Agnostic.com

21 0

A woman changing her surname 2 her husband's after marriage; is it constitutional, religious, traditional or just a belief?

Greenheart 7 July 26
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

21 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

4

this practice is no longer done in Québec (or very difficult to do). Women keep their original name. It streamlines government paperwork, medical, education and tons more stuff. You can hyphenate the children's surname but it gets complicated after 2 generations.

Another point to know here: Religious marriages are no longer recognized legally (as part of the official record). To be registered as married you must get married in court.

Why should a woman lose her identity after marriage?

Lukian Level 8 July 27, 2018
4

I knew a couple who married and both of them changed their names to one that took elements of each of their former last names.

PenLOP Level 7 July 27, 2018
3

Nothing more than an archaic societal construct. Wholly unnecessary, and a ridiculous expense.
It's costs entirely too much money to legally change one's name.

3

It is just a tradition. I have been married twice and did not change my name either times. I wonder if that was why it did not last?

Married twice, changed names both times, didn't last. So... what's in a name? A rose by any other name.... ?

And this is Bob my current husband. ? don't get too comfortable Bob. ?

@Anonbene You got it there.

2

Customary and traditional but yes outdated, but it’s up to each individual to choose whichever form. I chose a hyphenated last name. My mother never changed hers though people called her by my dad’s last name.

2

It was my father who insisted that I not change my name. He said a woman should not lose her identity just because she gets married. If I get married again, I’ll make the same choice.

2

I have my own name and didn’t change it for a marriage. I think the whole name change thing is sexist and outdated.

2

It's tradition based on a male-dominant society going back centuries. And it does make it WAY easier to track families and ancestors. That being said, I did not change my name when I got married. You couldn't have paid me enough money to change my identity.

Hihi Level 6 July 27, 2018
2

It is just an option based on a patriarchal tradition. It sucks that it is seen as expected. Wish society would move on from these asinine assumptions and expectations.

DeiP Level 5 July 27, 2018
2

Traditional with religious overtones. I, personally, think the couple should decide together on a new last name

Or we should go back to ancient Norse last names.

1

It is patriarchal tradition, that puts more importance on males than females. It has been institutionalized into many religions.

1

This is a very interest question I have wondered often about the origin of this practice, but never heard a convincing answer.

1
1

To me it seemed like if you change your name, people make the assumption that you are a tradionalist. If you keep your name, people assume you're a man-hater who keeps her husband on a leash. Neither applied to me, so I made the very scientific decision to pick the name that sounded prettier, which was mine. His last named, when spoken, was harsh, and vaguely reminded me of a cat horking on the floor.

1

Traditional. In some cultures it’s the female line that carries the family name. Of course that’s a different issue. Should the children be given their father’s last name or their mother’s? Or maybe neither, or some combination of both? Girls could have the maternal name and boys the paternal. Offhand I like that idea, which just popped into my head.

1

Key word here is "her surname"... it's her's. For what I care, the wife can carry my name or George Clooney or whatever she prefers.

1

In thoise cultures in which this occurs, it is simply a cultural norm -- nothing more, nothing less.

@PalacinkyPDX I hope that you are not suggesting that there is any relationship between the two. IN my 57 years of marriage, I have never hit my wife and did not victimize either wife with verbal or psychological abuse (in spite of my first wife heaping verbal abuse on me and playing mind fuck games constantly. In fact, I have never hit a woman in my l entire rife. I do not see any connection between the post and your comment.

1

Just a tradition. No law in the US requires it.

1

Traditional I think. I didn't change mine. Tax returns are filed using both names and so far no complaints from the IRS.

1

Ok tradition nor religious beliefs cover this one adequately. It's actually about property. Women were never allowed to own anything in fact if a women were a sole survivor of her family she held the property in trust until she married and her husband would then claim the property to be handed down to the eldest male heir. Once women were legacy allowed to own property last names became important (and a bunch of other historical events I am skipping over) . So women fought to get the last name of there husband to be counted. It's way deeper and sinister than that but limited time and typing space. If that very very very brief explanation has you thinking go down the rabbit hole and research it.

Wahker Level 6 July 27, 2018
1

My two friends Jane and Steve got together about 20 years ago. They are still together and have a fantastic son. Jane had been married before and would never do that again. However she did not want her son to suffer at school, so she changed her name by deed poll to Steve's.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:140705
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.