Getting married in a month and I can't decide if I want to take his last name

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm 39 yo in DC and it feels like maybe 10-20% of my friends changed their last names when they married. My non-DC friends seems to all change their names.

+1. I know a 35-yr-old in Ohio who just got married this summer, and she changed her name. I thought, isn't that a little late? Aren't you already very established in your adult life & career? I see changing surnames more a 20-something thing to do, like before you're really established.

[Anonymous]

The most recent survey data has maiden name retention at 17.1%, but much higher (28.7%) so far in this decade.
https://www.google.com/insights/consumersurveys/view?survey=tpjh7dfv56ff2&question=2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm 39 yo in DC and it feels like maybe 10-20% of my friends changed their last names when they married. My non-DC friends seems to all change their names.

+1. I know a 35-yr-old in Ohio who just got married this summer, and she changed her name. I thought, isn't that a little late? Aren't you already very established in your adult life & career? I see changing surnames more a 20-something thing to do, like before you're really established.

I grew up in dc and have many professional dc friends and I'd say my experience is the opposite of that ratio

[Anonymous]

I changed mine after not being sure what I wanted to do. I was surprised how disorienting it felt. I've never felt very attached to my maiden name, but it's been my name my whole life! I did not like feeling of going by my married name and wished I had at least kept my name professionally and then used his socially.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL what a stupid issue to founder a marriage over. This is lose-lose for the woman any way you slice it. Either the groom insists you take his name and you call off the marriage because you have to prove a pointless point, or he caves and you end up with a passive doormat.

Or you marry someone who thinks it's crazy that women change their last name this day and age. He was the first to encourage me to keep my name "it's your name! Why would you change it? " was what he said just after proposing. I respond to Mrs. HisLastName, just as he responds to Mr. MyLastName. We are both proud to be members of each other's families.

Obviously you're leaving something out, the part where you told him you weren't changing your name, lol that was the first thought on your mind after he proposed? By the way don't you think being proposed to is an old fashioned custom? Lol hypocrite

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I didn't change mine. I have too much pride to do that.

I told my husband if he really needed all of us to have the same name he was welcome to change his.

You won the battle (kept your name ) but lost the war (married a wimp who caved to you on something trivial).


It's great though for you to ego trip here about making hubby back down. Nice principles honey.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn't change mine. I have too much pride to do that.

I told my husband if he really needed all of us to have the same name he was welcome to change his.

You won the battle (kept your name ) but lost the war (married a wimp who caved to you on something trivial).


It's great though for you to ego trip here about making hubby back down. Nice principles honey.

Don't you have homework to do? Don't let mommy know you're wasting time on DCUM or she'll change the wifi password

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wanted us to all have the same last name. My husband would have considered taking mine if I'd asked him to.

I grew up with divorced parents and my mom remarried and I lived with them so they were all a family and I had a different last name. It always made me feel just the tiniest bit like an outsider. I a) didn't want to feel that twinge in the family I was building with my husband and b) didn't want my kids to feel it either.

Honestly its NBD. I am a VERY strong, opinionated, female supporting woman (and an atheist democrat in case people think its just conservative thing). Some people would say obnoxiously so but this felt like a silly hill to die on. It is not viewed as succumbing to the patriarchy in today's society, be real. I felt a little sad as my wedding approached and I knew my time as a 'Smith' was coming to an end but six months later it was whatever. Your last name is not your defining characteristic.

If you want to keep it, keep it. If you want to change it, change it. Neither choice defines you as a 'better' or 'more independent' or 'stronger' woman.

You can rationalize it all you want, but there are a million "little" ways that our society confers second-class status on women, and this is one. Is it worth wailing in the streets about, no, but please don't delude yourself that it doesn't.

I am the pp you are responding to.

You are completely off your rail. I had every right to not change my name, I did what I wanted to do and it had nothing to do with being a second class citizen. Take your feminist brigade elsewhere. I explained my reasons and you should respect my choice if you're a real feminist. I made no criticisms of women who keep their name, just that it was not that big a deal one way or the other.

Of course it is your choice, but I don't have to respect your choice to be a real feminist. That line of thinking is bullshit. The whole idea of the name change is *based* on the idea that women were the property of men...first their fathers, then their husbands. That is what it is based on. You cannot dispute this, even if you don't think of it that way yourself (now).

Well that's what the entire institution of marriage is founded on too. Should no one get married because a few hundred years ago marriage was frequently an exchange in female property?

Acting like history is the only thing that can influence a proper feminists way of thinking is just so stupid and narrow moved.

I never DID dispute that it was based in a sexist practice, I disputed that it means those same things today. Because it doesn't. And actually feminism DOES mean giving women the right to choose. I guess you don't have to respect my choice (which was, in case you didn't actually read it, based on my very real experiences as a child not sharing my family's name) but to judge this in particular so harshly seems like a lot of wasted effort. Plenty of very strong, secure, independent women choose to take their husbands name when they choose to start their family.

I can see where you are going, but one could argue that the institution of marriage under the law in this country has changed to be more egalitarian and that many couples do it either for spiritual reasons (a joining recognized by their religion) or for the legal benefits (or maybe both). I would argue that in this country, it has become more symbolic of joining two separate lives into one and not about exchange of property.

On the other hand, with the name changing, the norm is still for the woman to take the man's name. It may not translate to literal ownership of one person by another, but the symbolic meaning is still there. The woman ceases to be her old self and has a new outward identity and he changes his outward identity not at all. In most cases there is no discussion of whether the man will change his name; it is either assumed the woman will change hers or there might be discussion of the woman having the choice to keep her name. Some progress for women with that choice, but not full equality. It does remain as one way women are seen as secondary to the man they marry. I'm sorry if that insults you personally; I don't mean to insinuate that I think you are completely anti-feminist for changing your name. My original comment was meant to say, wait a minute, for some of us, this is a big deal. And you come back with "you are off your rail" and "feminist brigade" and I'm not a "real feminist" if I don't agree with you. Maybe you need to stop and think about who is really being narrow minded here. I never said history is the "only thing that can influence proper feminists way of thinking" but to forget or ignore history is not a good idea, either.

Oh yeah sure I'm the only one who heightened the rhetoric. You're the one who responded to my initial (very nice) post telling me I could "rationalize it all I wanted" but I was "deluding myself" that this doesn't demean women. Also that you did not "respect my choice" to change my name. But sure yeah I'm the narrow minded one who attacked you for no reason.

I hate this brand of feminism, this, you're only doing it right if you're fighting every fight. Are you also the type who says SAHMs are hurting the cause?

Taking on a family name is the norm. Sure it's normally the male but who cares? I'll tell you one thing I don't know if it's insecurity or whatever but the only people I know who beat this issue into the ground are people who wouldn't change their name. I don't know a single person who changed it who has spent time regretting it. What people do in their own relationships that isn't abuse is no one's business but their own.

You *are* the one who heightened it. People do rationalize things all the time to make themselves feel better. That wasn't meant to demean you. I could have done without the "delusional", you're right, so sorry about that. But that doesn't compare to "you're off your rail". Your are calling me crazy for having a well-thought out measured opinion that differs from yours and telling me I'm not a "real feminist" if I don't agree with you. Now you are way off the deep end, telling me how I feel about "every fight" based on one opinion. When it comes to hyperbole, overreaction and unwarranted attacks, I'm nowhere in your league, honey. If you don't care so much, why are you so mad?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can tell you what not to do -- don't try to use 3 names, ala "Mary Tyler Moore." I moved my maiden to the middle and wanted to use all 3. No hyphens, no middle initial. My god, you'd think in this day and age, people and computers could handle it, but they can't. I get so many "Mary T. Moore" or "Mary Tyler-Moore". Sometimes I get Mary-Tyler as my first name! Arrgh.

Does your surname (Tyler) sound like a first name? Does it happen so often you wish you'd stayed Mary Tyler? Or is it just annoying?

No, my maiden name doesn't sound like a first name at all. And a messed up name must happen a lot, because it's been 20+ yrs and I'm still amazed when someone gets it right! LOL.

I think it's a "pick your poison" type of thing. You either keep the maiden name and have admin hassles because everyone's name doesn't match. Or you try a combo approach like I did, and have trouble because it's unusual and/or the computer can't handle it. Or you drop your maiden completely and get flak for being too traditional.

My personal preference was to have one family name (I like being "The Moores"). So I didn't want a hyphen. Yet, I had some of the feminist thing and didn't want to totally drop my maiden. Also, pure aesthetics -- I didn't really like how my first, middle, hisname would sound. I did like my first, maiden, hisname, so I chose that version.

[Anonymous]

For the feminists taking the stance that they are fighting/fought a toxic oppressive symbol of a bygone era: Did you wear a white dress on your wedding day? Did your father walk you down the aisle?

Genuinely curious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always wanted to have the same last name as my children but it feels so archaic and anti feminist to take his name. We both have long last names so hyphenating would be tedious- 6 syllables. He doesn't care either way. My career wouldn't be affected. How did you decide? Has anyone regretted it either way?

How is it more feminist to use your father's name than your husband's?

Well, your husband's father's name, really. Or is it only men who own their names, and women just borrow them? My last name is MY last name. It is the same last name as my dad, but it's my name, just as much as it is his.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For the feminists taking the stance that they are fighting/fought a toxic oppressive symbol of a bygone era: Did you wear a white dress on your wedding day? Did your father walk you down the aisle?

Genuinely curious.

No, and yes. My dad didn't give my husband permission to marry me, and he didn't give me away, but he did escort me down the aisle. Because I love my dad and knew that it would feel special to him--it was a bit of a callback to the father-daughter dances we went to when I was a girl, which both of us really enjoyed.

It can be hard navigating these things. I don't want to fight every little thing, or have every choice be a big political statement. And some things felt meaningful to me in a non-sexist way, and some things felt like outdated traditions. You just feel your way through these things. I could think of no good, non-sexist reason for me to change my name to my husband's. But my kids have his last name because that's what we worked out--I chose their first and middle names, and named them after people in my family who meant a lot to me. (And frankly, a lot more names sounded good with his last name than with mine.)

And some people on this thread want to call me a hypocrite. Which, I don't think I am, but really, who cares what random strangers think? I don't pretend like I have all the answers. I deal with these issues as they arise, and I do the best I can, and try to make choices that feel right to me. I think the mere fact of reflecting on this stuff, and considering the traditions and where they come from, and whether or not they have any other meaning or value, and making an active choice, is important in itself. Women have various reasons for changing or not changing their names upon marriage, and I figure if a woman has really thought about it and what it means, then whatever choice she makes is better because of that process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wanted us to all have the same last name. My husband would have considered taking mine if I'd asked him to.

I grew up with divorced parents and my mom remarried and I lived with them so they were all a family and I had a different last name. It always made me feel just the tiniest bit like an outsider. I a) didn't want to feel that twinge in the family I was building with my husband and b) didn't want my kids to feel it either.

Honestly its NBD. I am a VERY strong, opinionated, female supporting woman (and an atheist democrat in case people think its just conservative thing). Some people would say obnoxiously so but this felt like a silly hill to die on. It is not viewed as succumbing to the patriarchy in today's society, be real. I felt a little sad as my wedding approached and I knew my time as a 'Smith' was coming to an end but six months later it was whatever. Your last name is not your defining characteristic.

If you want to keep it, keep it. If you want to change it, change it. Neither choice defines you as a 'better' or 'more independent' or 'stronger' woman.

You can rationalize it all you want, but there are a million "little" ways that our society confers second-class status on women, and this is one. Is it worth wailing in the streets about, no, but please don't delude yourself that it doesn't.

I am the pp you are responding to.

You are completely off your rail. I had every right to not change my name, I did what I wanted to do and it had nothing to do with being a second class citizen. Take your feminist brigade elsewhere. I explained my reasons and you should respect my choice if you're a real feminist. I made no criticisms of women who keep their name, just that it was not that big a deal one way or the other.

Of course it is your choice, but I don't have to respect your choice to be a real feminist. That line of thinking is bullshit. The whole idea of the name change is *based* on the idea that women were the property of men...first their fathers, then their husbands. That is what it is based on. You cannot dispute this, even if you don't think of it that way yourself (now).

Well that's what the entire institution of marriage is founded on too. Should no one get married because a few hundred years ago marriage was frequently an exchange in female property?

Acting like history is the only thing that can influence a proper feminists way of thinking is just so stupid and narrow moved.

I never DID dispute that it was based in a sexist practice, I disputed that it means those same things today. Because it doesn't. And actually feminism DOES mean giving women the right to choose. I guess you don't have to respect my choice (which was, in case you didn't actually read it, based on my very real experiences as a child not sharing my family's name) but to judge this in particular so harshly seems like a lot of wasted effort. Plenty of very strong, secure, independent women choose to take their husbands name when they choose to start their family.

I can see where you are going, but one could argue that the institution of marriage under the law in this country has changed to be more egalitarian and that many couples do it either for spiritual reasons (a joining recognized by their religion) or for the legal benefits (or maybe both). I would argue that in this country, it has become more symbolic of joining two separate lives into one and not about exchange of property.

On the other hand, with the name changing, the norm is still for the woman to take the man's name. It may not translate to literal ownership of one person by another, but the symbolic meaning is still there. The woman ceases to be her old self and has a new outward identity and he changes his outward identity not at all. In most cases there is no discussion of whether the man will change his name; it is either assumed the woman will change hers or there might be discussion of the woman having the choice to keep her name. Some progress for women with that choice, but not full equality. It does remain as one way women are seen as secondary to the man they marry. I'm sorry if that insults you personally; I don't mean to insinuate that I think you are completely anti-feminist for changing your name. My original comment was meant to say, wait a minute, for some of us, this is a big deal. And you come back with "you are off your rail" and "feminist brigade" and I'm not a "real feminist" if I don't agree with you. Maybe you need to stop and think about who is really being narrow minded here. I never said history is the "only thing that can influence proper feminists way of thinking" but to forget or ignore history is not a good idea, either.

Oh yeah sure I'm the only one who heightened the rhetoric. You're the one who responded to my initial (very nice) post telling me I could "rationalize it all I wanted" but I was "deluding myself" that this doesn't demean women. Also that you did not "respect my choice" to change my name. But sure yeah I'm the narrow minded one who attacked you for no reason.

I hate this brand of feminism, this, you're only doing it right if you're fighting every fight. Are you also the type who says SAHMs are hurting the cause?

Taking on a family name is the norm. Sure it's normally the male but who cares? I'll tell you one thing I don't know if it's insecurity or whatever but the only people I know who beat this issue into the ground are people who wouldn't change their name. I don't know a single person who changed it who has spent time regretting it. What people do in their own relationships that isn't abuse is no one's business but their own.

You *are* the one who heightened it. People do rationalize things all the time to make themselves feel better. That wasn't meant to demean you. I could have done without the "delusional", you're right, so sorry about that. But that doesn't compare to "you're off your rail". Your are calling me crazy for having a well-thought out measured opinion that differs from yours and telling me I'm not a "real feminist" if I don't agree with you. Now you are way off the deep end, telling me how I feel about "every fight" based on one opinion. When it comes to hyperbole, overreaction and unwarranted attacks, I'm nowhere in your league, honey. If you don't care so much, why are you so mad?

I'm the one who heightened it but you could have done without the 'delusional'? Do you not see the contradiction in that sentence? Seriously? I will also give you that I could have done without saying 'you're off your rail' but I'm going to say that that phrase and delusional both convey implications of being crazy pretty evenly. Although I meant it more in a, 'you're out of bounds telling me I'm deluding myself' tone FWIW. You responded to my well thought out and measured opinion by saying I was rationalizing things and delusional, when the reasons I chose to change my name had literally NOTHING to do with sexism and everything to do with my personal experience of being a kid with a different last name from my parent.

