Syndicate
Special Thanks To...
The following organizations were early supporters of Mensactivism.org, and we thank them for their support. If you'd like to trade links with us, see our Mensactivism.org supporters page.
'Why should married women change their names? Let men change theirs'
Submitted by Mastodon on Mon, 2013-03-11 03:18
Article here. Excerpt:
'Allow me to suggest an even stronger push: If it's important to you that your family all share a last name, make it the wife's. Yes, men, that means taking your wife's name. Or do what this guy did and invent a new name with your wife. And women, if the man you're set to marry extols the virtues of sharing a family name but won't consider taking yours? Perhaps ask yourself if you should be marrying someone who thinks your identity is fundamentally inferior to his own.
The suggestion that men change their names may sound unfair given everything I just wrote about the value of your name and identity, and the psychological impact of growing up in a world where your own name for yourself is impermanent. But men don't grow up with that sense of psychological impermanence. They don't grow up under the shadow of several thousand years of gender-based discrimination. So if you'd rather your family all shared a name, it actually makes much more sense to make it the woman's. Or we can embrace a modern vision of family where individuals form social and legal bonds out of love and loyalty, instead of defining family as a group coalesced under one male figurehead and a singular name.'
- Log in to post comments
Comments
Always thought it was dumb
Well, not always. Not until I reached a certain age, when the topic was likely to become relevant. At first I never thought to ponder the tradition of a wife taking her husband's name. But really, it's kind of an outdated thing, at least for western societies.
First, you're more likely to get divorced than stay married. So why bother changing your name only to place yourself in a position of having to change it back after you become an ex-whatever. Some states in the US make it easy to revert to your original name while others require you to get it changed via a formal legal process. In any case, I ask: why bother? It's a hassle.
As for the kids, try this: the boys' last name is their father's while the girls' is their mother's. Simple enough. Or, if it's a same-sex couple and they have different last names, they can flip a coin. Or, alternate last names: first kid gets partner 1's last name, second kid gets partner 2's last name, and so on. Though these days, most cpls, homo- or heterosexual, are not likely to exceed two kids. Too expensive.
Or, you can completely forego dealing w/ this issue entirely by neither marrying nor having kids. The best way to solve some problems is to avoid them entirely, and whether or not you get married or reproduce is entirely up to you.
Family unity is a valid reason
Couples should decide for themselves, but when having children I think it get's more important to share a surname. Hyphenating names are not a good idea because what if a child with a hyphenated name, marries a person with a hyphenated name, would their children's surnames then have multiple hyphens??
Marriage is supposed to be about doing what is best for the family not about what is best for an individual. I do believe sharing a last name is a reflection of family unity. IMO, at some point there has to be some order to the "classification" (I see surnames as a way of classifying who belongs to which family)
The woman who wrote this article thinks every married women who has changed her name to her husband's has caved. She sees it as his identify being superior to her's. That's fine, if that is how she interprets it for HERSELF. but I don't appreciate her defining it that way for me. I have not caved in to my husbands demands. I think of us as one family, not a group of individuals. Beside nothing stops me from using my maiden name when the situation seems fitting, like running in to an old classmate. I often use my maiden name when I am performing a role for my dad's company so others can identify who I am. But when I am with my husband and kids, I definitely want to be identified as one family.
Imagine what it is like writing Christmas cards or invitations when both the families (sender and receiver) all have different surnames for the wife, husband and children.
If family unity is not a valid reason and it is more about individual identity, then wouldn't every adult just make up a surname (wouldn't want to share one with your parent) and then make up a new one as each child was born, so each sibling has a unique surname? That sounds crazy to me.
P.S.
I realize the article suggest the husband change his name to the wife's. That's fine, but traditionally it has not been this way. It is like changing your filing system at work for no need There is also nothing wrong with leaving things the way it has been for centuries.
I see the attitude typical of feminist. They do not want to be seen as the weaker sex, and they will not subscribe to any tradition where they are in second place. But they are completely ignoring nature. Feminist (and perhaps some MRA's) may not agree with what I say next, but really there can only be one "head of the household" especially when children are in the picture. Co-leaders don't often work out well. That is why we have one president and not two co-presidents.
excellent idea!
as if women aren't complaining to everyone who will listen about how a good man is hard to find (or vice versa), and how men won't commit, and how they won't grow up and so on and on. now feminists want women to not only get these young wild country boys to the altar of submission, they want them to insist that these men take the woman's name as well. yeah, that'll get 'em there.
this is rich. you can always count on feminists for a good belly laugh. thanks gals. i needed that.