Marriage and changing one's surname.

[Finn]

My mother kept her maiden name. She says that while my dad's surname is nice, it's not her name.

My girlfriend said that if we will get there, she'd rather take my surname since her surname is fairly common and my surname isn't that common (it has other variants that are much more common).

 

[Sledder]

I am an unmarried woman and I would NOT take my husband's last name.

I am proud of my surname. I have researched my family tree and the name has become to mean a lot to me.

As someone else who has done a lot of family tree research I've got to point out that had your decision to not take your husbands last name been made by one or more of your ancestors then the last name that means so much to you wouldn't be associated with you at all...

That's not a hindrance to genealogical research in these here parts and I can count on one hand the women I know who have taken their husbands name. In fact the way people carry both their parents surnames makes it easier to do research because it's a lot more specific, specially when it comes to people with common names.


What I don't get is that I come from one of the most male chauvinist cultures on Earth and we have such a non uber patriarchal naming tradition. The father's surname still goes first but at least we give props to the mom's side as well.

How do you deal with the situation of surnames doubling in length every generation? You must at some point drop some names.

 

[trampledamage]

I want to marry a Douglas. They have the most awesome tartan.

My family (ie, my father's line) are part of the Bucannan clan, we have a very funky tartan

Buchanan.

Sorry - I do know that, I just wasn't paying attention to what I was typing.

 

[Neeka Keet]

As someone else who has done a lot of family tree research I've got to point out that had your decision to not take your husbands last name been made by one or more of your ancestors then the last name that means so much to you wouldn't be associated with you at all...

That's not a hindrance to genealogical research in these here parts and I can count on one hand the women I know who have taken their husbands name. In fact the way people carry both their parents surnames makes it easier to do research because it's a lot more specific, specially when it comes to people with common names.


What I don't get is that I come from one of the most male chauvinist cultures on Earth and we have such a non uber patriarchal naming tradition. The father's surname still goes first but at least we give props to the mom's side as well.

How do you deal with the situation of surnames doubling in length every generation? You must at some point drop some names.

Let me give you an example, let's say my father's name was Robert Smith Jones and my Mother's name was Mary Stephens Clark. When they marry they become the Smith - Clark family. Their children would be named that. Michael Smith Clark or Jenny Smith Clark.

Little Michael Smith Clark marries Shelley Thompson Evans and their family unit is referred to as the Smith - Thompson family, their children receiving that surname. So on and so forth ad nauseum.

 

[Sledder]

Well that works as long as there are clear rules as to which surname you take and it doesn't end up as Michael Smith Clark Thompson Evans Jones Black

 

[Neeka Keet]

Well that works as long as there are clear rules as to which surname you take and it doesn't end up as Michael Smith Clark Thompson Evans Jones Black

The rules are pretty clear on what you can or cannot do. The above is most definitely a no no.

 

[Daneel]

Well, thanks for the responses people. This has been an informative thread.

I didn't expect to get much of a response from the gay community, but it's interesting that a few gay men seem to think that there could be some surname-taking, one way or the other, if they get married. Intriguing... As I've stated, I am of the opinion that this tradition is, in heterosexual marriage, a reminder of the unequal treatment women have received throughout history, and how they are still often marginalized. Obviously, that wouldn't be the case in a same-sex marriage, so what would a name-change mean there? I guess it goes back to the idea that some have expressed about having a common name for "family unity". Well, in any kind of marriage, I could appreciate that more than viewing one partner as less equal to the other, but I still think the custom is an outdated one (and unfair to the woman since, family unity or not, it almost always is the man's name that is chosen to represent the family).

The results are interesting... although perhaps not too surprising. It seems that there are a lot of people in marriages where the wife took the husband's surname -- not unexpected, as I find that is still quite common with married couples I know.

The responses from unmarried people have been informative: it would appear that a significant amount of men still want their potential wives to take their last name -- about equal to the amount of men that don't have a preference (and significantly more than the few men who absolutely wouldn't want their wife to take their surname).

Amongst women, it seems there are a fair number who wouldn't want to take their potential husband's name (although there are a few who are undecided on the matter), a bit more than the number of women who do want to take their husband's name.

I'm curious: has this ever been an issue for anyone? A few people here have told some stories on the subject, but is there anyone else? Married people, was there any disagreement on this topic before you were married? Single men who would want their wife to take their name -- what if they didn't want to? Would it be a deal-breaker? Women who don't want to take their husband's name -- ever met any opposition on the matter?

Do tell!

 

[NCC1701]

I'm neutral about which spouse does or does not change surname, assuming either does at all. I do wonder what happens with a child's surname when neither spouse changes surname. Do the parents just pick one of the surnames? Do the surnames become combined and hyphenated? What if this were to continue over multiple generations? I can imagine someone having a surname like Metzger-Dodsworth-Okragly-Roberts-Krause-Hoffman-Buckley-Dickens.

If my girlfriend and I get married and have kids but she doesn't change her name, our kids would have a 5 word sentence as a last name, as I'm Dutch and therefore have a 3 word-long last name, and her parents aren't married and they combined and hyphenated their last names to form her last name. So poor kids . That's assuming she didn't change her name, but I don't see us torturing our children in that way lol, it's already bad enough for both of us having to spell our names for other people!

Oh, and I voted for I am an unmarried man, and it doesn't matter to me what last name my spouse chooses to go by.

 

[RJDiogenes]

It probably wouldn't be a deal breaker in and of itself if a woman wanted to change her name to mine, but i can easily see how it could be part of an overall mindset that would make us incompatible.

 

[Miss Chicken]

I think, in this day and age, a woman has a right to her own identity and why should that identity change because she marries? To me changing my name would be saying 'who you are now is not good enough' instead you have to be able to be instantly identified as this man's wife, or this child's mother.

The fact that at least one modern society where the woman has never taken her husband's name (Icelandic society) shows that a woman having her husband's name doesn't need to be important. You don't find Icelandic men upset because their wife and their children don't have the same 'last name' as them but then Icelandic men usually grow up with names different from their parents.

In believe that in Malaysia the most common name form is also using a personal name followed by a patronym (about the only ethnic group in Malaysia with surnames are the Chinese). In Malaysia a woman doesn't change her name when she marries.

Surnames didn't even come in existence in Europe until about the 14th century. In Finland surnames didn't become compulsory until 1921. Up to then people in West Finland tended to use the name of the farm they lived on as their last name. It wasn't compulsory for women in Finland to take their husband's surname until 1930 and up to then many women in Eastern Finland just used the feminine form of their father's surname. It ceased to be compulsory for a Finnish woman to take her husband's name in 1885.

Icelandic,Finnish and Malaysian families don't/didn't lack a sense of family unity because they didn't have surnames or because they wives had different last name from their husbands.

 

[Vulcan Princess]

I don't know how I missed this thread the first time around, but I just wanted to say that you rock, Daneel! I wish more men had your attitude about names.

I'm not married, but if I do marry, I still want to keep my name. It's not just my father's name, it's my name. I've had it my whole life and it's a part of who I am. I don't want to have to give that up just because I've found someone to spend the rest of my life with.

 

[Daneel]

Thanks Vulcan Princess! I wondered if my pimping this in the other, more recent thread on the same issue would result in some more responses within my old thread. Glad I left the poll open indefinitely.

I'm also glad to see you appreciate my attitude about names VP (though it's unfortunate that it's rare enough to even merit appreciation). I guess I've just always been open-minded about things like this... plus the idea of being traditional has never really appealed to me.