Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To wonder why people get married when...

116 replies

dancingmustard · 08/12/2011 03:47

They don't agree on who's name to take (Surname)

They like to be considered separate in a flimsy hippy type of way even though they've nailed their colours to the mast and took the nuptial plunge.

They hate the 'Traditions' of marriage yet actually get married.

OP posts:
LEttletownofBOFlehem · 08/12/2011 03:49

Erm Biscuit

Original poster
dancingmustard · 08/12/2011 03:53

Who said eloquence was dead Wine

OP posts:
RiaTheRedNoseReindeer · 08/12/2011 03:55

Maybe because there's more to marriage than having matching surnames?

Original poster
dancingmustard · 08/12/2011 03:56

Like what?
Tax breaks?
There really are not that many advantages to being married now other than tradition.

OP posts:
RiaTheRedNoseReindeer · 08/12/2011 04:01

Well I'm not married, or that fussed about ever being, but off the top of my head:

Financial security if the relationship breaks down or one person dies
An official statement of 'I love you and want to spend the rest of my life with you'
Religious requirements
Automatically being each other's next of kin

MrsTerryPratchett · 08/12/2011 04:01

From Wiki, more eloquent that I could be, "In various cultures... traditionally a woman inherits her surname or birth name from her father and changes it to match her husband's surname (which he inherited from his father). This name change custom has been criticized for a number of reasons.[3][4][5] It can be construed as meaning the woman's father and then husband had control over her, and it means that lines of male descent (patrilineality) are seen as primary?that a child has no inherited name tying him or her to female ancestors (matrilineality).[4] Moreover, it means that women have no matrilineal surnames of their own, but only "place-markers" indicating their relationship to men.[4]

I'll keep my maiden name thanks. Obviously, I will only change if I manage to marry the wonderful Terry Pratchett Xmas Grin

Original poster
dancingmustard · 08/12/2011 04:05

Hehehehe MTP :)

I thing Pratchett is a genius too.

But if a woman doesn't like the tradition then why marry in the first instance when a civil partnership could do the same job?

OP posts:
bedubabe · 08/12/2011 04:08

Huh? A male-female couple can't get a civil partnership. A gay couple can't get married. I don't get what on earth you're talking about.

RiaTheRedNoseReindeer · 08/12/2011 04:09

Straight couples can't get civil partnerships, although there is a campaign to change that, and let gay couples get married.

MrsTerryPratchett · 08/12/2011 04:14

I heard this conversation once, I kid you not... "I want to civil partnership my partner but he doesn't want to civil partnership me. I asked him why he wouldn't civil partnership me and he said that he doesn't want to ever civil partnership anyone." My ears bled. For that reason as well as all the millions of others gay people should be able to marry.

I love my DH, his surname, meh.

kickassangel · 08/12/2011 04:16

civil partnerships aren't available for male/female unions.

so, it's marry or nothing.

having the same name is a cultural norm that is 'fashionable' in the late 20th & early 21st C of the UK. Other countries & times have different norms.

It's like saying 'why get married if the bride doesn't wear a big white poofy dress?'

errr - cos marriage isn't about the 'trappings' but about the relationship.

bedubabe · 08/12/2011 04:16

To go back to the original point - so, OP, you're saying because I didn't take my husband's name I shouldn't have married him? I live in a country where the vast majority of women keep their names - should they all not have gotten married?

Original poster
dancingmustard · 08/12/2011 04:18

Straight couples should be able to have a civil partnership then :)

bedubabe marriage is a tradition and I don't see why/how people take offence after they have gotten married when the traditional way of thinking applies to them.
If people don't like the tradition they shouldn't be surprised at some of the assumptions.

OP posts:
Original poster
dancingmustard · 08/12/2011 04:20

Maybe in your country there isn't that problem then bedubabe.

But in the UK there obviously is.

OP posts:
bedubabe · 08/12/2011 04:24

But my point is that you're looking at the tradition from a very Uk centric position that only looks at approx the last 200 year's of UK history anyway. Examples of cultures where comen don't change their names on marriage include:

French Canadian
Most Arabic
Chinese
Ethiopian

and those are just the ones off the top of my head. I'd guess that's the majority of the world there!

bedubabe · 08/12/2011 04:26

'comen'? :)

Original poster
dancingmustard · 08/12/2011 04:32

I see your point and agree that these cultures have survived with the woman keeping her own name etc.

I'm thinking UK wise because that's where the majority of posters here come from I believe.

It's a womans right in this country to choose a partner and choose the tradition I wonder how many countries on that list give the woman a choice?

French Canadian (I would think so)

Arabic (Highly doubtful)

Chinese (Human rights aren't exactly their forte)

Ethiopian (Appalling record of victimisation of women)

Women in the UK are mostly educated and are not forced against their will to accept the tradition of marriage.

OP posts:
ThePoorMansBeckySharp · 08/12/2011 04:35

It's 'whose', not who's.

Sorry, but I have a bit of a thing about being judged by illiterates Smile

LovesBloominChristmas · 08/12/2011 04:42

it means that women have no matrilineal surnames of their own, but only "place-markers" indicating their relationship to men.

Mtstp that is the best explanation I have read on the subject

Original poster
dancingmustard · 08/12/2011 04:42

Looking back at some of your earlier posts TPMBS your educational prowess is only limited to sarcasm.
Yeah I noticed too :)

OP posts:
bedubabe · 08/12/2011 05:06

I'm confused - where is the link between retaining your name as a cultural tradition and exploitation of women? Surely if anything retaining your name would be an indicator of non-exploitation i.e. women have no identity of their own.

I think the majority of Arabic women would be extremely offended by your view that they have no ability to chose their partner and ditto to Chinese. Haven't spoken to enough Ethiopians to know but I'm not aware of a culture of forced marriage there (although yes there is exploitation of women). Yes there are human rights abuses but I don't see how it is any way linked to your point about whether that makes getting married pointless.

And ok I'm being non-UK focused but traditions change!

bedubabe · 08/12/2011 05:07

Anyway, need to start work so running away.

Original poster
dancingmustard · 08/12/2011 05:15

The perceived patriarchal myth is supposedly supported by marriage.

Why do people who despise the patriarchy get married ?

Some Arabic women are not allowed to drive and get executed publically,me offending them is probably the least of their worries.

OP posts:
Jacksmania · 08/12/2011 05:16

Actually in Quebec (the French part of Canada) women don't have the option of taking their husband's name.

Original poster
dancingmustard · 08/12/2011 05:17

Is that a good thing or a bad thing Jacks?

OP posts: