“Women Should Lose Themselves In Men”
By Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy on August 17, 2009 at 1:45 PM in Abuse, Afghanistan, Current Affairs, Feminism, Gender Bias, Human Rights, Misogyny, Sexism, Soldiers/Veterans
I know, not the kind of headline one might expect from me, to put it mildly. This is a quote from the following article, What women’s lib? 70 Percent Of Americans Think Women Should Take Spouse’s Name After Marriage. Say whaaa??
The results of this article came out the other day, though one might think the results would more likely be from the 19th century:
Newly minted brides should do more than vow to love their hubbies for a lifetime, say the majority of Americans. Some 70 percent of the respondents in a new study feel they should also take their spouse’s surname - and 50 percent say that it should be a legal requirement for a woman to take her spouse’s last name.The study, presented Tuesday at the American Sociological Association’s annual meeting, was done by the Center for Survey Research at Indiana University, as reported by USA Today.
Some 815 people were asked multiple choice and open-ended questions about a variety of family and gender issues. On the issue of marital name change, the majority of respondents weighed in with a fairly conservative answer, says Laura Hamilton, Indiana University associate professor and lead study author.“The results were surprisingly conservative,” she says. “Even though there is a general movement toward neutral language, like saying chairperson instead of chairwoman, people seemed to feel it was better for a woman to change her last name to her husband’s.”
You gotta admit. This is pretty surprising. Well, I should say, it would have been MORE surprising back in 2007, if you get my drift. But wait, there’s more:
She said that the fact that half of American thought this should be a legal requirement was also surprising.“Americans don’t want much government intervention in family life, so for 50 percent of Americans to feel this way was interesting,” she said.
Only 5 to 10 percent of women keep the name they were born with when they marry, Hamilton says. She notes that some studies show that younger women are more likely or as likely to change their name as baby boom brides. “It’s not a straight age trend,” she said, according to USA Today.
When the respondents were asked why they felt women should change their name after the wedding, Hamilton says, “They told us that women should lose their own identity when they marry and become a part of the man and his family. This was a reason given by many.” (Emphasis mine.)
Other respondents said they felt the marital name change was essential for religious reasons or as a practical matter.
“They said the mailman would get confused and that society wouldn’t function as well if women did not change their name,” Hamilton says.
For cryin’ out loud, really? That’s some of the logic going on there? That the “mailMAN” will get confused if people with two last names at the same address get mail?? Well, our mailWOMAN doesn’t get the least bit confused delivering mail to us. Hey, I’m just saying (and no, I am not putting down men - just the sexist implications all the way across the board with that one).
And yes, that so many think it should be a LAW is significant. So much for personal liberty and all that. Who needs to make decisions about something as personal as their name? Certainly not the little lady who just got married.
This is not as surprising, though:
Americans who feel that women should take their husband’s last name also tend to be conservative in other areas, according to Hamilton.“Asked if they thought of a lesbian couple as a family, those who believe that women should take their husband’s name are less likely to say yes,” she says. “If you’re more liberal about the name change issue, you tend to include a larger population in the definition of family.”
Oh, well. I feel better about that, don’t you? It’s a start, I suppose. Maybe we actually get to KEEP our own identity then?? Woohoo - being a lesbian in this culture is finally paying off! Yippee!!!
Ahem. Yes, according to the survey, “women should lose their identity…” LOSE THEIR IDENTITY. Forget about this sounding like the 19th century. It goes back WAY father than that. This is so disturbing on so many different levels, I can only shake my head in utter disbelief. Seriously - can you BELIEVE this? This “subjugate yourself to the man” thing is freakin’ biblical - and two THOUSAND years later, women are still expected to eradicate themselves?
Wow. You know, it is only a matter of degrees between this survey, and this recent article, Afghanistan Passes ‘Barbaric’ Law Diminishing Women’s Rights, Rehashed legislation allows husbands to deny wives food if they fail to obey sexual demands.
(Photo, Kabul, 2002, Sung Nam Hoon)
It is exactly the mindset above that gives SPACE to this kind of thinking, and allows laws like this to gain approval:
Afghanistan has quietly passed a law permitting Shia men to deny their wives food and sustenance if they refuse to obey their husbands’ sexual demands, despite international outrage over an earlier version of the legislation which President Hamid Karzai had promised to review.The new final draft of the legislation also grants guardianship of children exclusively to their fathers and grandfathers, and requires women to get permission from their husbands to work.
“It also effectively allows a rapist to avoid prosecution by paying ‘blood money’ to a girl who was injured when he raped her,” the US charity Human Rights Watch said.
Holy freakin’ shit. I feel like I have fallen through a wormhole and traveled way, WAY back in time.
But wait - didn’t The One wave his magic wand, ride in on his Rainbow Unity Unicorn and say this wasn’t such a peachy keen idea because women-folk around the globe might get a tad bit miffed, thus casting a pall on the reflection from his halo? Well, close enough:
In early April, Barack Obama and Gordon Brown joined an international chorus of condemnation when the Guardian revealed that the earlier version of the law legalised rape within marriage, according to the UN.Although Karzai appeared to back down, activists say the revised version of the law still contains repressive measures and contradicts the Afghan constitution and international treaties signed by the country.
Islamic law experts and human rights activists say that although the language of the original law has been changed, many of the provisions that alarmed women’s rights groups remain, including this one: “Tamkeen is the readiness of the wife to submit to her husband’s reasonable sexual enjoyment, and her prohibition from going out of the house, except in extreme circumstances, without her husband’s permission. If any of the above provisions are not followed by the wife she is considered disobedient.”
Huh, well, I’ll be damned. Evidently, SOME people don’t give a damn what The One has to say. Ahem.
Clearly it didn’t matter what Obama and Brown said, especially when you consider this:
The law has been backed by the hardline Shia cleric Ayatollah Mohseni, who is thought to have influence over the voting intentions of some of the country’s Shias, which make up around 20% of the population. Karzai has assiduously courted such minority leaders in the run up to next Thursday’s election, which is likely to be a close run thing, according to a poll released yesterday.Human Rights Watch, which has obtained a copy of the final law, called on all candidates to pledge to repeal the law, which it says contradicts Afghanistan’s own constitution.
The group said that Karzai had “made an unthinkable deal to sell Afghan women out in the support of fundamentalists in the August 20 election”.
Brad Adams, the organisation’s Asia director, said: “The rights of Afghan women are being ripped up by powerful men who are using women as pawns in manoeuvres to gain power.
“These kinds of barbaric laws were supposed to have been relegated to the past with the overthrow of the Taliban in 2001, yet Karzai has revived them and given them his official stamp of approval.”
Indeed. Women are pawns, and property of men. Dare I say it, they are forced to give up their identities, and their own bodies, to every wish and whim of the men to whom they are married? And any violation of the woman is really a violation of the man to whom she is linked. That is, to whom she belongs.
As for Karzai:
The latest opinion poll by US democracy group the International Republican Institute showed that although Karzai was up 13 points to 44% since the last survey in May, his closest rival, Abdullah Abdullah, had soared from 7% to 26%.If those numbers prove accurate, it would mean the contest would have to go to a second round run-off vote in early October. In that scenario, 50% of voters said they would vote for Karzai and 29% for Abdullah.
The survey was conducted in mid to late July, so it is not known whether Abdullah has made further gains on Karzai.
He could further increase his chance of victory by joining forces with Ashraf Ghani, the former finance minister who is also running on a platform fiercely critical of Karzai.
Fifty-eight per cent of the 2,400 people polled by IRI said they would like to see an alliance between Abdullah and Ghani, who is polling in fourth place.
In other words, at least from when this survey was taken, Karzai still seems to be the frontrunner. Gosh, that is SO good for the women in that country, isn’t it? Yeah, right - not even close.
And speaking of women in Afghanistan, this article came out recently, too “Marines Try A Woman’s Touch To Reach Afghan Hearts“:
Put on body armor, check weapons, cover head and shoulders with a scarf.That was the drill for female American Marines who set out on patrol this week with a mission to make friends with Afghan women in a war zone by showing respect for Muslim standards of modesty.
The all-female unit of 46 Marines is the military’s latest innovation in its rivalry with the Taliban for the populace’s loyalty. Afghan women are viewed as good intelligence sources, and more open to the basics of the military’s hearts-and-minds effort — hygiene, education and an end to the violence.
“It’s part of the effort to show we’re sensitive to local culture,” said Capt. Jennifer Gregoire, of East Strasburg, Pa. She leads the Female Engagement Team in the Now Zad Valley of Helmand province, the heartland of the Taliban insurgency.
“If you show your hair, its kind of like seeing a nude picture here, because women are very covered up,” she said.
Uh, yeah, you can say that again. As another reminder:
(photo by worldwidewandering)
I think that qualifies as “very covered up” (click HERE to read the rest of the Women Marines story). What is more, there is absolutely NOTHING of the actual woman underneath the burqa. You don’t know who she is, you can’t see her eyes, her mouth, HER. You cannot SEE her.
That is the point of women “losing their identity in men,” is it not? Of women being nothing more than the property of their husbands, or their fathers, because who they are doesn’t count. It doesn’t matter. They are NOTHING unless they are connected to a man, and he may do to her as he wishes, whenever he wishes, and she must, simply, take it.
Well, at least according to the majority of those who took the survey here in the US, and according to the lawmakers in Afghanistan. Yep - seems there are people here who seem to have the same high (cough, choke) opinion of women as they do in Afghanistan. “What Women’s Lib,” indeed.
I bet you didn’t see THAT coming…
(Release: November 13)
on sale for only $16.95.
has a spatula.)
And check out these: 
("This crazy redhead is on to something. Her pink Rambler story alone is worth the price of the book," writes 
- “Richard Sale’s reportage on Washington, the CIA, the American armed forces, and foreign intrigue has created a perfect background for this account of the steady growth of President Clinton as a master of the game of nations.”--W. Patrick Lang, former head of Middle East Operations, DIA
"Anne C. Heller's stunning biography of Ayn Rand" uses a "plethora of newly unearthed research and fresh insight."
Wow Rev. Amy–What a story!
It’s so upsetting. We keep forgetting that even though sexism is alive here in the states (made so obvious in the last presidential nomination phase and general election)exism is the Hulk on steroids in other parts of the world.
If I wasn’t so pissed off I would be in tears.
Well, it’s really no surprise, is it? In 2009 ll Americans should be forced to do all kinds of things. Why? Who the hell knows, but this is the path we’re on. The freedom haters want us all to sit around and do nothing while the Government provides for us and tells us how to live, with whom and where. We will soon be a nation of those fat folks from the movie Wall-e!
I am simply stunned. It scares me to think what this means for my daughter and granddaughter.
Lose yourself???? What the hell does that mean? It sounds like the non-person status given under a dictatorship.
Apparently we female non-persons must get lost. I can think of a few suggestions, none I can say on this site, for those who feel that way.
This really explains the outright hostility faced by Hillary and Palin, often led by women, when they dared to try to get anywhere near the WH.
“Apparently we female non-persons must get lost. I can think of a few suggestions, none I can say on this site, for those who feel that way.”
Sure you can, candymarl. Go for it!
Tricia, I know - I was practically speechless when I saw that survey. That is in the US!!! Can you believe it???
And yes, it DOES explain the hostility toward Hillary and Sarah. How DARE they be so OUT there! Don’t they know they are supposed to be supporting their husbands’ careers, and taking care of their husbands’ families???
Wow. Just freakin’ wow…
Fabulous article, Amy.
