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I know it’s a traditional thing and some people see it as outdated or patriarchal but I actually think there’s something quite nice about a whole family sharing the same name.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?

So if the man you are marrying offers to take your surname or wishes for you both to keep your own surnames but you wish to take his surname, is that sexist?

Yep.

Why?

As I said, it is sexist even if a woman chooses it.

Due to the history, the fact that men rarely take the woman's name because it is easier to spell/is more interesting/their name is a mouthful/insert other reason etc and because everyone's choices are influenced by society.

Women are perfectly entitled to take their husband’s name or make any other decision rooted in the patriarchy. But it’s important that they do it in the full knowledge that they are making a profoundly non-feminist choice.

Women are perfectly entitled to take their husband’s name or make any other decision rooted in the patriarchy. But it’s important that they do it in the full knowledge that they are making a profoundly non-feminist choice.

So if you say a woman's choice is influenced by society which option is she most likely to choose- taking her husband's surname or keeping her own?

The vast majority of women still take their husbands name.

And what if the woman doesnt give a toss about what society expects of her- what if she is a strong independently minded woman who does what she wants in life, and what she wants is to have her husband's surname, your still going to say its sexist right?

Of course it is.

Again doing something sexist doesn't magically make it not sexist because it is what someone wants.

It doesn't have to be sexist. It's your choice, nobody else's business if they think it's sexist. There's plenty of bigger things in a marriage to get your knickers in twist than this.
I'm old school, traditional. Took my dh name without giving it a second thought. I've never felt undermined, second class in our marriage, nor has been sexist towards me, ever. Still kept my identity, I don't get what the fuss is about.

So you think individual choice is sexist?

When the vast majority of women are making the 'individual choice' to take their husbands name? Absolutely.

Ask me again when just as many men are making the same choice.

Well traditionally it was sexist, yes. So the way I see it is if you keep your family surname as a woman, you’re still taking some man’s name. There’s no escaping it even with progress.

In all seriousness though, I’m with OP on this one. There are things I’m ‘traditional’ on and this is one of them. Not for sexist reasons, just because they are… well, tradition.

But an engagement ring is not just a piece of jewellery, is it? You do know this.

There are traditions around the buying and given of an engagement ring that are not relevant to any other jewelry.

There is emotional significance to the engagement ring that is not the same as any other piece of jewelry.

To suggest an engagement ring is just like any other piece of jewelry is flying in the face of what everyone knows to be true.

But an engagement ring is not just a piece of jewellery, is it? You do know this.

There are traditions around the buying and given of an engagement ring that are not relevant to any other jewelry.

There is emotional significance to the engagement ring that is not the same as any other piece of jewelry.

To suggest an engagement ring is just like any other piece of jewelry is flying in the face of what everyone knows to be true.

That's only true if you believe women never have their own name but men do because men get their names from their fathers too yet no one tells men they don't have their own name.

As I said, you can do it if you want. Of course you can. That doesn’t make it not-sexist. It is a sexist practice. Nothing can change that.

Obviously more women take their husband's name than the other way around as it goes way back in history. But it's also 2025 and women have choice and freedom and independence and they can choose to do something 'old fashioned' if they wish. It's their choice. By saying its sexist for her to choose to do so is putting negativity on her choice. Do we want women to feel bad for something that isnt wrong?

Sexist history. Hence a reason why it is a sexist choice, even in 2025.

I'm not going to pretend that something isn't sexist just because it might make someone feel bad otherwise.

As I've already said, of course it's their choice. Still sexist though.

Well in that case let's change the narrative shall we- it's not a sexist practice anymore because I'm a woman and it's my choice and I'm happy with my choice. Historically it was sexist but going forward with a new way of thinking we can view it as a woman's choice.

Dont stay stuck in the past.

Yes sexist in history. It's now a choice.

A sexist choice.

The bit that blows my mind the most is that women are distinguishable by their marital status. So many women proudly take on the role of Mrs, which is Mr's just without the apostrophe. But the connotations are the same.

Master becomes Mr at 18, but Miss doesn't become Mrs until she becomes the property of her husband.

I took the ugly name because I grew up in an abusive home with parents who couldnt have cared less about me or my well being. I was happy to have a fresh start with my DH and his ugly name. FWIW, my DH is very attractive, its just his name that's ugly. I can live with that.