Male colleague - views on changing name

Actually marrying is a much bigger concession to patriarchy than taking a husband’s name surely?

But we know that re marriage women’s choices are limited by social and economic consequences when it comes to not marrying...

It is the same with names.

Oh come off it lass

Of fgs come off it yourself. I quoted you and then I quoted Offred. Not it was not a personal attack.

But this is why it is irrelevant really. In this system the names have been passed down through men, with some exceptions.

A woman’s name is both her name and a man’s name by this logic.

It’s a mistake IMO to think that individual choices re names has any particular influence on dismantling patriarchy. Especially when women are making these choices because they have gotten married.

Dismantling the institution of marriage is a much greater priority surely for the individual choicers?

And yes, agree with PPs that it's still a man's surname anyway

So we are back to the defeatist "no woman really has her own name" argument?

This is all quite a typical way of things though

Patriarchal system set up by men for men
Women say hold on this doesn't fit right some of us want something else
fact that it was set up by men for men means that actually there is no obvious solution that can be made within the general existing structure
women do what they think best based on considerations around the above
field is opened to crticise women for making the "wrong" choice, out of a bunch of bad choices

This happens all the time. What we need here is an entirely different system (don't know what) as the current set-up was simply not constructed with women or children in mind as anything other than property.

A small group of unusually economically powerful women who exist within patriarchy being able to make choices about names because the real life consequences of this for them and their DC are acceptable is pretty irrelevant TBH

My mother wasn't economically powerful. She kept her surname through 2 marriages. (Although I suppose the "all names are men's names" brigade would just dismiss that as her keeping her father's name)

I'm glad she did - it's a much nicer name than either the name of my father or my brother's father.

I'm good friends with a man who took his wife's surname after marriage. And yes, agree with PPs that it's still a man's surname anyway.

What are we meant to do. Decide a brand new surname at marriage and then another at divorce or we all just choose our own surnames when we turn 18?

As an amateur family history researcher, that would be a nightmare for doing any family research.

Any woman who thinks these individual decisions are not part of a lifelong negotiation within patriarchy in which patriarchy sets the terms is misguided IMO. This is why I conclude that it is not possible to determine a naming decision ‘feminist’ or ‘not feminist’.

Oh come off it lass,

Your post quoted me and then said that directly underneath as a response!

"LassWiADelicateAir Sat 09-Jun-18 13:16:30
"Scrutinising individual women and then saying they are "good feminists" "bad feminists" or "not feminists" gets us nowhere. It's exactly what the man in the OP did"

I couldn't care less whether any one is a good feminist or a bad feminist. However this idea that no women owns her name so what does it matter is pretty self-defeating."

You are saying that your comment there directly after your quote from my post that you put in bold is not a response?

I don't normally waste my time discussing feminism with men, but I might have asked the colleague whether he took his wife's name when they got married, and if not why not.

Mind you, I kept my name when I got married and was asked about it at a job interview a year later. The interviewer also wanted to know what surname I would give my children. I wasn't even pregnant. And no, it wasn't relevant to the job in any way.

As soon as we are into scrutinising indiviudal choices, then you have
to discard pretty much all women from feminism as there is not a
one of us who has not bent to social norms/ expectations at some point.

Of course I would like to say I never did anything to bow to patriarchy but ya know I did. I came late to feminism anyways.
I can tell you that were I to get married anytime I would keep my name. Sounds all feminist of me I know, til you hear that I have used my exh name for far longer than I had my previous name.
I was glad to change names back then, but I was young and naive.
If I was to go back and do it again I would have kept my birth name.

I have never said that "no woman owns her own name" I have no idea where that even came from

If that is directed at me I never said you did. It was clearly a general comment. You are not being attacked.

And yes ridding structures of language like ‘maiden name’ is a good example.

Changing structures provides for individual choices though.

A small group of unusually economically powerful women who exist within patriarchy being able to make choices about names because the real life consequences of this for them and their DC are acceptable is pretty irrelevant TBH.

I was happy to lose my maiden name, I prefer my married name

I would be happy if the expression "maiden name" dropped out of existence.

I have complained twice to Scottish government about its appearance on official forms. I can't remember which department the first one was but it apologised; the second one ignored me.

If anyone wants cultural and structural change you should complain every time an official form asks for your "maiden name"

It is sexist, outdated and judgemental.

I just said that I have given my personal reasons on this thread even though I knew it would result in some people seeing an opportunity to have a go.

I have never said that "no woman owns her own name" I have no idea where that even came from.

I personally don't really care much about my name, in modern "identity" language, it's simply not an important part of my identity.

Scrutinising individual women and then saying they are "good feminists" "bad feminists" or "not feminists" gets us nowhere. It's exactly what the man in the OP did

I couldn't care less whether any one is a good feminist or a bad feminist. However this idea that no women owns her name so what does it matter is pretty self-defeating.

I think it is dubious to believe that fighting patriarchy via individual choices within it rather than fighting for structural changes does anything other than collude with patriarchy

This is the difficulty I have with a certain theory of feminism. It is very good at identifying problems but less useful in practice at doing anything about them. "Fight for structural change" - but not for an individual to put her money where her mouth is.

This guy is anti-feminist. By taking your husband's name you did not become his chattel or reduce your rights in any way, you just took his name and that was your choice.

I was happy to lose my maiden name, I prefer my married name.

Changing ones name is not the same as changing the sex on a birth certificate. The name on the birth certificate is not changed, that change is recorded by separate documentation and there is no reason why this shouldn't be the case with gender reassignment, and the GRC being the documentation for change in gender.

he's trying to trip you up. Don't even engage

So fine, if your ‘best because’ choice you have put thought into is keeping a birth surname, or changing a name via deed poll, or taking a husband’s name, getting married, not getting married, giving kids your name or their father’s name...

They are all ‘best because’ choices made with reference to your relative power within society.

Offred

Yes. I agree absolutely.

Women as a class all have varying degrees of privilege and feminism will struggle to succeed without empathy to the reality of all members of our class. We might be more than 50% of the population, but we need every one of us on board to prevail.

We need to convince other women, not berate them, and we need to provide them with a place of safety to speak, not another place of judgment and fear. No doubt, they have enough of that already.

I actually do not believe really in the idea of individual choice being feminist or not feminist.

Women’s choices when made within a patriarchal society are choices women make within a patriarchal society. This involves many layers of ‘best because’ and that’s as far as it goes in terms of choice.

The problem is not that women need to be able to make different choices. It’s that all choices women make are made within a patriarchal society.

I don't think the name thing is the issue at all tbh. The male colleague couldn't give a toss about her name, he was just looking for something that he could use to bully her. He feels that he's superior to women and has the right to tell them what choices to make. He's aware that he can't overtly bully women anymore because that doesn't go down well with HR, but feminism is a gift to him. Like a wolf dressed in lamb's clothing he thinks he can get away with anything by telling her how be a 'better' woman as a feminist.

It really doesn't matter whether it's old-fashioned 'telling women what to wear for their own good' misogyny or modern 'telling women how to be a feminist' misogyny, by focusing on the point that he's making (which he probably doesn't have any opinion about anyway) you are missing the over-riding reason for making the point. To make a woman feel bad about herself.

Just tell him, telling women that their choices are wrong is not what a feminist does, it's what an arsehole a controlling misogynist does. Don't get into a debate about why you made your choices, just "It's my choice, and you trying to tell me how to live my life is not feminism, it's the opposite."

I agree with you as well Offred,

Scrutinising individual women and then saying they are "good feminists" "bad feminists" or "not feminists" gets us nowhere. It's exactly what the man in the OP did -

On the if enough women do it things will change thing - very few of my female friends are married, so most have their own surname, their partner has his surname, and the kids have his surname. That doesn't feel preferable to me - I feel it indicates the children as "belonging" to the man more, being a part of him. I undertsand why it is done this way (what with tradition + male insecurity about fatherhood / showing fatherhood) but it feels very wonky to me.

As soon as we are into scrutinising indiviudal choices, then you have to discard pretty much all women from feminism as there is not a one of us who has not bent to social norms/ expectations at some point.

I dislike the idea of feminism as some kind of gang that you have to display certain behaviours to be in. I have seen a lot that women who are not lesbians / women who have children should not be "allowed in". I think this stuff weakens us and gives an "in" for men like the one in the OP to be a total dick.

It has a pretty tenuous link to feminism in general IMO given that it falls into a category of ‘individual choices women make within the context of patriarchy’ IMO