To not understand why double barrel surnames are so wrong/bizarre to some people?

[CarsonViolet]

So I recently registered the birth of my first child and gave him a double barelled surname. His name layout is Daniel Eric (My surname) (DHs surname). (None of these are actually my son's name just an example!)

In laws were visiting yesterday and were having a look at his birth certificate and were disappointed to see the surname. We did tell them that my name would be in there but apparently they just assumed it was a middle name 🙄

Cue all the 'concerns' and old fashioned twaddle about "It's just nicer and easier" and "what happens when he marries someone with a double barrel name" blah blah blah.

Am I being silly to have assumed that this crap was dead? Sure people have their own opinions on what they would personally do but to tell other people off about it?

Wanted a rant more than anything tbh but I just find it so bizarre that women wanting to share a surname with the child they carried and birthed is still contentious to some people 🤔

OP is married.

Everyone I know who has given their child a double barrel name is married or at least in a long term committed relationship. In my experience its usually the women blindly giving their children dad's surname alone that tend to be stereotypically 'unclassy'.

Double-barrelling is all well and good when you and your partner have short, easy to spell names. Daniel Jones-Butler works and it's not setting a child up for a lifetime of ridiculous form-filling and having to spell everything. Daniel Fitzsimmons-Kiriakopolous is a whole other ballgame.

Tbh I think it's also an age thing. Mumsnets demographic are of an age where in their time it likely was maybe a bit aspirational or a sign of being higher class but you're blind if you believe for a minute that this is still the case. It's absolutely rooted in equality for women these days.

I can quite confidently say that if you asked any random teen or 20 something year old why they think people choose DB names, 95% would answer along the lines of "because it's what is most fair to them". This entire thread is just a testament to how out of touch a lot of people on this site are.

Lots of people with only the one surname have a first name and surname that combine to make a very lengthy name. My surname is 14 letters alone. The argument that people should stick to one surname because it's a pain for others to write is a tad weak honestly.

People don't typically choose names based on what's easiest for Sharon in IT to type out on her computer.

In the example you give, anyone with a surname as non-Anglo and relatively uncommon as Kiriakopolous (ie not something like Singh which everyone knows) is potentially going to have a lifetime of spelling it anyway.

This principle would essentially mean that those of us who are a bit forrin, and actually quite possibly even British people who want to use names from Celtic languages but can't guarantee that their kids won't want to live outside of those areas, shouldn't be using those names. I doubt you actually think that.

Obviously not. But I have a "forrin" name. And it's a pain in the ass. DH's name isn't easily spelled. Double-barrelling them for my child would have made his life difficult, so DH and I chose one of our names.

I think children should be able to choose their gender and name when they are a teenager. Until then they can be known as MX and the number of their birthdate.
This will stop outdated stereotypes being foisted on children.

Not in my experience.

I actually have a surname as my middle name but my parents would certainly not have added a hyphen between it and my surname. It would have been odd to do so. Tradition is clearly a thing of the past!

And the past is a perfectly splendid place for them to remain.

I grew up with a double-barrelled surname.

Ditched it for husband's much shorter one as fast as possible.

Nowadays I think people just assume that kids with double-barrelled surnames have parents who aren't married, but I had decades of people assuming I was wealthy, posh, stuck-up before I even opened my mouth or met them. No way would I have landed my kids with one.

You have a quite specific situation where one name was much easier in your particular circumstances than the other then. Which means the principle you chose to apply there isn't going to be relevant in many cases, including in the example you gave. Fitzsimons can have one m or two, after all. Ultimately, avoiding what you describe as 'ridiculous form filling' means some people would need to change names entirely. That in itself is at best a ridiculous concept for many of us, and at worst something rather more nefarious.

Thanks, I have two middle names, mildly embarrassing, slightly pretentious, and definitely a nuisance when filling out forms. My kids have two names; the first name and the surname.

At least among people my age if anything it's an indicator that mums a feminist.

Again, age thing. Nobody my age thinks DB names are anything to do with class 😂That's something I can confidently stick in the only "only middle aged mumsnetters" basket.

Er, yes they do. Have you seen the baby name threads on here? Half of the names are objected to because ‘they’ll be forever spelling it out to people’

No, DS has a difficult-to-spell name. My name is Celtic and has many variations and DH's (while British) is spelled in a way that doesn't make much sense. Double-barrelling would be extremely inconvenient for my child, so DH and I chose DH's name for DS, as my brothers will use my family surname for their children.

I hope your brother's spouses/partners agree. If they aren't married then the children will have the name their partner decides.

I really don't think there's that many people who give up on the name they like solely because mumsnetters can't spell it. If people only named their kids things that MN approved of all kids would be called Elizabeth and James and only the fathers surname would be present...

And like another poster pointed out mumsnetters have a tendency to be a bit low level racist with their views. Throw away the perfectly lovely name that honours your Irish, Nigerian, Indian etc culture because the old English ladies aren't familiar with it? Yeah, no 😅

So you're not avoiding 'ridiculous form filling' yourselves then. In which case, why is it only double barrelled names that you highlight? After all, Kiriakopolous places them very firmly within that ball game anyway.

I am amazed by some of the responses on this thread. Telling women that they don't actually have a name, it's just borrowed from a man. We really don't need men to uphold the patriarchy do we. There are an awful lot of handmaidens very happy to do the work for them.

I was at a reception the other day and I heard the person in front give their surname. It was DB and I as soon as I heard it I felt grateful that I don't have a double barrel name.

Might be judgemental and prejudiced, but that was my initial reaction.

I'm middle aged. I don't give a stuff about what class anyone is. How do we still perpetrate this garbage (having a class system)?

It is wild to see...

Given that they're married and took my brothers' names, I'm pretty sure they will.

This is what people are missing here. It’s not a case of how people should respond, it’s how they do respond. And a study group of your friends and family, or indeed of mn champagne feminists, is not going to give you valuable feedback, because the former are going to tell you what you want to hear and the latter are, let’s be honest, away with the fucking fairies.