Adam Ramsay Peaty

[Mrsnothingthanks]

And why not? Why is it still seen as so "out there" that a man should double-barrel upon marriage? Nobody would pass one comment if his wife had changed her name to Holly Peaty.
My husband and I both db'd upon marriage. Titles remain unchanged.
It's 2025 ffs!! Stop with the misogyny!

My ex BIL did 😀

No newborn of either sex ‘owns’ (whatever that is supposed to mean) their surname. It belongs to their father or their mother’s father if she is unmarried.

I don’t think you understand what that means. It is simply a description for the father’s name being passed down to the children. It does not mean that the daughters of those fathers do not ‘own’ that name. If a woman gives her baby her name she is not following the patrilineal naming system.

Surely as soon as it is on their birth certificate, it belongs to them too? Boy or girl.

I don’t think you understand what that means. Define “own”.

What?! 😂 No it doesn’t. Fuck me.

At what age do boys become the magic owners of these names?

Your name is legally yours.

Like I say define ‘own’, define ‘belong’ - this is coming down to semantics.

My name is my own but only my first name is my personal name, my surname is my father’s. I can trace the line of his name handed down the male line back to the 16th c. So my surname is my father’s, grandfather’s, great grandfather’s etc, it’s not personal to me.

Belongs to. Your legal name, which you have a right to use. I don’t need to ring my dad and check I can use his name when I put my surname on documents. Because it’s my name.

You seem very confused.

You share the name with your ancestors, but it is your name as much as it is any of theirs.

Any bloke that takes his wife’s name on marriage must be an utter drip. I can think of one bloke I know that would be happy to do this.

What a strange take. Are women that take their husband’s surnames ‘drips’?

I’ve known a few men that either took their wife’s surname or hyphenated to preserve their wife’s surname.

In which case it isn't your father's either.

There are two options here. Surnames belong to everyone who uses them equally. That means all the men you list get their own surname as well as you do. Or they only belong to the first person who used them, in which case your father, grandfather, great grandfather etc are as surnameless as you are.

The former is less stupid than the latter, but it is an entirely binary choice.

Do you disagree that a woman’s surname is legally her surname, which she has a legal right to use, regardless of that name also perhaps being the same as her father’s?

@Dollymylove My husband added on to his name by taking mine, and I did the same. Why only the woman? Not in our marriage. Titles also not changed.

I don’t think so - I’m a millennial and we did this.

Is there a reason that you used ‘Mrs’ in your user name?

I think she’s saying she isn’t a ‘Mrs’ - hence ‘Mrs Nothing’.

Love the Archers’ reference in your username.

Yeah I can see why you’re getting confused.

My surname being my legal name has nothing to do with the fact that it’s patrilineal.

I think the meaning went over your head.

But it is personal to your father despite the fact that his father had it? If it isn't personal to you because other people have it and have had it in the past then isn't that the same for the men who currently have it too?

My last name belongs to me just as much as my first name does. It isn't any less mine just because it came from my father just as my DH's last name isn't any less his because it also came from his father.

It's mine. It belongs to me. It also belongs to my children because of me.

My surname isn’t t my husband’s or father’s.

Of course it’s not personal to him either, surnames are family names. It’s shared with his entire family. The difference for women is that traditionally they’d lose their family name on marriage and replace it with their husband’s family name. Of course that is changing hence the discussion on this thread.

Holly now has 2 patrilineal names now rather than just the one.

It’s a patrilineal system which is often, but now always, followed in the UK. That only means that children have been named the same name as their father. That does not mean that it’s their father’s name and not a woman’s own.

Just as when a woman gives birth and gives her child her name it may well be that that name is shared with her father, but that name is the woman’s own, and so by giving her baby her name, not the child’s father’s (the grandfather is irrelevant now), that child has not been named under the patrilineal system.

Our daughter also has both of our names - the way we see it, she is equally ours. We are all db'd.
Waiting for all of the "But she will have four names when she marries" comments now...

A system being mostly (certainly not wholly) patrilineal doesn't mean that women don't have their own names but men who get them in the exact same way do. They're two quite different points.