To think women taking their husband’s name doesn’t have to be sexist?

[RealNavyEagle]

I know it’s a traditional thing and some people see it as outdated or patriarchal but I actually think there’s something quite nice about a whole family sharing the same name. It doesn’t feel like “losing my identity” to me, just part of building a shared one.

AIBU to think it’s not automatically a regressive choice and that it can just be a personal one?

I'd rather just have the same name as my children above all else

Then give your children your name!!!!

I did.

I was engaged at 20 and knew I'd be changing my name so there was absolutely no need to independently change it.

But again, I draw back to my point of my reasons are my own and it isn't for anybody else to tell me what I could or should have done. I did exactly what I wanted to do.

My name, however, very much belongs to me just as much as it does my brother

Exactly.

My name belongs to me just as much as it belongs to my dad because we've both had it since birth.

No one 'gave me away' when I got married either. Yuck.

As opposed to men, whose names are nothing to do with their father? Right.

And for the love of God, if you want the same name as your children, give them yours!!

I should have put that in quote marks too, I know it's yuck .

The Spanish system works quite well: your name at birth is your name forever, and it comines your father and mother's surnames. You don't change it when you marry, and the only other people to have the same name are your siblings.

It’s amazing how men with difficult to spell/pronounce names aren’t desperate to change their names on marriage.

Why did you change your name and give your daughter this ugly name?

Thank you! My situation too.

I agree OP .I took dhs name, not because I'm a blind follower of tradition or because he owns me or because I'm submissive or because I'm trying to appease him. I chose it and don't intend justifying my choice to anyone.

I think my husband would've done if it had been the other way around.

My DD is getting married and plans to take her fiance's name and I'm actually upset about it. She has my birth name as DP and I weren't married when she was born, and I haven't changed my name on marriage.

I think this is in keeping with the trend I've observed anecdotally. The discarding of women's identities on marriage seems to be on the upturn again, despite a swing away from this in around the nineties/noughties. I married in 2008: many women I knew who married at around the same time continued to use their own family names, and in my profession this was quite usual.

The expectation that women will relinquish our names on marriage is often touted as a choice. Were this the case, men would adopt a similar practice as they tend to act in ways which benefit them. It taking someone else's name were a fully free choice, devoid of social conditioning and conventional expectation, then it's amazing how infrequently men choose to exercise it.

I agree. There also seems to be an upturn in other patriarchal notions such as "The Proposal" and even asking the father for the woman's hand. Marriage is patriarchal enough (but often necessary for legal protections) without sliding back into the 1950s or earlier.

Anybody who thinks its sexist doesnt need to take their husband's surname. Just stand up for whatever you want. It's a non issue.

@Eagle2025 That's such an oversimplification of a socially conditioned issue. For example, lots of women assume you name change and/or title change automatically upon marriage.

Well if they've never thought about it then it obviously doesnt bother them

Well, this thread was started by an OP who is clearly aware of the sexist aspects of the custom, did it anyway and thinks it's enough of an issue to want to talk it through.

One doesn't have to agree with her that it's worth discussing, but that being so, a thread where people engage with the topic might not be to your taste.

I'm agreeing with the OP. It doesnt have to be sexist. It's only sexist if you view it like that and if you dont want to take a man's surname then dont. She did it because she wanted to.

The OP doesn't appear to think it's a non-issue, so not sure you are agreeing with her in fact.

Her position is also more nuanced than yours. She said in her last post that even a decision a person thinks is an individual one is still shaped by wider societal factors, and is sceptical that there are 'pure' naming decisions.

Look I'm just as entitled to my opinion as you. I personally don't agree with people calling it sexist and that's my opinion. If your a woman and you think its sexist then dont do it. Of course there are some societal pressures in life but if your a woman who feels strongly on that sort of issue then surely you wouldn't be marrying a man who you didnt think would support you. And again if your a woman who feels strongly on these things your that bit less likely to be 'bullied' by other's opinions. I see it more and more now that women keep their own surnames or go double barrel. And I see more married women go with Miss Ms or even Mx is creeping in.

Not sure where anyone has said you weren't entitled to an opinion? We were talking about whether your view that this is a non-issue was in keeping with the OP, who clearly feels the issue is less black and white than you do.

Of course it's sexist.

A woman doing it because she wants to doesn't make it any less sexist.

Something has obviously caused the OP to question this and it's a case of dont worry about it!