wife keeps her name

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I am family oriented, not self oriented. I am fully gratified and my kids are better off.

Really admirable that you stick to your family oriented beliefs even when judgemental women try to shame you for it. Keep it up PP

A last name has nothing to do with being family oriented.

I am actually the PP who said I was family oriented, and I agree. It is a fairly trivial thing. But apparently the poster who responded to me suggested that the idea of a man being the head of the household in this subtle way indicated that women are second to men. That cracked me up. To me, it is a responsibility more than a privilege to be the head of a household. And it doesn't imply that the wife doesn't work, is subservient, or even secondary. It is like the CEO and the COO being jointly responsible to shareholders in different capacities.

I'm a different poster in this thread, not PP, and I did change my name but I don't think they're wrong about the HOH thing. That is the language of misogyny. Because you can say its like the a CEO and a COO (although the CEO gets more prestige and deference) but what is your title? Co HOH?

My husband and I are a unit, there is no head of household. Even if I were a SAHM I wouldn't call my husband the HOH. He is the breadwinner in that scenario, but the term head of household implies some extra authority. The idea that they get to make the final call on things. And I'm not a fan of that, because that is not an egalitarian relationship. And relationships that aren't egalitarian are susceptible to abuse.

My husband and I are a unit too, but I disagree with your ideas about the HOH distinction. To me, it confers not only some extra authority but extra responsibility that I expect my husband to feel for our family. He has a more prestigious career than I do, and I'm fine with that. His prestige benefits me and my kids, and even though there are some perks for him, he is oriented around us and not only himself. Part of his willingness to put us first is due to the perks. That is how life works and how human nature works. I am a competent, educated, and responsible person with a good career, but I am not capable of having a "big" job and focusing on my kids at the same time. Frankly my husband is more capable than me when it comes to sheer ability. I am more than happy to give him HOH status in exchange for his willingness to happily and lovingly (no abuse) confer his status and resources on me and my kids. I am not worried about being taken advantage of because I could fend for myself if the sh*t hit the fan, and I do agree any woman should always be prepared for that.

I bolded all the parts of your post that speak to the fact that in your household your husband is seen as superior to you in one way or another. You guys are not on a equal playing field, which you seem to fully understand and embrace.

I am not going to criticize an individual woman for choosing a relationship like this if it makes them happy and they are going into it with their eyes wide open. But this is not the attitude that women should have when they are looking for a mate. Because this attitude can be very very easily turned into an abusive situation.

I believe personally that even if an overweight maid who got Cs in school (let's call her Mary) is married to a big law guy who looks like Ken (let's call him Ken), they should be equals in the relationship. Mary shouldn't have to walk around her whole life feeling like she lives with someone who's better than her. They are human beings, and so they are equal, nothing about Ken being more accomplished or better looking or perhaps more intelligent takes away from the fact that Mary is a human being who deserves exactly as much dignity and respect as Ken does. Mary can appreciate Ken for bringing a lot of money into their household, and love that he is ambitious. She can admire that he is better at being a lawyer then she could ever be. But Mary should also realize that perhaps she is a little kinder then Ken could ever be, that she is better at Sudoku puzzles or cooking or parenting or gardening and certainly better at cleaning than he will ever be.

What is your husband better at than you due to sheer ability? I think it is troubling that that sentence doesn't actually have a noun. You just say he's better than you. Not what it is that he is better at.

Your household is run with your husband being labeled superior. You're cool with that and he doesn't abuse you, so I'm not going to say there is anything wrong with your life. But you need to realize that it is a dangerous world view to have. There are a lot of bad men in the world.

A) Stop telling women what attitude they should or should not have
B) My husband is not superior to me, because we both assign a tremendous amount of value to my personal qualities. Lacking in self esteem I am not, and I would have no problem leaving my marriage if my husband stopped behaving appropriately, which he full well knows.

This is sick.. I truly hope you don’t have daughters to follow your example

[Anonymous]

Amazing: women beating each other up rhetorically over - or worse, withholding approval of - a pretty benign pretty personal decision. You’re out-stupiding that guy arguing politics in the date-conservative-women thread, and that’s quite a trick.

[Anonymous]

To 13:03: Come on. I really have to disagree with characterizing PP as "sick".

