Changing last name after marriage: Who takes whose?

[Deranged Nasat]

So of course women think about it. You're underestimating them if you think that they don't.

I wasn't talking about women, I was talking about everyone. But, of course, I very much appreciate your input. I acknowledge I may have misjudged the degree to which other people in general tend to think about this, and indeed issues in general. I know I do, but most of the people I know haven't. Hey, perhaps its our age? Maybe many of my friends haven't yet thought about it due to their youth.

 

[JustKate]

^ And I yours. Natch.

I expect women think more about it than men. I could be wrong there, but my guess would be that unless a man has it brought to his attention somehow or other, he doesn't think about it until he needs to. But women start thinking about it long before then, in my experience.

 

[RJDiogenes]

The fact that they haven't talked about it to you doesn't mean that they haven't thought about it, and the fact that so many end up doing the traditional thing also doesn't mean they haven't thought about it. They have, they have.

I have no doubt that more people than ever are thinking about it, but it's definitely Human nature to conform. And I'll bet that for most of the people who think about it that the conclusion is foregone.

Have either of you changed your name or any reason at all? If you haven't, you don't know what it's like. I'm not saying it's necessarily bad, but it's odd. So of course women think about it. You're underestimating them if you think that they don't.

Again, more do than before. But in the past-- and as we're constantly shown, the past is still with us-- women considered it a point of pride to take a man's name, because it equated with social standing. That's why children born "out of wedlock" were said to "have no name."

I expect women think more about it than men. I could be wrong there, but my guess would be that unless a man has it brought to his attention somehow or other, he doesn't think about it until he needs to. But women start thinking about it long before then, in my experience.

Well, there you go. Why do more women think about it than men? Men aren't expected to change their names-- and most will just assume that their wives will change theirs.

ut, as you say, it's normally the woman who compromises, because it's expected of her. And the reason for that is that women were once property, and then were second-class citizens; that may have mostly changed, but this tradition is a surviving element of those times.

And the Volkswagen was developed by Nazi Germany, but that doesn't mean that people who buy them are White Supremacists. So what?

Uhhh.... That's not exactly a legitimate comparison. There's nothing intrinsically Nazi about a Volkswagen; it's just another model of car. The name-changing tradition exists solely because women were born and raised to be baby-making slaves.

 

[JustKate]

^ Oh, it does not - or it is, at the very least, not nearly that simple. The name-changing tradition came about because people started forming families, and because this happened in a patriarchal society or societies, the women joined the men's families (as did any children of the unions) instead of the other way around. That women didn't have the same rights as men is undeniable. That all men throughout the ages (and actually, last names are a fairly rencet innovation, in terms of human history, in most cultures) have thought of them only as "baby-making slaves" is deniable.

Names are not necessarily about ownership, you know. They are about family.

Edit: And anyway, if it does come directly from that "slave" tradition you talk about (and I think it would be pretty hard to prove one way or another), there is, in your words, "nothing intrinsically" slave-like about the tradition. It's only slave-like if you think of it that way, and since most women who take their husband's name don't, where's the "slave" part?

 

[RJDiogenes]

The part where they had little to no rights, no property, were given away by their fathers, or sold, had to obey their husband's orders, were subject to his every him, et cetera, and so on, ad infinitum.

 

[JustKate]

^ And yet much of what you're talking about is prior to the advent of family names. Really. The history of the subjugation of womankind predates that of last names by millennia. So why are the names themselves such a symbol for you?

 

[RJDiogenes]

Prior and after, and in cultures with different naming conventions. That doesn't matter. What matters is, specifically, the reason that custom came into being was that women were property and second-class citizens. It's not just a symbol for me, it's the original meaning of the symbol.

 

[JustKate]

Well, all I can say is that even if you're right (and I don't think you're wrong, exactly, but you are at best over-simplifying), is that's not what it symbolizes to me, a person who's done the name-change thing (actually, I sort of mostly did the name-change thing - I still use my maiden name at work). At all. And I'm pretty sure that's not what it symbolizes to most women who do it.

If that's what it symbolizes to you, so be it. But that's not what it means to most of us. Isn't its symbolic meaning now more important than whatever it symbolized in 1757 or or 1822?

 

[Kestra]

The fact that they haven't talked about it to you doesn't mean that they haven't thought about it, and the fact that so many end up doing the traditional thing also doesn't mean they haven't thought about it. They have, they have.

I have no doubt that more people than ever are thinking about it, but it's definitely Human nature to conform. And I'll bet that for most of the people who think about it that the conclusion is foregone.

You know, I think you'd be surprised. I have this conversation (well not this exact one!) with the brides that are my clients, and I'm continually surprised at how much thought each of them puts into it. Even my most fundamental conservative religious brides have looked at me and said "I really don't know what I'm going to decide." It's not a foregone conclusion.

Human nature to conform, yes. And many of them do end up taking their husband's last name. But I've seen the back and forth, and I've seen the decision go in a variety of directions.

You're coming off a bit ... patronizing? I'm sure that's not the right word. I just felt the need to post because it seems like you do not appreciate or believe the actual thoughts that go into this process for most women.

 

[Marie1]

Taking his name... no hyphens, no... whatever. I'm dropping this last name!

I may just marry some random guy named _____ Smith for that very reason...

 

[RJDiogenes]

If that's what it symbolizes to you, so be it. But that's not what it means to most of us. Isn't its symbolic meaning now more important than whatever it symbolized in 1757 or or 1822?

Perhaps, but it's still people giving up a part of themselves, and it's still mostly women.

Human nature to conform, yes. And many of them do end up taking their husband's last name. But I've seen the back and forth, and I've seen the decision go in a variety of directions.

But does that mean that they think it through and decide, or that they really don't want to do it, but decide to avoid the trouble and just go along?

You're coming off a bit ... patronizing? I'm sure that's not the right word. I just felt the need to post because it seems like you do not appreciate or believe the actual thoughts that go into this process for most women.

I appreciate it and believe it, but women are people just like everybody else. Most will go along with what is expected of them. We're living in a transitional time now, so more of them than ever will feel empowered to do what they really want. But the majority of women still take their husband's name; I suspect that in a perfect world, it would be a small fraction.

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

Again, you continue to read your own prejudices into what others are trying to tell you. Just because YOU have such a problem with the concept of someone changing their name does NOT mean that it means the same thing to every man or woman! In a perfect world, everyone (both women AND men) would be free to choose according to their sincerely-held beliefs, not badgered and belittled by others because they don't change their name OR because they do. Both sorts of condemnation are equally discriminatory. The fact that you seem to give no recognition to that is what is coming off as patronizing.

You say that the name is part of the self. And yet you have seen people here in this thread, myself included, who have stated they feel no such attachment to parts of their names, or even actively dislike them. For me, it would be a case of taking on a preferable alternative. What I would "give up" is not something I regard as a part of self. My first name, like it or not, is the one I feel a true attachment to. But the rest...not much. If I do change my name, it would be my chance to CHOOSE an alternative that I liked better. NOT something forced upon me.

 

[RJDiogenes]

In a perfect world, everyone (both women AND men) would be free to choose according to their sincerely-held beliefs, not badgered and belittled by others because they don't change their name OR because they do. Both sorts of condemnation are equally discriminatory. The fact that you seem to give no recognition to that is what is coming off as patronizing.

Except that's exactly what I'm saying.

You say that the name is part of the self. And yet you have seen people here in this thread, myself included, who have stated they feel no such attachment to parts of their names, or even actively dislike them. For me, it would be a case of taking on a preferable alternative. What I would "give up" is not something I regard as a part of self. My first name, like it or not, is the one I feel a true attachment to. But the rest...not much. If I do change my name, it would be my chance to CHOOSE an alternative that I liked better. NOT something forced upon me.

People are always free to change their names if they don't like them. They don't need marriage for that.

 

[JustKate]

Nerys explained in an earlier post why she didn't feel she could do that, RJ. She doesn't want to hurt her parents, and she believes that getting married is the only way she could jettison her name without doing so...

Which just goes to show that names are complicated, and that's because families are complicated. Heck, life is complicated. Names are affiliated with lots of things: self identification, family identification, ethnic identification, and so on. And yet to you, it all comes down to "self." But it's not that simple.

The thing that strikes me about your replies - all of them - is that you are concentrating on what is being lost: that birth name. But something is also gained, isn't it? An affiliation with another family, a family you weren't born into - not only the family that you're marrying into, but also the family that you and your spouse are creating together.

That's how I look at it, anyway. That's why I kept my birth name as a middle name - I'm a part of two families now, not just one, and that's what those names symbolize to me.

And I have to disagree that there is that much pressure to follow the traditional route - at least I never felt that much. Some, sure, but so what? Assuming your families don't freak out, it really isn't particularly hard these days to keep your own name, and I am speaking from personal experience since I have actually been married twice. During my first marriage, I didn't change my name. (In retrospect, I wonder if it was partly because I just wasn't that crazy about my first husband's family?) I made a different decision when I married for the second (and final) time. So I've done it both ways, both ways have their problems and their benefits.

You apparently see no benefits to changing, other than fitting in. All I can say is that in at least some cases, you're wrong.

 

[Deckerd]

I didn't take my husband's name because it's Irish and I'm Scottish. He doesn't care. 20 years later we're still happy.

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

Nerys explained in an earlier post why she didn't feel she could do that, RJ. She doesn't want to hurt her parents, and she believes that getting married is the only way she could jettison her name without doing so...

Yeah...the one time I expressed displeasure with it, I could definitely tell I'd hurt some feelings.

 

[JustKate]

^ Yes, I expect so. Because names are complicated! Maybe they shouldn't be, but they are.

 

[RJDiogenes]

Nerys explained in an earlier post why she didn't feel she could do that, RJ. She doesn't want to hurt her parents, and she believes that getting married is the only way she could jettison her name without doing so...

And that's fine, but that's one person's decision. Not everybody would make that decision or have that issue. All else being equal, people are free to change their names; that's not relevant to the issue of marriage.

The thing that strikes me about your replies - all of them - is that you are concentrating on what is being lost: that birth name. But something is also gained, isn't it? An affiliation with another family, a family you weren't born into - not only the family that you're marrying into, but also the family that you and your spouse are creating together.

No, I understand that; what I'm concentrating on is that in the majority of cases, still, it is the woman who is assumed, expected or pressured to change her name. Not the man. And changing to another name is not an affiliation, it's an absorption (hyphenating could be an affiliation, if both do it). And very few people make up a new name to represent the new family. Mostly it falls on the woman.

And I have to disagree that there is that much pressure to follow the traditional route - at least I never felt that much.

And yet these pressures do exist; otherwise Nerys wouldn't feel badly about wanting to change her name. It wouldn't be a problem.

You apparently see no benefits to changing, other than fitting in. All I can say is that in at least some cases, you're wrong.

I'm sure there are people who legitimately find benefits to it; my only points are that the tradition comes from a bad place originally and is sexist in that it is still mostly an expectation of the woman.

 

[Kestra]

Human nature to conform, yes. And many of them do end up taking their husband's last name. But I've seen the back and forth, and I've seen the decision go in a variety of directions.

But does that mean that they think it through and decide, or that they really don't want to do it, but decide to avoid the trouble and just go along?

Honestly? They think it through and decide. Maybe they're secretly going home and fretting over it. But in the conversations I have with my clients, none of them have talked of it as "avoiding trouble." In fact, it's quite a pain to change one's last name, even with marriage! If someone wanted to avoid trouble they'd keep their name.

You're coming off a bit ... patronizing? I'm sure that's not the right word. I just felt the need to post because it seems like you do not appreciate or believe the actual thoughts that go into this process for most women.

I appreciate it and believe it, but women are people just like everybody else. Most will go along with what is expected of them. We're living in a transitional time now, so more of them than ever will feel empowered to do what they really want. But the majority of women still take their husband's name; I suspect that in a perfect world, it would be a small fraction.

Maybe? I suspect that many women enjoy taking their husband's last names for a variety of reasons and would continue to do so even without any pressure. I know that I felt pressure not to change my last name, if anything. Yet I decided to.

Actually, that's something. You talk about what is expected of women. Many women would probably tell you that they feel pressure from their peers to keep their name.

I dunno, I wish I could express myself to you better or I had some statistics to show you, or that you could see the conversations I have with my clients. Maybe my experiences aren't representative of women as a whole? Oh well. This conversation with you is bumming me out.

 

[RJDiogenes]

Honestly? They think it through and decide. Maybe they're secretly going home and fretting over it. But in the conversations I have with my clients, none of them have talked of it as "avoiding trouble." In fact, it's quite a pain to change one's last name, even with marriage! If someone wanted to avoid trouble they'd keep their name.

I don't mean paperwork trouble, I mean trouble with spouse and/or family.

Actually, that's something. You talk about what is expected of women. Many women would probably tell you that they feel pressure from their peers to keep their name.

I'm sure that's very true in some peer groups; but that would still be the minority.

This conversation with you is bumming me out.

Why?