Where I'm from, all women keep their maiden name (it's the law) but give their child the father's name (they're not even married most of the time).

It's just the way it is.

Anonymous wrote:I didn't change my name for a variety of reasons (established in my career, its a piece of my personal identity, etc) and my DC has husband's last name.

I just want to add: I hate it when married women who took their DHs last name grill me on why I kept mine. It's like they are baiting me into implying they have less important careers than mine or are not "woke." I honestly don't care if you took your DHs last name and, frankly, I tip my hat for all of the paperwork and administrative bullshit you had to endure. There's a case to be made either way and God Bless America for letting us choose.

An interesting point because in some countries you can't choose. Maybe it's changed, but when I lived in Japan 20 years ago, upon marriage one spouse was required to change his/her name so the family would all have the same name. Of course 99% of the time it was the woman even though the law didn't specify.

I didn't change my name for a variety of reasons (established in my career, its a piece of my personal identity, etc) and my DC has husband's last name.

I just want to add: I hate it when married women who took their DHs last name grill me on why I kept mine. It's like they are baiting me into implying they have less important careers than mine or are not "woke." I honestly don't care if you took your DHs last name and, frankly, I tip my hat for all of the paperwork and administrative bullshit you had to endure. There's a case to be made either way and God Bless America for letting us choose.

Wow, there are people on this thread who can't deal with cultural change. Or that some people might legitimately want to do things differently from the way they do them. smh

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What a bizarre question. I was born and given a name I liked, and one I became known by. I saw no reason to change it. My kids were given a name shortly after birth that included my husband’s last name, which is more melodious than mine. If they like it, they can keep it, or they can change it. Why is this very personal thing of interest to anyone else?

Because you are part of the same family as your husband and children. It seems really weird to me for people in the same family to have different last names. Last names are supposed to signify your family. I wouldn't want to have a separate last name from my own children and husband.

Seems perfectly normal to me. It's how I grew up and the choice I and most of my friends made. In fact it's odd to me when a woman, especially a professional woman, changes her name upon marriage. I don't care what last names are "supposed? to do. My family is not lesser than someone else's because I didn't take my husband's name.

To each her own.

Anonymous wrote:I am not critical nor do I care what other people choose to do. But it is interesting that though I know lots of women who didn’t take their husband’s last name, I do not know a single child who has their mother’s maiden name as their surname.

For everyone saying some version of “I kept my name bc it was my identity but my children were blank slates” why does it follow that you would then give your children your husband’s name? Just because they’re a blank slate, they get their dad’s name instead of their mom’s because...?

Like I said, I really don’t care. But it does seem a little strange.

It's because society has come to see it as fine when women don't change their names upon marriage, but still assume that if a child has her mother's last name and not her father's, it's because she was born out of wedlock or to a different man. Not saying that is right or wrong, but that's still the view, and it's going to be harder to change because while women may be happy to take a stand on their own behalf, it's harder to think that people might be whispering about your child.

Attitudes do change though. My own mother kept her last name at a time when most women did not (early 70s). She said she got a lot of flak for it. Her primary care physician scolded her for it. The car dealer insisted she couldn't buy a car under her "maiden" name if she was married. Etc. Even when I was a kid in the 80s/90s, classmates would ask me if she was my step-mother or if she was really related to me. She was a teacher at my school and sometimes the other teachers would get angry when they realized halfway through the year for the first time that I was the daughter of a colleague -- they felt misled somehow. It's harder to imagine all this today when so many women keep their names. Although I have a colleague who asked another colleague, sotto voce, if I got divorced, because he "couldn't understand" why I had a different last name from my husband and children. And this is a guy my age (mid-30s).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not particularly a feminist, so that's not why I kept my name when I got married. I am who I am, and it seemed weird to me to change my name part way through my life because of a tradition that I didn't find persuasive. When my kids were born, I was totally fine giving them my husband'a last name. I have not for one minute felt my connection to them or to my husband diminished because I don't share their last name. And it has not once been an issue logistically or caused any confusion as to our being a family. It's just not a big deal. Heck, it's not even a small deal.

Ok, but ask yourself what the point of surnames are for. It's to signify family. With your attitude surnames become as meaningless as first names, and there is no reason at all for anyone in a family to share a surname with any other family member. Is that the solution? To get rid of identifying family relationships altogether? Should surnames simply be a a way of indicating an individuals identity, without having any tie to a person's family background?

DP here. You're right, the custom surnames was originally meant to signify family (back when women and children were considered the property of men). Modern people have discovered that you don't need a calling card to be a family. You can be a family just by loving each other.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not particularly a feminist, so that's not why I kept my name when I got married. I am who I am, and it seemed weird to me to change my name part way through my life because of a tradition that I didn't find persuasive. When my kids were born, I was totally fine giving them my husband'a last name. I have not for one minute felt my connection to them or to my husband diminished because I don't share their last name. And it has not once been an issue logistically or caused any confusion as to our being a family. It's just not a big deal. Heck, it's not even a small deal.

Ok, but ask yourself what the point of surnames are for. It's to signify family. With your attitude surnames become as meaningless as first names, and there is no reason at all for anyone in a family to share a surname with any other family member. Is that the solution? To get rid of identifying family relationships altogether? Should surnames simply be a a way of indicating an individuals identity, without having any tie to a person's family background?

Wow, talk about hyperbole. You want to keep your last name so you must want to get rid of any sign of a family relationship. Yeah, right, that was the reason I kept my last name. Sheesh...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Help me understand why most women who choose not to change their names when they get married still choose to give their children their husband's last name? It just seems like if you choose to give up an old tradition of taking your husband's last name, why would you choose your husband's last name for your children? I'm not criticizing. Really. I'm just trying to understand...

I have never understood refusing to take your husband’s last name as you s have a man’s name as your surname.

My surname is my name in the same way that my first name is my name. Once it was given to me when I was born, it became mine. It's the name I had for 30 years before I married dh. Why should I change it?

Because you and your DH are now a family. That's what last names are for. Otherwise why not just have everyone have separate last names? I suppose we could move to a system where last names don't have anymore significance than first names. If it doesn't signify any type of family relationship, I guess parents can pick whatever last name that sounds nice for their kid, and each kid can have their own separate last name that sounds nice with their first name.

Oh yes, I saw how that worked with my siblings. Sister changed her name for her first marriage. They divorced and she took back her birth name. Brother got married twice and both his wives changed their names. Neither marriage lasted. Me, on the other hand, I got married once. Been married for 29 years. Never changed my last name. Oh, yeah, that's a real indicator of what makes a family all right......

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a classic example of the DCUM thread category that I like to call "I'm incapable of understanding how/why other people view things differently than I do." There are always a multitude of, to me, obvious reasons why people do X thing differently, but also a lot of people who are apparently incapable of coming up with these obvious reasons on their own. Often, like in this thread, it comes across as a not-very-subtle way for the OP to proselytize about the way things ought to be or provide a platform to criticize the group they're supposedly trying to "understand." But, no, they're not criticizing or engaging in moral/political propaganda. They really, innocently, in good faith "don't understand." I don't know if it's one or a small group of posters who love to do this. I would hope there aren't really that many obtuse people ...

Best post in the thread right here

Yes, that pp has nailed it.

Totally agree. Sadly, I think there are a lot of obtuse people out there. The lack of theory of mind is pretty staggering.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What a bizarre question. I was born and given a name I liked, and one I became known by. I saw no reason to change it. My kids were given a name shortly after birth that included my husband’s last name, which is more melodious than mine. If they like it, they can keep it, or they can change it. Why is this very personal thing of interest to anyone else?

Because you are part of the same family as your husband and children. It seems really weird to me for people in the same family to have different last names. Last names are supposed to signify your family. I wouldn't want to have a separate last name from my own children and husband.

DP here. That's cool for you. Not what I chose but I support you in your choice. Why do you care what other people do?

Anonymous wrote:

There are many cultures where it's not the norm for the entire family to share the same surname. I'm Chinese and women are not expected to change their surnames upon marriage (though some do). Most women keep their "maiden" names. This is the norm in most Asian countries except for Japan. Dh is Hispanic and women are also not expected to change their surnames upon marriage. MIL/FIL have different surnames. It's a bit more complicated because children have a different combination of surnames from their parents. Dh only shares the same set of surnames with his brother.

Women changing their surnames upon marriage and that entire nuclear family having the same surname are subjective culturally specific traditions. Keep them or not for whatever reasons that make sense to you. It boils down to personal preference. But the the idea that these traditions are somehow universal or objective signifiers of family is absolutely absurd.

This. Cultures are not monoliths. Where I come from, we didn't even have a last name, just an initial. And the initial was the first letter of the mother's family name. A name is just a way to identify a person. They or their families don't become any lesser just because their last names are different from what someone's expectations are, based on their own culture and personal values.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a classic example of the DCUM thread category that I like to call "I'm incapable of understanding how/why other people view things differently than I do." There are always a multitude of, to me, obvious reasons why people do X thing differently, but also a lot of people who are apparently incapable of coming up with these obvious reasons on their own. Often, like in this thread, it comes across as a not-very-subtle way for the OP to proselytize about the way things ought to be or provide a platform to criticize the group they're supposedly trying to "understand." But, no, they're not criticizing or engaging in moral/political propaganda. They really, innocently, in good faith "don't understand." I don't know if it's one or a small group of posters who love to do this. I would hope there aren't really that many obtuse people ...

Best post in the thread right here

Yes, that pp has nailed it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What a bizarre question. I was born and given a name I liked, and one I became known by. I saw no reason to change it. My kids were given a name shortly after birth that included my husband’s last name, which is more melodious than mine. If they like it, they can keep it, or they can change it. Why is this very personal thing of interest to anyone else?

Don't pretend it is a bizarre question.

Not pretending. I find it completely bizarre that anyone would care what someone else chose to do with their name or the names of their children (unless the parents in question name their kid something gossip-worthy, like Inspektor Pilot). Why do you care? Are you the name police?

NP stop pretending it’s not interesting. Other cultures put names on names together. Other cultures favor the mothers family name or ascribe more importance to the maternal line. It’s incredibly interesting or maybe you have no intellectual curiosity? Agree I don’t care what other people do (in terms of controlling them) but the topic is fascinating, in part bc there’s no clear answer.

DP here. I agree that the question is interesting in the abstract but at least one poster, rather than just wondering why she was motivated to make a particular choice, is raising the question with a tone of judgment towards other people's choices.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Help me understand why most women who choose not to change their names when they get married still choose to give their children their husband's last name? It just seems like if you choose to give up an old tradition of taking your husband's last name, why would you choose your husband's last name for your children? I'm not criticizing. Really. I'm just trying to understand...

I have never understood refusing to take your husband’s last name as you s have a man’s name as your surname.

Um. My own name is my surname. It's not my father's name any more than it is my aunt's name. It's our family name. I was born with it, she was born with it, he was born with it. It's mine.

(And I'm a woman and now it is my son's.)

And now your husband and son's father doesn't get to share the same last name as his family. Sorry, family members should all have the same last name.

I know a couple (who have different last names) who have had 18 kids. One biological (no idea whose name he got), 17 fostered, some of those subsequently adopted. They have all kinds of names in their family and they are no less family than yours. You sound small-minded with this nonsense. Stop embarrassing yourself.