Male colleague - views on changing name

[Sailinghappy]

Just interested in what people think about this scenario.

Yesterday my male colleague (totally randomly) asked me if my surname was on my birth certificate. I said no, it's my surname through marriage. He openly laughed and said he was disappointed in me for taking my husband's surname at marriage. He said he thought he was "a better feminist" than me and that taking my husband's name is sexist. I told him I certainly am feminist and that I support women's choices, to do whatever they like. I wasn't forced to take his name, it was my decision and I'm happy with it!!

Do other people agree with my colleague or is he in the minority?

As soon as we are into scrutinising indiviudal choices, then you have
to discard pretty much all women from feminism as there is not a
one of us who has not bent to social norms/ expectations at some point.

Of course I would like to say I never did anything to bow to patriarchy but ya know I did. I came late to feminism anyways.
I can tell you that were I to get married anytime I would keep my name. Sounds all feminist of me I know, til you hear that I have used my exh name for far longer than I had my previous name.
I was glad to change names back then, but I was young and naive.
If I was to go back and do it again I would have kept my birth name.

I don't normally waste my time discussing feminism with men, but I might have asked the colleague whether he took his wife's name when they got married, and if not why not.

Mind you, I kept my name when I got married and was asked about it at a job interview a year later. The interviewer also wanted to know what surname I would give my children. I wasn't even pregnant. And no, it wasn't relevant to the job in any way.

Oh come off it lass,

Your post quoted me and then said that directly underneath as a response!

"LassWiADelicateAir Sat 09-Jun-18 13:16:30
"Scrutinising individual women and then saying they are "good feminists" "bad feminists" or "not feminists" gets us nowhere. It's exactly what the man in the OP did"

I couldn't care less whether any one is a good feminist or a bad feminist. However this idea that no women owns her name so what does it matter is pretty self-defeating."

You are saying that your comment there directly after your quote from my post that you put in bold is not a response?

Any woman who thinks these individual decisions are not part of a lifelong negotiation within patriarchy in which patriarchy sets the terms is misguided IMO. This is why I conclude that it is not possible to determine a naming decision ‘feminist’ or ‘not feminist’.

I'm good friends with a man who took his wife's surname after marriage. And yes, agree with PPs that it's still a man's surname anyway.

What are we meant to do. Decide a brand new surname at marriage and then another at divorce or we all just choose our own surnames when we turn 18?

As an amateur family history researcher, that would be a nightmare for doing any family research.

A small group of unusually economically powerful women who exist within patriarchy being able to make choices about names because the real life consequences of this for them and their DC are acceptable is pretty irrelevant TBH

My mother wasn't economically powerful. She kept her surname through 2 marriages. (Although I suppose the "all names are men's names" brigade would just dismiss that as her keeping her father's name)

I'm glad she did - it's a much nicer name than either the name of my father or my brother's father.

This is all quite a typical way of things though

Patriarchal system set up by men for men
Women say hold on this doesn't fit right some of us want something else
fact that it was set up by men for men means that actually there is no obvious solution that can be made within the general existing structure
women do what they think best based on considerations around the above
field is opened to crticise women for making the "wrong" choice, out of a bunch of bad choices

This happens all the time. What we need here is an entirely different system (don't know what) as the current set-up was simply not constructed with women or children in mind as anything other than property.

And yes, agree with PPs that it's still a man's surname anyway

So we are back to the defeatist "no woman really has her own name" argument?

But this is why it is irrelevant really. In this system the names have been passed down through men, with some exceptions.

A woman’s name is both her name and a man’s name by this logic.

It’s a mistake IMO to think that individual choices re names has any particular influence on dismantling patriarchy. Especially when women are making these choices because they have gotten married.

Dismantling the institution of marriage is a much greater priority surely for the individual choicers?

Oh come off it lass

Of fgs come off it yourself. I quoted you and then I quoted Offred. Not it was not a personal attack.

Actually marrying is a much bigger concession to patriarchy than taking a husband’s name surely?

But we know that re marriage women’s choices are limited by social and economic consequences when it comes to not marrying...

It is the same with names.

Marriage has been dismantled to an extent - insofar as lots of couples don't get married, and go on to have children, and then many split up, and the woman and the children are often stuffed.

So the dismantling of marriage - in the way it is happening - is highly beneficial to men (surprise surrprise) - at least from a financial / freedom perspective, obviously some would argue that men suffer as generally they end up losing a lot of time with children, again there's no easy answer to this in the context of the nuclear family unit thing that we have adopted.

What we mean is that we want society to change / marriage dismantled in a way that is better all round including for kids and removing the patriarchal baggage / expectations (etc lots if different things to aim for here) not just dismantling marriage IYSWIM.

Side note: Read a thing recently about gay marriage with a older activist feeling sad that in their day there was a lot of fighting societal norms and so forth, and now lots of battles are won lots of gay people want to adopt into the existing framework rather than fighting stuff. Their opinion obviously but it's interesting. Many people only fight when it's something they have a personal stake in. Lots of poeple want to / or do fit into the structures that we have. I suppose lots of people are happy with the way things are. In that sense we are all square pegs in round holes seeing it as obvious that the hole is the wrong shape but lots of people are round and happy and are baffled by people saying it's self evdient the holes are wrong... Think that analogy has run out of steam now!

Marriage itself yes is the major patriarchal institution here and the names, walking up aisle, whatever all come from that. But we are not allowed civil partnerships and going without the protections conferred by marriage fucks women over as well...

Yy that’s my point.

I meant really that for the individual choicers surely not getting married in the first place is more of a priority than getting married but keeping your birth surname.

I think re marriage and names it needs to be recognised that women are negotiating their individual lives within a system of patriarchy.

I agree re gay marriage that it is negotiating access to the systems of oppression rather than dismantling them.

For marriage to be dismantled many things, including distribution of wealth and resources would need to change and yes increased divorces and increasing numbers of people living together without getting married is again, not doing much to dismantle the oppressive system as it is being harnessed.

Bollocks, my name is mine to exactly the same extent that my husband's is his. Since our births.

"I agree re gay marriage that it is negotiating access to the systems of oppression rather than dismantling them."

Much more succinct than my version!

If I married, I would keep my own name. Taking your husband’s name is patriarchal & anachronistic. If my husband-to-be objected to this, we wouldn’t be getting married.

If my sister or friend who called herself a feminist took her husband’s name, I obviously wouldn’t say anything or make my views known in any way because it’s her choice, but I would be disappointed.

Fwiw I agree with your colleague, but wouldn't tell you

I wish we were able to move past being ‘disappointed’ in other women for making different determinations re negotiation of life under a patriarchy.

I don’t think you can focus on individual choices without ending up with hierarchies of oppression TBH.

Individual choices are all made under patriarchal systems. Some we see and consider, others we don’t see and don’t understand. It’s still there whether we see it or not and many of the people patting themselves on the back for making the choice to marry but to keep their birth name are as blind to the dynamics as those blindly following traditions IMO.

if you dont take your husbands name, in most cases youre still keeping your fathers name rather than your mothers name, and your grandfathers rather than your grandmothers.

The whole concept of surnames in this society is already patriarchal because its a patriarchal society. I hope it dies a death.

Not defeated Lass. Just pointing out that we don't all have special unique surnames; and us women don't have special female surnames created for us at birth. We mostly take our father's name or even if it's mother's maiden name, that'll be her father's name. They've come from somewhere in the first place - and 99 time's out of a hundred, from a male line.

I don't particularly like my surname. I've never married. If I marry then I would look at all the options, including double barrelling and choose the option that I liked the sound of most/ felt most meaningful.

Similarly if I ever have kids... If I have kids while I'm single then they'll have my name but if I'm coupled then it depends what we both decide to do.

My sister is just getting divorced. I don't know if she'll revert to her maiden name but kids will retain father's name so I don't know. It's messy.

Maybe my tongue in cheek suggestion earlier of us all choosing our own names at 18 wasn't a bad idea.

I fancy a nature name...

Ha! Just realised I already have one... I meant something slightly more imaginative.

Cisters Moon-Star-River-Mountain

My sister is just getting divorced. I don't know if she'll revert to her maiden name but kids will retain father's name so I don't know. It's messy

"Revert to her maiden name?"

You have a long way to go in dismantling the patriarchy if you are still referring to "maiden name"

I just couldn't be arsed to type whatever the words are I need to type to put it in non-patriarchal language.

I don't think I'm actually that bothered about this hence not really putting in the effort.

Chances are I will never marry and will die childless. Currently hoping that comes sooner rather than later. Have bigger fish to fry than arguing retaining the name your father gave you is inherently more feminist than taking the one your husband has.

Isn't it more about family making than anything else? You take on the family name of the family you are currently a part of, if you want to. If not you keep the family name of the family you grew up in or create a new name.

Have bigger fish to fry than arguing retaining the name your father gave you is inherently more feminist than taking the one your husband has.

Oh so your husband has his own name, but yours is your father's?

With bonus side order of "having more important things to worry about" because literally no one else does...