A new study presented at the American Sociological Association's annual meeting in San Francisco today shows that about 70% of Americans believe that women should take their husband's last names when they get married and 50% think it should be a legal requirement.* Say what?
I knew that the majority of American women who marry men take their husbands last names - but shit is just shocking. Not to mention depressing.
Now as many of you know, I'm getting hitched (in like 7 weeks, craziness). The thought of taking Andrew's last name never even occurred to me - not once. Why not? Because it's not my name. Why would I change it? It's not like it's easier - it's actively going out of my way to adopt someone else's identity. (To be clear, I'm not hating on women who do decide to go this route - it's just not for me, and I don't get it.)
What's really distressing about this news - Laura Hamilton, the study's lead author says that when respondents were asked why they thought women should change their last names, "they told us that women should lose their own identity when they marry and become a part of the man and his family."
"This was a reason given by many," Hamilton said. Really? Things like this - deeply ingrained sexism - rarely shock me. But I am actually astounded that such an antiquated notion could be held onto by so many. (Though I'm still holding out hope that this study is proven to be bunk. Sigh.)
*And for those of you think the legal requirement thing is too out there to worry about, consider that it was not so long ago that a couple in Washington, DC was denied a birth certificate for their child because they wanted to give the baby the mother's last name. Also, in 2004 a Pennsylvania court denied a petition from a woman who wanted her daughter to have a hyphenated last name; they said it was "in the best interests of the child" to have only her father's last name.
Related: Two years and a lawsuit later, CA man gets his wife's last name
What's in a name?
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: 50% of Americans think women should be forced to take husbands' last names.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/15466
I wonder what the demographical breakdown of this is, because as someone in my late 20s whose peers are almost all married, completely taking the husband's name seems the least popular thing to do. Most of my peers either hyphenate or move their maiden name to their middle name, take the husband's last name, and then use all three names. Fewer don't change a thing, but even those outnumber the women I know who remove all trace of their former name.
I don't really know, though, that you can determine that 70% of all Americans feel a certain way when only interviewing 815ish of them, though. Can you get a good representation of different generations living in different parts of the country from different religious backgrounds etc. etc. with just 815 people?
Exactly. This survey sounds too small and limited to be of real value.
Also did they ask the question, "Do you feel that YOUR daughter should be legally required to change her name upon marriage?"
People will often go along with traditions for themselves for the sake of not making waves, but when pressed they tend to want their daughters to have more choices.
I feel you, and that's why I love feministing commenters - so much more knowledgeable in the ways of studies than I!
Where do you live? I'm in the South and most people I know think the opposite of what you said.
I just posted, but I agree with you!!! I don't live in the south but in MT and surrounding states (Idaho, Wyoming, N. Dakota) no female that gets married keeps their name.
I live in the Mid-West, and all of my female peers who are now married changed their last name to their husbands' (including my sister).
I'm in Ohio.
The odd thing is, while my peers seem to have a more liberal view of name changing, they were all single-mindedly driven when we were 20, 21ish to get married. I know several women who gave their now-husbands ultimatums about proposing ASAP or breaking up. So they've all been married for at least 5 years so far, many are already having kids, have the whole house with picket fence, etc.
Compared with these women, I'm the odd one out for being single still. I'm like an old maid and I'm not even 30!
That is how I feel also sometimes. I feel like there is some pressure to get married and have kids (even though I already know I don't want kids). All my friends are getting married, I am not even close nor do I even know if I want to get married (OH NO!!!). But it seems like all my friends are always trying to "hook" me up with guys they know (even though I am perfectly happy being single). But on the other hand some of my married friends, I tell them about my one night hook ups and such and they always say they are living vicarious through me!
I'm in central Illinois and I've been to about 15 weddings in the past 5 years. I think 2 or 3 have outright taken their husband's name. Probably close to half kept their names. Of my friends every think it's totally normal that I will be keeping my name in a few weeks when I get married, and of the older people I talk to most are cool with it, or understand it after I explain my reasoning. But then again, a chunk of my last name is my nickname, so when I explain my last name is used for me more than my first, it's hard to say "no you can't keep that"
It would be very interesting to get the demographics and what/how the questions were answered. And how many people they surveyed. Although my experience with my 20 something friends getting married is the opposite. Of all my female friends/relatives who have gotten married have changed their last name with no hyphens (there might have been one to hyphen). But NONE of them have kept their last name. So my experience would actually say this survey is right, but I also live in a more conservative state (read=MT). So that might make a difference. And actually I only know of ONE woman who did not change her name, she is 40. I tell people if I ever do get married that I would never change my last name. And all of them think I am crazy. And ask me why I do not want to change my last name. I even dated a guy for almost 6 years that said he wanted to get married, but if we did I WOULD (no choice) change my last name, because that is what you are supposed to do. We are no longer together:) (for more reasons than that, but still). So I could definitely see this survey being spot on or even higher in my part of the country.
Where do you live? I'm in the South and most people I know think the opposite of what you said.
You bring up a good point about methodology but I'm afraid your peer group is in the minority. I'm originally from PA, and went to school in Boston. I have friends and relatives from PA and friends from college who've gotten married, and every single one has taken her husband's last name. No hyphens.
Sadly, while 815 is not quite big enough, it is not as small as it sounds either. A survey of between 1100 and 1200 people can give you an accurate representation of America if it is done correctly. 850 will have a much higher error rate, but it is not as small as it sounds.
The article unfortunatley does not say how they conducted the questioning, but I am willing to bet that it was over the phone (based on the fact that the poll takers actually evaluated how people responded). There is increasing debate about how accurate phone surveys are as most only call landlines, which causes the under-representation of many demographics (I am willing to bet that these excluded demographics would lean heavily against mandated name changing-- think about who has only cell phones vs. who has landlines). You don't hear much about cell phone only users being left out of polls because for political polling purposes they are also way less likely to vote, so it is not such a big deal, but for a viewpoint questionaire it could make a difference. Since the article doesn't say how they polled and if they incorporated cell phone users it is hard to know.
This is not a criticism of those conducting the study, phone calling is often the best way to go, but this does seem like an area where opinions would be impacted be considering only those with landlines.
Moving their birth name to the middle and taking the husband's last name as their last name IS changing their last name. They can call themselves Jane Smith Jones all they want, but their last name is Jones. The world will see them as Jane S. Jones (at best) or Mrs. John Jones.
Actually, I can't believe we're still on this issue 150+ years after Lucy Stone. By now, the issue should be children's surnames (no, I don't mean children's second middle names, I mean their last names).
But their motivations seem to be very different from those who cast off all traces of their former name. They want to retain their old name while adding the new one. I think it's a distinction worth noting, especially in light of what the study in the OP purports to have found. If you consciously and purposely retain your old last name while adding on a new one, it means you're not willing to "lose [your] own identity when [you] marry and become a part of the man and his family."
By your logic, if American society really has the views demonstrated by the study and by ancedotes from people who kept their own last name and yet were referred to with their husbands' names by stubborn family members and strangers, it doesn't matter WHAT choice the woman makes since other people will view her as Mrs. John Jones. But I think it's important to consider why women who alter their names in one way or another (or don't) make that specific decision.
"Most of my peers ... move their maiden name to their middle name, take the husband's last name, and then use all three names."
Unfortunately, this seems to be the same as just taking the husband's last name to a lot of people. I didn't change my name at all but in one particular circle of friends and acquaintances, I just added my SO's name onto my own (so it became wax_ghost MyLastName HisLastName) because it sounded pretty and important. Over the years, everyone in that circle has constantly shortened it to wax_ghost HisLastName, which pisses me off to no end (partially because it sounds terrible that way!).
Other than hating hyphenation, I like what my brother and his wife did. They BOTH hyphenated but kept the first two of the three names the same as they had always been - so he is Him HisLastName-HerLastName and she is Her HerLastName-HisLastName (thought I don't know if they did that legally or just sign their names that way).
"Most of my peers ... move their maiden name to their middle name, take the husband's last name, and then use all three names."
Unfortunately, this seems to be the same as just taking the husband's last name to a lot of people. I didn't change my name at all but in one particular circle of friends and acquaintances, I just added my SO's name onto my own (so it became wax_ghost MyLastName HisLastName) because it sounded pretty and important. Over the years, everyone in that circle has constantly shortened it to wax_ghost HisLastName, which pisses me off to no end (partially because it sounds terrible that way!).
Other than hating hyphenation, I like what my brother and his wife did. They BOTH hyphenated but kept the first two of the three names the same as they had always been - so he is Him HisLastName-HerLastName and she is Her HerLastName-HisLastName (thought I don't know if they did that legally or just sign their names that way).
(Sorry if this posts twice. I got an error and checked for it the first time but didn't see it so I'm trying again.)
Judging by my Facebook friends, it seems to be really common for gals in the south to completely take their husbands' names.
I keep having to do double takes or click into profiles to see who some people are (if they don't have a clear picture).
What's sad is I bet most don't even think about why, they just do it because they've always learned that's what you do when you get married.
Alixana, you bring up a good point about how this survey was done. It's surely hard to get an accurate sampling of this issue. I think regional differences are really important though. I know many women in their teens and 20s who dream of taking their husbands last name in the midwest. It's not even a question to them. It's also sad because in the District I have talked to many progressive, feminist women who still have a hard time with the last name thing. Mostly they are concerned to lose the tradition, upset their older family members or feel pressure from their significant others. It's just so plain to me that women should keep their last names, or at least have that complete freedom to do so. Ah..crazy societal norms.
I just barfed in my mouth.
but Alixana does have a good point. I would LOVE to know who exactly makes up 50% of those women who think that way.
Just a note on why the majority of women may take their husband's name... it's what the federal and state governments tacitly promote.
When my husband and I married two years ago, we had nebulous plans to change his name and my name and include both of our surnames. He wanted us to have the same last name as our children will have, and I wasn't taking just his name and giving mine up. We weren't having kids anytime soon, so we just didn't change our name right after we got hitched.
Fast forward to now. I'm getting a professional license, and wanted to have my name all set and whatnot. Found out that for both of us to adopt the other's name, it's $540 in court fees. Half that if he wants to take my name. So it's still very much ingrained that the woman loses her identity to the man, and it's all his property. Utter nonsense.
I agree that the sample size is ridiculously small to be generalizing about the population as a whole. But I do know that my (fairly traditional)father was upset at any name arrangement that didn't result in me taking my husband's last name, and his parents were visibly upset that he was adopting my name. Yay anecdotal evidence.
Yeah, my mom told me that she and my dad were considering alternate naming arrangements (combining, hyphenating, a new name, etc), but then they found out that they would have to go through a very expensive and complicated legal name change process to do so. But for the woman to adopt the man's last name, all she has to do is show up at the courthouse and show them the marriage license! (Sexist? Yes.)
Ultimately, she wound up taking his last name but keeping her maiden name as a second middle name. I'll probably do the same when I get hitched in a couple years...I know that this is a very important issue, but for me, a name is just a name. I'm the same person regardless of what my last name is, and it's not going to have a huge effect on my life.
(Additional fun fact: my mother's family has a great naming philosophy. You get your father's last name, a middle name that honors someone on your mom's side of the family, and a totally unique first name. I just love this idea, and think that it makes a relatively good compromise.)
