Why are so many kids STILL taking the father's name?

[LefthandRight]

Is this some kind of feminist blind spot? Most kids still get the dads name and I see women saying "it was just easier", "double barrelling was a mouthful", "I don't mind". You even get situations where the mum has not taken the father's name so she has a different name to her kids but "it's no big deal" and it's like... So it's no big deal for the woman but apparently its a huge big deal for the man?

It really makes me angry because I just can't believe women have to go through the effort and intrusiveness/pain of childbirth only to have that ownership "label" whipped off them, it feels unfair

Traditionally it's because it's fairly unambiguous who is the mother (birth and all that). And only the mother knows who the father is, so by assigning the name they are letting the world know. But I agree I don't think it needs to be automatic or just what we do necessarily. The parents should decide based on which surname they like best.

This is said a lot - why do so many women think their DH’s surname sounds better? Men don’t seem to have the same concerns?

You don’t own your children, makes no difference to me what their last names are I’m no less their mother because of it.

People don't see double barrelling as posh anymore, it's become the norm for kids of unmarried parents apparently

Ownership and belonging are two sides of the same coin.

I believe in French they use the same word for both.

you could look at it as ownership or you could look at it as something that connects people who love each other together. Is a mother giving her children her name not ‘owenership’ then? Maybe no-one should be able to give thier child thier surname and we all have to make up new ones each time!

When I say belonging I mean the child feeling like they are a part of the family as a whole, as in attachment and mh.
Realised belonging could be interpreted as similar to ownership and I meant more like partnership or family.

When a new family is formed - whether by marriage, civil partnership, informally or following the birth of a child - then it seems to me that that ‘unit’ gets to decide its identity. Is that one of the original surnames, a double barrelled name or a wholly different name (we discussed all 4 options). For me, it is an ‘identity if that family unit’ question, not an ‘x owns y’ question, and is always about choice. If the discussion is equal, and the choice is freely and equally made, any of the 4 options available have equal status and validity.

You find factual info hilarious?
It's true that my husbands surname was better than mine (shorter, easier to spell - mine was always being confused for a similar and more popular name).
I do also know of someone whose (male) partner took her name when they got married, his being more complicated and unusual than hers.
The problem also with double-barrelling is what you do when two double-barrels meet - do they pick one from each for their kids?

Because not everyone thinks like you
Why are you angry at the choices other women make ?

Double barreling is what they do in Spain but you are just kicking the can down the road because when those kids have children they only take one of the barrell and if the fathers name is the last one it's just delayed one generation. Same long term outcome.

Dd kept her own surname, but kids have taken her dh’s. One reason is that hers is at the end of the alphabet and his is near the middle. Many times she’d felt that being at the end was a disadvantage (last on the list for everything) particularly when she started uni and was allocated positively the crappiest room in hall! (‘Oh, sorry, it’s usually a spare or guest room, but we’ve had a higher intake than usual…’)

@Parker231 For me it was a surname that led to quite a lot of bullying at school. I'm very pleased dd won't have to experience that.

I think it a real problem for unmarried mothers. Children should always have their mother's name, whether that's a married name or their original name.

So many men manipulate women into giving the children their name with the promise of marriage sometime in the future, which then never happens

I completely agree. It's a very old fashioned idea.

In some cultures women don't take their husbands name on marriage. Boy children take Dads name, girls take mum's. Very civilised.

My name is my dad's name. I wasn't wild about him or his attitude to women. I chose DH - that was an empowering choice - I picked a man as unlike my father as I could find. It worked well. To me, DH's name is a symbol of my exercising my right to pick a man with values I uphold. Taking his name felt like a symbolic shift away from a belittling, cruel man and into a fair and equal relationship. I prefer his name to my own and am glad my DC have it. (Even though they love his mum's maiden name best and wish that was their surname. Can't win.

Your DH will resent you for life for that. And you do not give a fuck.

It does seem a bit like op thinks the mum owns the child and the father is less important? That's quite anti feminist tbh, men should be taking even more of a father role, emotional support to their kids etc not being less important than the female role.

Well that would have the exact same outcome for me as I have all boys so 🤷🏻‍♀️

Because mine lost his shit and went mental when I suggested double barrelling the names. So I didn't have much choice in it.

The law sides with men on this too. Even though he's had zero contact for a decade I am not allowed to change their names. It always should at least permit double-barrelling without having to ask for the fathers permission.

I completely agree with OP — it’s archaic and nonsensical. I have my mother’s surname and my children double-barrelled. I could never imagine giving my children solely my husband’s surname and he completely agrees. He double-barrelled his surname too, it’s equality.

There is huge pressure on women to give the child the father’s surname: that is almost the very definition of ‘tradition’.

Men’s names are always seen as their own names, while a woman’s is always ‘her father’s’ (so ‘no point in refusing to take your DH’ name , your name is a man’s name’) or ‘her DH’s’ (so ‘you can’t marry DH2 and keep another man’s name even if it is the same as your kids’ ).

Many women do choose the option to change to a surname they prefer. Fair enough , but odd how few brothers of women with ‘difficult’ surnames take their wives names!

We can’t pretend it is an equal choice while cultural pressure makes the man’s name the default. At the moment he default choice is a patriarchal tradition. So resisting that is a feminist act. You can be a feminist and choose not to change your name or to name your kids after their father, but that particular action is not the feminist choice.

The patriarchy has also played a winning move by framing marriage as some kind of oppression - so some women who are choosing not to get married before having kids end up getting screwed over financially. I'm also worried this will happen to my dh's friend's gf. He's a nice guy but these things can still happen

OP you see the world through your lens. Which by the sound of it, you are fully entrenched in your views. Not willing to change. Great. Let others have the same autonomy of choice. I don’t view the world as you. I don’t feel a label or ownership by a name. I feel a shared purpose and team. Whatever name is picked should not be about ownership.