Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Amal Alamuddin has changed her name professionally

490 replies

EhricLovesTheBhrothers · 14/10/2014 07:12

I'm actually disappointed. Her choice blah blah but honestly. Successful women who change their names professionally always strike me as either stupid or coerced and I'm sure that's unfair I'm not really but honestly why be so committed to the concept of the obliteration of the unmarried self that you allow it to impact on your professional reputation and renown?

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
ZombiePuffinsAreREAL · 24/10/2014 20:12

And yet, you keep coming back Smile

mjmooseface · 24/10/2014 19:48

grimbletart - It's not like I was looking around the Feminism pages. It was on the right hand side of the Mumsnet homepage where 'Discussions of the Day' are put. I clicked, commented, wished I hadn't bothered.

It wasn't until after I'd commented that I realised it was a 'Women's rights' topic of discussion.

amothersplaceisinthewrong · 22/10/2014 18:13

Brand Beckham
Brand Clooney

Though I did think Lawyers never changed their name professionally.

Maybe she just hates Almamuddin and wants a more western sounding name.

grimbletart · 22/10/2014 18:04

mj - it says Topics Feminism/Women's rights chat in large letters at the top of each page.

mjmooseface · 22/10/2014 17:37

You're right, MrsBuffyCockhead. I shall go elsewhere. I didn't realise this was on a feminism board, or I'd've never commented in the first place!

Chunderella · 20/10/2014 19:25

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Chunderella · 20/10/2014 18:25

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MrsBuffyCockhead · 20/10/2014 18:11

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Iggi999 · 20/10/2014 17:54

So when does a woman's choice become a woman's issue in your opinion?

mjmooseface · 20/10/2014 17:50

It's not women's issues you're discussing... It's A woman's personal decisions. Her decisions to make. Her life. Her name. Her marriage.

I was replying to the OP. I'm not going to sit around and read another 500ish posts because I just knew it would go off on a tangent, or five.

PuffinsAreFicticious · 19/10/2014 17:38

Oh dear... we do seem to have a lot of interesting opinions being posited on MN today.

And god scallops! Those 22 posts (19 now) mean everything! And we should just hush up and only discuss knitting or cooking or whatever mooseface decides is a proper topic for us.

I for one won't be standing for any of this discussing women's issues from any of you anymore.

scallopsrgreat · 19/10/2014 11:51

I know, I know. Quick run around. Do what you can. It's madness I tell you, madness.

Chunderella · 19/10/2014 11:46

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

scallopsrgreat · 19/10/2014 11:45

But Chunderella it isn't a 500 post thread. It only has 478 posts on it. Won't you think about those other 22 posts.

Honestly the stereotyping of threads going on here is just disgusting.

AbbieHoffmansAfro · 19/10/2014 11:42

I agree with Chunderella, way up thread.

Surely Amal Clooney changed her name because she and her new husband are building a brand, and that brand is to be called Clooney. I'm not suggesting the marriage isn't genuine or anything like that, only that each has much to gain from the profile of the other, a gain enhanced if they are jointly known by a simple name accessible to native English speakers.

Chunderella · 19/10/2014 10:43

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

mjmooseface · 19/10/2014 10:38

It really isn't that big of a deal that she changed her name.

I don't know what the big fuss is all about.

Can a woman get married and change her name and not be subject to The World's scrutiny?

JESUS CHRIST do people have nothing better to do than question the choices of other people?!

PetulaGordino · 18/10/2014 08:12

I think buffy might mean no innate violence above and beyond that of women.

Damsilli · 17/10/2014 23:32

I'm broadly in agreement with all that. And, no, one aspect of a group's behaviour is never proof of the existence of other, often conflicting, behaviours. Every group is, after all, both hugely diverse and broadly overlapping of other groups too.

No, no innate evil. But violence? Not sure. I think there is some innate violence in us all.

MrsBuffyCockhead · 17/10/2014 18:09

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

YonicScrewdriver · 17/10/2014 17:43

I will happily rephrase to:

Just another example of how patriarchy thinks names don't really belong to women but just denote the man they are most closely linked to at any point.
P

MrsBuffyCockhead · 17/10/2014 17:26

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

PetulaGordino · 17/10/2014 17:18

what buffy said

plus there are some interesting pieces here and here about where the "not all men" caveat has come from and why it is used in the way it is

Damsilli · 17/10/2014 17:17

I agree with that overarching premise Mrs C, but it strikes me it can be difficult to present an overall case that includes both 'don't stereotype women' and 'we've identified this as a trend amongst men'. Also, for the case in point, do we think Yonic has a valid and clearly identifiable trait that is inherently male such that men can be separated from women? I'm not sure. Surely the patriarchy encourages this example (of women being known by their association to a man) rather than 'men think...'.

Personally, I think it's a practice that opens any discussion to rather irrelevant and unnecessary polarization.... Like my comments actually. Sorry!

MrsBuffyCockhead · 17/10/2014 17:06

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.