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I know it’s a traditional thing and some people see it as outdated or patriarchal but I actually think there’s something quite nice about a whole family sharing the same name.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

Yes you would hope people wouldn't.

So I would call that looking at the symptom rather than the cause. Yes, I suppose women changing their surname is far from my biggest problem with the patriarchy.

But where it comes from - ownership/devaluation of women, implicit male leadership, even the concept of men owning their own name and identity in a way that women aren't - I do have a problem with all that! And it is those structural elements that feed sexism, even if the end results we can point to in isolation and claim they are benign

And of course not everything has to be 50/50 (although the law of large numbers indicates that in my ideal utopia of equality we probably would approach it!), but equality of opportunity and rights for women as men is difficult to achieve against this backdrop, even if some of the actual propositions like ownership are largely outdated (and even then, that's only largely and definitely not worldwide).

It was used somewhere around page 1.

And is obviously true.

Of course women can make their own decisions. But some have to struggle more than others to get that decision accepted. That’s the nature of adjusting the status quo.

You are being judgey because you are being dismissive of other women discussing something.

And it’s not a discussion that anyone needs to take personally.

You're being judgey by calling me judgey.

'But some have to struggle more than others to get that decision accepted.' The same applies to men.

I'm not being dismissive, I'm offering my opinion just like you are. You just don't happen to agree with it and that's fine.

I hadn't notice anyone had taken this thread personally until you started the name calling...

It's like MN is just flooded with people today who are determined to insist that if a woman points out an issue, unless it's actually goign to cause her to die, she's being very silly if she dares to question it.

Yes, these things annoy me. Of course I think most of the people who say it are a bit silly. But the sheer volume of comments like this makes it pretty clear that this isn't just one or two really dumb outliers. It's constant and relentless. And it represents the fact that as a whole, women are still expected to change their name, even as lots of women don't.

So, let me shout it out loud - it's not a VACUUM. I know, such a cliche when I use that statement. I must be so silly to dare to say something that's been said before. Tut tut, silly little woman that I am.

But cliches are cliches because they're used such a lot becuase they're true.

I was happy to change my name when I was married 53 years ago , mainly because I hated my maiden name but really liked his surname. Also I refused to say obey as part of our wedding vows. He died 18 years ago today and I’m glad that I have his name x

I took my husband's surname when we married. We've been divorced 26 years and I still have it. It's better than a surname that resembles a cat walking along a keyboard, it's not met with "erm how do you spell/pronouce that, blimey that's a mouthful, can I call you by your first name as I don't think I can say that", etc. DD also has his name as that was just a small thing I could do to save her a life-time of frustration. I won't change it to anything else as I like it so why bother.

Indeed, with seemingly no insight into how them trotting out cliched responses and minimising things they've not experienced isn't of earth shattering importance either.

I know lots of people bristle at the idea that a decision they make might be influenced by things around them. But naming and title customs are a particularly daft hill for them to die on, since they literally rely on other people to work the way you want them to, and other people not doing something in sufficient number can mean you don't get the choice you want. That's how these things function. They require other humans to understand and use them in the way you want them to, which means the choices everyone makes impact on people other than them.

Who views it's as ownership or devaluation of women. You could say the same about how marriage used to be viewed.

If it upsets you that certain people dont understand the choices youve made in life then that's not good!

I have something similar that is slightly against the norm in my life but im lucky as most people around me dont make nasty or silly comments about it.

While acknowledging the things going on around us, it is clear that women having to identify as Miss, Mrs or Ms is sexist, given that it is apparently unimportant for men to indicate their marital status in the same way. This has always aggravated me. Why should a woman have to make her marital status explicit when a man doesn’t have to? I have infinitely more sympathy with surname changing, though, so that a husband, wife and their children can all share the same surname. My reason for this is practical - it makes daily life far less complicated, with explanation for the name change required far less often than the irritation of regularly explaining why family members and spouses all have different surnames.

As for it mostly being the man’s surname that is taken, I have some sympathy with that, too - both husband and wife changing surname doubles the workload and obliges an effort to be made to find another name that is somehow meaningful; and both changing to the wife’s surname, imvho, creates a greater imbalance of power than the other way round, because like it or not, it is a fact that only the woman is always 100% certain who her biological children are, so to also be the one whose surname becomes the family name is a bit like a stamp of dominance, as the wife’s is the only family line with a genetic guarantee attached. It may only be symbolic, but to let the man keep the surname and the woman to change hers is a way of saying any children they have together are both of theirs, not just hers.

Because it’s traditional and I prefer traditional ways. Take me back at least 50 years away from this horrible AI future!

@SayItLikeItIsLetsKeepItReal Tradtional as in sexist then?

Leave the woman alone, she is living a different life to you.

It’s not sexist, because women here are free not to change their name. You don’t have to, so why you care that others choose to is something you may want to consider, as you certainly won’t stop other women continuing to do this. Women can choose to do what they like in the UK fortunately for us.

Traditional ways are great. I hate computers, love a pen and paper. I love properly handwriting cards and letters. I love proper books. I prefer home-cooked food. I prefer walking, gardening and being outside moving, would never choose to commute. I love interacting in my local community. Traditional is not a negative thing.

My cousin did this. Is that you Joe?

If you want to continue with a sexist tradition then of course that's up to you. Doesn't make it any less sexist, however.

Of course it’s sexist. Every time a woman adopts her husband’s name , she reinforces the patriarchy.

Make your own choice by all means, but own it.

It is a choice but it isn't always an easy choice. Lots of men, and their families, expect the wife to take the man's name, and if she doesn't want to it can cause resentment, because of, you know, tradition. Lots of traditions were shit, like children born out of wedlock being bastards, and having no inheritance rights. Or married women needing their husbands permission to have a bank account because traditionally men controlled the finances.

And attitudes change dont they, no longer do people care if a child is born out of wedlock for example. The same is true of surnames, there is the choice now, but choice shouldnt mean a woman is made to feel bad for choosing the traditional option or simply just the option she wishes.

Yes that is sadly true for some women, but not for the majority here in the UK. I certainly experienced zero pressure from anyone to change my name, nor did anyone else I know who was happy to. Bit of a non-issue these days really.

Well I like it, so I don’t really care how others perceive it TBH.

There’s certainly a lot of judgment on here towards women who do change their name, that’s very misogynistic. When will people ever stop trying to dictate what women do?! Would you have as much to say to a man who takes his wife’s surname?

A man who took his wife's surname would be challenging the sexist status quo.

And if all men took their wife’s surname/they lived in a country where they had to? Just as bad and sexist, no? Or is it only sexist when men benefit and are always the bad guy?

In which country do they have to do this?