Maybe it would have been a better study if they 815 people in each different demographic like age and religion.
I find it kind of bothersome that a person would even think about making it a legal requirement. Doesn't that take away from your freedom (or does the bride lose all her rights when she gets that ring on her finger?)
"they told us that women should lose their own identity when they marry and become a part of the man and his family."
That's what I highly disagree with. I would be scared to lose my own identity with my family. His family isn't my family (well I more apply this to my fiance's paternal side of things). What about those who don't want to be associated with the fiance's family when he doesn't want to be associated with them either?
The thought of taking Andrew's last name never even occurred to me - not once. Why not? Because it's not my name. Why would I change it? It's not like it's easier - it's actively going out of my way to adopt someone else's identity. (To be clear, I'm not hating on women who do decide to go this route - it's just not for me, and I don't get it.)
Co-fucking-signed. Maybe it's just because my mom had the same attitude, but I have never for a second even though about hyphenating (but I already have two names - I can't handle being RMJG!)
And those people who say it'll make it easier for the kids? Bullshit. Unless by "hurting the kids" they mean "valuing their mother's separate identity".
couldn't agree more.
I remember when we got engaged, thinking that my name wouldn't be the one I'd carried around on perfectly good terms for 25 years. What the hell was wrong with MY name? It sounded weird to my ears so I didn't change it.
The world didn't end :)
We still have separate names. My son has my name. We don't even wear wedding rings (this is sure to send us to hell in the eyes of some of those we know). When it comes down to it, the only business the govt has in it is that legal doc saying we're married. I don't see what our names have to do with it.
Double-co. People often ask me why I didn't change my name, and while I have reasons, my most common response these days is simply, "Because it's my name."
And okay, my kid's only two, but so far, I haven't run into a single problem having a different last name than she does.
I completely understand where you are coming from, however, at least when I get married (if) and (if) I choose to take my partner's name, it will be because I consciously choose to do so. I don't really like my last name and I never have and honestly, taking the name of the person I love would be much more fitting for me than to continue having my father's name. I know that it is still my partner's father's name, and maybe if I had a kick-ass last name I might want keep it, but I would also like to have the freedom to choose his last name if that is what I want and not be looked at as any less independent or informed.
Yeah, I've always been ready to offer a giant Fuck You to the people who ask if I'm worried about my kids not having my name. My mom married my dad when I was two. I have biodad's name, mom and dad have dad's name. I can't think of a single time, ever, that there was even a tiny little problem involved with not having mom and dad's name. Ever. No identity crisis, no confusion at school, no issues whatsoever.
And seriously, in this age of blended families and divorces and remarriages and foster care and everything else that isn't a plain nuclear family, are we honestly expected to believe that our children are going to be the only ones without our names?
"And those people who say it'll make it easier for the kids? Bullshit. Unless by 'hurting the kids' they mean 'valuing their mother's separate identity'."
That depends, actually. Like, me? I'm a queer trans man, and I very much want kids one day. And I am scared that they could be ripped away from me because of my sexuality and gender identity and/or the sexuality and gender identity of my partner.
Plus, depending on who I end up partnering with, I might not be able to legally marry.
So, having the same last name? Doesn't protect my kids as much as it would if I were a straight cis person. But it's better than nothing.
Please don't assume that straight cis experience is universal.
Oh, sorry I didn't say this too--of course I think the survey results are heinous and that no one should be forced, via pressure or legal mandate, to change their name. And I am quite open to being the one to change my name, if/when I partner.
Holy crap. I really hope that study is seriously flawed. I'm with you, Jessica - I'm engaged and the thought of taking my partner's name didn't even cross my mind...until a co-worker asked what my new name would be. I have zero problem with women who change their names, but to have laws making it mandatory? That's just wrong.
Small sample sizes are certainly a big problem with studies like this one, and therefore also the conclusion drawn from it.
I originally planned on changing my name when I married not because I wanted to, exactly, but because it's what was done! Now that I realise it's not necessarily a ...well, necessity, I'm all about keeping my own name. For one thing, I like my family and my last name is very important to me, and I don't as much like his family (they're nice, don't get me wrong).
Many of my friends are married, and most of them did take their husbands' last names. However, there's certainly those that didn't, and those that hyphenated. I do wonder who the hell they asked these questions of.
I've also been wondering about naming conventions in the united states and how many names you can legally have, or legally give to your child. Does anybody know where to find such information?
I did some research on that recently, and it's a really complicated business, because it's different for every state. My SO and I are both taking his mother's 'maiden' name, plus I'm keeping my last name as an extra middle name, and will use MyFirst MyLast OurLast as my professional writing name. We live in Mass. now, but will be getting married in Minn., and it took a while to figure out what our options were. Fortunately, Minn. has a marriage form that has you enter both partners' full names at the top, then both full desired names at the bottom, and no extra fee is charged for the various changes. HOWEVER, if we were to do the very same thing without the marriage license, it would cost us each in the range of $350 to do it.
For other states, I know they assume the woman is taking the man's name, and if you want to do otherwise, you may have to pay an extra fee, or get a court order to do it. Ridiculous.
Even though neither my spouse nor I changed our names when we got married, this was one of the things I loved about getting hitched in MN. I think this in no small part contributes to the number of folks I know in MN who have created combined last names, hyphenated, etc, since it makes it quicker, easier, and cheaper for both partners. Now, if MN could just get it's act together on the same-sex marriage front ....
Abso-fucking-lutely. I mean, Iowa did! So why can't we? :) I really hope to work on that in a big way when I move back.
I also know quite a few Minnesotans who did 'non-traditional' names, whether it was hyphenating, combining, both 'keeping' their own, etc. It makes me wonder if the form is that way because MN has a less traditional attitude in general, or if there were enough of the lefties who made a loud enough noise to make the legislature change the form.
I want to puke.
"They told us that women should lose their own identity when they marry and become a part of the man and his family."
This is the part that makes me want to cry. My mother did not take my father's last name. Yet, somehow (magically!), they have a beautiful marriage that has lasted 27 years as of this Friday.
She didn't have to lose any identity either. My father married her for her. He fell in love with the wonderful woman that she was, not some weirdo he could mold into some Stepford Wife.
And even the thought of my mother giving up her family for my father's brings tears to my eyes. While I love my father's side of the family, my maternal grandmother is the reason I identify as a feminist. I was closer to her than anyone else mostly because of the close bond my mother kept with her. She didn't just toss her family aside after marriage and say "So long! I have a new family and identity now!" That's ridiculous!
Ugh, this makes me furious! And I don't know if I'm even every getting married!
I never really thought about taking any possible husband’s surname when I was younger. My first name is fairly popular, but it is spelt in a quite a strange way. I have had to send back bank cards and passports, and have had to request that cheques be re-issued; so, I really appreciate my very common, four-letter (he he!) surname which is almost impossible to misspell.
I am Irish. I live in Colombia – where women CAN’T take their husband’s surnames. Some, in politics, add a “de (husband’s surname) to their surname – an example would be Claudia Rodriguez de Castellanos, a religious congresswoman.
Women here find it strange that I use the “de ______” option in my email address when I got pissed off looking for combinations of my name and surname that hadn’t already been taken – after the 6th attempt, I figured that it was just an email address! Still, for many Colombian women, it is terrible that I have compromised my own identity even if in such a small way.
If we have kids, they’ll probably have the traditional combination of his surname and then mine, which is automatic here. Honestly, I have to say that I much prefer the Spanish-language tradition in this aspect. It is far less complicated.
Incidentally, we’ve been married for nearly a decade!
Interesting to learn about the Colombian tradition -- that's actually quite different from Mexico (just goes to show there's no one single "Spanish language tradition").
Yeah... that aspect hurt the most.
I mean I can understand choosing to change one or both names for any number of reasons. I CAN'T remotely accept demanding that every marriage should be a Dominant/submissive relationship with a Dominant man and a submissive womon. But these people insist that it should be legally enforced. Then again, I've heard many people defending marital rape, so it fits the pattern.
Sorry about the extra postings. I was getting error messages each time.
Yeah... that aspect hurt the most.
I mean I can understand choosing to change one or both names for any number of reasons. I CAN'T remotely accept demanding that every marriage should be a Dominant/submissive relationship with a Dominant man and a submissive womon. But these people insist that it should be legally enforced. Then again, I've heard many people defending marital rape, so it fits the pattern.
Yeah... that aspect hurt the most.
I mean I can understand choosing to change one or both names for any number of reasons. I CAN'T remotely accept demanding that every marriage should be a Dominant/submissive relationship with a Dominant man and a submissive womon. But these people insist that it should be legally enforced. Then again, I've heard many people defending marital rape, so it fits the pattern.
I felt the exact same way as you. Why WOULD I take my husband's name? It's not my name. It's not who I am. So I hyphenated. And I've had strangers in my workplace chide me on having "a confusing name". I've had to fight with airlines about being who I say I am. And don't even get me started on online forms that will no recognized a hyphenated name.
Get. With. The. Program. Not EVERYONE wants to take their husband's name. And those who want to, good for you. That's your choice. But my choice is just as valid.
Our (as yet nonexistent) kids can take his name. He's the only son of an only son. That doesn't bother me. But I'm keeping mine.
I remember getting into a huge fight with my then boyfriend about this very subject. When my older sister got married, she chose to keep her name, mainly for professional reasons. She had spent many years working on her professional reputation and didn't want to start over with a new name. Plus, she liked her name. So, she got married and her and her husband have different last names (he didn't want to change his, either).
In talking with my boyfriend about the non-name change, it came out that he expected any woman he married to take his name. I countered that I wasn't sure if I would change my name should I ever marry. Much arguing ensued.
To make a long story short, the basic sentiment this guy had, and I expect other guys share this sentiment, is that if a woman does not take her husband's name, than she either does not love him enough or the guy is "whipped". Somehow it's never an issue that the guy doesn't love the woman enough to let her keep her name.
I once had a boyfriend where that same argument occured. I had not yet decided whether or not I wanted to keep my name. I had never really been in a mega serious relationship so the thought had never crossed my mind.
Well it turns out it was a "deal-breaker" for him if a woman didn't want to change her name to teh husband's name. He thought it was disrespectful and indicative of not loving the guy enough as well. I thought that was ridiculous. I pointed out that I loved my last name and it was a big part of me. I didn't know if I'd be willing to part with it. Long story short, he then brought up "Don't you want your kids to have the same last name as you?" To which I answered yes and quickly said I'd change my name if we married.
I was so young and naive it never occured to me that our kids didn't NEED to take their father's name. Duh! Our relationship quickly dwindled as I grew wiser and realized he was an ass and names were not the only part of me he wished to be in control of.
"Our relationship quickly dwindled as I grew wiser and realized he was an ass and names were not the only part of me he wished to be in control of. "
I hear you on that. The same thing happened with mine. It's a power thing for a lot of guys. 'You WILL take my name.' Really? What else do you think I will be doing for you, whether or not I want to?
Wow, I had this experience too! My first major fight with a boyfriend who turned out to be quite emotionally abusive turned on this issue. He insisted that I would take his name "when" (not "if," which was a surprise to me) we got married. I told him I had no intention of changing my last name.
