?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

I'm shocked at the condemnation I've received from people when I tell them I'm keeping my maiden name, as well as taking my FH's. We're in the 21st century, people. Just because I'm getting married doesn't mean I have to give up who I am and become my husband's property. It seems like such an archaic tradition to me.

This quote is from a girl in weddingplans. So, while I'm fine with her having an opinion on the subject that's different than mine... come ON! Why are women so upset about "becoming my husband's property"?! First of all, yes, we're in the 21st century, where taking someone's name doesn't mean you're their slave, it means you're their wife. Second of all, if you're so worried about losing your identity, you ought to take a really good look at yourself and ask why you're GETTING MARRIED THEN!! How is a symbolic name change "losing your identity," but getting married, becoming legally tied to a man, and all that shit NOT "losing your identity?"

Argh. Sorry. I really do think it's fine to not want to change your name when you get married, and you can keep it for whatever reason you want, it's just that it frustrates me that women want to be "liberated" from being "owned" by their husbands - it's just like women spelling "women" without the "men." What's the point? They're just words, not huge signs on your forehead saying "I'M INFERIOR!"

EDIT:I also don't get how you can be losing your identity by taking someone's name when your maiden name is the same name as everybody else in your family (and if it's a common name, you share it with a lot more people!). Your identity isn't your label. It's what's inside you.

Tags:

Comments

( 62 comments — Leave a comment )
bigby2k
May. 7th, 2003 09:50 pm (UTC)
Here here! I've always found this crap to be infuriating. True, in days of old wives were considered to be property. That's disappeared, but some males still believe in that, but they're in the miniority, one hopes.

Though, there are other forms of gender oppression that we need to be concerned about than this crap!
rivulet
May. 8th, 2003 07:41 am (UTC)
Re:
We need to be more concerned with REAL forms of gender oppression, not just percieved ones! Like... hmm, funny, I can't think of any. :)
Re: - bigby2k - May. 8th, 2003 08:48 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: - rivulet - May. 8th, 2003 08:51 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: - bigby2k - May. 8th, 2003 09:08 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: - rivulet - May. 8th, 2003 09:11 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: - bigby2k - May. 8th, 2003 09:49 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: - rivulet - May. 8th, 2003 09:50 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: - bigby2k - May. 8th, 2003 09:51 am (UTC) - Expand
luckaduck
May. 7th, 2003 09:54 pm (UTC)
Agreed
Everything you said espouses my opinion; the name change really isn't that big a deal. I myself have never been married (for many a reason) but when I turned 18 I decided to go through a legal last name change (it's a pretty long story; now that I think about it I will just make it into an entry) and I ended up with two non-hyphenated surnames. That's another option for the hesitant bride, but meh. Either way, it's cool. You're right as you frequently are Megan; "your identity isn't your label. It's what's inside you."
luckaduck
May. 7th, 2003 10:29 pm (UTC)
Re: Agreed
By the way, Mom #2...

Second Mom

I can have my own room, right?
Re: Agreed - rivulet - May. 8th, 2003 07:19 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: Agreed - rivulet - May. 8th, 2003 07:40 am (UTC) - Expand
georgelazenby
May. 7th, 2003 10:17 pm (UTC)
I'm sick to fucking death of all the Ellen Braithwaite-Walrustitty's out there anyway.
rivulet
May. 8th, 2003 07:34 am (UTC)
Re:
I second that.
(no subject) - solteronita - May. 8th, 2003 07:56 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: - rivulet - May. 8th, 2003 08:15 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - solteronita - May. 8th, 2003 08:23 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: - rivulet - May. 8th, 2003 08:28 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - solteronita - May. 8th, 2003 08:30 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: - rivulet - May. 8th, 2003 08:32 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - rivulet - May. 8th, 2003 09:58 am (UTC) - Expand
Must....keep...it...going. :) - solteronita - May. 8th, 2003 12:01 pm (UTC) - Expand
Re: Must....keep...it...going. :) - rivulet - May. 8th, 2003 01:22 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - coryg - May. 8th, 2003 08:50 am (UTC) - Expand
thothway
May. 7th, 2003 10:45 pm (UTC)
Because I'm the last of the Cassinghams, I was thinking of keeping it. Then I was thinking of adding on his last name. Wouldn't want a hyphen, either. Maybe just have a longer name that would be read as three separate names, not stuck all together.
rivulet
May. 8th, 2003 07:33 am (UTC)
Re:
I think those are all good reasons for keeping your own name.

But there are a lot of Cassinghams - you wouldn't be the VERY last, but you'd be the last of this branch...
windandsky
May. 7th, 2003 10:52 pm (UTC)
Maving a name like Malakowski for most of my life made the decision easy for me. Now It's Boyer and people can actually seem to pronounce that one! I was shocked though when the pizza store tried to pronounce it with some french accent. And you're right about the look at why you're getting married thing. Most of those relationships end in less than 2 years. Year number 2 is hard, lemme tell ya. But keep it in perspective (as in will I still be making fun of his cute little dimple on his butt when he's 80?)
rivulet
May. 8th, 2003 07:27 am (UTC)
Re:
I can pronounce your name!! My ex's name was Spakousky. :)

Yeah, it'll be interesting to see what the ups and downs are in married life over the years. Let's hope that starting the marriage with the petty mindset that your husband is out to beat you down doesn't make more downs than ups!
(no subject) - ignote - May. 8th, 2003 07:30 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: - rivulet - May. 8th, 2003 07:43 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - ignote - May. 8th, 2003 07:54 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: - rivulet - May. 8th, 2003 08:14 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - dstroy - May. 8th, 2003 08:37 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - coryg - May. 8th, 2003 08:46 am (UTC) - Expand
ignote
May. 8th, 2003 06:38 am (UTC)
Wow, this is a tough one... I guess it's a really personal thing, and everyone is entitled to act on their beliefs. For myself, I'd probably keep my last name somewhere in the mix. My name is highly uncommon- in fact I know everyone in the States who shares it! (They're all related to me) As for the "property" thing, that's a crock of shit. No-one believes that taking someone else's name is an indication of ownership anymore. If anything, it's just a proclamation of "I love him, and we're married!" I think it's silly to say that honoring the man you love in such a way would make you look weak.
rivulet
May. 8th, 2003 07:25 am (UTC)
Re:
It IS a personal thing, and it's OK if you want to keep your name, I'm all for that. My sister says somewhere in here that since she's the last of our branch of Cassinghams, she'll probably want to keep her name somewhere in the mix. But to make an excuse like "my husband is trying to take my identity away and oppress me by making me take his name!" is the kind of feminist paranoia that makes me really upset. You're right, you do it because it's an honor.
solteronita
May. 8th, 2003 07:52 am (UTC)
My $0.02
I can see what arguments like that stem from. It's just the whole idea that women take the man's name, rather than the man taking the woman's name. So, in that sense, it is an "archaic tradition". I guess the concept just bothers some people more than others. And that's completely understandable. Then there's Lyle's idea. Combine your two last names somehow into a new one and both of you change your last names.

Also, the whole point of that person's quote was she is "shocked at the condemnation [she's] received from people when [she] tell[s] them [she's] keeping [her] maiden name". Then people gang up on her over her reason for changing it. It shouldn't matter what her reason is, and I don't see why peoples' reasons for doing things bother others so much. To each his own.
rivulet
May. 8th, 2003 08:14 am (UTC)
Re: My $0.02
That's true. When wives actually WERE the man's property, they took the man's name like slaves took their master's name.

So now, we exchange presents at Christmas, and we sing songs with lyrics that we haven't really ever paid attention to, and that's OK, whether or not we're atheists. It's because the meaning behind the archaic tradition is almost gone. It can still be there for certain people, but the truth of it is that commercialism and all that good stuff has all but taken over the "true meaning of Christmas." (Now I want to watch VeggieTales, hehe.) To me, Christmas' archaic traditions are the same as wedding archaic traditions - they're symbolic, but the meaning's been pretty much all squeezed out of them, so they're not "dangerous" anymore.
Re: My $0.02 - solteronita - May. 8th, 2003 08:17 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: My $0.02 - rivulet - May. 8th, 2003 08:22 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: My $0.02 - solteronita - May. 8th, 2003 08:25 am (UTC) - Expand
coryg
May. 8th, 2003 08:28 am (UTC)
Curses, troll!!

I'm not going to make change my name for no one because no one owens me when I get married i'm going to have three names and then no one will stop me. your'e just a Republikkkan and you probably sell babys on Ebay!!!!!!11!!!11!!!

But seriously. You should post this on debate :)
rivulet
May. 8th, 2003 08:31 am (UTC)
Re:
Don't you remember that time when alocin brought a weddingplans debate about rini to debate? It was baaaad. :)
Re: - coryg - May. 8th, 2003 08:33 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: - rivulet - May. 8th, 2003 08:35 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: - coryg - May. 8th, 2003 08:36 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: - rivulet - May. 8th, 2003 08:37 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: - coryg - May. 8th, 2003 08:38 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: - rivulet - May. 8th, 2003 08:41 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - coryg - May. 8th, 2003 08:51 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: - rivulet - May. 8th, 2003 08:53 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: - coryg - May. 8th, 2003 08:54 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: - rivulet - May. 8th, 2003 08:57 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: - coryg - May. 8th, 2003 09:03 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: - rivulet - May. 8th, 2003 09:10 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: - coryg - May. 8th, 2003 09:13 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: - rivulet - May. 8th, 2003 09:22 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: - coryg - May. 8th, 2003 09:24 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: - rivulet - May. 8th, 2003 09:47 am (UTC) - Expand
Checkers - luckaduck - May. 8th, 2003 09:32 am (UTC) - Expand
Re: Checkers - rivulet - May. 8th, 2003 09:48 am (UTC) - Expand
( 62 comments — Leave a comment )