why do people assume me and DH would have the same last name?

It's marriage itself that is oppressive to women from the point of view of certain feminists, not what women are named. Getting upset over what your name is is like getting upset over what the colour the ties on your straitjacket is.

People assume it because most women do change their name upon marriage.
It's therefore reasonable for them to assume this as the default position while accepting that the women may correct them.

It's no big deal, is it? Just correct people when they do it. Don't see what the fuss is about.

Nobody has to change their name, anyway; there's absolutely no reason to do so. It's personal preference.

I really don't understand changing name to partner's if unmarried, though. If you like traditional marriage-y stuff, get married.
Also, legally it means nothing. People aren't somehow legally married because they call themselves their dp's surname. I'm not suggesting that the people who have said they've done that here think that it does so please don't think that I am. Not at all-but there are people out there who are so dumb that they think that it does.
Just like a woman who is married who keeps her maiden is as married as one who takes her dh's.

I can understand feminism not liking marriage because of it being a patriarchal institution and robbing of women's individuality, but all this fuss over something that:
women don't HAVE to do as regards marriage itself e.g. being given away, taking dh's surname, I really do not get.

As for being an argument for registered partnerships, if these partnerships are legally same as marriage, why have two systems i.e. marriage and registered partnerships because people have problems with things they don't have to do like changing their name?

I know of a couple (friends of a friend) who both changed their name on marriage, not to double-barrel or to blend but just to a name they preferred. I think it did have a family connection but I don't remember what already.

His name was a teasing-in-the-playground kind of name, (similar teasability to being called Gaylord) so I can see why they didn't want to keep it for their children, but I don't know what was wrong with changing just to her name.

I know of two men who changed their surnames. One was a colleague of a friend (who double-barrelled his name, as did his wife) and the other was the ex-husband of a friend, they blended their names together to make a new surname when they got married. They both kept the blended surname when they divorced and indeed his subsequent wife and son both took the blended surname I think, certainly the son did because my friend used to get calls about him occasionally from people assuming she must be his mother.

It's an area with no right answer, but fortunately now people can more-or-less please themselves with little more than the inconvenience of people assuming they have a different surname to the one they actually do have (or, as I do occasionally, spontaneously be unable to find a colleague in the phone book at work because she has 'vanished' without trace). To me it would have been utterly bizarre to have changed my name when I got married; I would have no more considered it than I would changing my first name at the same time. Of course it is my father's surname, but to me it is mine. Equally many of my friends did change their name, considering the feminist and practical implications of so doing. Entirely their choice.

I wonder what people's reactions would be to a man who change his surname to his wife's. I think it happens occasionally in aristocratic circles but that's about it?

"people assume so because the majority of married people do have the same surname. You might not like that idea, but it is a fact. I would consider myself a feminist in lots of ways, but I chose to take my DH's surname as a token of us belonging together . It does not signify that I belong to him or have lost my identity. He could have equally have taken my surname. No big deal."

Same here. But we did get married over 30 years ago. In all honesty it didn't occur to me not to take my husband's name as a surname. I just find it easier this way as all of us have the same surname. Having a double barrelled name wouldn't have worked as my maiden name was three syllables and my married name is two. Also 30 years ago double barrelled names were considered pretentious.

I only know three people in RL who haven't changed their surnames, but admit to making the mistake of assuming they have taken their husband's name simply because the vast majority of people I know still do.

Vanfurgston - we have two children. Eldest has my name, youngest has dh's.

people assume so because the majority of married people do have the same surname. You might not like that idea, but it is a fact. I would consider myself a feminist in lots of ways, but I chose to take my DH's surname as a token of us belonging together . It does not signify that I belong to him or have lost my identity. He could have equally have taken my surname. No big deal.

It's interesting how many people say that, but I've yet to meet a man who did take his wife's surname.

I'm not sure that keeping the name you got from your father rather than changing it to be the same as your husband's and children's is a feminist act but I am interested to see what people think
*I can never quite get that argument. To my mind, my name is my name. Ok, so I may have the same surname as my dad - and there's another feminist argument there - but most men also have their father's surname and no one ever refers to it as their father's name and suggests they should change it.

