Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Would you give up your surname of you got married?

925 replies

windowt · 18/09/2016 20:27

I'm so undecided Sad

OP posts:
Creativemode · 22/09/2016 10:01

Oh right, blimey!

Ah well I've always like to be different!

honeylulu · 22/09/2016 10:03

I did not change mine and I always said I wouldn't - since I was a little girl I was determined not to. Reasons:

  1. I like my name as it is.
  2. The change in name stems from a time when women had no legal identity as such. They were chattels of their father, then chattels of their husband. Hence being literally "given away" in church. (I refused to have that bit included in the ceremony.)
  3. Since my husband didn't wish to change his name (fair play)I don't see why I should change mine.
  4. I couldn't care less if anyone assumes I'm not married.
  5. I'm a professional and I earned my qualifications/reputation in my own name.
  6. If (hopefully not ) we separated the children would probably live/travel mainly with me and it makes sense to have the same name. (They actually have both names but given the option to drop one at secondary school age if they choose - our eldest has chosen mine. )
  7. I have friends who took their husband's name and also gave it to the children. Husband fucks off and doesn't give a toss. Lumbered with his name. Friends hate it but reluctant to change back as want to have same name as children. One friend has a son from previous relationship who was given husband's name and is now stuck with it even though he has no connection - genetic or otherwise - with that person. She says it's one of her biggest regrets.
Just a few thoughts. I've no idea why so many women do it just "because it's the done thing".
fakenamefornow · 22/09/2016 10:03

Yes, very, very glad I kept my name and gave my children both my name and their dads.

HappinessLivesHere · 22/09/2016 10:04

If you can't even share a name what else aren't you sharing?! I can't imagine having separate names, we're a team not individuals.

Sameoldiggi · 22/09/2016 10:08

I agree with Happiness, in fact dh and I have both changed our first name to "Bob" to demonstrate further what a team we are.

fakenamefornow · 22/09/2016 10:08

If you can't even share a name what else aren't you sharing?! I can't imagine having separate names, we're a team not individuals.

Yes you're right, families are much much more bonded if they all have the same name and dad never ever fucks off leaving women and children with only his name to remember him by.

KatharinaRosalie · 22/09/2016 10:08

If you can't even share a name what else aren't you sharing?!

So you shared your name and allowed your DH to take it as well?

KatharinaRosalie · 22/09/2016 10:08

If you can't even share a name what else aren't you sharing?!

So you shared your name and allowed your DH to take it as well?

Helmetbymidnight · 22/09/2016 10:08

What team name did you chose, Happiness?

Creativemode · 22/09/2016 10:10

Totally agree with all of that honeylulu.

Helmetbymidnight · 22/09/2016 10:11

Lol at Bob Sameold

Creativemode · 22/09/2016 10:12

Samediggi well me and my hubs not only changed our first names to match but we have matching outfits with our name on the back.

Mines pink his is blue xx

BertrandRussell · 22/09/2016 10:17

"If you can't even share a name what else aren't you sharing?! I can't imagine having separate names, we're a team not individuals."

It's not a matter of sharing or not sharing a name. It's the choice of the name to be shared which is the interesting discussion.

BuntyFigglesworthSpiffington · 22/09/2016 10:18

If you can't even share a name what else aren't you sharing?!

Sharing's great! What did you 'share' with your darling husband?

NataliaOsipova · 22/09/2016 10:22

Creative I am horrified that yours is pink! You are reinforcing gender stereotypes and supporting the patriarchy!

HyacinthFuckit · 22/09/2016 10:24

Late to reply Natalia, but here goes.

The problem with your argument is that, well, it's wrong. Both in the way that you ignore the cultural in favour of the economic, as though the former has no impact on the latter, and in the way that you imply those nasty men will soon give us economic equality if we just phrase things right and stop banging on about things that make us sound silly (and if you really were worried about the latter, you could do your bit by not downplaying our concerns).

The reality is that oppressed groups don't suddenly win concessions from the group with power because they've figured out how to phrase things nicely. That's not how it works. And suggesting that members of groups without power somehow bear responsibility for putting their case in a palatable way to people who have an interest in not listening to it has, to say the least, a rather problematic history. As for the rest, we already know that privileging of men's surnames has an impact on some women. There are women who have shared their stories on here about how male children of the family were treated as more important because of carrying on the name: do you imagine this didn't have any impact on other areas of their lives? It matters when there's an expectation that women will carry on a patriarchal, chattel days custom and men don't. Me changing my name would have had a negative economic effect for me, because that's how I'm known in my field, but unlike a man would it's not a decision I got to make and enact without a second thought. Fundamentally, name changing is something women have to waste energy and effort on, whatever they do. Anything that falls into that category has the potential to harm women. You either get this or you don't, but if you don't, that doesn't indicate that the problem is with the argument...

And really, you not identifying as a feminist but seeing fit to advise those of us who do is a bit much. If a cause is important enough for you to think I should behave in a certain way, it's important enough for you to do it too. So I reiterate, anyone who thinks those of us who want to discuss this issue should be shelving it until some other feminist priority is achieved, you had better be doing every single thing you can in support of that cause first.

HyacinthFuckit · 22/09/2016 10:28

Also, some numbers. Apologies for the Fail link, but apparently 38% of women marrying in their 20s keep their own name. Nice to know I was part of a rapidly increasing trend!

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2357789/Third-married-women-twenties-maiden-names-experts-claim-embracing-feminism.html

This was three years ago, so I wonder if it's crept up to 40% by now. Like a pp, I had heard 30% overall too. That too will probably increase, as more and more women getting married will be from communities where they don't take the FILs name on marriage. I always have a chuckle, actually, when people talk about how all having the same name makes them more of a team, a unit, whatever- numerous other cultures don't feel the need for it and still seem to get on alright!

NataliaOsipova · 22/09/2016 10:50

Hyacinth. I think we just disagree! Which is part of all good debate....

I think cultural factors are overwhelmingly outweighed by economic ones. I would say that this is borne out by history. You say that I am "suggesting that members of groups without power somehow bear responsibility for putting their case in a palatable way to people who have an interest in not listening to it". Quite the reverse. I am suggesting that women who want change would be more likely to achieve that if they can persuade other women that they would be better off pooling their democratic and economic power. Personally, I think the biggest issue facing women is the difficulty of managing a career and children. You have pretty much equal numbers of men and women graduating from university and (I think) equal numbers entering the professions (more in medicine). But what the powers that be do is look at the small number of women on company boards. Why is that? Because a lot of women in their 30s leave or go part time after children...and so never gain the requisite experience to take up these positions. So people talk about quotas. And men then resent less experienced people being foist upon them....which, in my view at least, is counterproductive. If you could get to a point where it was accepted that part time flexible working was the norm for people in their 30s/40s or whatever, then - over time - it would be the higher earner, regardless of gender, who took the step back career wise....and then more women would be in senior positions. Sorry to ramble - but my point is that this is driven by economics. Companies who (and they do at the moment, despite what legislation says) discriminate against women because they think they will be off on maternity leave (or whatever) will lose out - and ultimately fail - because they will not be choosing from the widest group of the best people and, in the final analysis, it is human capital that is the key to success.

....so to come back to your argument...a) in this economically driven scenario more people will take your view that it is financially punitive to change their name on marriage. So fewer will. And the expectation diminishes (in the same way, as, say, women being SAHMs has), which I'm turn makes it more likely that more people will take your view. And b) while I'm not seeking to advise you as such, if you want to bring about change, then you need people like me, from the 94%, to stand behind your cause. And I just don't think the name thing is the place to start (personal opinion, obviously!). It's just like Clause 4 - emblematic to the people who are already converted, but pretty irrelevant to the rest. And your power - in a democracy at least - comes from numbers....

Have to say, as a SAHM, this is one of the more interesting debates I've had in a while....

motherinferior · 22/09/2016 12:34

We are individuals. Not a team. We share some things - a commitment to co-parenting, one of our various separate bank accounts, the mortgage and the cats - but not everything.

MitzyLeFrouf · 22/09/2016 12:38

we're a team not individuals

Kim Jong-un, is that you?

bumblingbovine49 · 22/09/2016 14:43

There has been quite a lot of talk about women who don't change their name being judgmental of those who do. I have to say my particular experience is the absolute opposite.

As just about the only one of my married friends who kept their maiden name through two marriages and one child (I am in my 50s now so quite a a long time) I found most them quite surprised that I didn't change my name. Some of them even now tell their children to call me Mrs dhsurname. Dh's parents never really took my choice on board (despite ebing told) and many a (small) cheque sent as a birthday or Christmas present has gone uncashed over the years because it was written to Mr dhlastname.

I really don't think it is a big issue and as others have said I think there are many better places to focus our feminist energy for change but I do think that those of us who keep our maiden names, (I mean really just keep our name -no double barelling) do get quite a lot questioning or just downright ignoring of our choices. I have noticed less of this over the years but definitely in the 80s and 90s I had a lot of surprised looks and people telling me that it would make my life easier to change to dh's married name

HyacinthFuckit · 22/09/2016 14:54

I wouldn't say we just disagree Natalia. Saying that this is driven by economics when changing your name if anything costs money, because replacing your passport isn't free, the time you spend ringing everyone who has any of your details isn't free, seems woefully short sighted. It's not really an agree to disagree thing, tbh.

And once again, cultural and economic factors interact. They're not independent of each other. They can't be easily split into a discrete set of issues. Women's liberation needs to include both.

Lastly, if you don't think the name thing is the place to start, then don't. Do yourself what you're advocating others do. And while you're at it, ask yourself why you're not on every other thread saying but is this really the most important issue facing us. I would also point out that the increasing numbers of women not changing surnames on marriage, particularly younger women, rather suggests that something's going right...

NataliaOsipova · 22/09/2016 16:32

Hyacinth You miss the point I am attempting to make. And as for the "ever increasing numbers" - if 94% is the current number of changers, it is going to follow the law of small numbers for some time! And I'm not advocating anybody do anything - just saying, as outsider looking in, that if what you really want in the final analysis is equality for women then it seems to me a pretty poor place to focus attention. So I won't be on every other thread saying anything - I have neither the time nor the inclination!

WilLiAmHerschel · 22/09/2016 16:45

I would consider us both double barrelling but otherwise I would keep my name as it is.

KungFuPandaWorksOut · 22/09/2016 17:55

Took the husbands name, didn't really like my maiden name. The only way I wouldn't have changed my name if his surname was something childishly funny like
Cox , Swallows , Handcock , Bottomly GrinGrin
[no offence, if your name made my list, just a few surnames of people I went school with and I couldn't help but snigger... Mature I know!]