I have never denied the sexist origins, and I've never criticized people who change their name. I complained about how I personally find the type of feminists that get bent out of shape in the manner you seem to be bent out of shape to be frustrating. Women who think that any woman who chooses a 'traditional' path that was traditional because of old sexist beliefs such as women who choose to be SAHMs is not fighting the fight or is 'deluding' themselves if they think they made that choice of their own volition. That she is turning her back on the feminists who came beforehand. If that's not you then you're not who I'm criticizing.

I'm mostly mad and continuing to engage because I feel like every post you write you are trying to intentionally misrepresent the argument that came before by choosing one line where I was a little hyperbolic and focusing on it to slither out from any responsibility for turning this into a 'you're a crappier feminist than I am' argument with your first response. Which is about the LEAST feminist thing to do, so whatever. I'm done, hopefully someone else will pick up my 'hyperbole' where I left it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wanted us to all have the same last name. My husband would have considered taking mine if I'd asked him to.

I grew up with divorced parents and my mom remarried and I lived with them so they were all a family and I had a different last name. It always made me feel just the tiniest bit like an outsider. I a) didn't want to feel that twinge in the family I was building with my husband and b) didn't want my kids to feel it either.

Honestly its NBD. I am a VERY strong, opinionated, female supporting woman (and an atheist democrat in case people think its just conservative thing). Some people would say obnoxiously so but this felt like a silly hill to die on. It is not viewed as succumbing to the patriarchy in today's society, be real. I felt a little sad as my wedding approached and I knew my time as a 'Smith' was coming to an end but six months later it was whatever. Your last name is not your defining characteristic.

If you want to keep it, keep it. If you want to change it, change it. Neither choice defines you as a 'better' or 'more independent' or 'stronger' woman.

You can rationalize it all you want, but there are a million "little" ways that our society confers second-class status on women, and this is one. Is it worth wailing in the streets about, no, but please don't delude yourself that it doesn't.

I am the pp you are responding to.

You are completely off your rail. I had every right to not change my name, I did what I wanted to do and it had nothing to do with being a second class citizen. Take your feminist brigade elsewhere. I explained my reasons and you should respect my choice if you're a real feminist. I made no criticisms of women who keep their name, just that it was not that big a deal one way or the other.

Of course it is your choice, but I don't have to respect your choice to be a real feminist. That line of thinking is bullshit. The whole idea of the name change is *based* on the idea that women were the property of men...first their fathers, then their husbands. That is what it is based on. You cannot dispute this, even if you don't think of it that way yourself (now).

Well that's what the entire institution of marriage is founded on too. Should no one get married because a few hundred years ago marriage was frequently an exchange in female property?

Acting like history is the only thing that can influence a proper feminists way of thinking is just so stupid and narrow moved.

I never DID dispute that it was based in a sexist practice, I disputed that it means those same things today. Because it doesn't. And actually feminism DOES mean giving women the right to choose. I guess you don't have to respect my choice (which was, in case you didn't actually read it, based on my very real experiences as a child not sharing my family's name) but to judge this in particular so harshly seems like a lot of wasted effort. Plenty of very strong, secure, independent women choose to take their husbands name when they choose to start their family.

I can see where you are going, but one could argue that the institution of marriage under the law in this country has changed to be more egalitarian and that many couples do it either for spiritual reasons (a joining recognized by their religion) or for the legal benefits (or maybe both). I would argue that in this country, it has become more symbolic of joining two separate lives into one and not about exchange of property.

On the other hand, with the name changing, the norm is still for the woman to take the man's name. It may not translate to literal ownership of one person by another, but the symbolic meaning is still there. The woman ceases to be her old self and has a new outward identity and he changes his outward identity not at all. In most cases there is no discussion of whether the man will change his name; it is either assumed the woman will change hers or there might be discussion of the woman having the choice to keep her name. Some progress for women with that choice, but not full equality. It does remain as one way women are seen as secondary to the man they marry. I'm sorry if that insults you personally; I don't mean to insinuate that I think you are completely anti-feminist for changing your name. My original comment was meant to say, wait a minute, for some of us, this is a big deal. And you come back with "you are off your rail" and "feminist brigade" and I'm not a "real feminist" if I don't agree with you. Maybe you need to stop and think about who is really being narrow minded here. I never said history is the "only thing that can influence proper feminists way of thinking" but to forget or ignore history is not a good idea, either.

Oh yeah sure I'm the only one who heightened the rhetoric. You're the one who responded to my initial (very nice) post telling me I could "rationalize it all I wanted" but I was "deluding myself" that this doesn't demean women. Also that you did not "respect my choice" to change my name. But sure yeah I'm the narrow minded one who attacked you for no reason.

I hate this brand of feminism, this, you're only doing it right if you're fighting every fight. Are you also the type who says SAHMs are hurting the cause?

Taking on a family name is the norm. Sure it's normally the male but who cares? I'll tell you one thing I don't know if it's insecurity or whatever but the only people I know who beat this issue into the ground are people who wouldn't change their name. I don't know a single person who changed it who has spent time regretting it. What people do in their own relationships that isn't abuse is no one's business but their own.

You *are* the one who heightened it. People do rationalize things all the time to make themselves feel better. That wasn't meant to demean you. I could have done without the "delusional", you're right, so sorry about that. But that doesn't compare to "you're off your rail". Your are calling me crazy for having a well-thought out measured opinion that differs from yours and telling me I'm not a "real feminist" if I don't agree with you. Now you are way off the deep end, telling me how I feel about "every fight" based on one opinion. When it comes to hyperbole, overreaction and unwarranted attacks, I'm nowhere in your league, honey. If you don't care so much, why are you so mad?

I'm the one who heightened it but you could have done without the 'delusional'? Do you not see the contradiction in that sentence? Seriously? I will also give you that I could have done without saying 'you're off your rail' but I'm going to say that that phrase and delusional both convey implications of being crazy pretty evenly. Although I meant it more in a, 'you're out of bounds telling me I'm deluding myself' tone FWIW. You responded to my well thought out and measured opinion by saying I was rationalizing things and delusional, when the reasons I chose to change my name had literally NOTHING to do with sexism and everything to do with my personal experience of being a kid with a different last name from my parent.

I have never denied the sexist origins, and I've never criticized people who change their name. I complained about how I personally find the type of feminists that get bent out of shape in the manner you seem to be bent out of shape to be frustrating. Women who think that any woman who chooses a 'traditional' path that was traditional because of old sexist beliefs such as women who choose to be SAHMs is not fighting the fight or is 'deluding' themselves if they think they made that choice of their own volition. That she is turning her back on the feminists who came beforehand. If that's not you then you're not who I'm criticizing.

I'm mostly mad and continuing to engage because I feel like every post you write you are trying to intentionally misrepresent the argument that came before by choosing one line where I was a little hyperbolic and focusing on it to slither out from any responsibility for turning this into a 'you're a crappier feminist than I am' argument with your first response. Which is about the LEAST feminist thing to do, so whatever. I'm done, hopefully someone else will pick up my 'hyperbole' where I left it.

Never criticized people who DON'T change their name I meant.

[Anonymous]

This is really a personal decision that no one can coach you though.

I personally decided to take my husband's last name. Given that I was ten years older than him, and very established professionally (and published), this blew him, and many of my girlfriends, away. Initially, my husband objected to me taking his name, due to my professional success. I did it to show him honor. My surname came from my father, so felt keeping my name to, to me, honors my family over my husband. By marriage I am giving allegiance to my husband--he is my main and created family now (not in an "ownership" way). We joke about it now, but my DH "returned the favor" when we had kids. All four of our kids have some element of my maiden name, or family names from my side.

Thats the value a last name has to me. I don't judge those who value it differently. You have to decide what it means to you. And communicate with your husband/fiancee about it.