The b.s. is astounding in the American survey — a mailPERSON will get confused? I have been married for a lot of years and never changed my name. I have always gotten my mail and so has my husband. I’ll have to send a complimentary letter to the USPS for being such great detectives so as to overcome any “confusion.”
My parents had daughters — no sons. If I don’t keep my last name going, who will? I keep my name because it honors my family. It also reflects who I am. My husband has no problem with me not changing my name. It never even occurred to him to ask. So frankly, I’m not sure who in the hell these people are surveying.
As for “losing myself” - I would no more lose myself than ask my husband to do the same. We actually have a union based on mutual respect.
In a more positive way of looking at it — a healthy couple both “lose” a bit of themselves to put into the effort and union of the marriage. Not only I, I, I, but We. That is natural in any partnership. But that has nothing to do with leaving one’s identity and rights behind. Furthermore, for the marriage to work — both partners have to do that, not just one. There’s the dance we dance separately and the dance we dance together. With our identities intact, thank you.
As for Afghan women, I am appalled that so many countries still need to treat women as chattel.
As you rightly point out Amy, even in our own country, after the 2008 elections, we found out how far women still have to progress to be thought of as equals. The double standard is still firmly in place.
if any nation in the world treated black males the way that many of them treat women, the “progressives” in this country wouldn’t hesitate to start WW3, but when it’s “just women” we need to “respect their culture.” F that.
Great post.
I knew a guy who said that America needs to stop telling other countries that female genital mutilation is wrong, and to stay out of cultural matters.
Cultural matters!!
That should be considered a crime against human rights!!
exactly, but women’s rights aren’t really “human rights,” you know. (sarcasm.)
Excellent comment, Ani. Thank you.
And that’s just it - the assumption that the woman should leave it all behind and cleave to the man completely takes out of the equation mutuality and respect!
As pm317 pointed out below, there is also the issue of a dowry, still used in other countries. That just makes me shake my head. And it wasn’t THAT long ago that WE still had dowries…
It seems like on some levels, we really have moved forward. But when you see how some women act, aligning themselves with me in opposition to qualified women, it is an eye opener, isn’t it?
Then you have these kinds of surveys done, and it is just shocking.
Thanks, Ani!
NoBamaNoWay has a great take on it below, too…
What really blows me away is the total disregard for the present day reality that has been facing families for some time now — the majority of households cannot survive without a second income. In fact, with the crappy economy, reports show the job loss has hit men the hardest. What would have happened to these families, if the wife had “lost herself in her husband” and did not work outside the home?
This report has patriarchy written all over it. You won’t hear reports on how the majority of women who do work outside the home, also do the lion’s share of the housework and child care. Boy, I don’t know what women would do without the help of their husbands!
So, we’re back to women helping bring home the bacon and frying it up in a pan too!
i wasn’t really surprised at all, especially about the part that younger women are just as likely as older women to support the name change. this dynamic has been going on at least since susan b. anthony’s time; younger women (not surprisingly) grow up identifying with the male dominated culture. they think that the needs and wants of men should be their needs and wants as well. it’s only after they’ve been around a while that the realize this just isn’t so.
anyway, you remember the old saying - when a man and woman marry they become one, and that one is the man. and yes, this does go a long way toward explaining the hostility and vitriol heaped on hillary and sarah palin for having the “audacity” to step out of their place.
Maybe us female non-persons should just form our own nation with our own laws and Government. We can teach the America haters and equality haters a thing or 2.
Not a bad idea. Dunno what we’d call it.
To quote two characters in one my favorite shows:
1. “I have nothing left to lose”.
2. “There’s always something left to lose”.
Fortunately, more and more couples are choosing not to marry at all. If we ever get full marriage rights extended to civil unions, I expect marriage, and the associated ‘ownership’ baggage (look up the word ‘husband’), will eventually go out of fashion entirely.
Good riddance.
*****A
This is slightly off-topic. But I will tie it in by the end. I do not watch MadMen. I know it is very popular and critically acclaimed, but I see it as part of the sexist backlash we have been dealing with for the past few years. To put it in context, when All In The Family was on TV, everyone thought that it showed how stupid bigots like Archie Bunker were. But what I remember is that shortly after that we had the pushback on the activities of the 1960s. Where we saw stupidy, I think that a lot of people saw a likeable person like a lot of people they knew, and Rob Reiner’s character as a know it all who was still living in his in-laws house. In the same way, while we may see it as how far we have come, I think a lot of people look at it and think that gee those were the good old days — no arguments about women’s rights and supper and a martini waiting for you when you got home. So it does not surprise me to see that a large number of people think that a woman should take her husband’s name when she gets married.
It is not the kind of news I need to hear but any social scientist should challenge this study. I am one who is married for 25 years and is comfortable carrying my own name. We decided to have it this way so I could establish my own credit record and certainly not attached to my husband which makes me a non entity. If anything happens to him, the banks will never recognize any track record of my credit because it is under my husband’s name. A lot of people ask me if I have a hyphenated name and I answer no. Would it not be easier to just jot down my name rather than asking for a hyphenated name? It happens all the time and I give a classic answer like “Sorry, I have not earned my husband’s name so I am still keeping mine.” Then, too, there is a presumption that my husband and I are living together and not married… I love this one. It is some sort of mystery which keep people wondering.
I do not know about this study, but in my own circle of friends and family, the women have been copying me. Even if these women have been married before me, they started using their own name which of course is not valid since they have been using their husband’s name for quite some time. Now that will definitely confuse the mail lady . Some younger women I know have also copied me because they thought it is keeping with the times to do so.
Then, there are people who are family friends who assume that I have a hyphenated name or i carry my husband’s name. I have to keep explaining that it is not so and so for clarification, I often write down his name and my name side by side just to show them how it is done. This is important since I have a “DR.” before my name and my husband doesn’t. I don’t get upset if they do not do the right thing, but I still feel that I did the right thing.
The Dr makes all the difference. Congratulations! If I had had a Dr I would have kept just my surname and not hyphenated it.
My professional name (established before marriage) is the first part of my hyphenated name and my husbands’ name is the second part and I use either or both as the situation or fancy takes me.
My daughter just married and for the same reason is following my lead.
I mentioned the other day to my husband that we are regressing to the 50’s. My daughter is pregnant and working. I advised her not to mention it until it became so apparent that she couldn’t avoid it. She was puzzled until she was at a trade show with her clients and they made comments about a female colleague that was pregnant. Not nasty comments, but once this lady had a belly, apparently her mind and ideas were not the first thing they thought of. My daughter was shocked, and came back to report this.
I DO watch Mad Men because the 60s in advertising was my period and I want to be reminded so I can vow “never again”.
BTW - Where was this survey taken? Indiana? I don’t think you’d get the same results in L.A.
Probably in rural Utah.
I think the authors of that asinine article should loose themselves. Thanks for hitting it hard, Amy! I totally agree with you.
It is a surprise to see the survey outcome from Prof. Hamilton’s study. Traditionally where I come from, the language constructs are that “it is giving the bride away to her husband’s family.” In certain cultures, she has to bring in enough money and jewelery to sustain herself (heard of dowry?). In fact, one of my brother’s friends when he got married about 25 years ago talked about how he had the “burden” of caring for this woman for the rest of his life. He is an educated (?), upper middle class man.
I have always thought marriage is the most life changing event in a woman’s life and not always for the better (this does not apply to the man she is marrying — there in lies the rub). More so for women who have aspirations of their own career and following their own intellectual pursuits. More often than not, the family she weds into or the spouse are not supportive. I have fought my way through it (though not with my spouse but certainly with his parents) and I am sick of it. In my days, some 20 years ago, the social perception if the woman was working was that the man didn’t bring enough — so my in-laws didn’t want me to pursue my career even though I was as educated as their son was. It came as a shock and had to fend off conflicting forces for years.
