wife keeps her name

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm one of the men who isn't happy about my wife not taking my name but I married her despite her plan to keep her name

We are a happy couple despite our disagreement on this issue

Does that make me a misogynist?

A lot of the meaner/snarkier comments from men are responding to women telling them (us) we are insecure, man children, whiny boys, bitches, pathetic etc

No, but it does mean you should check your thinking about men, women, and patriarchy.

Was going to write this. You may not be a "misogynist" technically. But having negative feelings towards your wife about her refusal to do something that you would not do, in each case because of longstanding gender norms,..... well, it certainly doesn't make you a good guy.

I can see feeling hurt about it. I guess my question is whether this pp feels resentment as if it were his right to demand it. Not clear that he does. I think it's what you do with those feelings that matter, not whether it bothers you. ~another woman who kept her own name

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it interesting that so many women on here care about denying husbands the love/joy/respect that comes from this symbolic gesture instead of focusing on real problems facing women and girls

It's like you care more about belittling men than lifting up women and girls

I agree. I believe many women on DCUM are sexually and otherwise frustrated.

--a woman

Hahahaha! Oh yes, that's the problem, pp! All that sexual frustration!
Wow, nastiness is getting out of hand on both sides in this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hate that my wife kept her name. It's one thing I would change about her and our marriage if I could. It's embarrassing to me and makes me sad that we will never be able to send out Christmas cards from the (last name)

I kept my last name yet always send out Christmas cards from the “Smith” Family. I also tell my friends to go ahead and use my husbands name when sending things so I receive a lot of mail to the “Smith” family. I don’t care the my last name is not specifically mentioned on the card, wedding invite, etc. Socially we go by my husbands name and professionally I use my name. I also don’t have an issue being addressed as Mrs “Smith” by the kids teachers. If your wife has issues using your name socially then maybe it is time for a discussion to figure out why she is so adamant to not use your name. Her explanation may help you understand the issue but I am betting this is a control thing on your part if you are embarrassed by this. Honestly, this would be a huge red flag if my husband was embarrassed.

This is a good idea - using it socially. Maybe I will bring that idea up later on after we have some kids.

I am not so embarrassed that I regret marrying her - not by a long shot. She is mostly perfect, but this one thing about her -- keeping her last name -- bugs me a ton. I don't think my embarrassment is a huge flag. It is normal to be slightly embarrassed about being one of the 2% of husbands whose wives didn't take their name.

It's not like I avoid introducing her to people or something, but .. it's just something that will pretty much always annoy me somewhat as long as we don't have the same last name.

DF. Yeah. Socially people can address me however. I just want my checks, degrees, and my publications with my name.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm one of the men who isn't happy about my wife not taking my name but I married her despite her plan to keep her name

We are a happy couple despite our disagreement on this issue

Does that make me a misogynist?

A lot of the meaner/snarkier comments from men are responding to women telling them (us) we are insecure, man children, whiny boys, bitches, pathetic etc

No, but it does mean you should check your thinking about men, women, and patriarchy.

Was going to write this. You may not be a "misogynist" technically. But having negative feelings towards your wife about her refusal to do something that you would not do, in each case because of longstanding gender norms,..... well, it certainly doesn't make you a good guy.

I am a woman who considers herself a feminist. This is BS. Relationships are complicated, what people envision for their families is complicated. I kind of wish my husband was more verbal, he tends to keep his emotions inside. It makes me a little sad that he is like this. We love each other a lot and we are very happy. But this thing about him does make me a little sad.

People you have relationships do things and you are allowed to have emotional reactions to those things without being called names. If PP isn't holding it against his wife or fighting with her about it then it is very dismissive to say he's not allowed to be disappointed that a vision for his future family that he's likely held since childhood isn't coming exactly true. We face these small disappointments all through our lives. Acknowledging that they happen doesn't make you a bad person. Treating another person badly due to that disappointment does.

Another feminist here who thinks you nailed it, pp. +1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm one of the men who isn't happy about my wife not taking my name but I married her despite her plan to keep her name

We are a happy couple despite our disagreement on this issue

Does that make me a misogynist?

A lot of the meaner/snarkier comments from men are responding to women telling them (us) we are insecure, man children, whiny boys, bitches, pathetic etc

No, but it does mean you should check your thinking about men, women, and patriarchy.

Was going to write this. You may not be a "misogynist" technically. But having negative feelings towards your wife about her refusal to do something that you would not do, in each case because of longstanding gender norms,..... well, it certainly doesn't make you a good guy.

This is utter nonsense. You have no idea why this man wanted his wife to take his name, yet you infer he is a bad guy. There could be any number of reasons why and we don’t know them. It’s not fair to paint him a bad guy when we don’t know those reasons. But then again, the patriarchy nonsense is all about painting someone as a bad guy simply because he has a penis.

Totally agreed with you till the last sentence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm one of the men who isn't happy about my wife not taking my name but I married her despite her plan to keep her name

We are a happy couple despite our disagreement on this issue

Does that make me a misogynist?

A lot of the meaner/snarkier comments from men are responding to women telling them (us) we are insecure, man children, whiny boys, bitches, pathetic etc

No, but it does mean you should check your thinking about men, women, and patriarchy.

Was going to write this. You may not be a "misogynist" technically. But having negative feelings towards your wife about her refusal to do something that you would not do, in each case because of longstanding gender norms,..... well, it certainly doesn't make you a good guy.

I can see feeling hurt about it. I guess my question is whether this pp feels resentment as if it were his right to demand it. Not clear that he does. I think it's what you do with those feelings that matter, not whether it bothers you. ~another woman who kept her own name

In my dating years, I used keeping my last name as a screener. One pastor's son said it was a deal breaker because it symbolized union. I responded that staying married symbolized union more. He also probably added something about head of household and submission. And he had a name of that ended with IV and required his first born son the be a V. :/ We are still friends. I have been married to a more laid back dude for over a decade/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm one of the men who isn't happy about my wife not taking my name but I married her despite her plan to keep her name

We are a happy couple despite our disagreement on this issue

Does that make me a misogynist?

A lot of the meaner/snarkier comments from men are responding to women telling them (us) we are insecure, man children, whiny boys, bitches, pathetic etc

No, but it does mean you should check your thinking about men, women, and patriarchy.

Was going to write this. You may not be a "misogynist" technically. But having negative feelings towards your wife about her refusal to do something that you would not do, in each case because of longstanding gender norms,..... well, it certainly doesn't make you a good guy.

I am a woman who considers herself a feminist. This is BS. Relationships are complicated, what people envision for their families is complicated. I kind of wish my husband was more verbal, he tends to keep his emotions inside. It makes me a little sad that he is like this. We love each other a lot and we are very happy. But this thing about him does make me a little sad.

People you have relationships do things and you are allowed to have emotional reactions to those things without being called names. If PP isn't holding it against his wife or fighting with her about it then it is very dismissive to say he's not allowed to be disappointed that a vision for his future family that he's likely held since childhood isn't coming exactly true. We face these small disappointments all through our lives. Acknowledging that they happen doesn't make you a bad person. Treating another person badly due to that disappointment does.

Another feminist here who thinks you nailed it, pp. +1

Well said and surprisingly reasonable considering the less than civil discourse we've had in this thread. Thanks to PP and +1er.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Am one of them. Think nothing of it. Wonder a little about the women who change their names, though.

Easy there. You do you, I'll do me. Ok?

I changed my name. I knew my kids would get my DH's last name, and I wanted to share a last name with them. So I changed my name. Not a big deal to me.

My sister did not change her name. My SIL (brother's wife) did not change her name. I completely support their decisions and don't think they are any less committed to their husbands because of it. But neither of them share a last name with their children, which was important to me. They both had better/more established careers with their maiden names, so I think it was trade off that made sense for them.

To each their own. The best part about living now is being able to CHOOSE.

Not the PP, but another woman who kept her name.

I think the bolded part is what many of us have a problem with. Why did you know that your kids would get your DH's last name? I was the opposite. I knew that our kids would get MY name, whatever I decided that to be.

If DH wanted to change his name to have the same name as our children, that would have been fine with me. He decided not to do so, which was also fine.

Not sure why or how women grow and deliver babies, generally do by far the lion's share of child rearing (statistically speaking), and yet say things like "I knew my kids would get DH's name".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm one of the men who isn't happy about my wife not taking my name but I married her despite her plan to keep her name

We are a happy couple despite our disagreement on this issue

Does that make me a misogynist?

A lot of the meaner/snarkier comments from men are responding to women telling them (us) we are insecure, man children, whiny boys, bitches, pathetic etc

No, but it does mean you should check your thinking about men, women, and patriarchy.

Was going to write this. You may not be a "misogynist" technically. But having negative feelings towards your wife about her refusal to do something that you would not do, in each case because of longstanding gender norms,..... well, it certainly doesn't make you a good guy.

I am a woman who considers herself a feminist. This is BS. Relationships are complicated, what people envision for their families is complicated. I kind of wish my husband was more verbal, he tends to keep his emotions inside. It makes me a little sad that he is like this. We love each other a lot and we are very happy. But this thing about him does make me a little sad.

People you have relationships do things and you are allowed to have emotional reactions to those things without being called names. If PP isn't holding it against his wife or fighting with her about it then it is very dismissive to say he's not allowed to be disappointed that a vision for his future family that he's likely held since childhood isn't coming exactly true. We face these small disappointments all through our lives. Acknowledging that they happen doesn't make you a bad person. Treating another person badly due to that disappointment does.

Another feminist here who thinks you nailed it, pp. +1

What if the DH was disappointed that his daughter wanted to go to college and have a career, instead of preparing to be a stay at home mom? Because that's how women traditionally did things? But he kept these feeling to himself and didn't do anything with them?

Or what if he's disappointed his white daughter is dating a black guy? But doesn't say anything.

More extreme examples, but they certainly prove that some "emotional reactions" are absolutely entitled to derision from others. I think if her DH has disappointment in his wife, even if he keeps it to himself, because she isn't operating in the bounds of old social norms based or gender (or race, or whatever), then, yeah, you can make some judgments about the DH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm one of the men who isn't happy about my wife not taking my name but I married her despite her plan to keep her name

We are a happy couple despite our disagreement on this issue

Does that make me a misogynist?

A lot of the meaner/snarkier comments from men are responding to women telling them (us) we are insecure, man children, whiny boys, bitches, pathetic etc

No, but it does mean you should check your thinking about men, women, and patriarchy.

Was going to write this. You may not be a "misogynist" technically. But having negative feelings towards your wife about her refusal to do something that you would not do, in each case because of longstanding gender norms,..... well, it certainly doesn't make you a good guy.

This is utter nonsense. You have no idea why this man wanted his wife to take his name, yet you infer he is a bad guy. There could be any number of reasons why and we don’t know them. It’s not fair to paint him a bad guy when we don’t know those reasons. But then again, the patriarchy nonsense is all about painting someone as a bad guy simply because he has a penis.

Poor men. They have it so tough.

That’s not what the poster said. Nice attempt.

I disagree. Nice attempt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm one of the men who isn't happy about my wife not taking my name but I married her despite her plan to keep her name

We are a happy couple despite our disagreement on this issue

Does that make me a misogynist?

A lot of the meaner/snarkier comments from men are responding to women telling them (us) we are insecure, man children, whiny boys, bitches, pathetic etc

No, but it does mean you should check your thinking about men, women, and patriarchy.

Was going to write this. You may not be a "misogynist" technically. But having negative feelings towards your wife about her refusal to do something that you would not do, in each case because of longstanding gender norms,..... well, it certainly doesn't make you a good guy.

I am a woman who considers herself a feminist. This is BS. Relationships are complicated, what people envision for their families is complicated. I kind of wish my husband was more verbal, he tends to keep his emotions inside. It makes me a little sad that he is like this. We love each other a lot and we are very happy. But this thing about him does make me a little sad.

People you have relationships do things and you are allowed to have emotional reactions to those things without being called names. If PP isn't holding it against his wife or fighting with her about it then it is very dismissive to say he's not allowed to be disappointed that a vision for his future family that he's likely held since childhood isn't coming exactly true. We face these small disappointments all through our lives. Acknowledging that they happen doesn't make you a bad person. Treating another person badly due to that disappointment does.

Another feminist here who thinks you nailed it, pp. +1

What if the DH was disappointed that his daughter wanted to go to college and have a career, instead of preparing to be a stay at home mom? Because that's how women traditionally did things? But he kept these feeling to himself and didn't do anything with them?

Or what if he's disappointed his white daughter is dating a black guy? But doesn't say anything.

More extreme examples, but they certainly prove that some "emotional reactions" are absolutely entitled to derision from others. I think if her DH has disappointment in his wife, even if he keeps it to himself, because she isn't operating in the bounds of old social norms based or gender (or race, or whatever), then, yeah, you can make some judgments about the DH.

Two responses to this argument. 1) you can be anxious over your white kid dating a black guy and wish she wasn't doing it and still recognize that it's your problem not hers. I think that's okay. 2) Or you can think your white kid shouldn't date a black guy because you hate blacks and not say anything. And while I think that person should think differently about it, I'm so glad they're keeping it to themselves. Better than being an out and out jerk about it. But I see your point, pp.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Am one of them. Think nothing of it. Wonder a little about the women who change their names, though.

Easy there. You do you, I'll do me. Ok?

I changed my name. I knew my kids would get my DH's last name, and I wanted to share a last name with them. So I changed my name. Not a big deal to me.

My sister did not change her name. My SIL (brother's wife) did not change her name. I completely support their decisions and don't think they are any less committed to their husbands because of it. But neither of them share a last name with their children, which was important to me. They both had better/more established careers with their maiden names, so I think it was trade off that made sense for them.

To each their own. The best part about living now is being able to CHOOSE.

Not the PP, but another woman who kept her name.

I think the bolded part is what many of us have a problem with. Why did you know that your kids would get your DH's last name? I was the opposite. I knew that our kids would get MY name, whatever I decided that to be.

If DH wanted to change his name to have the same name as our children, that would have been fine with me. He decided not to do so, which was also fine.

Not sure why or how women grow and deliver babies, generally do by far the lion's share of child rearing (statistically speaking), and yet say things like "I knew my kids would get DH's name".

I think the traditional agreement is that children are named after the husband/father in "exchange" for his support raising the children and supporting the wife/family. One certain way to have no debate about children's names is to have them outside of wedlock.

The same thing could be said about a wife taking the husband's name. There is always the option to not get married and just be boyfriend/girlfriend or whatever else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Am one of them. Think nothing of it. Wonder a little about the women who change their names, though.

Easy there. You do you, I'll do me. Ok?

I changed my name. I knew my kids would get my DH's last name, and I wanted to share a last name with them. So I changed my name. Not a big deal to me.

My sister did not change her name. My SIL (brother's wife) did not change her name. I completely support their decisions and don't think they are any less committed to their husbands because of it. But neither of them share a last name with their children, which was important to me. They both had better/more established careers with their maiden names, so I think it was trade off that made sense for them.

To each their own. The best part about living now is being able to CHOOSE.

Not the PP, but another woman who kept her name.

I think the bolded part is what many of us have a problem with. Why did you know that your kids would get your DH's last name? I was the opposite. I knew that our kids would get MY name, whatever I decided that to be.

If DH wanted to change his name to have the same name as our children, that would have been fine with me. He decided not to do so, which was also fine.

Not sure why or how women grow and deliver babies, generally do by far the lion's share of child rearing (statistically speaking), and yet say things like "I knew my kids would get DH's name".

I think the traditional agreement is that children are named after the husband/father in "exchange" for his support raising the children and supporting the wife/family. One certain way to have no debate about children's names is to have them outside of wedlock.

The same thing could be said about a wife taking the husband's name. There is always the option to not get married and just be boyfriend/girlfriend or whatever else.

...and because the wife became his property upon marrying and no longer had her own property rights, right to enter into legal contracts, her own money. The list goes on.

As of 2016, about 70% of mothers work outside the home. So the "I'll support you in exchange for you becoming my chattel" no longer applies.

There is always the option to get married and retain the names that each party has had since birth, and to be equal contributors to the family in all respects. It is not rocket science.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm one of the men who isn't happy about my wife not taking my name but I married her despite her plan to keep her name

We are a happy couple despite our disagreement on this issue

Does that make me a misogynist?

A lot of the meaner/snarkier comments from men are responding to women telling them (us) we are insecure, man children, whiny boys, bitches, pathetic etc

No, but it does mean you should check your thinking about men, women, and patriarchy.

Was going to write this. You may not be a "misogynist" technically. But having negative feelings towards your wife about her refusal to do something that you would not do, in each case because of longstanding gender norms,..... well, it certainly doesn't make you a good guy.

I am a woman who considers herself a feminist. This is BS. Relationships are complicated, what people envision for their families is complicated. I kind of wish my husband was more verbal, he tends to keep his emotions inside. It makes me a little sad that he is like this. We love each other a lot and we are very happy. But this thing about him does make me a little sad.

People you have relationships do things and you are allowed to have emotional reactions to those things without being called names. If PP isn't holding it against his wife or fighting with her about it then it is very dismissive to say he's not allowed to be disappointed that a vision for his future family that he's likely held since childhood isn't coming exactly true. We face these small disappointments all through our lives. Acknowledging that they happen doesn't make you a bad person. Treating another person badly due to that disappointment does.

Another feminist here who thinks you nailed it, pp. +1

What if the DH was disappointed that his daughter wanted to go to college and have a career, instead of preparing to be a stay at home mom? Because that's how women traditionally did things? But he kept these feeling to himself and didn't do anything with them?

Or what if he's disappointed his white daughter is dating a black guy? But doesn't say anything.

More extreme examples, but they certainly prove that some "emotional reactions" are absolutely entitled to derision from others. I think if her DH has disappointment in his wife, even if he keeps it to himself, because she isn't operating in the bounds of old social norms based or gender (or race, or whatever), then, yeah, you can make some judgments about the DH.

Two responses to this argument. 1) you can be anxious over your white kid dating a black guy and wish she wasn't doing it and still recognize that it's your problem not hers. I think that's okay. 2) Or you can think your white kid shouldn't date a black guy because you hate blacks and not say anything. And while I think that person should think differently about it, I'm so glad they're keeping it to themselves. Better than being an out and out jerk about it. But I see your point, pp.

I'm the 'this is bs' pp. This is a true slippery slope PP.

If I as a white woman feel a tingle of fear when I see a black guy walking behind me at night I have three choices. Confront the guy angrily, silently cross the street and walk as fast as I can, consciously acknowledge that I feel it, that feeling it isn't really a good reflection on me, use that self awareness to try to change a bit about how I think to try to lessen the odds of my having that reaction in the future.

I don't think people can control thoughts, I think they control how they learn and react from them. And just like above, if the man us holding this against his wife and fighting with her about it, that is bad. If it is a small sadness he lives with because it is contrary to beliefs he has held his entire life, then he is trying and isn't a bad person.

If the racist father secretly resents his daughter's relationship for years allowing it to erode their love, then he is a terrible person. If he acknowledges the feeling, feels it but doesn't act on it and goes on to have a good relationship with the SO then he's trying to be a good person.

I think a lot of fathers have felt the one about the daughter in the last couple of generations. Does that make them a bad person if they still support and love her and are engaged in her life and future? I don't think so. I think a lot of humans have dark thoughts. We are who we try to be through our actions far more than the base emotions and instincts we sometimes fight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Am one of them. Think nothing of it. Wonder a little about the women who change their names, though.

Easy there. You do you, I'll do me. Ok?

I changed my name. I knew my kids would get my DH's last name, and I wanted to share a last name with them. So I changed my name. Not a big deal to me.

My sister did not change her name. My SIL (brother's wife) did not change her name. I completely support their decisions and don't think they are any less committed to their husbands because of it. But neither of them share a last name with their children, which was important to me. They both had better/more established careers with their maiden names, so I think it was trade off that made sense for them.

To each their own. The best part about living now is being able to CHOOSE.

Not the PP, but another woman who kept her name.

I think the bolded part is what many of us have a problem with. Why did you know that your kids would get your DH's last name? I was the opposite. I knew that our kids would get MY name, whatever I decided that to be.

If DH wanted to change his name to have the same name as our children, that would have been fine with me. He decided not to do so, which was also fine.

Not sure why or how women grow and deliver babies, generally do by far the lion's share of child rearing (statistically speaking), and yet say things like "I knew my kids would get DH's name".

I think the traditional agreement is that children are named after the husband/father in "exchange" for his support raising the children and supporting the wife/family. One certain way to have no debate about children's names is to have them outside of wedlock.

The same thing could be said about a wife taking the husband's name. There is always the option to not get married and just be boyfriend/girlfriend or whatever else.

...and because the wife became his property upon marrying and no longer had her own property rights, right to enter into legal contracts, her own money. The list goes on.

As of 2016, about 70% of mothers work outside the home. So the "I'll support you in exchange for you becoming my chattel" no longer applies.

There is always the option to get married and retain the names that each party has had since birth, and to be equal contributors to the family in all respects. It is not rocket science.

I'm a SAHM (now, although have higher education level and at one point out-earned my DH) and so I'm definitely not an equal contributor to the family financially, but I still kept my name and our kids have my name.

In "exchange" for DH's support to raise the children and support me and the family (at least while the kids are younger), I chose him to have the honor of being the father of our kids. He did pretty well, I think (and so does he).