I am an ordained minister (yet another trade of mine haha) I encourage people to write their own vows. As for the last name issue... I as well am an only child and alas female. The end of my fathers line..... however, I am growing more attached to the significant others last name and have not yet decided if I will take his or keep my own. Time tells all things so.....

Here's what happened when my wife and I thought about this same thing during our engaugement.

She asked me how I felt about her keeping her last name. I felt through my feelings and answered her after a while.

There's a certain part of me, ego, that wanted her to take my last name. There's also part of me that respects her heratage as I resepect my own. That part of me wanted her to keep her name if she wanted to.

The third part of me was basically practical. I've done some work in the "paper processing" area of a huge company's new hire process. From this processing work, I understand how much "fun" people with all thier cute names are. I mean "fun" in the "I have a spreadsheet of employee info I have to process" kind of way. The whole "lastname-lastname" bit is especially tiresome when it comes to form filling out. Soz, here's what I told her.

I said: honey, I'd like you to take my last name. both from ego and because it's a tradition I kind of like. It's a naming convention that shows we're together as a couple. However, if you want to keep your last name, that's really fine too. The only thing I don't want to do is hypehnate, because that's just awkward when it comes to filling out paperwork.

She suggested I could take her name...and I considered it as an option. We ended up talking through why we thought people take last names, or don't take them. What worked for the two of us was her decision to take my last name.

I think the more we talked about the various options available to us, the more we realized that it didn't mean a whole lot to us either way; that it was just paperwork, not who we are.

This may or may not sound crazy but I really like the last name change/unification. In my opinion for a marriage to actually work both people must abandon their former self-driven personalities and become in a sense, one person. The melding of the last name is legal just like the financial, physical, and emotional ties become. Now whether or not the man's name replaces the female or they combine or in the case of gay relationships one chooses over the other etc. doesn't matter to me at all. As the commitment deepens so should the ties and thus the names as well.

Officially, I changed mine to my husband's name.

Unofficially, I sometimes use my maiden name, purely because 1. haven't gotten around to changing it on some things - like work stuff and 2. I like my maiden name and felt I lost part of myself when I changed.

All legal docs are changed over, but it's purely for my own satisfaction. I change the spelling of my name sometimes too.

I recently went to my high school reunion and men way outnumbered women, because most women could not be located because they have a new last name.

Jonathan

I think this is a very nice summation of the beginning of laying the foundation for a successful marriage. When I got married, I wanted to change my last name because I wanted to show to the world that I was a new and different person- my husband's wife. It's really special for me to have his last name- and it really represents a sense of unity for us, our joining into a family. Althought now I'm stuck with a last name that people don't know how to spell, unlike my maiden name! :lol:

You know, it's not that big a deal to me these days (what others choose to do), but in my case I was very happy to cast off my step-father's name (he adopted me after marrying my mother) and adopt my husband's name. I had not only no emotional tie to my maiden name nor the man who "gave" it to me, I had an antipathy towards it.

I felt that in accepting a new last name, I was accepting a big part of Jack's background and family history, that he was offering me in love. It wasn't an ownership thing, it was an offer of a very intimate part of him, and I was proud and happy to accept it.

But I do totally see how it can be accuartely perceived as a continuation of female-dominance, "females are not as important" type of attitude in society.

Hmm, good to see this thread has come up again.

I've been thinking a lot about this again, and am a little torn. Mostly, I do think it's okay to switch my last name out for ktspktsp's, but I'm a little to feminist to go down that easily.

With all the development of women's rights in the last 50 years, it's amazing that while women are no longer forced to change their names to their husband's, men still have no pressure or motivation to change their own names. Why not ask both people to change their names?

For example, I know only one couple where both people DID change their names. BOTH the man and woman's last names changed and became two words... the last name of the wife first, and then the husband's last name (with a space in between). I know it's still just as long as a hyphenated one, but at least it doesn't have that annoying hyphen... and both man and woman change their names to reflect their unity.

I guess, to me, I fully agree with what everyone is saying about unity and abandoning one's selfish tendencies upon marriage... and how this should be reflected in a common name. I don't like the idea of not changing my name at all. But I also don't like the idea of the man not changing HIS name whatsoever. It just doesn't seem fair in terms of both people changing their identities together.

