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

Could you possibly try and be a tad more patronising, please? There are a couple of unmarried women at the back whose children have their father's surname, and who still think they made a rational, informed, thoughtful decision, based on the best outcome for their own family...

I didn’t see Sonora’s response to me and asked her once more. That doesn’t mean it’s a hang up. You could equally ask Sonora about her hang up on spelling and grammar.

Why are you quoting @TeaKitten to me?

I think the whole women changing their name on marriage thing is slowly dying out. I haven't changed mine, and of the four or five weddings I've been to in the last few years the women haven't changed theirs.

I see my name as also part of my culture and heritage, I'm proud I had my father's name.

My kids have my OH name. Also a choice I'm happy with. I like being part of a group with a shared identity. None of us own anyone else.

I keep my name at work. Works for me.

Can you show us where you found that this happens in most cases? Assume you have a link ... because it seems far fetched.

Because you said ‘no one’ is insinuating control or misogyny. I gave you an example of someone who is.

Well obviously. That's not the issue, it's not about something not being new, it's about bowing to patriachy for no real reason. (except the unspoken one, ie. men are more important than women)

It’s still not socially acceptable for a man to change his name.

i run a database where names can’t be changed, and accounts are automatically set up when someone joins the company.

few years down the line a woman will move roles and need access. I can’t find them on the system. I get a tinkly laugh and “oh that’s my maiden name, I forgot hehe”

in five year we have had one man change his name on marriage. The comments were overwhelmingly negative, mainly from other women. What was wrong with his name? Why has he done that? She must keep him in line etc etc. not one person congratulated him in the way they would have for one of the females.

That's interesting.

I assume its a couple who are more progressive in their thinking.

I’m not responsible for other people’s posts. All I know is I didn’t see the words ‘controlling’ or misogynistic’.

If you have an issue with a poster, take it up with them.

Why are you bullying me by constantly asking me to answer for other posters?

So still the name of a feckless father then?

Yes I was infering mysogeny, it wasn’t to be offensive, it’s the whole point of this thread. That poster states that that’s not the case which is fine, but she was rude when speaking to me, not the other way round. She said he let her choose and given the context of the thread it’s obvious what it implies. I was also sympathising and saying it’s a shame that she chose because she felt it was like give her kids an easier time, because society shouldn’t be that way. Nobody was badgering the poster, the person badgering and being rude here is still you.

No, the name she had from birth, so her name.

It’s interesting how @Didimum has not one word to say about how that poster was rude to you and corrected your typo.

I wished I'd thought about this a bit more. Kids have DH's surname as we weren't married at time, I am high earner, house in my name etc. And I wanted him to have acknowledgement as part of family. When we did marry I didnt take his name because mine is better!

It was an easy thing to do as I didnt care, probably because of social norms.

Turns out now teen DCs do and I am deed polling them to include my surname as second name. So made more complicated than needed.

This is something that has just not changed with the times and I agree with others - it is to do with the patriarchy.

Before passports, bank accounts, email addresses etc surnames weren't used much. Now if you change your name there are 101 places it needs to be done. Logically everyone should keep their own name. This problematic though with all the women who don't like their name, think it's difficult to spell etc - amazing that women are 50% of the population and it's mainly them who think this 🤔.

Many women on here also seem to feel that their names being the same makes them a unit. Obvs entitled to that opinion but in my world there are many many more important things that make my family a unit.

The thing I have never understood is the women who change their name, get divorced, re-marry and change their name again, often leaving their original DCs with their fathers name so now their 'unit' has different names but it's all ok. Mind blowing 🤯 🤣.

Each to their own though. I'm one who didn't change her name but DC have his name and yes I regret it, wish I'd double barrelled. People tend to refer to us as the double barrelled version anyway!

I do hope things change, sadly I don't think they will, too many young women not understanding the patriarchy and how it is detrimental to them.

too many young women not understanding the patriarchy and how it is detrimental to them

🙄 patronising, much?!

The thing I have never understood is the women who change their name, get divorced, re-marry and change their name again, often leaving their original DCs with their fathers name so now their 'unit' has different names but it's all ok. Mind blowing 🤯 🤣

yep. Dh’s ex had an affair, married her OM, changed her name, then wanted the kids to have the same name as her so tried to get her OM parental responsibility and change their names. she hadn’t realised she needed dh to sign off on it.