He said it was important for him that we have the same last name.
I said it's not important for me that we have the same last name, so if it's so important to you, then you can go ahead and change YOUR name.
He said that was not an option. Why? Because he felt attached to his name. Oh really? Well so am I! What makes you feel so entitled that your attachment to your name should take priority to my attachment to mine, even though you're the one who wants us to have the same name and it makes no difference to me??
Wow, I had this experience too! My first major fight with a boyfriend who turned out to be quite emotionally abusive turned on this issue. He insisted that I would take his name "when" (not "if," which was a surprise to me) we got married. I told him I had no intention of changing my last name.
He said it was important for him that we have the same last name.
I said it's not important for me that we have the same last name, so if it's so important to you, then you can go ahead and change YOUR name.
He said that was not an option. Why? Because he felt attached to his name. Oh really? Well so am I! What makes you feel so entitled that your attachment to your name should take priority to my attachment to mine, even though you're the one who wants us to have the same name and it makes no difference to me??
I understand what you are saying. The same thing happened to me with my ex. He told me he wanted to marry me, but I WOULD change my last name and that was the end of the discussion. And since than I have had two semi-serious relationships: 1. didn't want to get married, but said if we did he would NOT want me to change my name and he even said if I ever did get married to someone else that I should NOT change my last name, because he thought my last name rocked, but than I got pregnant with him and he told me that the baby WOULD have his last name, well I never did have a child (long story, but I would have wanted my child to have my last name. And the other boyfriend I had didn't think that people should change their last name. I guess it just depends, but I know I want to keep my last name.
I would run in the opposite direction of any man who insisted that his wife take his name.
Every. single. argument. people put forth is rooted in sexism.
The woman doesn't love him enough? Well the man must REALLY dislike the woman because he's not even considering taking HER name.
You know, another thought - if this study is seriously flawed, as many commenters are pointing out. Then another issue comes up - the media coverage and how that affects the conversation. If USA Today and other national papers are putting it out there that most people feel women should take their husbands' last names, then that just feeds into that argument that "everyone is doing it" and makes it easier for jerkie husbands-to-be to get all entitled feeling if the name-change conversation comes up. Just a thought.
This. Maybe that's the underlying point. Doesn't this kind of thing happen all the time? Remember that 'women over a certain age will never get married' study from the 80s? Make a big deal over a flawed study that 'confirms' what they want us to believe, even though it's most likely inaccurate.
This. Maybe that's the underlying point. Doesn't this kind of thing happen all the time? Remember that 'women over a certain age will never get married' study from the 80s? Make a big deal over a flawed study that 'confirms' what they want us to believe, even though it's most likely inaccurate.
When I got married, at 22, I took my husband's last name. It matched my image (then, not now)of making a family, and followed along with societal pressure. It was easy to do. Most of the time I didn't even have to provide a copy of the marriage certificate. Three years later, when I got divorced, I had to file a separate "Notice of Intent to Retake Prior Name" with the courts, and I STILL (5 years later) have mail coming to me with the wrong last name. As long as it is so ingrained in societal expectations that we will take on someone else's identity it will continue to be a challenge for a woman to not take her husband's name, or to give it back if she no longer wants it.
I was married (divorced now thank goodness), kept my name, and STILL got mail addressed to Mrs. [his name].
snort
I always state, "There is no "MRS So and So here, maybe you've got the wrong person?"
If it's something important, I guarantee you that they'll get your name right eventually :)
Even though I still have my maiden name, I still don't mind going by Mrs. Smith. It's not something I'm willing to fight over (and I will take his name when I apply for citizenship). In a sense, it is who I am, and while I would prefer Ms. Newell, it doesn't bother me.
Hyphens I don't really care for, simply because you have to stop at some point if you're having kids. Plus, if my parents had gone that route, I'd have winded up with French, Scottish and German surnames all at once by now.
I'm changing my name when I'm eighteen. This study really reinforced it.
It started out, way back when I was in fifth grade, because I really hate my name. It evolved, and now I also don't want to have my father's last name. I love my dad, but I see no need to transfer last names from father to offspring, or to husband. It irks me; when I was younger, I always wanted my mom's last name (my parents were never married, so she always had her maiden name), and constantly asked why I got stuck with my dad's. It was just "what was done."
My name will be entirely my own in six months. I'm so excited.
Good for you, starryeyed. I changed my name when I was 18 for similar reasons. I faced a lot of resistance, but I chose a name that I loved. Much later, when I married, some family members were surprised to learn that I wasn't going to adopt my husband's name. They thought I shouldn't be attached to my name since I had made it up.
The fact was/is that I am more attached to my name because I chose it. And I married a man who agreed with me, so yay for us.
There are family members who think I'm being weird or stubborn, and I do get some mail addressed to Mrs. So-and-so. We named our child First MyLast HisLast to appease family. All of that was easy. Keeping my name has caused no confusion and no complications. I highly recommend the practice.
I felt the exact same way as you. Why WOULD I take my husband's name? It's not my name. It's not who I am. So I hyphenated. And I've had strangers in my workplace chide me on having "a confusing name". I've had to fight with airlines about being who I say I am. And don't even get me started on online forms that will no recognized a hyphenated name.
Get. With. The. Program. Not EVERYONE wants to take their husband's name. And those who want to, good for you. That's your choice. But my choice is just as valid.
Our (as yet nonexistent) kids can take his name. He's the only son of an only son. That doesn't bother me. But I'm keeping mine.
When I got married, at 22, I took my husband's last name. It matched my image (then, not now)of making a family, and followed along with societal pressure. It was easy to do. Most of the time I didn't even have to provide a copy of the marriage certificate. Three years later, when I got divorced, I had to file a separate "Notice of Intent to Retake Prior Name" with the courts, and I STILL (5 years later) have mail coming to me with the wrong last name. As long as it is so ingrained in societal expectations that we will take on someone else's identity it will continue to be a challenge for a woman to not take her husband's name, or to give it back if she no longer wants it.
When I got married back in 1985 it never occurred to me to ask my fiancee/wife what last name she was going to take, until someone asked me and I advised this someone to ask her. She kept her own. She caught a lot of flack from some of her family for doing so, but if any of them or anyone else looked on me pityingly thereafter, I remained blissfully unaware.
This is one of those subjects that elicits a gutteral reaction from people. It's a very personal decision, so why all the pressure?
At this point in my life, should I ever actually get married, I will most likely be taking the husband's name. I have a lot of issues with my parents, and do not particuarly want to be associated with my father's name. I'll probably just tuck it in with my middle name and have 2 middle names, so I don't loose my identity completely (I've spent over 30 years with this name, so I'm at least a little attached to it, regardless of the dysfunctional family) And hopefully, I'll get a last name that's easier to pronounce.
But yeah, guys seem to think that they're entitled to having their name thrust upon their wives, whether she likes it or not. It's a power thing.
How does the name change dynamic work with same sex couples who are legally married or civil unioned? Is there pressure for the couple to have the same last name?
"How does the name change dynamic work with same sex couples who are legally married or civil unioned? Is there pressure for the couple to have the same last name?"
Speaking from my own experience, the LGBT community as at a toss-up on this issue. Most people I've asked want to combine names, or legally create new last names from both, though I know people who've taken one or the other also. For many who aren't legally able to marry, or who have just "earned" that privilege [since it's not a right for us second class citizens], a name [the same name for both parties] gives cultural validity to our love... validity that we need when so many question us, our intentions, our rights as people.
I personally want to get rid of my name because I've been teased about it for ages, no one can get it right, and I'm the walking oxymoron [a lesbian with the last name that reads like 'gay'? How funny!] Sick of it. I dont really like any of my names, which is why I have nicknames and aliases and the whole thing. Can I just have a legal non-sexist name do-over? lol
"How does the name change dynamic work with same sex couples who are legally married or civil unioned? Is there pressure for the couple to have the same last name?"
Speaking from my own experience, the LGBT community as at a toss-up on this issue. Most people I've asked want to combine names, or legally create new last names from both, though I know people who've taken one or the other also. For many who aren't legally able to marry, or who have just "earned" that privilege [since it's not a right for us second class citizens], a name [the same name for both parties] gives cultural validity to our love... validity that we need when so many question us, our intentions, our rights as people.
I personally want to get rid of my name because I've been teased about it for ages, no one can get it right, and I'm the walking irony [a lesbian with the last name that reads like 'gay'? How funny!] When I'm on the phone with someone and have to give my last name, it's not just my name, it's "Gey, G-E-Y". I'm sick of the whole thing. I dont really like any of my names, which is why I have nicknames and aliases and the whole thing. Can I just have a legal non-sexist name do-over? lol
VT Idealist, you might want to just change your name completely. In my experience, simply adding your husband's name onto the end of yours leads to everyone shortening your name to your first name with his last name! I didn't even change my name when I got married, but in one particular circle of friends and acquaintances I tacked his last name on at the end of my full name (it sounds pretty), and more people in that circle have called me myFirstName hisLastName than I care to count.
I'm supporting a friend right now who got married this summer and is getting all sorts of flack from her husband and his family about not wanting to take his name. "Just" wanting to keep her name hasn't been seen as a good enough reason (SO FRUSTRATING!). If anyone has links to any writing on women keeping their name, basically anything that would give her talking points in an arguement, I would be so appreciative if you posted them. Thanks!
I don't have any talking points right now (though I've been thinking of writing a post) but I would challenge her critics to give a good reason why she SHOULD change it. Keeping her name is the default. The onus is on them to give her a good reason to change it.
Names do not dictate whether a family is "unified."
Men can always take their wives' names if they feel strongly that a family must all have one name. If they are opposed to doing so, but demand that the woman takes the man's, it is sexism.
It is sick to equate shedding one's given name and adopting her husband's as "love." Really warped. Ask why it's necessary for a woman to subsume herself in order to prove her love. What is the man doing to prove HIS love?
Well, since you asked...allow me:
She can ask her fiance how he intends to prove his love and commitment to their marriage since he isn't changing HIS name either. She can ask why the onus is on her to show 'respect' or commitment in a way that he is not expected to do. She can ask her fiance to tell her what is his understanding about how these traditions came to be in the first place and then she can ask him if he thinks that the origins of the practice (the legal ownership of women as property) is an ideal that he thinks should be supported (and if he still says yes to that she should run like hell!). She can ask why his family name is more valuable than her family name or why he deserves top billing in the relationship. If he insists that sharing a name demonstrates family unity she can graciously offer to share her name and see what he says to that. She can tell him that she sees marriage as a merger and not an acquisition. She can ask him why it is so important to 'be like everyone else' when 'everyone else' usually seems to have plenty of their own shit to deal with. She might want to ask why he doesn't have the guts to stand up to his parents (if they are a reason)if he thinks he's man enough to get married in the first place.
People deny to their last breath that the name issue has anything to do with dominance but you can clear the dust on that one by suggesting he take her name. When you get the response that it would make him a wuss, he would feel insulted or emasculatedt then you really know that for him it is about putting his stamp of ownership on her. Otherwise, why would he be insulted at all if not for fearing that it shows he isn't in charge of the relationship?