But I don't see how to go about it any other way, unless to adopt a brand new last name by both people (which just seems weird to me, and awkward). I would like to somehow keep the uniqueness of both last names for both
people, but without a hyphen! :lol:

However, in the end I will most likely just take ktspktsp's name and be done with it, because I don't want to fuss around with all my massively long Icelandic names in addition to his Lebanese one. Sigh. Practicality wins, I guess. :rolleyes:

It's an individual decision but my wife took my last name and we are both very satisfied with that. I'm sure someone thinks that means my wife has betrayed her gender and I'm a dominating caveman, but I could care less what anyone who thinks that way believes, y'know?

Do whatever feels good.

Eh, it's honestly just a hold-over of days when women were considered property, pure and simple. I guess we should be grateful they didn't get into the habit of branding women when they wed, or else we'd have a thread on "Did you get branded when you got married?", and discussing the merits of why or why not brand, how meaningful it can be, and branding as a symbol of selflessness and unity... ;)

I would say its more of a hold over days when the woman would join the mans family. Taking the last name would be a way of saying you are now part of that clan, no longer an outsider. If anything it would have been a way of saying you were equal to the other family members. We forget that prior to the industrial age, families tended to stay together, in the same home, for many generations.

I've said this before, but not all cultures have always required women to change their names. In Iceland, women have NEVER changed their last name. It's just not expected, so there's no "discussion" about it. It's still an historically-patriarchal society, since women (and men's) last names are based on their father's first name (with a -dottir or -son after it)... so the discussion there is often regarding whether to give your child the father's first name, or the mother's (again, with the appropriate affix... and who knows what happens when people are transgender, therefore not clearly a son OR a daughter).

Anyway, I am half-Icelandic but I wasn't raised in that society. I was raised in the US, where women still generally take their husbands' name. But even though I don't judge other women for taking their husbands' names, it doesn't feel right to me. But it also doesn't feel right to have my name (and his) remain unchangd after marriage, either. :( So, when highthief said:
I agree, but I don't know what "feels good" to me in this case. It doesn't feel good to have to change my name when the man isn't expected to do anything, either. But then again, I can't think of any viable alternative (I don't like hyphens or whatever). The way the system is, it seems that ONE name wins out, unless you're willing to hyphenate, which is frickin' annoying. So it's just "easier" to go along with the man's name, for practical reasons, and to try and ignore all the ideological shit that comes with it.

And that doesn't feel very good to me, but I don't know what else to do. :| I love ktspktsp's last name as much as I love mine, but I also want us to share those names somehow. What to do?

Don't know if this has been already mentioned or not, but I have some friends who recently got married, and they BOTH changed their name to something completely different from what eithers had been before. It's certainly an option.

Bet it's confusing at family reunions though. "You're the whatses?"

Hey I know the Earps in Arizona, is she from here?

I hope my future wife will take my last name, but I don't care too much. Mostly to avoid confusion.

That sounds a little ... competitive? Is that what you meant to say?

No single thing is ever exactly equal in a marriage. Someone will always make more money, or do more housework, or have more friends. And someone might change their last name. Marriage is not about exact equality in each and every little thing, it is about equality and respect in the overall scheme of things.

I think in many places now it is very much easier to keep your maiden name as you have to go through a process to get all your IDs changed. I know in Quebec, it is quite an ordeal and most women now just keep the maiden name.

Anyway, it's what you have to live with until the divorce (just kidding!) so make sure you like your decision. I guess it is easy to keep your own name then switch if you so desire. It is harder (sans divorce) to take his name, then decide you made the wrong move and go back to the maiden name.

Good luck!

Change both your names or get over it.

As for me, I don't really want to give up my last name, but I wouldn't care if my wife didn't want to give up hers either. Hyphenating them would be stupid because I have a long last name, plus it's just stupid.

My fiancee wants my name? And I'm not forcing it on her.

Don't call it something it's not. And it's certainly not sexist to want to be a part of someone. If ash was stuck on her name I would take it; it's much better then mine. But she wants mine, and I want her to have it.

Not sexist... just nice.