Sums up some feminists well. If you agree with them you're right, if you don't your silly little girl mind hasn't understood them... the irony is lost on them.

If I was taking a lesser wage than a man for doing the same job, then you're talking. But it's not an inferior thing to take a new name.

You do realise that many British women's surnames are names they inherited from their fathers? And even if they were given their mother's surname, then THAT surname is most likely inherited from their grandfather? And so on and so forth?

So, why are you "really angry" about my son having the surname of his father (who gave me my son in the first place, loves his son and me, has supported me throughout the pregnancy, and will raise him alongside me in the home he helped me to afford) instead of the name of my father (who I only used to see at weekends growing up and will probably visit my son once a month at best) or (had my mother given me her maiden name) my maternal grandfather (who had a difficult relationship with my mother and won't be involved at all on account of being dead)?

If it's patrilineal surnames that bother you, shouldn't you instead be "really angry" that any people at all in Britain have a surname? Shouldn't you rage at yourself for having the surname of your [insert male relative/ancestor here]? Shouldn't you be campaigning for a reset of every surname in Britain, in which we all tit about inventing new surnames from scratch?

I am assuming you are equally bothered by women who allow themselves to be "given away" by their fathers at weddings because of the historical connotations that a daughter was her father's property. But... you think I should have "ownership" over my son? Why is that okay but not the reverse? Why should anyone be owned by anyone else?

While pregnancy has its challenges, why is the child more my child than my partner's on the basis of my biology? I thought feminists didn't want women to have their status dictated by biology, to be seen as mere "baby incubators" - why, then, am I allowed to whip out my baby incubator card to determine my child's surname? Why does my 9 months of discomfort during pregnancy trump my partner's disproportionate financial contribution during my maternity leave? Why does only the period of pregnancy count in your calculations? Should an adopted child be forced to retain the surname of an abusive/neglectful biological mother because the biological mother was the one who carried the baby and therefore has "dibs"? Should we extend your logic to all childcare or to all suffering undertaken on behalf of the child - if so, should the surname change from mine to my partner's if my partner becomes a stay at home dad for longer than the duration of my pregnancy, or if he protects our child from being mauled by a dog and suffers life-changing injuries that are more painful and lasting than my labour? Is it practical, healthy or ethical to continually change a child's surname based on an endless, tedious, immature game of tit for tat?

Not that it's your business, but my children will have my partner's surname because:

• my partner is a good man and I love him (shocking, I know)
• he ISN'T carrying the baby - he's been excluded from a lot of the so-called "intrusive" private bonding I've had with my son, so I would like him to pass on his surname to give him that extra sense of connection; frankly, it's a poor consolation prize compared to several months of kicks, chats and giggles but it's the best I can offer
• each to their own, but I personally dislike double-barrelling. It's cumbersome. Plus, both of our surnames resulted in us being teased a little bit at school, and if you try to double-barrel them it results in something far worse
• I will probably be at the school gates/play groups more than my partner, so I am more likely to be immediately recognised as the mother of my child regardless of my surname; I am also perceived as less of a "threat" to a child on account of being female. My partner is not only male but a different race to me; misunderstandings have been known to happen in public settings when the father and child don't look similar, such as accusations of kidnapping. Partner and son sharing a surname might help to prove they are related or at least make my partner more memorable to acquaintances as the father.
• I'm not tremendously attached to my surname anyway. I used to think about continuity of my dad's surname when I was younger, but my paternal grandfather was an absolute bastard so I'm not bothered anymore. I doubt my dad cares or expects any different, and no doubt if I asked him how he felt about the family name dying with me, you would consider that offensive, too, because I would be committing the cardinal sin of asking a man's opinion about something

I would do all of the above if my partner was a woman, too, if you were wondering.

It's a real shame that you dismiss women's right to make their own choices as "bollocks" because they don't agree with you, but never mind.

I'm really surprised your DC care. Mine never have. Are you still married to their father?

Believe it or not. I didn't like my surname and find double barrel surnames too long. DC's have my surname as their middle name.

And what in my post convinced you that I did?

Not that anyone should have to justify it (and well done to the "feminists" putting other women down for their choices and making snide judgy comments, really pushing the cause there 🙄), but I don't want the surname of an abuser ("father", now NC) myself, so I certainly wasn't giving it to my children. If I ever marry DP I'll likely take his name, at least I won't have the surname of a vile, abusive person.