I'll admit to a general disdain for people who can't even be bothered to question the status quo, to not just go along with something because 'that's the way it is' and for no other reason. It shows weakness and frankly, a basic lack of intelligence. Yes, that's my snobby opinion and I'm sticking to it without apology. I also think many women struggle with this issue internally but try to justify it to themselves with the old 'well, I want us all to have a family name' or 'I want to show respect to my husband', etc. Thier brains obviously haven't expanded enough to consider that the family name could come from anywhere, not just the husband. It's also strange to me that there are all these women who've "never liked my name anyway" who never bothered to change it until they got married when they could have done so at any time in their lives.
Lastly, explain to this man that she can understand that society has ingrained into men this sense of entitlement that their names are their own and they will never be asked to change it. They will be "Mr." whether they are 8 or 80 years old and their is not prefix to describe their marital status to the world because they are their own person regardless. So, they really can't understand what it feels like for someone to demand that they give up their name. That it doesn't make sense that it is laughable for a woman to consider her name part of her identity but totally reasonable for a man's name to be part of his identity and a source of pride. If he asks her why she doesn't want to advertise to the world that she is his wife, ask him how he intends to let the world know he is married to her since his name won't change and he'll still be "Mr." just like always. Historically, forcing someone to give up their name has been a primary tool for domination and oppression and a way to effectively diminish the self exteem of the altered party (as is what happened to slaves who were forced to take their master's name....as a sign of ownnership). I'm not saying he will change his mind but a lot of people need to be encouraged to at least consider this issue from our point of view since we are the ones expected to make the sacrifice.
Well, since you asked...allow me:
She can ask her fiance how he intends to prove his love and commitment to their marriage since he isn't changing HIS name either. She can ask why the onus is on her to show 'respect' or commitment in a way that he is not expected to do. She can ask her fiance to tell her what is his understanding about how these traditions came to be in the first place and then she can ask him if he thinks that the origins of the practice (the legal ownership of women as property) is an ideal that he thinks should be supported (and if he still says yes to that she should run like hell!). She can ask why his family name is more valuable than her family name or why he deserves top billing in the relationship. If he insists that sharing a name demonstrates family unity she can graciously offer to share her name and see what he says to that. She can tell him that she sees marriage as a merger and not an acquisition. She can ask him why it is so important to 'be like everyone else' when 'everyone else' usually seems to have plenty of their own shit to deal with. She might want to ask why he doesn't have the guts to stand up to his parents (if they are a reason)if he thinks he's man enough to get married in the first place.
People deny to their last breath that the name issue has anything to do with dominance but you can clear the dust on that one by suggesting he take her name. When you get the response that it would make him a wuss, he would feel insulted or emasculatedt then you really know that for him it is about putting his stamp of ownership on her. Otherwise, why would he be insulted at all if not for fearing that it shows he isn't in charge of the relationship?
I'll admit to a general disdain for people who can't even be bothered to question the status quo, to not just go along with something because 'that's the way it is' and for no other reason. It shows weakness and frankly, a basic lack of intelligence. Yes, that's my snobby opinion and I'm sticking to it without apology. I also think many women struggle with this issue internally but try to justify it to themselves with the old 'well, I want us all to have a family name' or 'I want to show respect to my husband', etc. Thier brains obviously haven't expanded enough to consider that the family name could come from anywhere, not just the husband. It's also strange to me that there are all these women who've "never liked my name anyway" who never bothered to change it until they got married when they could have done so at any time in their lives.
Lastly, explain to this man that she can understand that society has ingrained into men this sense of entitlement that their names are their own and they will never be asked to change it. They will be "Mr." whether they are 8 or 80 years old and their is not prefix to describe their marital status to the world because they are their own person regardless. So, they really can't understand what it feels like for someone to demand that they give up their name. That it doesn't make sense that it is laughable for a woman to consider her name part of her identity but totally reasonable for a man's name to be part of his identity and a source of pride. If he asks her why she doesn't want to advertise to the world that she is his wife, ask him how he intends to let the world know he is married to her since his name won't change and he'll still be "Mr." just like always. Historically, forcing someone to give up their name has been a primary tool for domination and oppression and a way to effectively diminish the self esteem of the altered party (as is what happened to slaves who were forced to take their master's name....as a sign of ownnership). I'm not saying he will change his mind but a lot of people need to be encouraged to at least consider this issue from our point of view since we are the ones expected to make the sacrifice.
I don't know if it would make any difference to bring in other cultures but the woman taking the man's name isn't the default everywhere.
In Korea, both people traditionally keep their own names.
In Mexico, everyone has hyphenated last names, from both their mother and their father. So here's how it works (with American names because I'm not comfortable using Hispanic names when I am not myself Hispanic):
Jen is born to Doug Smith and Anna Brown. Jen's name is Jen Brown Smith. Jen gets married to Mike Lewis Johnson. Her name changes to "Jen Smith de Johnson" (translation roughly: Jen Smith of the house of Johnson). His name remains Mike Lewis Johnson, so while they both have "Johnson" as part of their name, they effectively have different last names, and children will have the name "Smith Johnson."
Also, all of this is what I've learned, not from personal experience. Apologies in advance if I got anything wrong here.
What I find most useful here is to debunk ideas that it's "natural" for a woman to take the man's last name. Or in the case of them saying, "it's how it's always been doing," for people who are at least a LITTLE socially aware, you can counter that with, "it's not how it's always been done everywhere!" (I realize this argument can often backfire, as people who are making sexist arguments may also have racist and/or classist reactions to these examples. But I've found it works with people who are otherwise progressive but are maintaining this particular sexist holdout).
Your description is a leeetle inaccurate. Kids are typically given both parents' surnames, as you wrote, but the father's surname generally comes immediately after the given name. E.g., if Luis Listo and Fania Feminista have a daughter they name Gloria, her name would be Gloria Listo Feminista. And if Gloria marries Julio Obrador Guapo, her name after marriage would be Gloria Listo de Obrador.
I'm not sure this is much better than the U.S. norm, as it is the maternal names that gets dropped when children are named.
"I don't know if it would make any difference to bring in other cultures but the woman taking the man's name isn't the default everywhere..."
In the Iranian mainstream, babies get their fathers' surnames. That's it. The female ones aren't expected to change their names after growing up and getting married.
Then of course there are the patronyms in Iceland and Russia, based on the fathers' given names.
This reminds me of a conversation I had with two WOMEN in law school who felt this way. I just thought they were conservative religious throwbacks and kind of laughed in their face at first (I thought they were kidding!). A classmate of mine was thinking of going back to the use of her birth name and these two silly girls decided to butt into the conversation and offer their two cents...which as it turns out was not even worth that much!
This reminds me of a conversation I had with two WOMEN in law school who felt this way. I just thought they were conservative religious throwbacks and kind of laughed in their face at first (I thought they were kidding!). A classmate of mine was thinking of going back to the use of her birth name and these two silly girls decided to butt into the conversation and offer their two cents...which as it turns out was not even worth that much!
This drives me crazy as someone with an "unusual" last name. My father is ethnically Polish and our family's last name really stands out here in Georgia, as there aren't very many people of Polish origin. I've had to defend and explain my last name a lot throughout my short 21 years for it's presumed "foreign" origins. I've always been the girl with the last name and I can't imagine having any other last name than what I have.
Some people don't understand why I'm so attached to my last name. Many have even told me "It'll be nice when you get married, you can finally have a normal last name!". My last name is normal, I'm Polish-American! I don't ever plan on changing it, it's too much of who I am.
I totally understand.
My last name is basically the only Jewish part of me (until people hear it no one ever has a clue I'm Jewish) and I love it. It's not difficult to pronounce (though you'd be surprised how some people have messed it up!) but it's very Jewish and it's mine and I love it! I'm not at all religious but I'm very very very tied to my Jewish ethnicity and I just couldn't imagine giving that part of me up. It's extremely important.
And regardless, IT'S MY NAME! I shouldn't have to explain it to anyone!
Me too! Right on.
All of the young women I know personally who are now married changed their last names to their husbands', including my sister. Around here (meaning the Mid-West), that's just the norm. I, personally, made the decision not to change my name when/if I marry, and I've even had my mom remark that she doesn't understand why I wouldn't change it, and that changing your last name to your husband's is a great way to "honor" him (bleck!). I must admit, though, I have no attachment to my current last name (more my father's than mine, really), so I'm not entirely certain what it will end up being if I marry!
I don't intend to get married, but if I ever did, I would never change my last name. My father was a great man who passed away when I was 8, and his name is just about all I have left of him. No man will ever replace my father.
My mother's subsequent husband wanted to adopt me and give me his last name, and even at 10 years old I knew it wasn't what I wanted. I cried even at the thought of losing my name.
If it was made mandatory to take your husbands last name, and I married my current boyfriend, my first and last name would rhyme. Really not something I need in my life.
mind if we all call you julia gulia?
More information about the study here:
http://newsinfo.iu.edu/tips/page/normal/11558.html#7
Note that the survey was nationally representative
For those who doubt that 815 people is not enough to accurately reflect American's veiwpoints: are you survey experts? No? Then how do you know how many people are needed? Surveying is an extremely sophisticated field, and much depends on how the survey is conducted. Nobody here on this blog knows enough about how the survey was done to determine whether there was a sufficient sample size. For those who want to know more, Ms. Hamilton's e-mail address is at the above link. I bet if Jessica contacted her, she would be delighted to discuss her methodology.
Agreed. I'll leave it to a statistician to explain but I remember being very surprised in college when I learned how accurate relatively small sample sizes are for very large populations so long as the selection/distribution is done correctly. Intuitively you would think that as a total population increases the percentage necessary for an accurate sample size would increase proportionally. It's true to a point, but when you look at something like 1000 out of 20,000 and 1000 out of 300 million, the margin of error changes very little. It goes against our gut instinct, but 800 is probably large enough to accurately establish a general trend assuming the rest of the methodology is sound.
Note that the survey was nationally representative
The same was said for California exit polls during the last election--that it was representative. Yet just looking at the raw data the numbers of African American males were too small. Of course later, the validity of the prop 8 data was questioned again.
I don't think people have to be statisticians/survey experts to be skeptical. And it's the burden of those presenting the research to prove their case. The same study also indicates that many folks think a man should be able to change his name as well. Sure not very many folks do this, but again, I could have taken that line and written an article based on that and made it sound like America is enlightened or something.
To echo other people's comments I suppose this is something everyone has to figure out for themselves.
Love is after all about change and compromise. I mean if we care enough about someone then figuring out what name a person takes on marriage should be a process of compromise and discussion between the individuals in the relationship. Sometimes it goes one way and sometimes the other but it's not exactly up to us to say what's good for everyone else.
On one side being Mr. Jane Doe has an appeal to it despite what I would have to explain to people. On the other side I don't imagine that anyone has a right to say to anyone else take this name or else.
I do however like what my neighbors did. They took the first part of his name and the last part of her name and have been married for a long time.
To echo other people's comments I suppose this is something everyone has to figure out for themselves.
Love is after all about change and compromise. I mean if we care enough about someone then figuring out what name a person takes on marriage should be a process of compromise and discussion between the individuals in the relationship. Sometimes it goes one way and sometimes the other but it's not exactly up to us to say what's good for everyone else.
On one side being Mr. Jane Doe has an appeal to it despite what I would have to explain to people. On the other side I don't imagine that anyone has a right to say to anyone else take this name or else.
I do however like what my neighbors did. They took the first part of his name and the last part of her name and have been married for a long time.
To echo other people's comments I suppose this is something everyone has to figure out for themselves.
Love is after all about change and compromise. I mean if we care enough about someone then figuring out what name a person takes on marriage should be a process of compromise and discussion between the individuals in the relationship. Sometimes it goes one way and sometimes the other but it's not exactly up to us to say what's good for everyone else.
On one side being Mr. Jane Doe has an appeal to it despite what I would have to explain to people. On the other side I don't imagine that anyone has a right to say to anyone else take this name or else.
I do however like what my neighbors did. They took the first part of his name and the last part of her name and have been married for a long time.
Wow, 50% want to make it a law? I really hope the study is flawed, like many of you have stated.
I've got a long term boyfriend who I intend to marry sometime in the future, and I'm not going to change my name. People act like my refusal to change my name is some sort of disrespect to him. In reality, it is nothing against him or his family, I just don't believe is perpetuating a tradition based on the oppression of women.
A lot of people think I'm being selfish or that a name is not important. Names are very important and the ability to name yourself is important to someone's independence and identity. My name is part of my identity. How is wanting to keep part of my identity selfish? If I expected my boyfriend to change his name to mine, people would think I was being overbearing, even more than they do now. That's not fair.
I still don't know what to do about any future children though. I've been toying around with giving sons my boyfriend's last name, and giving daughters mine. And of course people I tell this to think it's crazy.
Hah, if they really thought names weren't important they wouldn't be so aghast at the idea of a woman not changing hers upon marriage.
Wow, 50% want to make it a law? I really hope the study is flawed, like many of you have stated.
I've got a long term boyfriend who I intend to marry sometime in the future, and I'm not going to change my name. People act like my refusal to change my name is some sort of disrespect to him. In reality, it is nothing against him or his family, I just don't believe is perpetuating a tradition based on the oppression of women.
A lot of people think I'm being selfish or that a name is not important. Names are very important and the ability to name yourself is important to someone's independence and identity. My name is part of my identity. How is wanting to keep part of my identity selfish? If I expected my boyfriend to change his name to mine, people would think I was being overbearing, even more than they do now. That's not fair.
I still don't know what to do about any future children though. I've been toying around with giving sons my boyfriend's last name, and giving daughters mine. And of course people I tell this to think it's crazy.
Why is that crazy? I would suggest that you give the boys your last name and the girls his...hee, hee...
I once got into an argument about naming conventions with a male friend. He was horrified to learn that I had no intention of ever changing my name because I told him I identified with it strongly and have always loved it just the way it. He told me (and this a paraphrase) "but it's not your last name-- it's your father's name-- it doesn't belong to you it belongs to him."
That f*cker.
So, according to your friend, since it "belongs" to your father *gag* would you need his permission to change it as well?
"but it's not your last name-- it's your father's name-- it doesn't belong to you it belongs to him."
By that logic, your friend's last name is his father's last name, it doesn't really belong to him.
I fucking hate that argument.
Yeah. My mom changed her last name to my dad's when she got married. I have that last name.
That last name is as much mine as it is my male cousin's.
Anyone who says otherwise can bite me.
I once got into an argument about naming conventions with a male friend. He was horrified to learn that I had no intention of ever changing my name because I told him I identified with it strongly and have always loved it just the way it is. He told me (and this a paraphrase) "but it's not your last name-- it's your father's name-- it doesn't belong to you it belongs to him."
That f*cker.
I agree that 815 people is too small of a study to represent. But 98% of the American population (that statistic is taken from How to lie with Statistics) don't pay attention to sample size, how they decided to take the sample, the biases that go into the sampling ect. But that doesn't change the fact that people who see this are going use it to try and force women into taking their husbands name because not doing so would be going against what society wants, and a lot of women care about that, because they have been trained and brainwashed into believing so. Also Jessica, How are you handling the name situation? I too am getting married soon. My fiance feels that its important for us to have the same last name so he is taking mine.
When I got married several years ago, I kept my name. Partly because I was uncomfortable with the idea of changing it from what it had always been, but mostly because not changing it meant not having to do anything. Not getting a new DL, new passport, new SS card, all of that. I'm lazy. And then as time went by, and I think my conservative relatives got used to us having different last names, it just seemed like I'd made the right decision. My brother's wife made the same decision, and she's fairly conservative. It's just so much easier this way. I've never had a problem with our children taking their father's last name, when/if we have children. My husband is from Quebec, where for the past 20 years it's very uncommon for women to change their last names, and children use hyphenated names. It seems like when people with hyphenated names become adults, they generally pick one or the other to use.
When I got married several years ago, I kept my name. Partly because I was uncomfortable with the idea of changing it from what it had always been, but mostly because not changing it meant not having to do anything. Not getting a new DL, new passport, new SS card, all of that. I'm lazy. And then as time went by, and I think my conservative relatives got used to us having different last names, it just seemed like I'd made the right decision. My brother's wife made the same decision, and she's fairly conservative. It's just so much easier this way. I've never had a problem with our children taking their father's last name, when/if we have children. My husband is from Quebec, where for the past 20 years it's very uncommon for women to change their last names, and children use hyphenated names. It seems like when people with hyphenated names become adults, they generally pick one or the other to use.
If there were no tradition of doing this, can you imagine the looks a woman would get if she said "oh, when I marry Scott, I'm going to change my last name to his"? I can't see fighting with someone over this, but if she asked me what I wanted her to do I'd advise her to keep her name, and frankly if she were leaning towards changing it I'd be a little curious as to why.
Senator Shaheen married in a different time, of course (though not before Lucy Stone was writing), but I still wonder why she changer her name knowing it would rhyme.
I wonder how many of the people who think it should be required by law believe it already is. It's easier to say "the law requiring this should be kept" than to say "the laws should be changed to require it," if no less ridiculous.
Is it really any less fucked up that the name you're keeping is your father's last name, or if you go by your mother's family name, your grandfather's last name? Granted, you're keeping the name of the family of which you've been a part your whole life, whereas you've been married to your husband all of 30 seconds, but it still represents the fact that some woman in your family gave up her name and took a man's. I don't think people keeping their names when they get married solves the problem.
No, it doesn't solve the problem completely. But my question to you is this: Why do consider men's names "theirs" but not women's, when both girl and boy babies are typically given their dad's names at birth. By that logic, you're not taking your husband's name either - since it's not his; it's his dad's (and his is his dads, and so on and so forth).
THIS! Oh my goodness. I recently had a male friend complaining that after a divorce his ex-wife kept "his" name. I thought it was really telling that he never actually considered it "her" name. My last name is not only my father's, or my grandfather's, it is MY name. By this logic, women have no last names at all; our "last names" are really more like addresses, letting people know under which household's authority we reside. Blech.
The difference is that everyone expects that the girl will change her name when she gets married, so hey it's really only a loaner.
My point in all this is that I just think there's a sad irony in that to keep my identity when I marry, I have to claim something that represents another woman having given hers up. That's all I'm sayin'.
"The difference is that everyone expects that the girl will change her name when she gets married, so hey it's really only a loaner."
Now you're going in circles.
Yes, this is the problem, and unless women stop abandoning their names upon marriage, this expectation will never stop.
It doesn't solve it, but it's a step. If there's a single sexist custom that's been eliminated in one fell swoop, I've never heard of it.
I kept my name. We gave my daughter her father's. He's already encouraging her to keep it, and mentioning that, you know, she could give it to a child some day.
It's a step.
For me, my last name is mine. It also happens to be my douchebag dad's, which I could care less about, but it was also my father's father's. Since I was restrained from getting to know him better when he was alive for various reasons, but have heard stories about what a kind and generous person he could be, I keep it as a connection to him. It's also the name that my grandmother went by, that my brother goes by, my aunt's maiden names, my cousin's maiden names, etc. So no, it isn't just my father's name and if it was, I would change it in a second (though not to my husband's name - probably a different grandfather who I never got to meet, which would also be the maiden name of several women in my family who are very important to me).
What's really distressing about this news - Laura Hamilton, the study's lead author says that when respondents were asked why they thought women should change their last names, "they told us that women should lose their own identity when they marry and become a part of the man and his family."
Part of me wonders what question was asked for the authors to come to this conclusion. I highly doubt that most people who believe that women should be legally mandated to change their names when they get married answered "yes" to the question "Do you believe women should lose their own identity when they marry and become a part of the man and his family," if that question was asked. Most people don't answer questions like that in the affirmative, no matter how extreme their political views.
I'm not surprised that it's come down to an issue of force regarding marriage. After all, those who wish to seek control - of marriage, of women, of some sort of fairy tale society - weren't likely to stop at WHO could marry. Once you're there, more and more control is grabbed and pretty soon there's a desire to control what they'd consider "normal" marriage as well.
I kept my own name when I married. My son also has my name. My husband wanted to take MY name upon marrying but it became such a fight, such a battle to accomplish that one small thing, that we said to hell with it. Not that we didn't have the will, but it clearly meant more to the people denying it to us than it meant to us.
I've lost count of the people who are baffled by the fact that I'm not Mrs. XXX XXXXXX but am Ms. Same Name I Was Born With and Amazingly Still Married.
khw mentioned this earlier in the thread, but completely changing one's last name is not the custom in Mexico either. You can either add a DE.. Khw's example was Claudia Rodriguez de Castellanos, or simply be Claudia Rodriguez Castellanos(your original last name plus husbands attached at the end). Most hispanics that i know, at least from mex, use BOTH names. All the time. If the couple has kids, the kids get the father's last name first and then the mother's. So said person's children would be Something Castellanos Rodriguez. The mother's last name is important too in Mexican culture. People tend to drop it somewhat when they move to the US. But it's totally customary to use your entire name, especially on the border, where I'm from. Score 2 for Mexico! They won today too. =)
I'm really not willing to accept that Mexico's system is less patriarchal. Yes, you get two have two names... but the one from your mother is actually her father's. And still, only the woman changes her name when she gets married. And when they have kids, the kids' first (and primary) family name is still the father's.
And although some people do use both of their family names, it's much more common in the interior of Mexico for people to just use the first of their family names (always the one from their father) in a social and professional context. Using both names sort of sounds pretentious or super-formal, at least where I lived in the center and south of Mexico.
Think about public figures in Mexico. Aside from Salinas de Gotari, perhaps, how many presidents even semi-regularly used both of their family names? Pop stars? Soccer players?
The whole "one name unites the family" thing is pretty damned dismissive of blended families like mine. Mom, step-dad and half of my sisters have one last name, and another sister and I have our father's last name, while another step-sister has her father's last name. And yet we're all still magically able to love one another!
an excellent point I hadn't considered.
And not just blended families, it also devalues other forms of so-called "alternative" families and communities of all kinds. Elevating the (heterosexual) marriage bond as the most important kind of love and the nuclear family as the most important kind of kinship network codifies the same patriarchy that forces women to take husband's names.
My partner has the same last name has her ex-husband and their daughter. If we marry, 2/3 of the household will have one name and the other person will have a different name. Come to think of it, that's the situation right now, without hurting any of the relationships involved.
as a woman who "kept" my name, (oh I hate that, "kept" kept what? myself? geez) and the mother of a child who has my last name, these people can go screw!
"these people can go screw"
They don't screw. They all think sex is evil
I think it says something so interesting and sad about the psycology of the men for whom this is a deal breaker, and based on the experiences of commenters, it sounds like there are quite a few. I can say with a fair amount of confidence that it would just never occur to my boyfriend to be threatened by this. I mean, what? How insecure does someone have to be about themself for this to be a deal breaker? My boyfriend will go on being sufficiently "honored" and "respected" by everyone around him for who he is and all of the various things he does.
It makes me so angry to think about families pressuring women who marry into them to change their names. If you don't want your son to feel disrespected, then raise him to feel okay about himself and judge his value based on something other than another person's desire to take his name.
I did not change my last name when I got married. When our son was born he got both last names. Legally we had no problems, my friends on the other hand were aghast that we were giving our kid 4 names!
Making it a legal requirement just blows me away. How often do you hear "I don't want the government in my private life" yet to tell women what they will do with the most personal of all - your name, it just defies explanation. Maybe people really do still think that wives are property.
ah, but there's the rub. People that would be aghast at the idea of the govt in THEIR lives have absolutely no problem with the govt dealing with those OTHER people. Especially if those other people happen to be women.
i'm getting married in december, for the second time, and we're both changing our names. we're both going to use his last name as a common last name, and my last name will become both of our middle names. we each want to give each other the gift of coming into one another's families. weird thing....when i got married before, i kept my own name. we had both agreed to hyphenate, but at the last minute, i decided we should keep our names the same. i think it was my subconscious telling me something. also, my fiancé wants to have a name in common with my daughter, who is "sarah mylastname exhusbandslastname", so we thought this arrangement was the best way to go about it.
i'm not looking forward to having to get a new driver's license and passport, though. ergh.
Hmmm. Lose their own identity and become A PART OF THE MAN? So, it's more distressing for a lady to keep her own last name than it is to view a wife as an EXTENSION OF THE HUSBAND?!
Besides, we all know that that idea is FAR too close to queer marriage for the comfort of people making such ass(inine)ertations.
This makes me absolutely ill.
[On a happier note, though, congratulations, Jessica, to you and yours! :) ]
Some people wanted more information. A good scholarly article was published in the University of Chicago law review in 2007. I'm not sure if that publication gives away free content, but you can get it free on ssrn.com or by googling Elizabeth Emens (the author) + Chicago + changing. This paper has all the info you want about marital name-changing in the US.
A large majority of American women change their name upon marriage (about 90% I believe) with recent trends going up rather than down--so I'm not shocked by this survey's response, except for the part about making it mandatory, which seems gratuitous even if you like the idea of following tradition.
I say we should go with the Norse naming system. Everyone gets their own surname. Who's with me?
*crickets*
Well, worth a shot. Though maybe I should try it. Ariel Bethsdottir. Catchy.
I wouldn't mind that, though even that has some problems. It was rather patriarchal in some Scandinavian countries because the parental name at the beginning was usually the father's name, and the "-dottir" form was becoming less and less common before it was done away with leaving, for instance, my Norwegian grandmother with the last name "Peterson".
So we can modify it! Boys get the dad's name and girls get the mom's name. Everyone get's their own surname! *is overly excited about such a silly idea*
Well Sarah, men certainly do get their names from their fathers too, but no one ever expects them to change their names. That's the point. My point is that surnames in this country are tied to, as we unfortunately say in the south, "who's your daddy, and who was your daddy's daddy?" It doesn't matter much who your mama was or who your mama's mama was. My middle name, which is also my mother's family name, is Edwards, which is a Welsh name that means "son of Edward." The same is true of Stephens, my maternal grandmother's family name. So had I ended up with one of the names from my mother's side of the family, I would still have been son of somebody.
Don't get me wrong. When I get married, if I do, I plan to keep my last name because as many have said it is part of who I am. I just think it's ironic that to keep your identity, you have to claim something that is a symbol of another woman's having given up hers. That's all I'm sayin'.
Well Sarah, men certainly do get their names from their fathers too, but no one ever expects them to change their names. That's the point. My point is that surnames in this country are tied to, as we unfortunately say in the south, "who's your daddy, and who was your daddy's daddy?" It doesn't matter much who your mama was or who your mama's mama was. My middle name, which is also my mother's family name, is Edwards, which is a Welsh name that means "son of Edward." The same is true of Stephens, my maternal grandmother's family name. So had I ended up with one of the names from my mother's side of the family, I would still have been son of somebody.
Don't get me wrong. When I get married, if I do, I plan to keep my last name because as many have said it is part of who I am. I just think it's ironic that to keep your identity, you have to claim something that is a symbol of another woman's having given up hers. That's all I'm sayin'.
Well Sarah, men certainly do get their names from their fathers too, but no one ever expects them to change their names. That's the point. My point is that surnames in this country are tied to, as we unfortunately say in the south, "who's your daddy, and who was your daddy's daddy?" It doesn't matter much who your mama was or who your mama's mama was. My middle name, which is also my mother's family name, is Edwards, which is a Welsh name that means "son of Edward." The same is true of Stephens, my maternal grandmother's family name. So had I ended up with one of the names from my mother's side of the family, I would still have been son of somebody.
Don't get me wrong. When I get married, if I do, I plan to keep my last name because as many have said it is part of who I am. I just think it's ironic that to keep your identity, you have to claim something that is a symbol of another woman's having given up hers. That's all I'm sayin'.
I once dated a guy with the same last name as mine. (It's not hard when you're a Smith.) I used to joke that if we got married I'd hyphenate just to screw with people...
That said, actually changing my name never occurred to me.
I'm not entirely surprised by that, but I do seriously wonder how the question about whether women should be forced to change their name was asked.
I once dated a guy with the same last name as mine. (It's not hard when you're a Smith.) I used to joke that if we got married I'd hyphenate just to screw with people...
That said, actually changing my name never occurred to me.
I'm not entirely surprised by that, but I do seriously wonder how the question about whether women should be forced to change their name was asked.
I once dated a guy with the same last name as mine. (It's not hard when you're a Smith.) I used to joke that if we got married I'd hyphenate just to screw with people...
That said, actually changing my name never occurred to me.
I'm not entirely surprised by that, but I do seriously wonder how the question about whether women should be forced to change their name was asked.
My friends who are getting married mostly do take their husband's names, which weirds me out. Ladies, do you know how hard that makes to find you on facebook?
I'm a guy and I've always thought that if I were to get married I'd find it weird for my wife to take my name. If I fall in love with Jane Smith, that's who I'd want to spend my life with. Not Jane Kandela. (names changed to protect the innocent)
I mean I'm willing to be flexible, but any name taking would have to be mutual. I want an equal relationship and to begin with an inequality like that would seem, well wrong.
If she wants my name, she can have it. It'd just be weird to me.
You might want to consider that some might just think it should be a requirement because having a standard makes paperwork so much easier.
Imagine two people get married but both keep their same individual last names. Normally, the whole point of the last name is to indicate the "family" you are from. Your first name is only one to represent the individual, the last name says what family you are a member of. If both keep different last names, its as if they aren't forming a family.
Then, the two people have a child. Whose last name does the child take? The mother's last name? The father's? Both, hyphenated? Let me tell you... giving a child two middle names, a hyphenated last name, or really long complex names are just torture. Most forms only have room for a name of a certain length and many do not have a space for a second middle name. What's worse, when the child grows up and becomes married, what now? Do names just keep getting bigger and bigger and more complex?
Finally, maybe we decide that the married couple take the woman's last name. That's fine. But then they have a male child who then marries. What if that male child keeps his last name and his wife takes his last name? What if this keeps happening, where it's a crap-shoot as to which names lands where. Imagine trying to track down THAT genealogy.
The whole point of last names is just to help keep track of family trees. The first name is all you should be concerned with. After all, a long time ago the last name was simply an indication of the profession. Smith? You were a blacksmith family. Shoemaker? Yes, you actually made shoes. The tradition was that the women took the men's names because it was the men who worked... were the blacksmiths... or shoemakers.
Times have changed, but there's no reason to break with tradition when it comes to last names. Breaking with the tradition only serves to make it impossible for our children or our children's children to try to track down where they've come from... to track down long lost relatives... etc... let's think about this children.
Honey, somehow we have managed to survive this fiendishly difficult task when women's names have changed every generation.
Somehow arguing that we should change our names for our future children's ease in hunting us down through the ages really doesn't strike me as all that relevant in MY life TODAY.
You might want to consider that some might just think it should be a requirement because having a standard makes paperwork so much easier.
Imagine two people get married but both keep their same individual last names. Normally, the whole point of the last name is to indicate the "family" you are from. Your first name is only one to represent the individual, the last name says what family you are a member of. If both keep different last names, its as if they aren't forming a family.
Then, the two people have a child. Whose last name does the child take? The mother's last name? The father's? Both, hyphenated? Let me tell you... giving a child two middle names, a hyphenated last name, or really long complex names are just torture. Most forms only have room for a name of a certain length and many do not have a space for a second middle name. What's worse, when the child grows up and becomes married, what now? Do names just keep getting bigger and bigger and more complex?
Finally, maybe we decide that the married couple take the woman's last name. That's fine. But then they have a male child who then marries. What if that male child keeps his last name and his wife takes his last name? What if this keeps happening, where it's a crap-shoot as to which names lands where. Imagine trying to track down THAT genealogy.
The whole point of last names is just to help keep track of family trees. The first name is all you should be concerned with. After all, a long time ago the last name was simply an indication of the profession. Smith? You were a blacksmith family. Shoemaker? Yes, you actually made shoes. The tradition was that the women took the men's names because it was the men who worked... were the blacksmiths... or shoemakers.
Times have changed, but there's no reason to break with tradition when it comes to last names. Breaking with the tradition only serves to make it impossible for our children or our children's children to try to track down where they've come from... to track down long lost relatives... etc... let's think about this children. I understand there are blended families... I came from a blended family and am currently in a blended family... all I can tell you is it creates havoc and it would be so much simpler if the last names matched.
You might want to consider that some might just think it should be a requirement because having a standard makes paperwork so much easier.
Imagine two people get married but both keep their same individual last names. Normally, the whole point of the last name is to indicate the "family" you are from. Your first name is only one to represent the individual, the last name says what family you are a member of. If both keep different last names, its as if they aren't forming a family.
Then, the two people have a child. Whose last name does the child take? The mother's last name? The father's? Both, hyphenated? Let me tell you... giving a child two middle names, a hyphenated last name, or really long complex names are just torture. Most forms only have room for a name of a certain length and many do not have a space for a second middle name. What's worse, when the child grows up and becomes married, what now? Do names just keep getting bigger and bigger and more complex?
I'm sorry, I rarely comment on this blog -- but this study made me furious.
I am a young-ish man. If I were to get married (as may happen soon in my own personal relationship), I would never EVER want to marry someone who would want to drop her own last name to take mine. It would suggest a total incompatability in life goals.
I've read all the silly justifications about "oh, I got my own last name from my father, so I might as well have a NEW last name from my husband, because I love him more than my dad." But -- seriously, it's been YOUR NAME for your whole life! And for all the talk on this blog about the respect for the rare circumstance of men who decide to change their last name upon marriage... jeez, I'd never change my name: it's MY NAME, after all!
Likewise, I would NEVER want to get married and have my new female spouse change her NAME! It's totally absurd. It would be, like, a total deal-breaker. It would suggest that she was after something totally different in life than me. Next thing, she'd be wanting to give up her career and settle into some totally sexist male-breadwinner / female-homemaker relationship. Lame!! Keeping own NAMES and CAREERS and IDENTITIES and stuff = much cooler marriage!
Reading these studies, I am totally depressed at how standard it has become for young women to adopt their new husband's name upon marriage. I wish the clock were turned back to a late-1970s moment where there was at least SOME consciousness of how degrading that name-changing practice is -- despite all the current justifications of "oh, well, I like his name better, it sounds better," etc. Or, "Oh, well, I kept my own name as a new middle name." Yuck. People giving up their names upon marriage? Just keep your own damn name!
And the business about kids is just a silly excuse. Flip a coin for the first kid, if you choose to have kids at all, and alternate from there on with any subsequent kids. Maintain some dignity, people! And I'm not trying to lecture women, here. No, I am trying to chastise the MEN mentioned in many of the previous comments who seem to expect their female fiances to change their names. YOU ARE RIDICULOUS! YOU ARE IDIOTS! GAH -- GROW UP!
I'm sorry, I rarely comment on this blog -- but this study made me furious.
I am a young-ish man. If I were to get married (as may happen soon in my own personal relationship), I would never EVER want to marry someone who would want to drop her own last name to take mine. It would suggest a total incompatability in life goals.
I've read all the silly justifications about "oh, I got my own last name from my father, so I might as well have a NEW last name from my husband, because I love him more than my dad." But -- seriously, it's been YOUR NAME for your whole life! And for all the talk on this blog about the respect for the rare circumstance of men who decide to change their last name upon marriage... jeez, I'd never change my name: it's MY NAME, after all!
Likewise, I would NEVER want to get married and have my new female spouse change her NAME! It's totally absurd. It would be, like, a total deal-breaker. It would suggest that she was after something totally different in life than me. Next thing, she'd be wanting to give up her career and settle into some totally sexist male-breadwinner / female-homemaker relationship. Lame!! Keeping own NAMES and CAREERS and IDENTITIES and stuff = much cooler marriage!
Reading these studies, I am totally depressed at how standard it has become for young women to adopt their new husband's name upon marriage. I wish the clock were turned back to a late-1970s moment where there was at least SOME consciousness of how degrading that name-changing practice is -- despite all the current justifications of "oh, well, I like his name better, it sounds better," etc. Or, "Oh, well, I kept my own name as a new middle name." Yuck. People giving up their names upon marriage? Just keep your own damn name!
And the business about kids is just a silly excuse. Flip a coin for the first kid, if you choose to have kids at all, and alternate from there on with any subsequent kids. Maintain some dignity, people! And I'm not trying to lecture women, here. No, I am trying to chastise the MEN mentioned in many of the previous comments who seem to expect their female fiances to change their names. YOU ARE RIDICULOUS! YOU ARE IDIOTS! GAH -- GROW UP!
I'm sorry, I rarely comment on this blog -- but this study made me furious.
I am a young-ish man. If I were to get married (as may happen soon in my own personal relationship), I would never EVER want to marry someone who would want to drop her own last name to take mine. It would suggest a total incompatability in life goals.
I've read all the silly justifications about "oh, I got my own last name from my father, so I might as well have a NEW last name from my husband, because I love him more than my dad." But -- seriously, it's been YOUR NAME for your whole life! And for all the talk on this blog about the respect for the rare circumstance of men who decide to change their last name upon marriage... jeez, I'd never change my name: it's MY NAME, after all!
Likewise, I would NEVER want to get married and have my new female spouse change her NAME! It's totally absurd. It would be, like, a total deal-breaker. It would suggest that she was after something totally different in life than me. Next thing, she'd be wanting to give up her career and settle into some totally sexist male-breadwinner / female-homemaker relationship. Lame!! Keeping own NAMES and CAREERS and IDENTITIES and stuff = much cooler marriage!
Reading these studies, I am totally depressed at how standard it has become for young women to adopt their new husband's name upon marriage. I wish the clock were turned back to a late-1970s moment where there was at least SOME consciousness of how degrading that name-changing practice is -- despite all the current justifications of "oh, well, I like his name better, it sounds better," etc. Or, "Oh, well, I kept my own name as a new middle name." Yuck. People giving up their names upon marriage? Just keep your own damn name!
And the business about kids is just a silly excuse. Flip a coin for the first kid, if you choose to have kids at all, and alternate from there on with any subsequent kids. Maintain some dignity, people! And I'm not trying to lecture women, here. No, I am trying to chastise the MEN mentioned in many of the previous comments who seem to expect their female fiances to change their names. YOU ARE RIDICULOUS! YOU ARE IDIOTS! GAH -- GROW UP!
(Though I'm still holding out hope that this study is proven to be bunk. Sigh.)
How are we supposed to know if you don't bother actually linking the study?
I always thought of keeping my last name, but I gave in when I got married because of pressure from my fiance' and other family. I had an uncle who said there is "something wrong with me" if I didn't take his name. Anyway, I got married, but it took several weeks to get a certified copy of the marriage certificate before I could even legally change my last name. In those few weeks, I got wedding gifts in the form of a check written out to Mrs. his first name-his last name. I didn't have any identification on me to cash the check so I had to wait. A few days after I got married, I rented a movie from Blockbuster video, and I signed the receipt with my maiden name because that was the name on the account. Of course, the husband was pissed, and I got yelled at for "disrespecting" our marriage vows even though the asshole knew I couldn't legally change it for a while. Anyway, flash forward 6 years, we're geting a divorce (no surprise there, huh?). We had no children and no property, so the divorce went through in a matter of weeks, and I took back my maiden name. Well, shortly after the divorce was final, I found out I was pregnant. I planned to give the baby my maiden name because we were divorced. Of course, ex-husband found out about it and demanded that I give the baby his name. My response: Fuck you, buddy! We're divorced and the baby gets my name! He was just livid especially if said baby would've been a boy. Anyway, he was threatening legal action if I didn't give the kids his name, blah, blah, blah. One of the reasons we got a divorce was because he had an affair in addition to being a big jerk. He wanted to be with this other woman so bad, and I was just suppose to just give my kid his last name just because? Hell, no. Anyway, I had a miscarriage, but I personally believe it was from all the stress that fucker was puting on me. OTOH, I was kind of relieved because I didn't have to deal with HIM anymore. I really doubt I want to get married again, but I'm not changing my name again if I do, and my kids get my name. And my current boyfriend knows this as well. Furtunately, he isn't as hung up on this name business like the ex-husband.
That is insane! I cannot believe that people like that still exist! I can't believe we are still having this conversation...who cares who takes who's name? Apparently 50% or respondents...
Ugh. I'm so sorry you had to go through that, virago, and so glad that you aren't in that marriage anymore!
"Ugh. I'm so sorry you had to go through that, virago, and so glad that you aren't in that marriage anymore!"
I totally agree!
Wow. Pretty everything I wanted to say has been said. My two cents: When I got married, I took my husband's name. However, on my social security card I kept my maiden name. Lol, so I have four names on my social security card. (Including my middle name.) I received a bit of flack for this, but oh wells. I love the fact that I have the option of choosing to do this. If said option were to be legally taken away, there would be hell to pay. (I promise I didn't mean to make a corny rhyme.)
I think the study is (unfortunately) pretty accurate. 815 is a sufficient sample size to get decent national representation; though as someone pointed out, non-landline coverage could be a bias in this sort of study, where the cell-phone only demographic might have a different view. But that's still only about 20% of the population, so including them could only change it by 10% or so.
I did change my name (and I didn't lose my identity!) But I can't imagine saying women "should." It's a personal decision. Period.
I can believe that many people think women should take a man's name, but that half of them think it should be a legal requirement? That's ridiculous. Whatever happened to the Land of the Free? Oh, right, that never applied to women anyway.
I never seriously considered changing my name when I got married two years ago. I did, however, give our daughter my husband's name, not mine. Our names end in the same last three letters, and they sound dumb together. Also, my stepson has his mother's last name, and I knew it was much more important to my husband that our daughter bear his name than it was to me. So the poor girl is stuck with my husband's last name (it's one sometimes used as an insult.)
While I certainly don't think that women should be legally required to take their husband's names, I have to admit I am a little tired of the assumption that you are a "bad feminist" if you do. My entire life I loathed my last name. My future husband had a last name that sounded much more pleasant when paired with my first name than my original last name. I happily changed it. My husband didn't care one way or another about my last name so that wasn't an issue.
I don't think I've "lost my identity", my identity is made up of so much more than my name. However, several fellow feminists have told me more than once that I shouldn't have changed my name, starting with one ill-mannered woman at the celebratory party my husband's parents' threw a month after we got married at the courthouse who announced loudly that she was a "good feminist" because she kept her original last name right after I mentioned to an elderly relative that I had changed mine. Beyond being incredibly boorish on her part, I just don't think that is true. Unfortunately, this is not the first time I've been on the receiving end of a name related rant from a "better" feminist than I.
Since when did feminism mean that women only had one choice? Maybe changing your name because it sounds better is slightly shallow (even people who don't know my original name comment positively about how memorable and attractive my "new" name is, which I can only think is a plus as a writer) but why should I have to go through life with a name I never liked or chose? I chose this one.
(Speaking very heteronormatively here, I realize) I do think a woman changing her name to her husband's when she marries--even if it's an informed choice on an individual level--perpetuates the idea that it's just what women do when they get married.
Because our choices aren't made in a vacuum.
Because the vast majority (something like 80-90% I remember reading) of (American) women do change their names when they marry.
Only a minority of men do the same. (I don't know what the rates are on both parties changing their names [e.g. hyphenating and then both taking the hyphenate].)
Until those numbers shift, I see a problem.
I certainly don't think changing one's last name makes someone a "bad feminist." Anymore than, say, wearing makeup or shaving one's legs makes one a bad feminist.
You can't always be an activist in everything that you do.
At the end of the day you simply have to make a choice that suits you as an individual, and makes you happy. Even if it's less than ideal on a societal level.
I just don't see why it is a statement against the idea that women have to take their husband's last name after marriage to keep my father's last name. Isn't that just validating my mother's choice to have the same name as my dad? By keeping it wouldn't I also be guilty of perpetuating the idea that children automatically get their father's last name?
Should I have changed my unwanted last name to my mom's "original" name? Oh wait, that was her father's last name. Unless your mother or grandmother et al changed her last name to something she made up from whole cloth, the vast majority of woman's last names are from men. So which man's name should I chose?
What about the argument that both partners should dispense with using the last names they are born with and pick an entirely new one to share when married? Or that each partner should pick an entirely new, unrelated name for themselves and which is different from their partners? Perhaps that would send a stronger message that women don't have to change their names to that of their husbands? But of course that would mean the woman would have to change her name...
While I am sure there are women who are somehow forced against their will into taking their husband's name (Which should make one wonder why one would marry such a man in the first place. If he is that controlling about a name, what is to come?), I think the vast majority of women do think about changing their names and make a choice even if they end up in that 70-80%. Perhaps they change because it is "easier" to explain, for their future children, easier to spell, to feel solidarity with their new spouse, to leave behind the forced upon name of their father etc. Maybe that thinking is antiquated and needs to change but I have yet to meet a single woman, no matter how apolitical, middle of the road or conservative that didn't think at least a bit about what it meant to change her name and then made a choice. Maybe it falls with in traditional norms but it is still a choice. I (along with most people) didn't have a choice when it came to my birth name but I have a choice now.
One might not agree that taking the husband's name is ideal and think it sends a negative message but other choices (most commonly hyphenation) aren't always practical. If I had hyphenated, I'd never fit my name on a form again. Not to mention how tiresome it would be spell out 20+ letters each time I gave my name. I couldn't even get people to spell my 4 letter original last name or my relatively common first correctly. The thought of having to spell out my first name and then two different and trickily spelled last names makes me want to bang my head against the wall. The fact is that having a single last name is easier. Unless there is some accepted single name alternative or the world's forms accept ever growing last names (her name + her husband's means their potential children have 2 names adding a 3rd and possibly a 4th when/if they marry and so on), there is only so much one can do.
I think perhaps what we need to do as a society is to think about other ways in which we have identity. My name is just a very tiny bit of who I am and what I do. I think making the best choices about what you as a woman need and want and inspiring others to do so is the most feminist thing you can do on a personal level. If someone wants to judge me because of my name, that tells me about their character and values, not mine.
Isn't that just validating my mother's choice to have the same name as my dad? By keeping it wouldn't I also be guilty of perpetuating the idea that children automatically get their father's last name?
I agree, that it's not ideal. Relatively little is.
But, in my opinion (mileage, as we know, varies), it's closer to ideal than for women to continually trade up the name they were born with for their new husband's.
And by the logic of us "having our father's last names," none of us--men or women--have our own last names.
We have "our fathers."
But for some reason these father's last names seem to stick to boys and not girls.
That deserves questioning.
And frankly, if you really don't like your name, why not change it before marriage?
And maybe this is something we need to make more readily available to people. Make the process of name changing a bit easier outside of the marital scope.
What about the argument that both partners should dispense with using the last names they are born with and pick an entirely new one to share when married? Or that each partner should pick an entirely new, unrelated name for themselves and which is different from their partners? Perhaps that would send a stronger message that women don't have to change their names to that of their husbands? But of course that would mean the woman would have to change her name...
Yes, but the man is also changing his name. (Or his father's name, if you will.)
I certainly see more equity and balance in both parties changing their name, whether it's hyphenation (Sam Smith and Joan Jones become Sam Smith-Jones and Joan Smith-Jones) or picking a new name or a combination made up of their previous ones.
It's not a one-sided deal where one party (the woman) changes her name and the man keeps and carries his on (because it just sticks to him better).
As to everything else, there's a nice post from SarahMC over here.
"Make the process of name changing a bit easier outside of the marital scope. "
In Australia the only time anyone gets to change their name without being charged for it is if a woman wants to change to her husband's name after marriage. Men don't get the same privilege, it's made harder for them. One or two of my male friends I know have been frustrated and annoyed by this.
In Australia the only time anyone gets to change their name without being charged for it is if a woman wants to change to her husband's name after marriage. Men don't get the same privilege, it's made harder for them.
Not surprising. There was a guy in California who had to go through court and several hundred dollars worth of fees in order to take his wife's name.
Men are supposed to be the power-brokers and heads of the household, of course.
How can they do that without labeling everything with their name? Ugh.
I've heard that it's hard for men to change their names after marriage than it is for women, but not in my state. I was listed on my marriage certificate with my maiden name while I husband was listed with his own name. I heard some states have a seperate place on the marriage certificate that states the name the wife will use after marriage, but not one for the husband or whatever. My marriage certificate didn't have any such place to put my married name. In fact, all I did to change my name was go to the social security administration, bank, etc, show them the certificate, and walla, it was done. My husband would've been able to automatically do the same thing if he was so inclined (he wasn't). I know a couple of men who took their wife's name, and they didn't have anymore trouble than I did, nor did they have to pay anything extra. The same with my divorce. I just requested that my name be changed in the divorce papers, and it was done. Interesting how this is such a big deal in other states.
In fact, all I did to change my name was go to the social security administration, bank, etc, show them the certificate, and walla, it was done.
Correction: I think I meant to say voila, it was done.
Anyway, I double checked with my county courthouse to see how hard it was in my state for the man to change his name automatically upon marriage, and it looks like I was right. He can change it automatically upon marriage just like a woman without paying any kind of extra fee. Nice to know my states more egalitarian that way. Unfortunately, not enough men want to actually change their names, but they expect their wives to.
I had thought of changing my name before I got married but couldn't decide what to change it to.
Something I made up? Some random stranger's name I picked out of the phone book? I am not a hero worshiper so I didn't want to rename myself after an author or political leader etc. Looking at family names was no help, most were very Eastern European and difficult to spell and pronounce and held no special meaning to me.
At least my husband's name is that of someone I love and chose to have be part of my family. It seemed silly to pick a name that has no meaning just to make a political statement that let's face it, I'd have to point out to people for them to notice.
The fact is that there isn't a law that says that women have to change their name. If we did, I would find it an issue that needed rectifying and with haste. However, these women are making their own choices for their own personal reasons. It is just as narrow minded to expect a woman not to change their name to that of their husband if she wants to or to insist that both parties change their names to something new or to hyphenate so they can make a political statement about the practice as it is to blindly expect all women to change their name.
I think what is important is what is going on in these marriages (is there equality? do both parties feel valued as individuals? is the woman seen as more than an extension of her husband?) than what name they chose to use. Not once have I been treated as anything less than equal to my husband despite my name change and I don't expect to. I am a strong, intelligent, independent woman and people see that, not my name. Our names don't make our marriages equal and balanced, how we act does.
Also, it is incredibly easy to change your name at any time and for any reason in the US. All you have to do is fill out a simple form. There is a fee which varies by location but there are also fees to get married, buy a house, adopt, own a dog, get divorced, and for just about every other legal transaction or licensing so I don't find it punitive in any way.
Perhaps you could lobby for a name change to be included in the marriage license fee for both men and women if it isn't already in your area. I know when we got married we both had to write down what our new names would be.
Count me as another who wants to know exactly how this study was carried out. I worked for several years in marketing research, which was the most stunningly dishonest business I've ever been involved in. Some of our "research" wasn't directly involved with marketing: our office carried out several studies on people's sexual habits, studies that were going to be used by psychologists. Naturally, the questionnaires were completely anonymous.
In marketing research, for those not familiar with it, the practice is to offer the "respondent" -- the person answering the questions -- a small amount of money to compensate for his or her time. This can range from a dollar or two for a five-minute survey to fifty dollars for a lengthy presentation.
Most surveys are not anonymous: we'd ask for the respondent's name and address and telephone number. Later the client -- the business for whom we were doing the survey -- would telephone a randomly selected sample of respondents, to make sure we weren't just making the surveys up.
Of course, we were making up at least a few, usually on the day before a survey had to finish, to close out a particular demographic group. "Can you SS a white female, 35-54, on the credit-card survey?" my boss would say. SS was the office's term for this: it originated when the home office asked him if the office was "pulling any shifty shit". If time was short, we'd fake surveys and hope that particular questionnaire wouldn't be drawn for a confirmation call.
But on anonymous surveys, there were no confirmation calls, so there was nothing to worry about. And the money we were supposed to give to the respondents stayed in the petty-cash fund.
So entirely anonymous surveys were entirely faked. I once filled out fifty two-page questionnaires about a particular brand of cheesy snacks (with a cartoon cat on the label). The survey on military recruitment ads was anonymous, so it was completed by the staff at our office.
And so were the surveys on sexual habits. Fifty computerized questionnaires, filled out by three teenagers and two sixty-plus retired ladies -- one of these last was a Mormon.
So I'd really like to look into the methodology of this survey.
From what I can tell, this was done by reputable researchers at a university based research center (indiana university, if I recall correctly.) It was presented at the American Statsitical Association, which generally has pretty high standards for research methods.
Market research may be full of shoddy methodology, but in general, most university based research is done with a fair amount of rigor.
I can see some potential flaws, as pointed out above. If it's an RDD of landlines, excluding the cell phone population could lead to some bias. But my estimates are that it couldn't have swung it more than 10 percentage points at the highest.
My husband and I BOTH hyphenated our last names, so we have the same hyphenated last name. People were really confused as to why on earth HE would change his last name...::fume:: I do kinda wish we just kept our names though. Also, I think maybe people who meet me just assume that I hyphenated, not my husband.
I REALLY don't understand women who change their last name's when they get married. I especially don't understand why some of my feminist friends did it...
Many of the postings on this page seem to reflect a general bafflement at why, in this day and age, a woman would change her last name. I seem to fit the profile of someone who would never change her name (27, live in Mass., very liberal, enrolled in a very liberal sociology doctoral program, would even consider myself a feminist), and yet I did.
Why? Well, I certainly wrestled with the decision for a while, especially because I felt like I was undermining the efforts of feminists before me. But in the end, here was my reasoning.
IDENTITY: I was shocked to see the author of the original post say of the prospect of adopting her fiancee's last name, "it's actively going out of my way to adopt someone else's identity." Really? I don't see taking your hubbie's name as necessarily sacrificing or subverting one's own identity -- there's a lot more that goes into my identity than that. And I believe having the same last name as your SO is a symbol that you're joined to another person in a significant way, which I appreciate and enjoy showing to the world. Similar idea as wedding rings, which used to only be worn by women of course.
HYPHENATION: I think hyphenated names are ugly (sorry if this offends) so that option was off the table for me.
KIDS: If the parents have different last names, what are the kids' surnames? The mom's? The dad's? Either way you're making a choice between two (hopefully) equal parenting partners.
CHANGING YOUR MIDDLE NAME: I wanted to keep my middle name and having two middle names seemed like it would be a hassle for the rest of my life.
Granted, there are a couple of things in my case that may have made the decision easier than others':
- I haven't published anything under my maiden name.
- I LIKE his last name better than mine and so does he.
- We've agreed that our first kid's middle name will be my maiden name.
In the end, the reasons above contributed to my decision. But how did I feel about undermining the accomplishments of the feminists' before me - my main concern? It seems to me that many women are not changing their names today because, in some groups of people at least, THAT is the right thing to do. To take your husband's name would be backwards, weak, subservient. Yet in some cases, the woman might PREFER to change her name, and so she should. I believe THIS is exercising free choice in the matter, and is what our feminist foremothers ultimately wanted. (Or maybe I'm wrong. Maybe unless all of us always refuse the change until no one thinks anything of it, as a society we'll never really get to where we want to be.)
Also, what's up with the James Bond girls-ish logo at the top? Have we reclaimed that sexist image by having them point at the sky?