Y'know, I was kind of asking a hypothetical question, more for the sake of discussion than anything else. Most women (and some men) have had to think carefully about this decision, and I respect people for what they do decide. I wanted to hear other people's processes, not judgments.

Anyway, I already said earlier: ... so that's pretty much already my decision, but I was looking for other suggestions that I might not have considered.

I don't think it's wrong or sexist to always take the man's name; my point was that it IS a bit much if a man *expects* the woman to take his name, and not even consider what that might mean for her. For some women, it means nothing. Fine. For me, it does mean something. From what I can tell here, most TFP'ers have realized that in their own relationships, and it was part of their decision; I appreciate those stories.

I should also mention that because I'm in academia and publishing papers that will be under my maiden name, changing my name after marriage will make things a bit more complicated for research and job interviews. Female academics are notorious for using hyphenated names because of this very issue. I never said it was a great idea, at least not for me, but other people are just fine with it.
Thanks for the considerate post. Always good to hear people getting called "stupid" for a rather complex decision. It's what TFP is all about. :rolleyes:

:confused:

Whatever. Only my first line was in reply to your post. I thought that saying "as for me" would have signalled that, but I guess you failed to understand.

dammit.... I have to unsubscribe from this thread. It really bothers me that she didn't change her name...almost 5 years later and I'm still bothered by it.

At least you're honest about it. What would she say if you told her that you were still bothered by it? Maybe she would reconsider if she knew how important it was to you?

See, this is why I am thinking through my rationale for changing my name... I don't want to realize five years from now that I regretted changing it, or regretted not changing it. There is just no easy solution, but I do want to feel good about it, in the end.

Nah, I understood, I just didn't like your tone.

Seriously, though, when you said "Change both of your names or get over it," what did you mean by changing both of our names? I assume you don't mean hyphenating... but I'd like to know more about your suggestion. Changing them to something brand-new, like what Zar talked about?

highthief--interesting that you thought I sounded competitive. Honestly, that wasn't my intention. Mostly it's in the interest of equality, which I do believe is attainable (or at least, something to strive for) in marriage. But I agree with you that the overall picture is often more important than the minor details. To me, though, changing one's name is akin to changing one's identity in some way... not something to be taken lightly, by men or women. That's not to say it shouldn't be done, but that it shouldn't be brushed off, either.

-----

One more comment on this. Ktspktsp and I were discussing this earlier, and he has always reiterated that he doesn't care one way or the other if I change my name or not. But then I asked him what name he would want our children to have?... and he said that yes, it would bother him if they did not have his name. Because there is this expectation that our children would have his name, to carry it on.

This is what bothers me. Not about him personally, but about the system most of us live in. Why is the woman's name seen as disposable? Maybe not in marriage itself, but most often for the children? This is one holdover from the old days that I cannot make sense of.

Yeah yeah, I'll get over it. But like I said, I won't go down easy. :)

Sorry Carno... you directly said that anyone who hyphenates is stupid. Unless english is not your first language.... ?

Jonathan

Well, there is a lot of Spanish spoken in Flori-duh... ;)

No I didn't. Is english your first language? I said hyphenating names is stupid; I did not say that people who hyphenate their names are stupid. Semantics maybe, but you chose to go there and you are wrong.

In any case, that's my opinion, love it or hate it. If you choose to get offended by my opinion, have at it; it doesn't bother me in the least.

does getting tattooed count? :lol: Dave and I got matching tats unique to US...so in a sense yes to me...yes I got branded :thumbsup:

I considered several different options when I was married. I could keep my father's name, take my mother's maiden name, move my maiden name to my middle, hyphenate my name with Grace's, or just take Grace's name. Alternately, we could have chosen something new for the family.

Keeping my maiden name was the first thing I dismissed. Breaking ties with my father and his line was actually a big positive, and thus, keeping it in any way, as my last, middle, or hyphenated, was discarded easily.

I felt little connection to my mother's maiden name, and didn't like the "son of [male name] patriarchal formation of it.

I did want to have the same last name as her, and since I was changing it anyway, it made the most sense to take her name. I like the idea of being a part of her family more than my own birth family anyway, and it helps reinforce for us the sense of family. It's also symbolic for us in that it's a way of saying that our marriage is as real as anybody else's.

