Men - Would you take your wife's last name instead?

[eudaimonia]

So, now I pose the question to the men of RF: Would you change your last name to your wife's if she asked you to?

Possibly, but my wife and I retained our own last names.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[salma888]

In Islam, it is not mandatory for women to acquire their husband's name as their surname. In fact they are advised to be recognized by their father's name rather than husband's because that way there remains no doubt about who the father is.

 

[Smoke]

My husband and I both objected to taking the other's name, although the only reason he wouldn't take mine is that he thinks it would hurt his father's feelings. But we both wanted to share a name. He agreed to hyphenate our names, but I didn't like that, so I had to complicate things. I said I'd use any surname he wanted -- as long as it was the name of one of my great-grandparents. The name we settled on, Reilly, occurs in his father's ancestry and is my father's paternal grandmother's maiden name. Theoretically, I've agreed to use my surname + Reilly (no hyphen), while he prefers his surname-hyphen-Reilly. In fact, though, we both use our original surnames professionally and nobody calls either of us individually by his "new" name. Some of our friends refer to us collectively as "the Reillys," which suits me fine. It's not nearly as confusing as it sounds. I've changed my first name twice (well, changed it, then changed it back), and still answer to both, and that confuses people much more than the surname thing.

Quibbling over a last name and disrespecting tradition is insulting to the traditional family. What is wrong with traditions?

Nothing. But there are all kinds of traditions, and they all started somewhere, because people did what seemed appropriate to them at the time.

Does anyone here come from a family that their father and mother are still married and have only been married once?

My parents have been married for 48 years -- first marriage for both. My husband's parents have been married for 53 years, also the first marriage for both.

None of our grandparents were divorced from each other, but my paternal grandfather was divorced before he married my grandmother. His first marriage lasted four years. He was Catholic, and thought it was a huge scandal, and we never told him that we knew about it; however, my grandmother told my father, who told my mother, who told my brother and me. When my dad was in the Marines, a palm-reader in San Diego told him one of his parents had been previously married, and since he didn't know about it at the time, he scoffed at her. Later, he thought it was pretty creepy.

I am also the last male on my father's side of the family, so it's up to me to carry on the family name.

I couldn't care less about carrying on the family name; it started somewhere and it will end somewhere. However, my name is fairly common without being Smith or Jones, easy to pronounce, and sounds English, though it's not -- so it's convenient.

A real mans wife would be proud to carry his name.

Why wouldn't a real woman's husband be proud to carry her name?

My mother, by the way, couldn't wait to dump her maiden name, which looks like it should be pronounced differently than it is, and isn't very euphonious either way. One of her cousins changed his surname to his mother's maiden name for that reason, and I think my grandmother would have been well within her rights to have kept her maiden name. However, I'm sure my grandfather, who was born in 1881, would have disagreed with that.

 

[PureX]

So, now I pose the question to the men of RF: Would you change your last name to your wife's if she asked you to? And if not, what are your reasons? Would you expect her to change her last name to yours? Why, or why not?

I would not change my name, nor would I expect my wife to change hers unless she specifically wanted to.

 

[Ozzie]

Before I was married, my partner used to insist upon the fact that when we got married, he wanted me to change my last name to his. While an atheist, he was raised in a very traditional Portuguese, Roman Catholic family, and that's "just how things were done." I, on the other hand, was raised an atheist, in a very non-traditional family, where my mother was the head of the household, and while she had changed her name to my fathers, many of her sisters had chosen not to when they married. I was insistant on keeping my last name when we married. My partner and I bickered back and forth about this for years, but ultimately, I won out, and I think mainly because I posed this question: "Why don't you change your name to mine when we marry?" He didn't want to. "Why not?" I asked, "Then we'll have the same last name, just like you want. There will be no question that we're married, no confusion over whose last name to give the children." After much discussion, he really couldn't come up with a good reason not to change his name to mine other than the fact that he just didn't want to, and if that reason was good enough for him to keep his name, it was good enough for me to keep mine.

So, now I pose the question to the men of RF: Would you change your last name to your wife's if she asked you to? And if not, what are your reasons? Would you expect her to change her last name to yours? Why, or why not?

No change for me because my children carry my name. I don't think you have given tradition enough thought as a valid reason for not changing the name. For instance in your family the tradition seems to be developing for the girls to carry the name, or is it both?

These questions were of no importance in the past when large families were the norm and most family names were carried on through the male side.

Its more a symptom of people having small families that this question arises in the first place?

BTW IMO, both parties should keep their birth names but one should choose to give the kids their name.

Is it important to keep names going for identity?