In some Latin cultures, women still are traditionally known by their own names. When my grandmother moved back to Italy in the early 1980s I was surprised to learn that I was to address the envelope with her birth name, not her married name. Then I recalled that growing up, some of her friends referred to her as “La (her maiden name)”.
I believe that some Spanish speaking countries follow that same tradition, but someone from that culture would have to weigh in.
Here in the States, she went by my grandfather’s name, I guess it made all the legalities that much simpler.
Also in countries that are former colonies of Spain, the child carries the mother’s last name as the middle name. The order varies, but just the same, the mother’s last name or family name does not disappear.
e.g. Patricia Cruz y Salazar
Cruz is the father’s last name and Salazar is the mother’s last name.
OR
Patricia Salazar Cruz - Salazar is the mother’s and Cruz is the father’s
This is a good practice since the mother carried the child for nine months, that child should carry the mother’s name as well. The United States, the most modern of all countries wants to revert back to the clinging vine mentality
That’s right, in Italy women never loose their identity as an example, passports are always in the birth name but with a reference to the husband (if married).
VERY good article Rev Amy. Thank you for reminding me of the eye opener we got in last year’s election. Now I’m mad all over again.
I’m a lesbian, but I’m thinking “ownership” of women wouldn’t be a problem in this country if women put up a sustained resistance against it. Not blaming the victim, because I don’t believe women ARE victims. Many many (not all, but many) women in this country are completely satisfied with the warm and fuzzy aspects of being “owned,” even if they don’t call it that. Let’s say traditional, stable, normal, fill in the blank, but more often than not those comfy words are code for a woman’s (acceptance of) lower status in marriage and scoiety. How many centuries will it take to reverse that, and will women ever make the determination that it’s worth the trouble?
From what I saw last year, men AND women will always find a way to slap women down.
I still can’t believe the ***crickets*** from feminist groups when Hillary and Palin were bashed. What a joke and a huge disappointment NOW et al turned out to be. BAH!
You hit the nail on the head. There are women who participate in woman bashing and want to retain the “warm and fuzzy” status quo because of the illusion of male stewardship is gone and they must be the bottom line, what then? The irony is plenty of women are the bottom line already and are breadwinners and the sole support of their families. Perhaps they are uncomfortable seeing themselves that way.
Just thought all you Gals would like this story:
They have changed the way the United States military goes to war. They have reshaped life on bases across Iraq and Afghanistan. They have cultivated a new generation of women with a warrior’s ethos — and combat experience — that for millennia was almost exclusively the preserve of men.
And they have done so without the disruption of discipline and unit cohesion that some feared would unfold at places like Warhorse.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/17/us/17women.html?_r=2&hp=&pagewanted=all
Yeah, but:
Rapes are soaring among active-duty combat troops. Women warriors are paying a very steep price every day for combat equality. Unit discipline and cohesion may not be affected on the surface; but women in uniform are not getting the support they should at command levels, either.
That must be symptomatic of the times and not entirely causally connected to the service. I was in a border unit tactical site in FRG, 5 kilometers from GDR during the 70s. We had women in our unit and they were treated as any other soldier, although their facilities were much nicer.
I have been paying close attention to the women of our armed forces who are raped by their fellow soldiers!
While we continue to get reports thrust upon us such as “women should lose themselves in their man…”, we NEVER seem to get any reports about the atrocities suffered by our female soldiers. We all recognize the great sacrifice our soldiers give to protect our freedom, but it seems the women pay an even greater sacrifice than the men for serving their country.
This should be brought out into the mainstream and stopped! Why is this still happening and why are journalist keeping mum about it?
What’s next, a good old fashioned branding? What sort of grog are these dullards imbibing?
They botabags under them burkas?
Makes me want to ask is there such a thing as a Virtual Burka of the mind?
Virtual burka? Yep, that is a useful phrase, Teak.
Yeah, as in some people are incapable of thinking outside the burka.
LOL–Virtual high-fives all around.
Wait until you see this kind of culture:
Who do that voodoo.
The Obama White House is abuzz with talk of witchcraft by first grandmother, 72-year-old Marian Robinson, who lives in the White House residence. A close friend of Michelle Obama says the president is furious at his mother-in-law after learning that she was practicing Santeria, an African spirit cult, in the White House.
http://atkinsonsadvice.blogtownhall.com/2009/08/15/witchcraft_in_the_white_house.thtml
Oh no! This is a Nancy Reagan moment. Remember when it was exposed that the First Lady was consulting a psychic?
I hope they’re ready for the blowback. And Santeria? Isn’t that with the chickens and blood sacrificial element, a fusion of Christianity and African tribal beliefs?
It just keeps getting better!!!!
Wow! Watch out for your pets in the area of the white house.
Oh thanks for the biggest laugh I’ve had all day.
OMG HARP–it was probably the chicken blood on the carpet in the Lincoln Bedroom that first caught Thee One’s attention.
Santeria–Rev. Wright would not even go there. If this is really true (and even I am sceptical), it’s a real jaw-dropping knee-slapping Weekly-World-News-worthy shocker!
When she[MO] told the president about it, he blew up and said, “No voodoo in the White House.”
So this is the healthcare we can expect??
HA! That’s a great line coming from BO. LOL Made my day.
Albert King & Stevie Ray Vaughan In Session - Stormy Monday
For you Taters.
Sweet.
He needs to be careful his wife don’t start wiggling her nose….!!!
Nah, the wiggly nose was Samantha in Bewitched! Not the same voodoo done in the White House!
cue: oowawa’s rendition of a song something like, “you do, that voodoo, only you can do, that voodoo I love…..?”
I married first in ‘68, right about the time some women began to question whether they needed to take the man’s surname. Since I came from a huge traditional family, as did the man I was marrying, I didn’t question taking his name.
But, after enduring that man, while earning more than he did during 6 years of a marriage that lasted 8 and a half years, I legally took my maiden name back and have never again even thought of signing it away.
People thought I was loopy at the time because I divorced him when my first son was only one year old. They thought it would send the wrong messgae that his name (my son’s) was different from mine.
I just took the attitude that anyone who wanted to make mean assumptions about why my name was different from my child’s was not worth thinking about.
As a teacher, I tried my best to learn the right pronunciation of each of my student’s entire name. Names are important. And I was careful to call them by whatever name they preferred.
You make me, and Muhamad Ali proud.
Oy!!! RRA, this is a hot button, isn’t it? I have Ferd’s last name, (Mrs. Berfle? ROFL) out of convenience; due to the spelling and butchery that follows of my native last name. However, I use them both, together as I deem necessary; it is legal.
I must say I feel we have a generation of woman-children, who have a difficult time growing up and accepting the responsibilities of adulthood. this of course goes for the man-boys as well. Specifically, younger women seem(generalization) to prefer not to make choices, but have them made for them, leaving them to a perpetual state of pre-teen petulance that is not tolerable nor productive. Seems it is more important to have all that style over substance. In the last week alone I have witnessed a 24 year old haranguing her parents to send her to college; with endless screaming, crying phone calls, until she thought she got what she wanted. Her window of opportunity had closed earlier for that support and the parents are hard pressed right now to help. What got me was the demand for it, that she had the right!
Seems to be the status-quo. She is due to be married next month and is not sure what to do with her last name, what was most important was what her friends had done…..no mind of her own, just follow the crowd. Good topic, much more here than meets the eye.
Oy!
ROTFLMAO - “Mrs. Berfle.” Oh, my - thanks for the laugh.
You know, I knew someone years ago in NYC who had been married. She said that, since she used her “maiden” name while married to him, she was operating under an AKA. The law was that a woman AUTOMATICALLY got her husband’s name when she married (she was Latina, btw, in reference to a comment upthread). If she kept her own name, it was considered an alias. That was in the early ’80’s.