We had a traditional marriage ceremony with a slight accommodation for there being no groom. When referring to "traditional" wedding vows or ceremonies, you should keep in mind that not everyone has a Christian ceremony. Grace and I had a traditional ceremony--a traditional Shinto ceremony.

Sissy says there is no way she's changing her name for some man after so carefully choosing just the right name to fit who she is as a person.

Gilda

When I got married, It really didn't matter to me if my wife took my last name or not. I thought of it as her decision. Her coice was to take my last name, and move her maiden name to the middle name. That way she got to keep her name and take mine. She treats it just liek a middle name (i.e. when she signs her name she puts the middle initial)

Although we live in the US, we spend a lot of time in Quebec. In Quebec it appears to be tradition that legally everyone keeps their name, but socially are called by the husbands name.

We have one set of friends that both changed their last name to Bandon. It was the name of a town that they had been visiting on a bike tour where they met and started the relationship that led their to marriage. I thought it was amusing the grief that he got for changing his name... A LOT of puzzled looks. Hey! If Madonna and Elton John can change their name, why not him... :)

Life is to short to be unhappy. If you care about you name, keep it, or stick it some where that makes you happy. ;)

Okay, Carno, so you are saying that the second stupid is exactly the same as the first stupid in your english correct grammar sentence ?

So to use your own logic, your sentence is stupid, but you are not stupid.

LOL

Jonathan

I contested your use of the word "directly," not whether or not I was implying people were stupid for hyphenating their names; which I am not.

Thinking that hyphenating names is stupid does not mean that I think that people who hyphenate their names are stupid.

Why do you think it is the same thing?

EDIT: and yes, it is possible to say something stupid and not be stupid, but my sentence was not stupid. Einstein could have said that the moon was made of cheese (a stupid sentence), but that does not mean that he is automatically stupid.

Sidebar: Carno's logic is sound. Are you saying is that everyone who ever said a stupid sentence is stupid?

Back to topic: If I understand some viewpoints correctly, although men are routinely ridiculed or dissed for "inability to commit," a woman who can't commit to a marriage enough to change her name is a feminist to be admired.

Sorry, not buying that. I understand if both parties want to change their name, but IMO, the woman can easily solve the problem by not getting married.

Of course, that could interfere with alimony, but hey--she shouldn't compromise her convictions.

Maybe I am misunderstanding, but are you saying that if a woman doesn't change her name, that means she "can't commit to a marriage?" :| Or are you just playing devil's advocate?

In any case, glad this thread has come up again, because I'm getting married in two weeks and must sign the license in 7 days. I thought I had resigned myself to taking ktspktsp's last name, mostly due to a mix of personal and professional reasons. No sooner do I announce this, than I start feeling the same old way again... that it's just plain unfair, and why doesn't he have to go through the same shit (I get hellfire and brimstone whether I change it or not, these days), etc. I just hate the whole system right now, and I hate how it's been bred into both me and him from day one. As if that means we can't stand up and do our own thing??? BLEH.

dammit... why am I still subscribed to this thread that bugs the jeebus out of me.

and yes abaya all that anxiety, multiplied by 100 and toss in some guilt there.

Who has ridiculed men for not committing in this thread? I'd think that since we are discussing marriage, the commitment is a given.

What does changing her name have to do with committing to the marriage? What about the man? If both parties are keeping their own name, wouldn't that mean, by this logic, that the man wasn't committing to the marriage by keeping his name?

Or by keeping her name is that's what is best for her.

Of course, because divorce and the subsequent spousal support, which can go both ways, and the ensuing drop in quality of life for both spouses, that's the purpose of marriage. Not, say, commitment to the person you love.

Gilda

I've never been married, but have been engaged 3 times. Which will explain the following.

The first time I was nineteen and a little superficial I wanted his name and mine because I thought it was the cool thing to do.

The second I wanted both because he was so obsessed with keeping his name and I was loosing my own identity in a very controling relationship.

The third time I said no worries I want his name and didnt hesitate in saying so when he asked. I suprised myself. I want to be a part of his family completely.:love: