wife keeps her name

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
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.

Yes, lots of mothers work outside the home but in other ways things are pretty traditional, like how men tend to get pretty unfavorable outcomes from divorce court decisions for child support, alimony, custody etc.

Considering that most divorves are female initiated and no cause is required, signing up to get married as a man isn't really a great deal unless there are some other perks to sweeten the deal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

So well said, pp.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
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.

Yes, lots of mothers work outside the home but in other ways things are pretty traditional, like how men tend to get pretty unfavorable outcomes from divorce court decisions for child support, alimony, custody etc.

Considering that most divorves are female initiated and no cause is required, signing up to get married as a man isn't really a great deal unless there are some other perks to sweeten the deal.

Joint custody is standard in 2018, and alimony is rare.

Women’s standard of living goes down after divorce, and men’s go up.

These are facts.

[Anonymous]

Any links for those facts? Not saying you're wrong, but curious what gives you that idea.

[Anonymous]

I looked forward to taking my husband’s last name. I like the idea of a man being head of the household even though I am educated and have a nice career. My feeling is why throw the baby with the bath water? I enjoy having a relationship where I am both self-sufficient and protected. I also find it sexier. Androgyny is not sexy.

[Anonymous]

I kept my maiden name. We didn't end up having kids-if we had I'm not sure what we would have done.

I live in a more conservative area than DC and I've had some people (including a friend) judge me for not changing my name. It's funny, because this friend is divorced-she didn't change her name back after the divorce and plans to take her fiancé's name when they get married. She has told me several times that she thinks it's important that couples have the same last name (her passive aggressive way of telling me that that she doesn't approve of my choice). Whatever. That's cool if that's what she wants to do but don't judge me. When she gets into that I just make a general comment about how people need to do what they feel is best for themselves (which I believe). I think her judgey-ness comes from insecurity and she's a good friend in other ways so I try not to let it get on my nerves.

It's odd to me that people have so many opinions about how others live their lives. Live and let live.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I looked forward to taking my husband’s last name. I like the idea of a man being head of the household even though I am educated and have a nice career. My feeling is why throw the baby with the bath water? I enjoy having a relationship where I am both self-sufficient and protected. I also find it sexier. Androgyny is not sexy.

I think the issue is that what you consider the baby is what a lot of us consider the bathwater.

And it's fine to live a life where women are second to men. But just don't call it anything else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I understand why this thread is upsetting to a lot of people

Men who wish there wives had their last names

Women who wish they could keep their last names without any consequences

People with a political/cultural agenda to move away from the norm of women taking husbands names

You forgot the people with a political/social agenda to maintain the appearance that women are owned by their husbands.

I didn’t legally change my name, I hyphenate at work, but I wish I hadn’t made that change. I would love to get rid of the hyphen, but then I would have a bunch of people assuming I was getting divorced. I don’t need that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any links for those facts? Not saying you're wrong, but curious what gives you that idea.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/04/the-divorce-gap/480333/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24811135

http://time.com/money/4116161/alimony-reform-spousal-support/

“Unlike child support, which is common when divorcing couple has kids, alimony awards have always been very rare, going from about 25% of cases in the 1960s to about 10% today, said Judith McMullen, a professor of law at Marquette University. In one study of Wisconsin cases, she found it was only 8.6%.“

[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

Ah you both are delusional! I am Italian and I would NEVER take my husband’s name. How weird and backward. I love my husband and I show it in REAL ways. Not in this bs name changing. Oh and btw after 6 years and 2 kids we still have sex 3-5 times a week... not sexually frustrated at all

[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.

I hope you don’t pull a muscle patting yourself on the back.

I'm not the PP but I also kept my name. Why wouldn't I? It's my name. It's one thing if you really love the name Smith or whatever and always wanted your name to be that. In which case just change it whenever you want.

But you can count me as another person who wonders about the women who are lacking an identity so much that they change their name to their husband's name after the man agrees to marry her and hence 'allows' them to do so.

You're making a lot of assumptions. After I got married, I eventually changed my last name. My husband didn't care one way or the other, and certainly was not the one to "allow" me to do so, or not. It was a personal decision that I made for my own reasons. My maiden name just wasn't a crucial part of my identity, as you describe. People make the decision to change their names, or not to, for reasons beyond "lacking an identity" or that someone else "allows them to do so". You need to take people out of the little boxes you've placed them into-- expand your horizons a bit.

[Anonymous]

My DH and I laugh about the fact that I kept my name, much to the very loud objections from both our families. Our siblings all made it a point to let us know that they thought that was a sure sign we'd get divorced and that in their marriages, the woman always changed her name. My MIL refused to speak to me because I was "disrespecting" the family, and my mother informed me "I didn't raise a feminist!"

We're the only ones not divorced. 15 years now. Meanwhile, the longest marriage any sibling managed was 4 years. My in-laws are divorced, and my parents have been living separately for 13 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any links for those facts? Not saying you're wrong, but curious what gives you that idea.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/04/the-divorce-gap/480333/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24811135

http://time.com/money/4116161/alimony-reform-spousal-support/

“Unlike child support, which is common when divorcing couple has kids, alimony awards have always been very rare, going from about 25% of cases in the 1960s to about 10% today, said Judith McMullen, a professor of law at Marquette University. In one study of Wisconsin cases, she found it was only 8.6%.“

Great links. And yes, after pouring over hundreds of child support cases across the nation for a decade, women who dip out of the workforce for the SAHM do so at their peril. They should at least try part-time to keep the resume warm, social security payments, and 401k contributions, even if 100% of the part-time work goes to 18k for the 401k, taxes, and part-time childcare, it is good to safeguard against a dip in earning potential and to lose out on job connections, and compound interest.

[Anonymous]

I’ll be honest- I took my DH last name because I hated mine. I always wanted a new last name. I’m in my thirties and would say about 75 percent of my friends have taken their DH name. I don’t know if others are finding that the

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My DH and I laugh about the fact that I kept my name, much to the very loud objections from both our families. Our siblings all made it a point to let us know that they thought that was a sure sign we'd get divorced and that in their marriages, the woman always changed her name. My MIL refused to speak to me because I was "disrespecting" the family, and my mother informed me "I didn't raise a feminist!"

We're the only ones not divorced. 15 years now. Meanwhile, the longest marriage any sibling managed was 4 years. My in-laws are divorced, and my parents have been living separately for 13 years.

Pretty much. Let the marriage speak for itself. The overreliance of symbolism is shaky ground.