Is it a symptom of modern sameless life that family names as a last vestige of tradition should become the centre of a power struggle?

Some random thoughts.

 

[Nanda]

I don't think you have given tradition enough thought as a valid reason for not changing the name.

Not true. There were several instances in this thread where men said they wouldn't change their name because of tradition, and I didn' t bug them too much about it. I'd just like people to think about why they do the things they do.

For instance in your family the tradition seems to be developing for the girls to carry the name, or is it both?

No, there is no surname tradition in my family. Some women keep it, some women change it, depending on the woman. I kept mine, my sister-in-law changed hers, and my sister is the first to get her spouse to change his. The only "tradition" we're passing down, I suppose, would be the tradition of letting women decide for themselves what they want, and teaching our sons and daughters that women have as much of a right to make these decisions as any male - that the final say does not fall to the man simply because he's male.

These questions were of no importance in the past when large families were the norm and most family names were carried on through the male side. Its more a symptom of people having small families that this question arises in the first place?

I think it's more a symptom of women thinking for themselves; but I can see why you'd think that, because I think smaller families are another symptom of that.

Is it important to keep names going for identity?

It depends on who you ask. It was important for me to keep my name for my personal identity, yes. Others don't care as much. Some women would rather have a new identity, as the wife of their spouse and a member of his family, and if that's what they want, more power to them. To me, it doesn't really matter what they choose, as long as they have a choice, and are doing what's right for them.

 

[Ozzie]

Not true. There were several instances in this thread where men said they wouldn't change their name because of tradition, and I didn' t bug them too much about it. I'd just like people to think about why they do the things they do.



No, there is no surname tradition in my family. Some women keep it, some women change it, depending on the woman. I kept mine, my sister-in-law changed hers, and my sister is the first to get her spouse to change his. The only "tradition" we're passing down, I suppose, would be the tradition of letting women decide for themselves what they want, and teaching our sons and daughters that women have as much of a right to make these decisions as any male - that the final say does not fall to the man simply because he's male.



I think it's more a symptom of women thinking for themselves; but I can see why you'd think that, because I think smaller families are another symptom of that.



It depends on who you ask. It was important for me to keep my name for my personal identity, yes. Others don't care as much. Some women would rather have a new identity, as the wife of their spouse and a member of his family, and if that's what they want, more power to them. To me, it doesn't really matter what they choose, as long as they have a choice, and are doing what's right for them.

Before I respond, what do you think of the power issues I raised at the end of my post.

 

[Nanda]

Before I respond, what do you think of the power issues I raised at the end of my post.

You'd have to reword it, because I can't figure out what you're trying to say there.

 

[Ozzie]

You'd have to reword it, because I can't figure out what you're trying to say there.

I think I mean't tradition is carried in a name. People knock themselves out trying to name new babies in a distinctive way only to find out everybody else had the same idea when there are 3 Lachlan's in the class. We should call eachother by our last names as a rule.

 

[Ozzie]

Not true. There were several instances in this thread where men said they wouldn't change their name because of tradition, and I didn' t bug them too much about it. I'd just like people to think about why they do the things they do.

Yes it is important to me too. But I thought you were looking for reasons that you would consider valid for not changing.

No, there is no surname tradition in my family. Some women keep it, some women change it, depending on the woman. I kept mine, my sister-in-law changed hers, and my sister is the first to get her spouse to change his. The only "tradition" we're passing down, I suppose, would be the tradition of letting women decide for themselves what they want, and teaching our sons and daughters that women have as much of a right to make these decisions as any male - that the final say does not fall to the man simply because he's male.

Maybe it will become a tradition in the next generation if the woman keeps her name and the bloke changes in this?

I think it's more a symptom of women thinking for themselves; but I can see why you'd think that, because I think smaller families are another symptom of that.

A symptom of women thinking the same thing as men maybe? Smaller families mean names are more in danger of being selected out if only boys carry the family name.

It depends on who you ask. It was important for me to keep my name for my personal identity, yes. Others don't care as much. Some women would rather have a new identity, as the wife of their spouse and a member of his family, and if that's what they want, more power to them. To me, it doesn't really matter what they choose, as long as they have a choice, and are doing what's right for them.

Agreed.

 

[methylatedghosts]

I've heard of people taking each other's last names and hyphenating when they get married, but I can't say I'm a real fan of it.

I can see that leading to problems in a few generations...

"Mr (Father's name)-(Mother's name)-(Wife's father's name)-(Wife's mother's name)"

LOL

Anyway to answer the thread, I'd like to keep my surname, because I like it and I prefer to keep it. And it's my future partner's choice as to if she takes my name. I'd prefer not to hyphenate surnames, because my surname is long enough as it is, and it hyphenated surnames are associated with parent re-marriages (which aren't necessarily bad in themselves, but I've heard people say it can indicate family instability)

 

[Smoke]

I can see that leading to problems in a few generations...

"Mr (Father's name)-(Mother's name)-(Wife's father's name)-(Wife's mother's name)"

I think most people would just pick two.

 

[anders]

It is part of the Culture in the U.K that the wife takes on the husband's surname......... I have never heard of anyone who has even thought to question that, but I guess I can understand your point. The only time I have seen a wife retain her maiden name has been when she was a professional person before marriage, and didn't want to lose the name.

I can agree with the last sentence. When I married, my wife didn't want to lose her rather unique surname, very well known in her home town, to mine, which was at the time unique in my home town, but not in any way recognized like hers. There, it was, Oh, like the engineer X at SAAB aeroplanes?, here, it was How do you spell that?

I considered taking hers, but on hinting it to mother, I got the feeling that she would be almost insulted, so the two of us kept our previous names.

As far as the married name is concerned, I don't think that the married name has anything to do with the Religious aspect of a marriage; on the European Continent, a wife legally is called by her husban'ds surname ( hyphen ) her Maiden name.

I agree that Swedish names can't be linked to religion, but if the latter part of that sentence is correct, we aren't a part of "the European Continent". Some girls retain their maiden names like, for surname, their maiden name - hyphen - husband's surname, not the other way round, and have the result officially recorded. Like in my case, it's convenient, because on a divorce, there's at least a part of her surname that isn't changed.

If my latest relation would have resulted in marriage, I would have expected, accepted and if necessary even demanded that she keep her (non-European) name from its beginning to its end.

Perhaps a sign that I'm approaching senility and subsequently am enhancing remote memory at the expense of short-term memory,

kltpzyxm!

Strange, mrscardero was just sitting next to me and then simply disappeared.

the way I remember the alien's name from the 1950's corresponded to the spelling here.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

In my case, my wife wanted to take my last name, so she did.

I was thinking, though: why not start the tradition that both the wife AND the husband change their names to something totally different? A new name for a new life together... sounds sorta romantic.

 

[Dr. Nosophoros]

To the origional post, I'm sure you know that females last names are just their fathers before them so it's a loaded question to a degree for males who want to start their own family, continue your own bloodline under the name you have been given or continue it under another mans name (even though bloodlines are mixed). I might see it a little differently because I adopted my wifes kids from a former marriage and they chose to take my last name, we had a nice legal battle over adopting them but fortunately for us he was a deadbeat and owed a lot of back child support so when he fought my wifes and my childrens request for full adoption we used his character against him and the choice was either pay the full amount by this date and avoid jail and keep your "parental" rights or pay half over a period of time and sign over your rights and not go to jail. Being the useless alcoholic and drug infested piece of garbage that he was, he opted not to go to jail and signed the papers (his mother paid in full a week later-this guy was 46 at the time, incredible!) My son and daughter have stated that they consider him just a sperm donor.

But besides that I would guess that if you really wanted to get funky, both male and female should create their own last names together with nothing at all to do with their ancestry, that way no-one is the top or bottom and no-one will feel intruded on, all that matters is that we feel good about things.

 

[Pardus]

I've been thinking of doing it, as i have no attachment to any of the surnames available to me.

 

[MdmSzdWhtGuy]

Not no, but HELL NO!!!

B.

 

[Nanda]

Not no, but HELL NO!!!

B.

Why not?

 

[Pardus]

I think in general a good idea to have both people keep their name and have the children take the father's name as incentive towards a two parent household.

This has nothing to do with traditional values, just an effort to give the kids more assistance in growing up.

 

[MdmSzdWhtGuy]

Why not?

Because I am a man. . . make that A MAN!!! and taking someone else's name is a feminine thing. I am not into feminine things. . . except the underwear on occasion, and as we have discussed, that is strictly a comfort thing. (that last part was a quote from Homer. . . Simpson, not of Illiad and Odysey fame.

I guess the simple and truthful answer is that I am a bit of a chauvanist, at least in a few matters. I live my life by the old codes, such as chivalry and the code of the west that one can find in Louis L'Amour and Zane Grey books, and the idea of me taking a woman's name when I marry her, or for that matter, her keeping her own, goes violently against my sentimentalities.

Perhaps that makes me a brute, or an ogre, or old fashioned, but on that subject, I will never bend.

B.