Monm82 Posted September 20, 2014 Share Posted September 20, 2014 How does everyone feel about marriages in which the husband takes the wife's last name? I think it's beyond beautiful, and this is coming from a man. 4 Link to post Share on other sites
Ronni_W Posted September 20, 2014 Share Posted September 20, 2014 I think it's kinda gay, and this is coming from a woman. ("Not that there's anything wrong with that," to quote from Seinfeld.) But that's just me. I guess if the couple want to do it, then power to them. 8 Link to post Share on other sites
carhill Posted September 20, 2014 Share Posted September 20, 2014 If I had to be objective, I think my name would have sounded better with my exW's maiden surname than hers in the reverse. As it was, we kept our respective names since she was already established in her business with her maiden name and she'd grown tired of changing it back after her other two divorces. Practicality won out. TBH, it doesn't really matter to me. You can call me anything you want if you don't call me late for dinner. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
pink_sugar Posted September 20, 2014 Share Posted September 20, 2014 It's different, but I think add ons are better. Like as if the guy keeps his last name and both spouses add on one another's name. Such as "Smith Anderson" or "Anderson Smith". 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Ronni_W Posted September 20, 2014 Share Posted September 20, 2014 Such as "Smith Anderson" or "Anderson Smith". Oh! I forgot to remember that as a possibility. To me, that is lovely For myself, we each kept our family names. Link to post Share on other sites
evanescentworld Posted September 20, 2014 Share Posted September 20, 2014 It's different, but I think add ons are better. Like as if the guy keeps his last name and both spouses add on one another's name. Such as "Smith Anderson" or "Anderson Smith". In some areas of Europe, a woman is EXPECTED to keep her maiden name, or at least, her official documents (passport, id cards, marriage certificates) have to give it equal prominence to her married name. This makes genealogy and finding long-lost relatives much easier. Coupling names can be confusing, particularly if you need to prove inheritance or property rights. It does happen. I went for most of my life believing my maiden-name was double-barrelled, only to discover, when reading my birth certificate, that the first half of what I thought had been my surname, was actually one of my baptised/christening middle names! The rigmarole I had to go through to make changes to all official documents was both long-winded and expensive. But it had to be done, to avoid confusion. Link to post Share on other sites
ufo8mycat Posted September 20, 2014 Share Posted September 20, 2014 I think it is a lovely idea and I have enormous respect for any man who takes this option. My husband and I kept our own family names but he often uses mine socially as it just sounds better. The idea of women changing their surname isn't as widespread as people seem to think. I have an american friend who married an italian and they live in italy. She changed her name, which is is less common in italy so many assume they are brother and sister than husband and wife. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
evanescentworld Posted September 20, 2014 Share Posted September 20, 2014 ...I have an american friend who married an italian and they live in italy. She changed her name, which is is less common in italy so many assume they are brother and sister than husband and wife. Exactly. Hence my mention of 'Europe'. Thanks for this! Link to post Share on other sites
evanescentworld Posted September 20, 2014 Share Posted September 20, 2014 Well, a name doesn't make a man... remember Shirley Crabtree and Marion Morrison? One was a champion wrestler, the other a world-wide famous 'as-macho-as-you-can-get' mean machine. Stage names Big Daddy and John Wayne, respectively. A name says nothing about anyone, and if you consider the gesture to be a beta' one, then I must heartily disagree with your opinion. Link to post Share on other sites
jackslife Posted September 20, 2014 Share Posted September 20, 2014 Like everything today, if you want to do it that's your call. I think it's a terrible idea. I'm not a fan of the shared surname thing either, it's pretentious a bit wank. What do you want to do next, have a womb transplant and carry the baby for her? Link to post Share on other sites
Thegameoflife Posted September 20, 2014 Share Posted September 20, 2014 I would never give up my family name. My last name has survived for thousands of years, and exemplifies my families perseverance throughout history. My family tree has outlived the majority of countries that have existed throughout history. I consider it an honor to carry it and pass it to my future kids. However, if you have some serf name like smith, which was just given to your family because they were bringing in second names for record purposes, it probably wouldn't matter what you do with it. I think that men should keep their names and women should take their husbands name. Everyone messing with tradition is just breaking down marriage until it really means nothing. Link to post Share on other sites
Author Monm82 Posted September 20, 2014 Author Share Posted September 20, 2014 Everyone messing with tradition is just breaking down marriage until it really means nothing. I respectfully disagree. 4 Link to post Share on other sites
Author Monm82 Posted September 20, 2014 Author Share Posted September 20, 2014 Well, a name doesn't make a man... remember Shirley Crabtree and Marion Morrison? One was a champion wrestler, the other a world-wide famous 'as-macho-as-you-can-get' mean machine. Stage names Big Daddy and John Wayne, respectively. A name says nothing about anyone, and if you consider the gesture to be a beta' one, then I must heartily disagree with your opinion. Jay-Z took Beyoncé's last name. Link to post Share on other sites
Allumere Posted September 20, 2014 Share Posted September 20, 2014 To each their peach. My ex was not happy that I did not take his name. Although his name IMHO was lousy that wasn't the reason. I am the last of the family line on my Dad's side and it is simply important to me to let the name live on as long as possible. That said, I never corrected anyone if they called me "Mrs.ExH Last Name". Of course I also now view it as an omen...just a few less steps after divorce. Link to post Share on other sites
veggirl Posted September 20, 2014 Share Posted September 20, 2014 Wow, some surprisingly strong opinions on this. I think it's fine. I don't see why it wouldn't be. Link to post Share on other sites
denise_xo Posted September 20, 2014 Share Posted September 20, 2014 I don't see what it's any worse or better than a wife taking her husband's name. However, I don't generally see a point in changing names. But if my husband would like to take mine, I'd be honoured and supportive, if that was what he really wanted. Link to post Share on other sites
denise_xo Posted September 20, 2014 Share Posted September 20, 2014 The idea of women changing their surname isn't as widespread as people seem to think. Where I live, it's not very common anymore. It's considered old fashioned and out of date by many. Even my mother didn't do it, and I'd certainly never consider it. Link to post Share on other sites
denise_xo Posted September 20, 2014 Share Posted September 20, 2014 I respectfully disagree. Yes, on my list of criteria for a successful and strong marriage, surnames are not included. 3 Link to post Share on other sites
compulsivedancer Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 It was very important to my H that his family name be passed on. I had a lowly "surf" name, as a previous poster called it, so I changed mine. If I was getting married today, I wouldn't. Why does my husband's name get a long and glorious tradition because he's male, and mine only gets passed on through my brother's line? But if I don't want to take his name, why would I want him to take mine? That seems kind of dumb to me, unless there's an actual reason to take her name. 3 Link to post Share on other sites
Michelle ma Belle Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 I'm quite surprised by the massive swings on either side of this particular topic. I certainly don't see it as weak or unmanly as so many have pointed out. That is just ridiculous. If it's a choice a couple makes together than so be it. I don't see it as a battle worth fighting in my opinion. To each their own 3 Link to post Share on other sites
todreaminblue Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 my family surname ends with a long line of girls.....there are no boys to carry it on.....my cousins,my sister and myself carry the last ...kinda sad really...... i do think changing surnames is part of a tradition that is beautiful......the uniting of two people names and all......to become one......and i dont have a problem with people have their own traditions and their own reason...i prefer old school.. .....just as long as the marriage is for me,an eternal united thing, it really doesnt present a problem either way....i would question a guy who didnt want me to have his last name...i would find that odd.......deb 2 Link to post Share on other sites
Thegameoflife Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 It was very important to my H that his family name be passed on. I had a lowly "surf" name, as a previous poster called it, so I changed mine. If I was getting married today, I wouldn't. Why does my husband's name get a long and glorious tradition because he's male, and mine only gets passed on through my brother's line? But if I don't want to take his name, why would I want him to take mine? That seems kind of dumb to me, unless there's an actual reason to take her name. It's because x chromosomes are passed only within males from generation to generation. The family name is a label which represents those genetics, and the code of honor the family lives by. Every male is the embodiment of the will that is passed from generation to generation. Honorable people understand the importance of the surname. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Almond_Joy Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 It's because x chromosomes are passed only within males from generation to generation. The family name is a label which represents those genetics, and the code of honor the family lives by. Every male is the embodiment of the will that is passed from generation to generation. Honorable people understand the importance of the surname. Pretty sure when this tradition started they didn't have a comprehensive understanding of genetics and how they are passed to further generations. This is a contemporary rationalization based on scientific discovery. That honor crap can go right out of the window though, because history and present day clearly indicate on an ongoing basis that a person carrying a previous generation's surname in no way guarantees the timbre of that individual's character. And what EXACTLY is "dishonorable" about acknowledging the lineage of a woman in marriage? The woman's good enough to take care of a home, bear and raise children, and/or financially contribute to a household, but having her lineage represented is frowned upon? Do you have any idea how hypocritical and irrational that sounds? My lord. This line of thinking really gets my goat. Women are not non-entities, they're people and having the person you marry get equal representation in a name is not asking too much. I wouldn't expect my husband to forgo his name....I might actually be against it lol....and he should not expect that I forgo mine. 4 Link to post Share on other sites
SJS Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 It wouldn't work for us. And if I was going to keep my maiden name, then I may as well just not get married. For us, marriage is a union and having the same last name symbolizes that. We're traditional all around though. My mom's maiden name is now gone, as she had only sisters. My dad's last name is on its way out too. My husband is the last male in his family with his last name so it was up to us to keep it going, and we had a daughter...it is what it is. Link to post Share on other sites
Mascara Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 It's because x chromosomes are passed only within males from generation to generation. The family name is a label which represents those genetics, and the code of honor the family lives by. Every male is the embodiment of the will that is passed from generation to generation. Honorable people understand the importance of the surname. Well first of all it's the Y chromosome that's passed down the male line, and secondly it makes more sense to keep the female name as the family name, because if we're talking about genetics it only takes one woman to have cheated ten thousand years ago to completely negate that. A woman always knows that the child she has produced contains her genetic material. A man doesn't. If great-great-great-great grandma did the nasty with the neighbour, that name you carry so proudly is nothing to do with you or your genetics. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts