Late night thoughts... women changing surnames after marriage

[FatJan]

Not sure if this is the right board as I'm not fully sure where I'm going with this yet! Feels vaguely right, but happy for it to be moved.

Basically, I was scrolling through social media this evening and clicked on a post from a girl I knew at school which had got lots of comments.

As I scrolled down the post, I saw a load of comments from women whose names I didn't recognise.

I thought it was a bit strange I didn't recognise/couldn't remember who they were because the post was about something that happened at the school, and they were all talking as if they'd been there.

Suddenly I realised that I did actually know all of the women - they were all girls from our year.

I hadn't realised because they've all got married and now have their husbands' surnames.

It gave me a weird and not particularly pleasant feeling.

I haven't followed these ladies' lives over the years as they weren't in my close friendship circle, but I remember them well and how they were as children and teenagers.

Something about the fact that the identities they had when they were young no longer exist (on paper anyway) and they all have their husbands' names now made me feel a bit upset, which surprised me.

I'm trying to explore that feeling and I thought writing it down/sharing it might be a good place to start.

Obviously being happily married isn't a bad thing, so I think it's more the (perceived) loss of old identity thing that has given me a jolt, probably linked to the fact that men get to keep theirs.

I think it was also related to the fact it wasn't just one woman with a new name, it was the entire friendship group. It made it seem like the 'thing' to do, and I suppose it is, although I'm not sure how I feel about that. Some of the girls were very outspoken feminist types and to see them all as wives now with their husbands' name was a bit unexpected.

To be honest, I've been very in-my-head with the Sarah and Sabina cases and the ongoing discussions around things women go through that men don't, and this might be impacting the way I responded emotionally to that particular post.

Does the above make sense at all? Has anyone noticed or felt something similar?

I really think of all the justifications for changing a name - the one above that says that it is a woman choosing for the first time as empowering because she was given her name by her father - as the most silly!

@NCBlossom

I really think of all the justifications for changing a name - the one above that says that it is a woman choosing for the first time as empowering because she was given her name by her father - as the most silly!

Right?!

@lazylinguist

Then why do so many still do it? It is massive symbolic. To suggest it's just a piece of jewellery is laughable.

Because it's a tradition, because they like a sparkly ring and because they are excited about being engaged and having a visible sign of it.

All kinds of traditions that we've chosen to retain were originally symbolic of things that few people actually believe in any more. People like to have rituals to mark important life events or times of year. I mean... look at Christmas and Easter. Or the fact that tons of people still get married or have funerals in church when they don't believe in god.

To suggest that women (or men) in the UK in 2021 view an engagement ring as a property stamp is frankly absurd.

Exactly my point FatJan

When the chance of an expensive, sparkly ring that can be shown off to friends is on the table then feminism goes out the window.

Anybody can decide to have or not have any tradition on their wedding day. Have them all, have none of them- I don't care.

But don't cherry pick then call into question the choices of others.

If you don't change your name but do wear an engagement ring , fine nobody's business but yours but you then can't really question choice of others to change their name.

I kept my maiden name as a middle name. But I was married 37 years ago . We divorced five years later and I didn't marry again until I was almost 50 so I , against all advice kept my first married surname. It had been mine for 30 years and it's me . My boys have that surname as do my grandchildren. Neither my first or second husband minded a bit .

@Rugsofhonour err.. they're not automatically getting his name? If you read my post you can see I haven't decided. They may have my name, or they may have a double barrelled name, or my fiancé's name. If we give them a combination of our names it would still be different to mine. Of course he's not more important, how patronising of you.

@AICM

Most marriage traditions are out dated.

To those that did change their names, do you wear an engagement ring? Did somebody walk you down the aisle, Did you wear a posh dress? Did any women give speeches?

I'm sure some here can answer no to all.of these. But to those that didn't change your name but wear an engagement ring... what's the difference?

I did wear an engagement ring but I don't now. I don't wear my wedding ring much either- just when I want to wear jewellery. But I did do other traditional elements on the day (father walked me down the aisle ) which I wish I hadn't but just felt young and like I couldn't 'push back' at the time. My dad was an absolute rock on the day though and hated it, just like me, that on the marriage certificate they asked for his profession and not my mothers.

I really think of all the justifications for changing a name - the one above that says that it is a woman choosing for the first time as empowering because she was given her name by her father - as the most silly!

If you're referring to my post, I absolutely didn't say it was empowering to take your husband's name . I simply said that exchanging a name that was only yours because it was your father's for a name that you are taking on from your husband does not seem like an 'erasure of identity' to me. Neither is 'empowering'. Personally I don't feel that my identity is defined by the name I got from my father or the one I got from my husband. My identity is defined by the person I am.

I hope that enough of our generation’s women and the next give our kids our name or double barrelled or amalgamation that this ‘father’s name’ stuff is no longer an argument.

I think it’s obvious that if you’ve had your name since birth, then it’s blimmin well yours! If you choose your name as an adult, stands to reason it’s more your fella’s name than it is yours as he’s held it for more of his life. And he’s not wiping out the identity known to all his school/uni mates, as OP points out.

As PP said, a good rule of thumb is that if the men aren’t choosing to do it then it’s probably sexist.

I do understand why older women changed their names as it was more of ‘the done thing’ and likely to raise eyebrows if not. Plus the average age of marriage was so much younger.

Well done OP for questioning everything - it’s the only way we’ll make any progress.

lazylinguist

It doesn't matter where it came from. It is her name. I can't fathom this idea that a woman only has a name on loan from her father until such time as she can borrow a name from another man's father. It's ridiculous.

The other posters are right - of all the feeble justifications given , this one really is the most feeble.

As PP said, a good rule of thumb is that if the men aren’t choosing to do it then it’s probably sexist

Wearing engagement rings.

