To not understand why double barrel surnames are so wrong/bizarre to some people?

Do tell me what class I'm in as I'm soon to be an unmarried parent. I'm intrigued?

It literally comes down to one simple question. Would you rather give your adult DC options, or would you rather enforce patriarchy on them since birth?

Err.. no it doesn't! For example you could choose a new family surname or choose maternal surname

My kids have two surnames (no hyphen). When they get to the age where they want to have kids or get married or whatever they can make their own choices. If they want to drop a name or change it to Smith I don't care because they will be making the decision for themselves. I know a few Portuguese families who have more than two surnames as well as Chilean and Spanish families where they either follow the tradition of keeping the male surname for their children or are now starting to do their own thing. Nobody is massively confused in lots of other naming cultures which are often a lot more complex than two surnames.

Indeed! I hadn't read much of the thread in detail, but chuckled when I saw this.

I do, personally, happen to think it's a big issue. It's just one more social indication as to how men's identities are valued, as is 'passing down the family name', whereas women's (in the UK at least) don't matter. It's quite okay for them to relinquish their own family identity and become an adjunct to a man on marriage.

I've lost count of the number of comments on MN that a woman's family name is deemed to be her father's name, without acknowledgement that if the mother adopted that name on marriage then it's her name too.

I have a very large list of things I consider to be 'small stuff'; the kind of thing you don't sweat. This is actually quite important. Calling someone by their correct name is about as basic a courtesy as you can really get.

I double barrelled my sons name with my surname and my partners. We aren't married and I wanted to carry on my surname, have since met school mums who also aren't married who have automatically given their children the fathers surname. It hadn't even occurred to them to use their own surname.
I particularly find it weird if people question it, I'm the one who grew and gave birth to the child, I think I should be able to pass on my name!

Every "DC" has options. You can change your name to whatever you want.

So forced patriarchal traditions are better than giving adults a choice in what their own name should be? Okay....

Once again, this is a false dichotomy. Why do you keep parroting it?

I've just read about the Spanish system. I can see it avoids multiple names but it only allows for the the name from maternal side to remain for 1 generation.

It's not a legal requirement, nowadays also in Spain you can choose which names to keep or ditch.

Yanbu

Its misogyny plain and simple.

I judge anyone who would judge a double barrelled name. I have no time for the faux ignorance about what do you do when they get married... or claims its pretentious.... absolute bollocks! its disingenuous and merely a ruse to cover their misogyny.

😂
The same way couples now decide which name(s) will be ditched? By discussion and their preference?
Those are two totally normal names btw. Imagine having a fit over someone being called Smith-Jones.

This

The time for you to have posted that was before you treated us to several paragraphs of batshit about how pretentious you think it is. Someone who doesn't think it's a big issue would not have done that.

How will they decide which names are ditched?

Well guess they just have to figure it out, it's their name so their decision. Why would I better placed to choose which names of their 2 parents to ditch? Maybe they would prefer to use my name over DH's and I don't even give them the option?

Thank you for that intelligent, insightful, considered contribution (and complete waste of column inches). I'm sure other MN users really appreciate it.

👏👏👏

I live in Norway, in DH’s (Norwegian) family it’s common to have your last name double barrelled without a hyphen with wife’s surname first then husband’s surname.

This then continues down the line, so my DSs are Jones Bloggs now but if one got married to a Jane Smith Harrison their name will become Smith Bloggs. If we had a DD that married John Smith Harrison their name would be Jones Harrison.

Hard to explain concisely but works well in practice and is so common here people don’t bat an eyelid…varies a lot whether people bother using both surnames though unless it’s official business!

I married a man with a double barrelled name. He is the 5th generation of that name so not a new creation either. The ancestor who doubled it up was a Victorian who needed a more interesting surname than Smith. I think he already had his mother's maiden name as a middle name (so that's not a knew thing either)

Looking at the family tree one of his brother's children also double barrelled the smith.

I changed my name on marriage and took his DB. Keeping my own name wasn't a big deal for me.

Our kids have the same DB surname. Zero issues and tbh most people either assume we're not married or that my maiden name was one of them.

I've just read about the Spanish system. I can see it avoids multiple names but it only allows for the the name from maternal side to remain for 1 generation. It still favours the male line for naming.

I find it pretentious tbh

I don't buy for a second that they believe any such thing, any more I believe those who trot out the stupid platitude 'your husband's name is your LEGAL name!' are really under any illusion that this is the case. Why else would they have to provide documentary evidence to change their names on marriage, whilst women who keep theirs adopt the default legal position and need to do precisely nothing?

This is called being willfully obtuse. It's done deliberately to make a cheap point against any woman who refuses, even in this small way, to bow to convention. Because how dare we require the basic courtesy of expecting to keep our own names, and to pass them onto our children?

Another interesting thing. IME, those who object to this effrontery of social convention have usually been other women.

All of my friends when they discuss(ed) marriage had the conversation of “what to do with our names?” - double barrel, some
fun merging of the two names into one (surprisingly common), man takes woman name, etc. My children will have the exact same conversation with their spouses when they grow up and get married, only with more options to choose from. I somehow think they’ll have the common sense to avoid a quadruple-barrelling scenario…

Taking the mans name is no longer the default among the younger generation (20s/30s), as much as the older generation might mock and find it ~confusing~. Your views are outdated. And so childrens’ names follow suit.

I don't have feelings either way about what other people call their kids, but I do see double barreling as a class marker. Whereas in the past, it signified "posh" now I feel it's the opposite. It suggests unmarried parents, which of course is a class marker in itself.

So you want to be able to preserve your name and your husbands name - but you expect everyone else down the line to ditch some names?

It's pretentious and quite honestly, I just think it's totally naff. If you want to keep your name, keep it. But all this nonsense of the man taking on the wife's name and then inflicting some double barrelled nonsense on the kids is just madness.

I actually do know a Miss Smith-Jones and a Mr Ellis-Parker. Seriously wft. So they'll become Mr and Mrs Ellis-Parker-Smith-Jones? How will they decide which names are ditched?

If you can't see why it's blinking ridiculous, no help for you!

Why don't people just pick an entirely new surname and both of you have a new surname if taking the male name is such a problem?