and we all know that that is no where near the percentage. We are asking why that is and for some unknown reason, that is incredibly threatening to those that have changed their name. What is wrong with examining the mechanisms for which our decisions are based? How are we going to get to this magical, ideal society where both partners are equally as likely to change their names (or not) upon marriage if we don't examine why it's not occurring now? How do you expect to change sexist attitudes if you don't examine them, especially within yourself?

I'm not even going to mention the hetero-normative implications of [insert reasons for a woman to take her husband's name here].

Katwoman7: I'm glad you have recognized that the choice you made was informed by sexist cultural expectations, but many of the posters here obviously have not. And most of these commenters are just trying to get them to do that. If you took exception with one person's comment, you might want to direct your vitriol toward them instead of being generally biting. I believe it has been said numerous times here, but no one is trying to take away your "feminist cred." It's nice, however, that you accuse the women who are trying to get folks to "recognize their choices are informed by sexist cultural expectations" aren't as feminist as you are.

Katwoman7, I also think that one major difference is that you're not rationalizing. You freely admit that you made that choice to make things easier on yourself. And when I wear makeup, I freely admit that I do it b/c I grew up believing that I need to look like I have flawless skin. Sure, I like to play with color, but I feel embarrassed if someone can tell I have a zit. So I wear makeup, and I don't come up with 50 reasons. I wear it b/c it's easier for me. And I absolutely respect every woman's decision. I just have extra respect, b/c you admit that you did it to make things easier. That's hard to do.

String_Bean_Jen: I would be personally indifferent to my surname if I was a boy, growing up where and how I did. My brother doesn't give two shits about his surname either, but will keep it because he doesn't want to hurt my grandfather. My grandfather doesn't care if I keep the family name. Yes, that's sexist. He's almost 95 years old. I'm gonna let that one slide. (At least he's not as bad as my late grandmother, who wouldn't get into a plane if there was a female copilot. *eyeroll*)

You describe it as so "easy" and yet all I see are challenges. Is it really worth the hassle, if you have no attachment to your name, to deal with figuring out what to call the kids, or trying to convince your husband to shuck his own name, or getting mail with the other name anyway? I mean, really. I just don't see the point in making a big deal about it unless you have a specific reason to keep your own name, such as a sentimental attachment or a request from a parent. Men often have those requests made of them, so maybe instead of telling women that they shouldn't take their husband's names, we should tell parents to not make a big deal out of the family name to their sons?

"‘that’ sort of thing is only going to change when women stop simply accepting that one day they will take their husband’s surnames and then do it."

I accept that I'll take my husband's name and I have NEVER assumed that another woman made the same decision. When I know a couple who has married, I ask them if either of them changed their names or anything, and once I know, it never comes up again and I do my best to use the right name. I hope that someday, the majority of people will treat name-changes the same way.

I haven't had time to read all the posts so sorry if this is a repeat. The problems I have with women taking last names when they get married are:

1) First and foremost, men are not expected to do the same. Various people wrote that they were being nice to their husband or wanted to honor his heritage, etc, well would your husband be willing to do the same? And what about celebrating/honoring your own heritage? To the people who don’t like their last names, why not change it to something you do like on your own instead of waiting to get married and hoping your husband has a last name you like?!? And while I know that part of the decision to change one's name is to show one loves one's husband, since they didn't change their last name to yours, does it mean they don't love you?! these are just all secondary excuses, as nice as they might sound, to the main one that women are expected to and men aren't.

2) The practice means women symbolically lose their identity by having to have a different name and it is a remnant of the common law idea termed “coverture� where all women's legal rights, including her name, were merged, or rather covered, by the husband's at marriage. Women were absolutely legally and economically dependent on their spouse and could rarely divorce and if they were able to receive a divorce, they didn't usually have a right to their own children. Thankfully these traditions are no longer, but why do we still have the accompanying name changing tradition left in practice?

3) I know that some matrilineal traditions passed names down by mother or one’s clan identity was determined by one’s mother, but this is still problematic to me if men had no such right. Dividing anything along gender lines when not absolutely necessary (yes, only women can physically give birth) can become very problematic.

4) Last names in general are problematic to me because even if one doesn't take one's husband's name, presumably you've got your father's name so it's still a mark of patriarchy. If you have kids, what will their last name be if you and your husband have two different last names? If you both hyphenate your last name and your kids have hyphenated last names, what will they do when they marry? Have doubly hyphenated last names?
There just doesn’t seem to be a good solution but that doesn’t make having only women take the man’s last name any less problematic. If it was more like 50% men take their wives’ last names and 50% women take their husband’s last names then maybe I still wouldn’t agree with the practice of changing one’s identity at marriage but at least it wouldn’t be YET ANOTHER DOUBLE STANDARD for women to bear and there would be more choices for people to choose from when they marry.

And as a side note, I think marriage itself is problematic as it has always until very, very recently, been a sexist institution that oppressed women and now it is a selective institution that excludes those who do not fit the heterosexual male/female couple. I have been with my significant other for nearly 5 years with no intention of marrying for these reasons, despite the fact that I love, respect, and care for him deeply and despite the fact that we both have to deal with questions from family, friends and coworkers about why we aren’t married and aren’t at least engaged, etc.

Let's be clear about the the issue. It's about male sovereignty over the name of your union.

In this free country, it is a choice. If you take your husband's name, it's like those who just happened to find it easier to sit in the back of the bus. "Gee I happen to like it back here."

If you want to work for a different world, there will be discomfort, hassle, and things that just aren't "easier." You might risk getting laid, married, and passing in your family as a woman who doesn't make waves.

What about vision in the feminist movement that here is something we want changed? Do we see a better future here or is it an "oh well, I can't do anything about it." What would it mean if three married women off this thread took their own names back or asked for a new name for their married union? What if? What if you would make that change? Let's have some people write in on the subject of "if I made that change today...it would mean this."

It's not over when you get married; you can change your name now AND your husband can change his name. And if you have kids, you can change their name. What a powerful statement and a wave of change would occur around your friends and family! You'd show them that you are working for a better world!

How much more wonderful if we could work toward a critical mass, a tipping point here.

I would absolutely keeping my name. My best friend, a guy, is engaged. They are both hyphenating. This led to a conversation about what would happen with the names in the next few generations. And I pondered this extensively. What should the rules be? If I'm keeping my name and my husband keeps his name, do the kids hyphenate? What're the rules?! There have to be rules! And then an incredibly simple epiphany came upon me:
Screw rules, how about everybody decides for themselves? Which I know is not as easy as it sounds- somewhere an uptight family member will be offended. But for pity's sake- everybody's different, everybody has different preferences. Maybe my hyphenating friends' future kids will drop half their name someday or come up with something new or call themselves Bamboo Shoot. It's your name, convention shouldn't choose it for you.

Apologies for the terrible opening typo above.
I just want to add that yet another reason I love my dad is because though he talks fondly of the patrilineal line going back to the Mayflower and though his sisters had no children and I am his only child, he couldn't give a rat's ass about the "end of the name."

betty,

I'm yours in sisterhood.

Sincerely,

String Bean Jen

"To all of those folks ... taking the comments here personally, I urge you to actually read some of the posts.... This is not a personal attack on YOU; it is, however, an attack on a sexist tradition."

Let's explore that, shall we? Here are some choice snippets:

"It is practically the only 'choice' confronting women that I remain absolutely rigid on saying no to when it comes to calling one's self a feminist." - StringBeanJen

"Either you're opposed to sexism or you're not. [snip] I am anti-sexism and I was uncomfortable being a hypocrite." - SarahMC

"The tradition is a sexist one. So nobody who isn't sexist should want to take part in it." - SarahMC

"If you take your husband's name, it's like those who just happened to find it easier to sit in the back of the bus. ... It takes courage to actually stand up against sexism and do your part and moving the world down the path of recognizing equal worth. Don't think for a minute that [taking your husband's surname ] is as brave, as world-improving, or as praise-worthy as those who work for change and a better solution than male sovereigny over family names." - betty (Yep, this one has got to be my favorite. She actually says "back of the bus.")

"[F]eminists have a duty to make changes in their lives to spread the gospel of feminism. [snip] [B]y not only making the anti-feminist [choice], but by pretending that it is easier, you are making the choice on other women harder." - JenLovesPonies

These comments are clearly directed "at the person" making the choice. They state, rather explicitly, that the women who make this choice are hypocritical, sexist, anti-feminist, making life harder for other women, and are otherwise not as courageous and "world-improving" (gack!) as those who don't. Thus my expression of shock at the judgmental incivility of these and other posts on the subject.

I have read the entire thread and appreciate that there are some folks posting who are actually just interested in discussing the sexism of the cultural expectation and the lameness of the arguments surrounding it. I even agree with most of what has been said. Yes, it is obviously a sexist practice. Yes, the presumption of a FTM name change is demeaning. Yes, the entitlement that most men feel to keep their surname and to foist it on their spouse and offspring is sexist and offensive. Yes, it is wildly unfair that women who keep their surnames are likely get a giant ration of shit for it, sometimes daily for the rest of their marriages/lives, as I know from personal experience.

And no, the arguments "I hate my own surname," "It's dad's name anyway," "It's for the kids," and "It's for family unity" do not in any way address the question of why this is a female-only issue in our culture. What those arguments really address is the judgment and criticism of other feminists who feel entitled to bash women who are apparently failing in our "duty" to spread the feminist "gospel," as expressed so pithily above. It's a shame that we are defending ourselves against one another rather than addressing the underlying issue.

ShelbyWoo - I did not "accuse" anyone of not being as feminist as I am. I objected to others inappropriately labeling women "anti-feminist" for making this particular choice. That's not a discussion of the larger issue or a compassionate acknowledgment of the societal problems and pressures surrounding it. Nor does it admit the intensely personal nature of the issue and the fact that different women may bring different things to bear on the question. It's just self-righteous bullshit and it promotes divisiveness and defensiveness rather than discussion - especially from those of us who are apparently speaking from "the back of the bus."

I described my own history to make two points: (1) it is nervy in the extreme to pass judgment on the feminism (or "anti"-feminism) of a total stranger whose life one knows nothing about. One's surname is not a litmus test of how dedicated, "courageous," or pro-woman anyone is, any more than one's choices regarding lipstick are. (2) Our life experiences may change our perspectives even on issues where we once saw no room for movement.

If this blog conveys nothing else, it conveys the diversity of opinion, perspective and experience of feminist life, which I celebrate. That's why I bristle when judgment and righteousness rears its ugly head. It is presumptuous and offensive to state that one particular perspective on this issue is the only acceptable "feminist" one and that all feminists must toe that line or call themselves something different. A movement that can claim both Andrea Dworkin and Annie Sprinkle can surely accommodate a few women with their husband's surnames.