I kept my name, and my husband and I are a team. We consider each other equals. But other couples prefer a leader/follower dynamic, and that works for them. It's not up to any of us to dictate how other people live their lives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Amazing: women beating each other up rhetorically over - or worse, withholding approval of - a pretty benign pretty personal decision. You’re out-stupiding that guy arguing politics in the date-conservative-women thread, and that’s quite a trick.

I don't think its nothing that the poster wrote an actual sentence saying that her husband just has more sheer ability than she does.

I think that is ingrained misogyny. That isn't saying she's a bad person, but its pointing something important out.

And as I told her I changed my name so I'm not arguing that point. And I am not even arguing the leader/follower angle. But I don't think its healthy to think your partner is basically just 'better' than you. Not at any one thing, just generally better. That is a big power imbalance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Amazing: women beating each other up rhetorically over - or worse, withholding approval of - a pretty benign pretty personal decision. You’re out-stupiding that guy arguing politics in the date-conservative-women thread, and that’s quite a trick.

I have not read more than a couple of pages in this thread so I might have missed what you saw, but I have seen (and I have) argued for something more meaningful and important than a name change. Some PPs above have wrote about their husband being “superior” or “more talented” or “head of the household”. I truly hope my DDs never meet these people’s sons and daughters because this is scary and 100% against everything I believe to be right. So the argument in my case is not around a name change (I did not change my name). If your reason to change your name is because of tradition, because you want the same last name as your kids, etc. it’s fine. But if you change your name because now you are your husband’s property or because he is the head of the household, or because you would be disrespecting him otherwise, then yes... I have a problem with you and with your choice because you are modeling a scary and dangerous behavior to your kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It makes thing harder. People, doctors and businesses assume you are not married. I know one couple where the wife was in an accident and the hospital/doctors would not allow the husband in the room/give info. Another couple were flying overseas, the airline over sold the main cabin and bumped the husband to first class but not the wife. Finances are not viewed as shared. Etc etc.

I've been married to my husband for almost 14 years, I kept my name (kids have his), and I have never had any problems such as these.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Amazing: women beating each other up rhetorically over - or worse, withholding approval of - a pretty benign pretty personal decision. You’re out-stupiding that guy arguing politics in the date-conservative-women thread, and that’s quite a trick.

I have not read more than a couple of pages in this thread so I might have missed what you saw, but I have seen (and I have) argued for something more meaningful and important than a name change. Some PPs above have wrote about their husband being “superior” or “more talented” or “head of the household”. I truly hope my DDs never meet these people’s sons and daughters because this is scary and 100% against everything I believe to be right. So the argument in my case is not around a name change (I did not change my name). If your reason to change your name is because of tradition, because you want the same last name as your kids, etc. it’s fine. But if you change your name because now you are your husband’s property or because he is the head of the household, or because you would be disrespecting him otherwise, then yes... I have a problem with you and with your choice because you are modeling a scary and dangerous behavior to your kids.

Agree. Some of these posts have gone beyond name changing. The idea of the man as the "head of the household" unequivocally puts him above the wife in the hierarchy of the family. It's 2018; it's time for this harmful way of thinking to go.

It doesn't matter what occupation each spouse has or doesn't have, they should be a partnership. They should be considered and treat each other as equals. They should have equal responsibility and equal input into decisions in making their relationship and household work.

The my-husband-is-better-than-me lady is modeling a bad dynamic for her children, no matter how self-satisfied she chooses to present herself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

You sound like the grown up in this relationship, pp!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would assume the guy's a cuck.

That's pretty lame. Try again!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I am family oriented, not self oriented. I am fully gratified and my kids are better off.

Really admirable that you stick to your family oriented beliefs even when judgemental women try to shame you for it. Keep it up PP

A last name has nothing to do with being family oriented.

I am actually the PP who said I was family oriented, and I agree. It is a fairly trivial thing. But apparently the poster who responded to me suggested that the idea of a man being the head of the household in this subtle way indicated that women are second to men. That cracked me up. To me, it is a responsibility more than a privilege to be the head of a household. And it doesn't imply that the wife doesn't work, is subservient, or even secondary. It is like the CEO and the COO being jointly responsible to shareholders in different capacities.

I'm a different poster in this thread, not PP, and I did change my name but I don't think they're wrong about the HOH thing. That is the language of misogyny. Because you can say its like the a CEO and a COO (although the CEO gets more prestige and deference) but what is your title? Co HOH?

My husband and I are a unit, there is no head of household. Even if I were a SAHM I wouldn't call my husband the HOH. He is the breadwinner in that scenario, but the term head of household implies some extra authority. The idea that they get to make the final call on things. And I'm not a fan of that, because that is not an egalitarian relationship. And relationships that aren't egalitarian are susceptible to abuse.

My husband and I are a unit too, but I disagree with your ideas about the HOH distinction. To me, it confers not only some extra authority but extra responsibility that I expect my husband to feel for our family. He has a more prestigious career than I do, and I'm fine with that. His prestige benefits me and my kids, and even though there are some perks for him, he is oriented around us and not only himself. Part of his willingness to put us first is due to the perks. That is how life works and how human nature works. I am a competent, educated, and responsible person with a good career, but I am not capable of having a "big" job and focusing on my kids at the same time. Frankly my husband is more capable than me when it comes to sheer ability. I am more than happy to give him HOH status in exchange for his willingness to happily and lovingly (no abuse) confer his status and resources on me and my kids. I am not worried about being taken advantage of because I could fend for myself if the sh*t hit the fan, and I do agree any woman should always be prepared for that.

Different poster here. It sounds like you put him in that position because he is an exemplary individual. I wouldn't do it myself but I can see doing that. It makes sense. But if you did it just because he's the man and you're the woman, oof, that would be a different matter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I am family oriented, not self oriented. I am fully gratified and my kids are better off.

Really admirable that you stick to your family oriented beliefs even when judgemental women try to shame you for it. Keep it up PP

A last name has nothing to do with being family oriented.

I am actually the PP who said I was family oriented, and I agree. It is a fairly trivial thing. But apparently the poster who responded to me suggested that the idea of a man being the head of the household in this subtle way indicated that women are second to men. That cracked me up. To me, it is a responsibility more than a privilege to be the head of a household. And it doesn't imply that the wife doesn't work, is subservient, or even secondary. It is like the CEO and the COO being jointly responsible to shareholders in different capacities.

I'm a different poster in this thread, not PP, and I did change my name but I don't think they're wrong about the HOH thing. That is the language of misogyny. Because you can say its like the a CEO and a COO (although the CEO gets more prestige and deference) but what is your title? Co HOH?

My husband and I are a unit, there is no head of household. Even if I were a SAHM I wouldn't call my husband the HOH. He is the breadwinner in that scenario, but the term head of household implies some extra authority. The idea that they get to make the final call on things. And I'm not a fan of that, because that is not an egalitarian relationship. And relationships that aren't egalitarian are susceptible to abuse.

My husband and I are a unit too, but I disagree with your ideas about the HOH distinction. To me, it confers not only some extra authority but extra responsibility that I expect my husband to feel for our family. He has a more prestigious career than I do, and I'm fine with that. His prestige benefits me and my kids, and even though there are some perks for him, he is oriented around us and not only himself. Part of his willingness to put us first is due to the perks. That is how life works and how human nature works. I am a competent, educated, and responsible person with a good career, but I am not capable of having a "big" job and focusing on my kids at the same time. Frankly my husband is more capable than me when it comes to sheer ability. I am more than happy to give him HOH status in exchange for his willingness to happily and lovingly (no abuse) confer his status and resources on me and my kids. I am not worried about being taken advantage of because I could fend for myself if the sh*t hit the fan, and I do agree any woman should always be prepared for that.

I bolded all the parts of your post that speak to the fact that in your household your husband is seen as superior to you in one way or another. You guys are not on a equal playing field, which you seem to fully understand and embrace.

I am not going to criticize an individual woman for choosing a relationship like this if it makes them happy and they are going into it with their eyes wide open. But this is not the attitude that women should have when they are looking for a mate. Because this attitude can be very very easily turned into an abusive situation.

I believe personally that even if an overweight maid who got Cs in school (let's call her Mary) is married to a big law guy who looks like Ken (let's call him Ken), they should be equals in the relationship. Mary shouldn't have to walk around her whole life feeling like she lives with someone who's better than her. They are human beings, and so they are equal, nothing about Ken being more accomplished or better looking or perhaps more intelligent takes away from the fact that Mary is a human being who deserves exactly as much dignity and respect as Ken does. Mary can appreciate Ken for bringing a lot of money into their household, and love that he is ambitious. She can admire that he is better at being a lawyer then she could ever be. But Mary should also realize that perhaps she is a little kinder then Ken could ever be, that she is better at Sudoku puzzles or cooking or parenting or gardening and certainly better at cleaning than he will ever be.

What is your husband better at than you due to sheer ability? I think it is troubling that that sentence doesn't actually have a noun. You just say he's better than you. Not what it is that he is better at.

Your household is run with your husband being labeled superior. You're cool with that and he doesn't abuse you, so I'm not going to say there is anything wrong with your life. But you need to realize that it is a dangerous world view to have. There are a lot of bad men in the world.

A) Stop telling women what attitude they should or should not have
B) My husband is not superior to me, because we both assign a tremendous amount of value to my personal qualities. Lacking in self esteem I am not, and I would have no problem leaving my marriage if my husband stopped behaving appropriately, which he full well knows.

This is sick.. I truly hope you don’t have daughters to follow your example

You are aware that the vast majority of marriages operate this way, are you not? Or else perhaps you are imagining something that I did not write and do not mean?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I am family oriented, not self oriented. I am fully gratified and my kids are better off.

Really admirable that you stick to your family oriented beliefs even when judgemental women try to shame you for it. Keep it up PP

A last name has nothing to do with being family oriented.

I am actually the PP who said I was family oriented, and I agree. It is a fairly trivial thing. But apparently the poster who responded to me suggested that the idea of a man being the head of the household in this subtle way indicated that women are second to men. That cracked me up. To me, it is a responsibility more than a privilege to be the head of a household. And it doesn't imply that the wife doesn't work, is subservient, or even secondary. It is like the CEO and the COO being jointly responsible to shareholders in different capacities.

I'm a different poster in this thread, not PP, and I did change my name but I don't think they're wrong about the HOH thing. That is the language of misogyny. Because you can say its like the a CEO and a COO (although the CEO gets more prestige and deference) but what is your title? Co HOH?

My husband and I are a unit, there is no head of household. Even if I were a SAHM I wouldn't call my husband the HOH. He is the breadwinner in that scenario, but the term head of household implies some extra authority. The idea that they get to make the final call on things. And I'm not a fan of that, because that is not an egalitarian relationship. And relationships that aren't egalitarian are susceptible to abuse.

My husband and I are a unit too, but I disagree with your ideas about the HOH distinction. To me, it confers not only some extra authority but extra responsibility that I expect my husband to feel for our family. He has a more prestigious career than I do, and I'm fine with that. His prestige benefits me and my kids, and even though there are some perks for him, he is oriented around us and not only himself. Part of his willingness to put us first is due to the perks. That is how life works and how human nature works. I am a competent, educated, and responsible person with a good career, but I am not capable of having a "big" job and focusing on my kids at the same time. Frankly my husband is more capable than me when it comes to sheer ability. I am more than happy to give him HOH status in exchange for his willingness to happily and lovingly (no abuse) confer his status and resources on me and my kids. I am not worried about being taken advantage of because I could fend for myself if the sh*t hit the fan, and I do agree any woman should always be prepared for that.

Different poster here. It sounds like you put him in that position because he is an exemplary individual. I wouldn't do it myself but I can see doing that. It makes sense. But if you did it just because he's the man and you're the woman, oof, that would be a different matter.

Well I did pick my husband! Who would marry someone they do not regard very highly? Anyway, I am obviously of the opinion that insisting on equal and egalitarian in all ways instead of a more complementary egalitarianism (which I believe reflects reality better) we create men who under perform in all ways, and it is a very sad thing.

And no, I am not religious.

[Anonymous]

Most men take the guy for a cuck if wife keeps name. Sorry, I just don't respect these men.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Most men take the guy for a cuck if wife keeps name. Sorry, I just don't respect these men.

Man here who disagrees. The cuck is the one who takes his wife’s name or agrees to them both changing their names to something made up. The guy whose wife keeps her name, outside of professional reasons to do so, is just whipped.

[Anonymous]

Yeah... When women keep their names, they basically are choosing to subject their husbands to a certain degree of embarrassment

It's a nice way to have a woman win and a man lose