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

No one is attempting to take that choice away. People are just pointing out that it isn't a free choice, it's not made in a vacuum. It's just trying to level the playing field and raise awareness.

But I appreciate you agreeing regarding the earlier comment that feminism is bollocks. I actually couldn't believe I read that. Turns out turkeys voting for Christmas is real.

No one proposed taking away anyone’s legal right to give children the father’s name though. That almost all women do so, and that there are women on this thread describing being browbeaten into it, or having been told it was the law to do so, means that at the moment many women do not have a free choice about this. Us talking about it, all the pressures, reasons and misunderstandings why it’s not more like 50/50 is part of increasing choice, not taking choice away. So even if feminism is just about women being able to have their own opinions and choices, it would be important to talk about this?

Good to hear a tight little unit can succeed without dad’s sole name!

Will wonders never cease

@LefthandRight

I really don't understand your anger here. Surely every person does what they believe is right for them

I love that my children and I all have my husbands surname. We are a unit, bonded together and the name is part of that. I really can't see why this would be viewed negatively?!

Do you think she will keep her birth name and give it to her children? Even after marriage?

or change her name on marriage and then give the children “her” new name?

i don’t see the tradition of women keeping their own names on marriage changing. The vast majority of women I work with change their names.

As pp have pointed out- women have always given children “their” surname. It’s just that they’ve changed their surname to their husband’s on marriage…

What does your husband think?

did you consider him changing his name to yours, and giving your children your name? Same result, you still get your bonded family unit with the same surname.

if not, why not? If your husband refused is it because he doesn’t care about your bonded family unit having the same name- the reality is he likes you all having HIS name…

this is where the inequality for women lies. They make the “choice” because men won’t.

the way it looks to me is men don’t give a fuck about family units or bonding, if they did we’d have more men changing their names on marriage. Men and society still centres men as the head of the family. It’s not “creating a family unit” with the same name, it’s you joining his umbrella.

Would you even know if the people you work with had changed their names on marriage if they were already married on joining the workplace?

Where you see "tight little unit", I see "ownership".

Why else would a name change to their name be so important? Why on this thread do we only have one story of one man changing his name to his wife's name?

@Nonamesleft1

Yes, we did actually discuss both ways, we were clear we wanted to share a common name. My husband couldn't have cared less which is was, it was me who wanted his name for us and for any children we would have.

There seems to be so much anger and assumptions on this thread. Just because I have my husbands name does not mean we are living in the dark ages, or that he dictated that it should be that way.

@LefthandRight

See my comment above. It wasnt dictated that I take his name, so there is nothing of the sort about ownership.

Why can you not accept sone people willingly choose this, and it is not a negative on the man or a black mark as to how he views his family?

If she gets married she will keep her name and give any children her name too. I'd imagine her partner would be free to double barrel if he wishes.

Her friends ( teenagers) share this view. Possibly in part due to the number of same sex relationships which highlight the absurdity of the convention to them.

Perhaps it's your social circle/work environment as all my friends/colleagues have kept their own names. It's the done thing really.

As long as your registration officer does a good job on all your certificates, it's not any harder to trace a new name or double barrelled name. Archivists/genealogists will be fascinated by the trends. I've heard some very creative first names in my job, it's always rare but nice to get some more original surnames.

The problem with genealogy comes with women refusing to put their formerly married names on marriage or birth certificates, because they are ashamed or because it was an awful marriage. There is nowhere for men to mention previous marriages unless they changed their name. The less information we have about a person's life, the harder they are to learn about. It's very annoying, hardly anyone sees those certificates and no one is judging you, especially once you're dead. If you're divorced, please consider giving all your names so your descendants can find their tenuous link to Robert the Bruce when they go on Who Do You Think You Are?

Picking up on the 'choice' thing again, because we're in agreement on that point @coffeeaddict77 as we discussed upthread. No, not all choices are feminist (and feminism itself has, in many cases, been a fight to the death for fairer and more equal rights, and to resist discrimination on the basis of sex). The 'choices' that may or may not be available as the end result of those struggles are incidental.

A point that occurred to me on reading the later thread is: is it possible to make a choice that isn't feminist, yet still be feminist? I think yes; largely because of the huge areas of contestation within feminism itself. There's a longstanding, strong thread that says: domestic work should not be undervalued because it's 'women's' work: it should receive equal value, rights, some say even pay, as 'men's' work. Some dismiss that as essentialist, and demand equal pay, opportunities and an end to sex-based discrimination in the workplace.

Some forms of cognitive dissonance tell me that both these positions can be right. Position 1 doesn't work for me, but huge numbers of women are still choosing that as their life. What's influencing that choice is another question.

Some women might see the 'all having one name' equating to a family unit as important. I don't. I think the factors that make a family a unit are anything but a name. We are a close-knit family. We know (and value) who our spouse, child, and parents are. Not one of us has the same name.

@LefthandRight

‘Where you see "tight little unit", I see "ownership".’

That’s your opinion and that’s OK, do whatever you want.

You obviously feel very strongly, to the point of anger, about the subject. It’s down to personal choice though and people, myself included, have very different opinions to yours on the matter. Just accept the fact.

Ok, its down to personal choice. If the tradition didn't exist, would you still stop using your birth name and ask everyone to start calling you by your husband's name?

I think the answer to that lies in the large number of women who hate their surnames, for many reasons, from difficulty spelling and pronouncing, to being bullied for it or it having traumatic associations.

none can wait to ditch it on marriage.

but if it’s that awful, why wait for marriage? Why not crack on with a deed poll at 16? Surely it’s easier then when you have far fewer official documents etc to change it on.

so no, women don’t stop using their birth name outside of the marriage tradition.

@LefthandRight

it’s the done thing really

Nope, everyone I know has taken their husband’s name, though a few have kept their maiden name for work and one has gone double barrelled.

To dictate to women what they should do and what the “done thing” is regards keeping a name, is as caustic and toxic as saying they should always change their name in totality to their husbands.

All women’s choices should be respected and no woman should be looking down on others with a sense of superiority. It’s very bad form and anti-women.

I never said anything was the done thing, you've misquoted

I would imagine (as someone who likes her surname but still changed it) that in part it’s because marriage provides a widely understood reason to change your name, whereas changing your surname because you don’t like it is unusual, and on an emotional level is likely to cause hurt to loved ones perceiving it as rejection of them.

Yes- this also demonstrates the societal imbalance..

men don’t change their names because as you say, it is unusual, and many families are hurt and perceive it as rejection. Plus the whole less of a man, pussy- whipped connotations.

why don’t those same families see a woman changing her name on marriage in the same way? Why is it a cause for celebration in women but not for men?

in fact, a woman not changing her name on marriage is often seen as an insult to her new husband’s family. I did not change my name, and dh’s family still always address me as Mrs dhname. I apparently am up myself, think I’m better than them etc. dh’s sister and her adult kids don’t speak to me, and openly say they don’t consider me family.

from posts here it’s not unusual for people to refuse to accept a woman keeping her own name.

again, we think it’s a free choice, but there are consequences to not following social convention. And many people would rather not open themselves up for conflict or comment.

My maiden name was my dad’s who I’m NC with. I love having my husbands surname. My choice!

Another poster that think surnames belong to men.

Old wave feminism fighting for actual rights and equalities perfectly valid and I support that wholeheartedly actually. I should have clarified that it's the new wave feminism of men hating and clawing at men's rights and the absolute slating and degradation of other women who happily and wholeheartedly choose to live in a more traditional set up, the ridiculous way that many men nowadays are subjected to cruelty and humiliation just for being a man ...that is what I find bollocks.

That’s literally what surname means - the name of the sire.

What "cruelty and humiliation" are men subjected to nowadays just for being men?