We are not married and the boys have dp's surname. I did go through a phase of not liking this but ds1 is almost 7 now and it doesn't seem to matter. I gave ds2 a middle name from my family so he is named after both sides. I suppose there's no ideal solution really.*

This is a really interesting discussion. I'm wondering what those of you who kept your last name once married have done about your children's last name ( if you have them). In my experience of friends who keep their name, they have all given the children the father's last name, which in someways seems to highlight the gender inequality. If you give your child a double barreled last name, what do they do if they then get married? I'm not sure that keeping the name you got from your father rather than changing it to be the same as your husband's and children's is a feminist act but I am interested to see what people think.

Ok I am going to throw a real spanner in the works. I use both dh's surname and my surname and we are NOT MARRIED!! Just depends how I feel. We consider ourselves married for all intents and purposes. Any occasion that has an official form I will just fill in the part where it asks if you are known by any other names. So I use "my" name on first bit and "his" name on also know as.

vanfurgston, just if you decide to give the kids combined names, that you consider how they will get alphabetized. Often in English, we use the last listed family name, but in Spanish speaking countries it's the first listed family name that's most significant. Gabriel Garcia Marquez is properly listed under Garcia.

But remember, a rose by any other name would smell as sweet!

people assume so because the majority of married people do have the same surname. You might not like that idea, but it is a fact. I would consider myself a feminist in lots of ways, but I chose to take my DH's surname as a token of us belonging together . It does not signify that I belong to him or have lost my identity. He could have equally have taken my surname. No big deal.

Also, people tend to assume you do what they would do, or did. That's where most assumptions come from, I think.

And where I live, it's very Spanish, and it's common for couples to combine their names.

vanfurgston, I live in the States, recently married, have a career started well before meeting hubby, and most people assume that I did NOT change my name. I did change it, because it mattered to DH, as he is the last of his family, and I wanted to have the same names for all kids and family.

So I find it strange that you deal with the opposite! I will say that if I had known how pesky and bothersome it is to get a name changed, I may not have done it.

I did experiment with combining our names, but the results were laughable! One version sounded like a medical condition.

Also, I see no problem with changing ones name if that's what you want to do.

I wonder how you would feel about this one. I am not married to my son's father, nor do I intend to be, but he is my partner and we do live together. After putting up with son's new secondary school constantly referring to me as Mrs Mysurname verbally, and then finally in an email, I signed my reply
Cathycomehome (MISS - I am not married).

Maybe this was a bit rude, but I was irked by the assumption that I have given birth to a child and live with said child's father, therefore I must also have married him. Presumably, when they met my partner, had I not done this, they would have referred to him as Mr Myname. Which is my dad.

And I could've/should've used MS, I suppose, but Miss is easier for the children I work with, so that's what I mostly use.

I was referring back to the OP saying "there is always an Oh wen i correct them"

There's no reason for the person who wrongly assumed you had the same name to look all surprised and say "oh", because it's not that unusual. The assuming person is silly if they are surprised when their assumption was wrong.

its not at all silly Trills - how on earth will sexist assumptions about females joining male clans on marriage change if we don't challenge those sexist assumptions?

Every time we challenge an assumption about our name we raise awareness that it is perfectly possible to be married and keep our own name - there are plenty of people who still think it's not legal in some way [hshock]

No reason to go "oh" and look surprised though, that's silly.

They assume it because it is still more common to have the same last name than not.

If you have to make the assumption, it makes sense to do it in the way that is statistically most likely to be right.

I kept mine for all purposes, and a few people are surprised by it. About half my friends in real life have changed and half have kept their own names - don't know anyone who's gone the route of being one thing at work and another at home. DH occasionally gets referred to as Mr DogIncident, but doesn't mind. One or two elderly relatives can't get their heads round it and refer to me as Mrs Hisname, but we don't see much of them so it's not worth making a fuss about.

I find it's very handy for dealing with cold callers - if they ask for Mr DogIncident or Mrs Hisname, we know it's no-one we want to talk to!