To still feel uncomfortable with my married surname (and wonder if anyone else does too)

[bitjel]

I've been married 20 years and it still feels off/wrong when I say my name with married surname and even signing it feels off. I'm in a very happy marriage but I still feel like that's not my name. In my head I' still "bitjel maiden-name". (I do have a few items still in my maiden name 20 years later, maybe its because I haven't dived in the whole way). Wondering if anyone else has this.

Edited to add I didnt mean to make this a poll!

This is illogical. Why do men get to own their name but women merely “borrow” theirs.

You could equally say a man’s name merely belongs to his father and his grandfather. But yet people never say that. Odd.

Did I? I’ve re read it and I seem to have just said other posters used them.

Which has nothing to do with what I wrote about what is representative.

I’ve really no idea what is upsetting you about my comments. Have a good evening, I’m out.

Equally, I've no idea what it is about mine that prompted this sequence of comments from you. I pointed out that not knowing anyone who's changed their name is unrepresentative. That isn't a controversial statement.

As that was my point too, as a counter to people who didn’t know anyone who had this is particularly odd. Maybe you’ve misinterpreted everything I’ve written.

It depends on how you felt about your maiden name I suppose. I was glad to get rid of my maiden name and didn't look back from day 1 of marriage (decades ago!). My maiden name rhymed with a easy bullying taunt and also it wasn't the name I was born with. I found that embarrassing. So it was all fixed with my married surname.

Yes I felt like this, and after some truly horrible stuff come out about my in laws (and we're now no contact), I changed back to my maiden name. DH doesn't mind at all of course

You wrote 'it seems not unrepresentative though'. The 'it' in question being a circle where the poster didn't know anyone who'd kept their name. So actually, your point was the opposite.

When I pointed out that it is in fact unrepresentative, you then moved the goalposts.

Yes, it belongs to me too. It was given to me when I was born, so it’s mine.

I didn’t change mine. I didn’t consider it for a minute. I had no problems vowing to love, honour and cherish but it’s beyond my understanding why I’d need to change my name to do that.

I do have to regularly remind people that I’m still Ms Pies though, except my in laws, who have absolutely no idea what my surname is. Fortunately they also have absolutely no idea when my birthday is either, so they’ve never needed to address anything to me 😁

That’s part of the reason why I chose to double barrel my name because I refuse to drop my maiden name and plus his parents absolutely hate me and that feeling is more than mutual and I refuse to have the same name as them.

My ex husband is Anglo African heritage and when i have to say my surname to people who don't know me I get some funny looks when I a fair skinned redhead say my surname and have to spell it as its the African side of his heritage.

I am seriously thinking of going beck to my maiden name legally as its my Scottish heritage , apart from official paperwork I go by my maiden name usually

I have been saying all along that most women change their names so not knowing anyone who's changed their name is unrepresentative (direct quotation from the post of your I just replied to).

In the post that began our discussion you wrote:

'The poster may have a small circle, I’ve no idea. It seems not unrepresentative though.'

The 'it' was a poster who didn't know anyone who'd kept their name. That is what we have been talking about, not whether not knowing anyone who did change their name is unrepresentative. Did you think the poster had said she didn't know anyone who'd changed it?

No it wasn’t. It was in response to that poster saying the person who knew nobody who hadn’t changed their name had a small social circle. I’ve been, quite clearly and with statistics, saying most women change their names all along. Image of the beginning of the discussion to confirm.

Yes, you've tried your best to make it about that. It isn't.

Our discussion began when you claimed the poster's circle was 'not unrepresentative'. Unless she knows barely anyone, it is. That is what I took issue with, because you were wrong, and that is what we're talking about.

We all know the majority of women name change. No dispute there. But as the stats you provided say 15% don't, that means a circle where nobody does is either very small or unrepresentative. Has to be one of the two. It's not very likely the poster only knows such a small number of women, so it's evidently unrepresentative. Which makes your 'not unrepresentative claim' wrong.

Gen Zer here- I still have the 1st year contact list from when I started secondary school in 2017, I had a look the other day & noted more than 1/2 mothers had kept their names, but the children always have the dad's name.

I get why, but personally I prefer hyphenating tho it could be a mouthful depending what the names are. After all, if the woman doesn't have to change her name by default, why should the kids have the dad's name only by default? I have my mum's name as my father has never been around- I like that it connects me to my grandfather, who was Polish & passed when I was 3 & my father has a very boring surname so even if he had been nice I would've preferred my mum's.

I get the arguments for all having same name, my friends w different names from their mum's often have airport issues& it' good to show unity. I just think personally that the most equal way is to use both names, provided they work well together etc

After all, despite the arguments that it doesn't impact equality, it's nearly always the woman who has to change & get used to a new name. On the father's name argument, yes, normally her name will be from her father. But why should that mean she should change her name to the name her husband probs got from his father? Would her husband change his name to hers? Why should it by default be her who changes? If she prefers her husband's name, sure. But if you like your birth name, I think it's a poor argument to say it doesn't matter as it's your father's name, when you'd probs not make that argument to a man.

I'm lesbian myself & pretty sure I want kids. Who takes whose name then, according to the posters who say the woman is the one who ought to change? Hopefully hyphenating works well, I think I'd choose that?

No, not at all, it’s my name now and in fairness I’ve had it almost as long as my maiden name.

Me too. The surname i was born with and had throughout my life pre marriage is part of me and I would never change it.

Another thought- my grandmother wasn't the stereotype of a 50s submissive housewife (plenty of women weren't ofc, housewives or not), she , & worked until 60 bc she loved teaching. To her tho, there was ofc no question that she'd change her name. But emotionally she still feels v much that she's (birth surname), it's a v English one & she was v close to her paternal family esp. There could be confusion bc of her having a Polish surname & often, esp now she's quite old, she writes her original name.

Ofc some women marry people from other countries & love having a different kind of surname. But bc of this, I think in some cases holding to your birth surname can be important for cultural/familial reasons. Obvs different for each person.

Why did you change it?

Why did you change it if you don't like it? Your husbands name belongs to his father and his grandfather anyway.

Another thought- I read a while ago about a couple who wanted to create a totally new name, as neither were keen on their original names. I think that's quite nice, it symbolises starting something new in collaboration. I like the unifying aspect of a name change, and w that it's totally equal.
But I feel like most people don't dislike their surnames.

I definitely still have a strong attachment to my maiden name. Growing up, my family were very well known for various (non-criminal!) reasons. My friends still refer to me by my maiden name.

When I talk about myself, in jest, in the third person, it's my maiden name I use. I don't see my married name as 'my name' but a term for the person who is my child's mother and my husband's wife. I know that sounds like I shouldn't have bothered charging it, but mentally I never changed it.

And I still have the same signature (because it's illegible anyway!)

I took my husband's surname as wanted rid of my maiden name which was my father's. He gave me up so meant nothing to me. I divorced h last year 🥳 so my son has picked a new surname for me which I'll organise as soon as I've moved.