@AICM

As PP said, a good rule of thumb is that if the men aren’t choosing to do it then it’s probably sexist

Wearing engagement rings.

Wearing wedding rings. Oh, er, oops.

Never once occurred to me that engagements rings are sexist, but now I think about it, of course they are. Goes to show how easy it is to go along with the patriarchal status quo without questioning.

I hadn't considered this either but can see that they are. There are a lot of marital traditions that are very problematic the white dress, one man giving the woman to another and the fact it's often just men making the speeches. This is one of the reasons I don't want a wedding and just a party. The whole thing just doesn't sit right with me.

@pinacolada5

I hadn't considered this either but can see that they are. There are a lot of marital traditions that are very problematic the white dress, one man giving the woman to another and the fact it's often just men making the speeches. This is one of the reasons I don't want a wedding and just a party. The whole thing just doesn't sit right with me.

Didn't know the history of the white dress? What's behind that?

Man giving to another is a pisstake - I (reluctantly) did that - long story but have massive regrets and wish I'd walked down alone.

Also, DH didn't do a speech I did to make a point that women are not just there to be mute observers - ridiculous isn't it

Many men wear wedding rings

Men never wear engagement rings.
Men never expect to be bought an engagement ring.

@ArblemarchTFruitbat

My maiden name wasn't very likeable so I was happy to adopt my husband's name. If I'd have had a nice maiden name I'd have kept it.

Same here. I was desperate to get shot of my unpronounceable and difficult to spell maiden name.

I know I could just have changed it, but I didn't want to upset my parents. If my maiden name had been something like Smith I would have kept it or gone double barreled.

As a side note, since I got rid of said tricky name, my career success has skyrocketed - I get loads more interviews with my boring name. Could be coincidence I suppose, but I'm doubtful.

Didn't know the history of the white dress? What's behind that?

It was a fashion initially set by Queen Victoria. White/cream/ivory don't have any other symbolic significance other than that. It's a fashion. It's the veil that's slightly more suspect, given this item is supposedly worn for 'modesty'.

As for the symbolic significance of the ring: whether engagement, wedding, eternity, whatever tf they are, they're worn on a specific finger for a specific purpose: to indicate someone (M or F) is betrothed or married. That's it. Unless you interpret marriage as being in possession of another human being, it's in a different league to that of women, their families and their very backgrounds effectively becoming invisible because they've ceded over their own identity as part of the bargain of committing to one partner for life.

I'm completely uncaring as to what other women choose to call themselves, style themselves, or whatever. I haven't lambasted anyone on this thread for being 'unfeminist' or otherwise: there will certainly be times in my life when 'The Sisterhood' (if it exists) can take a happy back set to what I decide is best for me in my individual life.

But to try to parcel these up as the same level of being in thrall to The Patriarchy is quite patently ridiculous.

As PP said, a good rule of thumb is that if the men aren’t choosing to do it then it’s probably sexist.

Absolutely this. Of course it’s patriarchal, if you change your name that you’ve had your whole life, to a man you’ve met and are marrying. When the man would not do this. So why are you?

This thread proves to me that it is women often more than men who hold up patriarchy. Men reading this thread would probably be fairly amused, looking at how women are justifying their ‘free choice’ whilst they just sit back, never have to change their name, have their children have their names. Not only do they retain their identities, they can see their children, and children’s children have their name far into the future. Whilst the women’s names becomes ghosts in history.

I know I've mentioned it before but "maiden name" is offensive, sexist and outdated.

For once I will use Caitlin Moran's advice- if men aren't doing it, it's sexist- unless "batchelor name" is a concept I've simply not come across.

Absolutely this. Of course it’s patriarchal, if you change your name that you’ve had your whole life, to a man you’ve met and are marrying. When the man would not do this. So why are you?

@NCBlossom You might if you had a surname that you were teased about, as I was! Think something like Higglebottom or Death. You then meet someone with a name you actually like, so you choose to change your name to that. Why not?

This thread proves to me that it is women often more than men who hold up patriarchy.

Completely this - which is why it will never disappear.

Then when you point this out you're accused of victim blaming and that it's men who are holding up the patriarchy. It why would men bothers changing a system that benefits them?

Some women can't seem to see it's down to is to make the changes. And that's why change will never happen

@Cameleongirl

Absolutely this. Of course it’s patriarchal, if you change your name that you’ve had your whole life, to a man you’ve met and are marrying. When the man would not do this. So why are you?

@NCBlossom You might if you had a surname that you were teased about, as I was! Think something like Higglebottom or Death. You then meet someone with a name you actually like, so you choose to change your name to that. Why not?

Because I’ve never, ever met or heard of a man who changed his name for a woman on marriage. Despite several men I know having very silly names. I’m not saying you might have a name you didn’t like, but even so, why would you change it to your husbands? You could change it to anything.

I thought the white dress was from Queen Victoria - a demonstration that she was so rich she could buy a dress for her wedding in a completely impractical colour. Iirc, women didn't always marry in white.

I don't understand the notion that a woman's name is her father's and not hers. If a boy gets his name from his dad, it's no less his, is it?

Both DH and I wear wedding rings, so not un feminist. I did get an engagement ring but it was just an excuse to buy bling.

I didn’t like my maiden name and much preferred DH’s so that’s why I changed mine. I love my last name now. I also had quite a difficult childhood so I wasn’t too bothered about putting that behind me and starting a fresh.

Wedding dresses are interesting. I remember being thoroughly confused when reading an Edith Wharton novel , I think it was The Age of Innocence, when it talked about the heroine's wedding dress being made over for the next season's balls but apparently that was a thing. The upper classes restyled them. Other classes had a dress which became their best dress.