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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here- wow that was a lot of responses. Thanks for sharing. I am *probably* going to take his name. I just have cold feet and won't do it until next year anyway when I have some personal days at work to use at the DMV.

You won't need personal days. Just go one afternoon. It's really not that big of a deal. Start with the most important items (drivers license, passport) and work on other stuff later.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I kept my name. It's a quirk of American culture to have women change their name upon marriage and I hope that my daughters don't do adopt this tradition. I agree with you that it is archaic and un-feminist.

What about my kids? Officially, they have DH's last name and my last name as a middle name. This makes it really easy to show their connection to both parents.

Fun sidenote, in my culture there is no such thing as a middle name - the child can have multiple given names and/or surnames. So for example on my DC's passport my last name is listed as a surname along with DH's last name. I like this tradition much better than erasing the mom's name completely as is the custom in the U.S. For practical purposes in my country, we also just use the last surname in everyday communication for example: DC would still be Mr. or Ms. (DH's last name.) Still, it's considered important for the children to have the mom's name to honor both sides of their family tree.

This.

I really don't understand why more families don't do this. I also kept my last name and my children have my last name as a middle and husband's last name as their last name. I think that it's archaic for women to change their names upon marriage and I'm American!

Because I wanted to give my kids an actual middle name (we used family names for all of the kids) instead of my long and very Italian maiden name. No one uses their middle name anyway- so it's not like your name is getting much recognition, especially if it's really a middle, not hyphenated.

What blows my mind is when women refuse to change their name but then give their children their husband's surname. There isn't anything more sexist than that.

Fwiw I wanted us all to have the same name. It didn't matter whose name it was or if we made up a name. Just the same last name. We are a family

A couple of posters have explained their reasoning. You just aren't reading.

Not one poster who tried to explain made sense. It's completely nonsensical to refuse your husband's name but then give your husband's name to your children. No one can make any sense of that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I kept my name. It's a quirk of American culture to have women change their name upon marriage and I hope that my daughters don't do adopt this tradition. I agree with you that it is archaic and un-feminist.

What about my kids? Officially, they have DH's last name and my last name as a middle name. This makes it really easy to show their connection to both parents.

Fun sidenote, in my culture there is no such thing as a middle name - the child can have multiple given names and/or surnames. So for example on my DC's passport my last name is listed as a surname along with DH's last name. I like this tradition much better than erasing the mom's name completely as is the custom in the U.S. For practical purposes in my country, we also just use the last surname in everyday communication for example: DC would still be Mr. or Ms. (DH's last name.) Still, it's considered important for the children to have the mom's name to honor both sides of their family tree.

This.

I really don't understand why more families don't do this. I also kept my last name and my children have my last name as a middle and husband's last name as their last name. I think that it's archaic for women to change their names upon marriage and I'm American!

Because I wanted to give my kids an actual middle name (we used family names for all of the kids) instead of my long and very Italian maiden name. No one uses their middle name anyway- so it's not like your name is getting much recognition, especially if it's really a middle, not hyphenated.

What blows my mind is when women refuse to change their name but then give their children their husband's surname. There isn't anything more sexist than that.

Fwiw I wanted us all to have the same name. It didn't matter whose name it was or if we made up a name. Just the same last name. We are a family

So you changed to your husband's name and your kids got his last name as well?

[Anonymous]

Kept my name. It's all fine. Kid has dh's last name and my last name as a middle name. That's because I have a boatload of relatives including two nephews with my last name and dh was the only child of a man who was estranged from his family. When kid was younger, I got called Mrs. [dh's last name] fairly often. Bothered me at first but then I got over it.

I think you should do what works for you and don't worry about what other people think. This is really a personal choice!

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.

This!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I kept my name. It's a quirk of American culture to have women change their name upon marriage and I hope that my daughters don't do adopt this tradition. I agree with you that it is archaic and un-feminist.

What about my kids? Officially, they have DH's last name and my last name as a middle name. This makes it really easy to show their connection to both parents.

Fun sidenote, in my culture there is no such thing as a middle name - the child can have multiple given names and/or surnames. So for example on my DC's passport my last name is listed as a surname along with DH's last name. I like this tradition much better than erasing the mom's name completely as is the custom in the U.S. For practical purposes in my country, we also just use the last surname in everyday communication for example: DC would still be Mr. or Ms. (DH's last name.) Still, it's considered important for the children to have the mom's name to honor both sides of their family tree.

This.

I really don't understand why more families don't do this. I also kept my last name and my children have my last name as a middle and husband's last name as their last name. I think that it's archaic for women to change their names upon marriage and I'm American!

Because I wanted to give my kids an actual middle name (we used family names for all of the kids) instead of my long and very Italian maiden name. No one uses their middle name anyway- so it's not like your name is getting much recognition, especially if it's really a middle, not hyphenated.

What blows my mind is when women refuse to change their name but then give their children their husband's surname. There isn't anything more sexist than that.

Fwiw I wanted us all to have the same name. It didn't matter whose name it was or if we made up a name. Just the same last name. We are a family

So you changed to your husband's name and your kids got his last name as well?

Yes. If my husband's name was good enough for my kids then it was good enough for me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I kept my name. It's a quirk of American culture to have women change their name upon marriage and I hope that my daughters don't do adopt this tradition. I agree with you that it is archaic and un-feminist.

What about my kids? Officially, they have DH's last name and my last name as a middle name. This makes it really easy to show their connection to both parents.

Fun sidenote, in my culture there is no such thing as a middle name - the child can have multiple given names and/or surnames. So for example on my DC's passport my last name is listed as a surname along with DH's last name. I like this tradition much better than erasing the mom's name completely as is the custom in the U.S. For practical purposes in my country, we also just use the last surname in everyday communication for example: DC would still be Mr. or Ms. (DH's last name.) Still, it's considered important for the children to have the mom's name to honor both sides of their family tree.

This.

I really don't understand why more families don't do this. I also kept my last name and my children have my last name as a middle and husband's last name as their last name. I think that it's archaic for women to change their names upon marriage and I'm American!

Because I wanted to give my kids an actual middle name (we used family names for all of the kids) instead of my long and very Italian maiden name. No one uses their middle name anyway- so it's not like your name is getting much recognition, especially if it's really a middle, not hyphenated.

What blows my mind is when women refuse to change their name but then give their children their husband's surname. There isn't anything more sexist than that.

Fwiw I wanted us all to have the same name. It didn't matter whose name it was or if we made up a name. Just the same last name. We are a family

So you changed to your husband's name and your kids got his last name as well?

Yes. If my husband's name was good enough for my kids then it was good enough for me.

But you consider it *more* sexist to give the kids the husband's name if the wife keeps her own name? Please explain.

Actually, no...don't explain. You're clearly the sort of woman who would never consider keeping her own name, and are trying to start a thunderdome amongst those of us who identify as feminists by calling our choice "sexist". You almost had me there!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I kept my name. It's a quirk of American culture to have women change their name upon marriage and I hope that my daughters don't do adopt this tradition. I agree with you that it is archaic and un-feminist.

What about my kids? Officially, they have DH's last name and my last name as a middle name. This makes it really easy to show their connection to both parents.

Fun sidenote, in my culture there is no such thing as a middle name - the child can have multiple given names and/or surnames. So for example on my DC's passport my last name is listed as a surname along with DH's last name. I like this tradition much better than erasing the mom's name completely as is the custom in the U.S. For practical purposes in my country, we also just use the last surname in everyday communication for example: DC would still be Mr. or Ms. (DH's last name.) Still, it's considered important for the children to have the mom's name to honor both sides of their family tree.

This.

I really don't understand why more families don't do this. I also kept my last name and my children have my last name as a middle and husband's last name as their last name. I think that it's archaic for women to change their names upon marriage and I'm American!

Because I wanted to give my kids an actual middle name (we used family names for all of the kids) instead of my long and very Italian maiden name. No one uses their middle name anyway- so it's not like your name is getting much recognition, especially if it's really a middle, not hyphenated.

What blows my mind is when women refuse to change their name but then give their children their husband's surname. There isn't anything more sexist than that.

Fwiw I wanted us all to have the same name. It didn't matter whose name it was or if we made up a name. Just the same last name. We are a family

So you changed to your husband's name and your kids got his last name as well?

Yes. If my husband's name was good enough for my kids then it was good enough for me.

But you consider it *more* sexist to give the kids the husband's name if the wife keeps her own name? Please explain.

Actually, no...don't explain. You're clearly the sort of woman who would never consider keeping her own name, and are trying to start a thunderdome amongst those of us who identify as feminists by calling our choice "sexist". You almost had me there!

And you seem to be the kind of woman who is saying that women who never consider keeping their name are LESS feminist? Pot kettle dude.

All PP is saying is that giving children the father's name is from the same philosophically misogynist seed as the wife changing her name. So to make a big deal about keeping your own name but then allowing the children to take their father's name is kind of weird and inconsistent. Particularly since the goal of the old patriarchal system was to ensure than a man's family name continued. So you do nothing to actually stop this by keeping your own name.

Nothing WRONG with it, and maybe you don't care about the patriarchy and just love your name and don't want to change it. That's cool. But there is a logical inconsistency with the people who are doing it for 'feminism' but then go on to give their kids the new name.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I kept my name. It's a quirk of American culture to have women change their name upon marriage and I hope that my daughters don't do adopt this tradition. I agree with you that it is archaic and un-feminist.

What about my kids? Officially, they have DH's last name and my last name as a middle name. This makes it really easy to show their connection to both parents.

Fun sidenote, in my culture there is no such thing as a middle name - the child can have multiple given names and/or surnames. So for example on my DC's passport my last name is listed as a surname along with DH's last name. I like this tradition much better than erasing the mom's name completely as is the custom in the U.S. For practical purposes in my country, we also just use the last surname in everyday communication for example: DC would still be Mr. or Ms. (DH's last name.) Still, it's considered important for the children to have the mom's name to honor both sides of their family tree.

This.

I really don't understand why more families don't do this. I also kept my last name and my children have my last name as a middle and husband's last name as their last name. I think that it's archaic for women to change their names upon marriage and I'm American!

Because I wanted to give my kids an actual middle name (we used family names for all of the kids) instead of my long and very Italian maiden name. No one uses their middle name anyway- so it's not like your name is getting much recognition, especially if it's really a middle, not hyphenated.

What blows my mind is when women refuse to change their name but then give their children their husband's surname. There isn't anything more sexist than that.

Fwiw I wanted us all to have the same name. It didn't matter whose name it was or if we made up a name. Just the same last name. We are a family

So you changed to your husband's name and your kids got his last name as well?

Yes. If my husband's name was good enough for my kids then it was good enough for me.

But you consider it *more* sexist to give the kids the husband's name if the wife keeps her own name? Please explain.

Actually, no...don't explain. You're clearly the sort of woman who would never consider keeping her own name, and are trying to start a thunderdome amongst those of us who identify as feminists by calling our choice "sexist". You almost had me there!

And you seem to be the kind of woman who is saying that women who never consider keeping their name are LESS feminist? Pot kettle dude.

All PP is saying is that giving children the father's name is from the same philosophically misogynist seed as the wife changing her name. So to make a big deal about keeping your own name but then allowing the children to take their father's name is kind of weird and inconsistent. Particularly since the goal of the old patriarchal system was to ensure than a man's family name continued. So you do nothing to actually stop this by keeping your own name.

Nothing WRONG with it, and maybe you don't care about the patriarchy and just love your name and don't want to change it. That's cool. But there is a logical inconsistency with the people who are doing it for 'feminism' but then go on to give their kids the new name.

I am not the PP you're arguing with though FYI

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I kept my name. It's a quirk of American culture to have women change their name upon marriage and I hope that my daughters don't do adopt this tradition. I agree with you that it is archaic and un-feminist.

What about my kids? Officially, they have DH's last name and my last name as a middle name. This makes it really easy to show their connection to both parents.

Fun sidenote, in my culture there is no such thing as a middle name - the child can have multiple given names and/or surnames. So for example on my DC's passport my last name is listed as a surname along with DH's last name. I like this tradition much better than erasing the mom's name completely as is the custom in the U.S. For practical purposes in my country, we also just use the last surname in everyday communication for example: DC would still be Mr. or Ms. (DH's last name.) Still, it's considered important for the children to have the mom's name to honor both sides of their family tree.

This.

I really don't understand why more families don't do this. I also kept my last name and my children have my last name as a middle and husband's last name as their last name. I think that it's archaic for women to change their names upon marriage and I'm American!

Because I wanted to give my kids an actual middle name (we used family names for all of the kids) instead of my long and very Italian maiden name. No one uses their middle name anyway- so it's not like your name is getting much recognition, especially if it's really a middle, not hyphenated.

What blows my mind is when women refuse to change their name but then give their children their husband's surname. There isn't anything more sexist than that.

Fwiw I wanted us all to have the same name. It didn't matter whose name it was or if we made up a name. Just the same last name. We are a family

So you changed to your husband's name and your kids got his last name as well?

Yes. If my husband's name was good enough for my kids then it was good enough for me.

But you consider it *more* sexist to give the kids the husband's name if the wife keeps her own name? Please explain.

Actually, no...don't explain. You're clearly the sort of woman who would never consider keeping her own name, and are trying to start a thunderdome amongst those of us who identify as feminists by calling our choice "sexist". You almost had me there!

And you seem to be the kind of woman who is saying that women who never consider keeping their name are LESS feminist? Pot kettle dude.

All PP is saying is that giving children the father's name is from the same philosophically misogynist seed as the wife changing her name. So to make a big deal about keeping your own name but then allowing the children to take their father's name is kind of weird and inconsistent. Particularly since the goal of the old patriarchal system was to ensure than a man's family name continued. So you do nothing to actually stop this by keeping your own name.

Nothing WRONG with it, and maybe you don't care about the patriarchy and just love your name and don't want to change it. That's cool. But there is a logical inconsistency with the people who are doing it for 'feminism' but then go on to give their kids the new name.

Amen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I kept my name. It's a quirk of American culture to have women change their name upon marriage and I hope that my daughters don't do adopt this tradition. I agree with you that it is archaic and un-feminist.

What about my kids? Officially, they have DH's last name and my last name as a middle name. This makes it really easy to show their connection to both parents.

Fun sidenote, in my culture there is no such thing as a middle name - the child can have multiple given names and/or surnames. So for example on my DC's passport my last name is listed as a surname along with DH's last name. I like this tradition much better than erasing the mom's name completely as is the custom in the U.S. For practical purposes in my country, we also just use the last surname in everyday communication for example: DC would still be Mr. or Ms. (DH's last name.) Still, it's considered important for the children to have the mom's name to honor both sides of their family tree.

This.

I really don't understand why more families don't do this. I also kept my last name and my children have my last name as a middle and husband's last name as their last name. I think that it's archaic for women to change their names upon marriage and I'm American!

Because I wanted to give my kids an actual middle name (we used family names for all of the kids) instead of my long and very Italian maiden name. No one uses their middle name anyway- so it's not like your name is getting much recognition, especially if it's really a middle, not hyphenated.

What blows my mind is when women refuse to change their name but then give their children their husband's surname. There isn't anything more sexist than that.

Fwiw I wanted us all to have the same name. It didn't matter whose name it was or if we made up a name. Just the same last name. We are a family

So you changed to your husband's name and your kids got his last name as well?

Yes. If my husband's name was good enough for my kids then it was good enough for me.

But you consider it *more* sexist to give the kids the husband's name if the wife keeps her own name? Please explain.

Actually, no...don't explain. You're clearly the sort of woman who would never consider keeping her own name, and are trying to start a thunderdome amongst those of us who identify as feminists by calling our choice "sexist". You almost had me there!

And you seem to be the kind of woman who is saying that women who never consider keeping their name are LESS feminist? Pot kettle dude.

All PP is saying is that giving children the father's name is from the same philosophically misogynist seed as the wife changing her name. So to make a big deal about keeping your own name but then allowing the children to take their father's name is kind of weird and inconsistent. Particularly since the goal of the old patriarchal system was to ensure than a man's family name continued. So you do nothing to actually stop this by keeping your own name.

Nothing WRONG with it, and maybe you don't care about the patriarchy and just love your name and don't want to change it. That's cool. But there is a logical inconsistency with the people who are doing it for 'feminism' but then go on to give their kids the new name.

You know what I do for feminism? I make choices about what I want to do without passing it by the thought police to see if they approve.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I kept my name. It's a quirk of American culture to have women change their name upon marriage and I hope that my daughters don't do adopt this tradition. I agree with you that it is archaic and un-feminist.

What about my kids? Officially, they have DH's last name and my last name as a middle name. This makes it really easy to show their connection to both parents.

Fun sidenote, in my culture there is no such thing as a middle name - the child can have multiple given names and/or surnames. So for example on my DC's passport my last name is listed as a surname along with DH's last name. I like this tradition much better than erasing the mom's name completely as is the custom in the U.S. For practical purposes in my country, we also just use the last surname in everyday communication for example: DC would still be Mr. or Ms. (DH's last name.) Still, it's considered important for the children to have the mom's name to honor both sides of their family tree.

This.

I really don't understand why more families don't do this. I also kept my last name and my children have my last name as a middle and husband's last name as their last name. I think that it's archaic for women to change their names upon marriage and I'm American!

Because I wanted to give my kids an actual middle name (we used family names for all of the kids) instead of my long and very Italian maiden name. No one uses their middle name anyway- so it's not like your name is getting much recognition, especially if it's really a middle, not hyphenated.

What blows my mind is when women refuse to change their name but then give their children their husband's surname. There isn't anything more sexist than that.

Fwiw I wanted us all to have the same name. It didn't matter whose name it was or if we made up a name. Just the same last name. We are a family

So you changed to your husband's name and your kids got his last name as well?

Yes. If my husband's name was good enough for my kids then it was good enough for me.

But you consider it *more* sexist to give the kids the husband's name if the wife keeps her own name? Please explain.

Actually, no...don't explain. You're clearly the sort of woman who would never consider keeping her own name, and are trying to start a thunderdome amongst those of us who identify as feminists by calling our choice "sexist". You almost had me there!

And you seem to be the kind of woman who is saying that women who never consider keeping their name are LESS feminist? Pot kettle dude.

All PP is saying is that giving children the father's name is from the same philosophically misogynist seed as the wife changing her name. So to make a big deal about keeping your own name but then allowing the children to take their father's name is kind of weird and inconsistent. Particularly since the goal of the old patriarchal system was to ensure than a man's family name continued. So you do nothing to actually stop this by keeping your own name.

Nothing WRONG with it, and maybe you don't care about the patriarchy and just love your name and don't want to change it. That's cool. But there is a logical inconsistency with the people who are doing it for 'feminism' but then go on to give their kids the new name.

If PP would not consider giving her children her own name, and having her husband take her surname, it is a hollow argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I kept my name. It's a quirk of American culture to have women change their name upon marriage and I hope that my daughters don't do adopt this tradition. I agree with you that it is archaic and un-feminist.

What about my kids? Officially, they have DH's last name and my last name as a middle name. This makes it really easy to show their connection to both parents.

Fun sidenote, in my culture there is no such thing as a middle name - the child can have multiple given names and/or surnames. So for example on my DC's passport my last name is listed as a surname along with DH's last name. I like this tradition much better than erasing the mom's name completely as is the custom in the U.S. For practical purposes in my country, we also just use the last surname in everyday communication for example: DC would still be Mr. or Ms. (DH's last name.) Still, it's considered important for the children to have the mom's name to honor both sides of their family tree.

This.

I really don't understand why more families don't do this. I also kept my last name and my children have my last name as a middle and husband's last name as their last name. I think that it's archaic for women to change their names upon marriage and I'm American!

Because I wanted to give my kids an actual middle name (we used family names for all of the kids) instead of my long and very Italian maiden name. No one uses their middle name anyway- so it's not like your name is getting much recognition, especially if it's really a middle, not hyphenated.

What blows my mind is when women refuse to change their name but then give their children their husband's surname. There isn't anything more sexist than that.

Fwiw I wanted us all to have the same name. It didn't matter whose name it was or if we made up a name. Just the same last name. We are a family

So you changed to your husband's name and your kids got his last name as well?

Yes. If my husband's name was good enough for my kids then it was good enough for me.

But you consider it *more* sexist to give the kids the husband's name if the wife keeps her own name? Please explain.

Actually, no...don't explain. You're clearly the sort of woman who would never consider keeping her own name, and are trying to start a thunderdome amongst those of us who identify as feminists by calling our choice "sexist". You almost had me there!

And you seem to be the kind of woman who is saying that women who never consider keeping their name are LESS feminist? Pot kettle dude.

All PP is saying is that giving children the father's name is from the same philosophically misogynist seed as the wife changing her name. So to make a big deal about keeping your own name but then allowing the children to take their father's name is kind of weird and inconsistent. Particularly since the goal of the old patriarchal system was to ensure than a man's family name continued. So you do nothing to actually stop this by keeping your own name.

Nothing WRONG with it, and maybe you don't care about the patriarchy and just love your name and don't want to change it. That's cool. But there is a logical inconsistency with the people who are doing it for 'feminism' but then go on to give their kids the new name.

You know what I do for feminism? I make choices about what I want to do without passing it by the thought police to see if they approve.

Are you the original OP of this side thread? Because that PP said that she would be disappointed if her daughters did it and that it was 'un-feminist' and 'archaic.'

And that seems quite a bit like attempting to police thought.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes unless you want to have to explain every pickup

Nope. Never been a problem.