Amal Alamuddin has changed her name professionally

DunedinSunshine Yes. I agree. I could have written your last post.

I do so wish that my husband had been the Cockhead

Just wanted to say how much I enjoyed that statement!

As you were...

I agree that choosing to change doesn't make you a bad feminist. I didn't change my name, but I have made other choices that are not feminist choices. It's very difficult for a woman to survive in our society without making heavy compromises. But I try to be mindful about my choices and recognize that they have wider implications.

My career has taken second place to my husband's for a variety of reasons, family responsibilities among them. I have some regrets about that.

It's obviously the totality of a life and one's choices that matter most.

I think you are right Petula, given the automatic maiden name type questions.

I didn't change my name when we got married, it felt like a very important political point at the time. And i was worried about losing my identity in some way. We also already had our children and thought it would be confusing for them. In retrospect, eleven years on, Ikinda wish I had changed my name. To build a new family identity for all of us. But to be fair the one time i suggested, pre-wedding-that we just choose a new name and all of us change, it was not well recieved......

Names are potent symbols, weather we change or not is very personal and there are many reasons for and against. What choosing to change does not make you, in and of itself, is a bad feminist.

this is just musing, i haven't really thought about it at any length, but are women (as a class) socialised to see their surnames as temporary until marriage do you think (in the uk and other countries where the tradition is for the woman to take the man's name)? like a "placeholder" until she takes her husband's name (in a similar way to "miss" as a placeholder for "mrs" perhaps)?

Wadman sorry

Yes I agree, I would prefer a civil partnership to a marriage, and I have never married, partly because of the connotations it brings. It would make me uncomfortable to think of myself as a "wife" because of the associations that has for me. I don't think it necessarily need always be that way and as Wadham says, if you have a situation where it's a genuinely even split between men and women changing their name, the issue is gone. Society-wide, though, as well as in most people's circles, we don't have that.

Also, the reason I don't think the symbolism is lost is because a whole lot of women do change their name because of pressures put on them or not wanting to stand out or rock the boat. It's not divorced from its origins. It still is deeply associated with seeing men as the more important partner. I think that's made clear by the fact that if you ask a man to do it, he'll generally not be keen (though I accept some men do do it). If it's entirely meaningless and symbolises nothing, and is "easier", why would any man mind?

MrsBuffyCockhead I agree with you. Though I suggest you change your name before running for office.

Duned by that argument you could say that it's unfeminist to get married in the first place. I'm well aware of the origin of name change, but meaning can change over time. For what it's worse, in my family and circle of friends there are all combinations - women who took their husband's name, men who took their wives' name ( and in one case passed it on to the next after divorce), couples where both kept their own name. That symbolism thankfully can be lost, if you stop assigning that meaning to it.

Sholer what's a little 1950s is thinking that if a woman's name doesn't change throughout her life, that indicates that she's single and unmarried. It shouldn't indicate that. The reason it shouldn't indicate that, is that it doesn't for men, so women should have the same freedom not to be judged or assessed on their marital status, or indeed for their marital status to be public knowledge that can be deduced from their title.

Well until George releases his next film and proves otherwise, I am going to assume that they have swapped names and he is now known professionally as George Almuddin.

It's nothing at all to do with appearing to be unmarried!

"ly) why is changing a name career damaging? "

Because people you meet before you marry might not be able to find you after you marry (on linked in, on an invitee list at a conference, on the new publications or articles you've written etc)

I haven't read all of the threa but I just wanted to ask a quick question.
If the social norm after getting married is for a woman to change we name (rightly or wrongly) why is changing a name career damaging?
Are we saying in order for women to be successful they have to appear single and unmarried? Isn't that a little 1950's?

This whole thread is about Amal's decision to change her name as not being feminist. I am assuming she made this choice based on what's good for her and her family or is the feminist movement more important ?

Widow You suggest that it is a neutral choice. I disagree. The societal expectation that a woman will change her name is a vestige of the common law doctrine of coverture, whereby a woman's legal existence was entirely subsumed in her husband's when she married; in other words, she became his property. That's some powerful symbolism, in my opinion.