You are most welcome :). The problem with some different ethnic groups is the last names were given to them, or forced upon them. TO this day that thought does not go over well in my family.
Native peoples were given last names as were African Americans, both for very sad reasons. It affects genealogy and tradition and actually causes a loss for many families back to their history.
Just sayin.
In doing mine and my husbands genology I was struck and dismayed by the number of nameless women, or ones that only were given a first name. I did not do a count but I would say that their were at least 90% of the people who had a mother listed. Of that 90%, most of them were immegrants up until modern times or very well known historical personages.
It made me quite ill, and I made it a plan to run out any womans family, and do her husbands last. I did see the nameless facelessness of it, and it saddened me.
You made many valid points.
As for taking my husbands name, it never bothered me. It helps establish the boundaries for a family. My daughter after her divorce, choose to keep her ex last name to preserve continuity in the family.
We all must choose our battles. If this is important to you then carry on. I admire you and applaud your ideals.
tzada, Peggy Sue captures the issue for me below. It should be a matter of CHOICE. If a woman WANTS to take her husband’s name, so be it. If not, she shouldn’t be REQUIRED to do so. As in, there shouldn’t be a law requiring a woman to do so, IMHO.
And then there is that whole expectation that the woman should “lose herself” - holy smokes, really? So that we (well, not me, per se) become those nameless/faceless entities whose primary function is to provide children to the man and take care of him?
You’d think I got this survey from 1758 or something, not 2009. Shocking, really - except we saw big, huge glimpses that this is what many people REALLY think abt women over the course of the past two years…
And you both did it very well. I like the idea of hypenated names, in no speccial order, but all the family should have it the same way.
Doing family roots searches is made more difficult people making the choice to change name in mid life, for no good reason. Or all family members have different last names, or the town they came from being the last name, or 5 ways to Sunday of spelling the same name. I speak from that point of view also.
But tzada, what will happen in the next generation, when a Smith-Jones marries a Gonzalez-Martinez? Their kids will be called so-and-so Smith-Jones-Gonzalez-Martinez…. either that, or names are going to have to be changed again…
Thanks for the piece, Amy. I found the 50% vote of “requiring” a woman to take the husband’s name utterly appalling.
When did we forget what choice meant? And women should lose their identity???
I swear to God, we’re marching backward, rather than forward.
But then, when you look at comments by women against other women in this country, I suppose we should not be surprised. The “keepers of faith” in many of these oppressive cultures are not simply men, but women as well. Women oversaw the binding of feet in Asia and often perform or approve of female genital mutilation[circumcision]in a variety of cultures.
Too frequently, we are our own worst enemy!
Four-inch heels anyone?
No thanks,and girdles will be in vogue again.
You know when you think of it, Katmoon, girdles and four inch heels go together. I’ve never worn a girdle [let it all hang out is my personal motto]. But a girdle squeezes the thighs and legs together [the old fashioned kind, my mother once wore]. Put a 4″ heel on those feet?
You ain’t going far. And where ever you go? It ain’t fast :0).
Please could someone explain me what means “reasonable sexual enjoyment”? western porno sold through clabe tv? that scares me, poor people
Solo ??
I’m afraid that for some afghan women yes it will be solo that. It will depend on their husbands
I would think that younger women would want to keep their own last name–most professional women I know do that anyway.
My sister-in-law has to testify on a regular basis in court as a forensic scientist; she uses her maiden name for professional occasions, and her “married” last name on personal occasions.
It’s not that big of a deal; but since all of her professional documentation is in her maiden name, it would be a constant hassle for her to try to explain it.
well enough, but why do men ALMOST NEVER take their wives’ names, personally or professionally, and in fact it would be considered an extreme humiliation if they did? that’s the issue, more so than whether any one woman chooses to take her husband’s name or not.
I agree. I think the disparity is the crux of the issue.
Mountainaire- I was just doing a background check on a potential employee whose diploma, professional documents and licenses were a mismash of various last names: maiden, first-husband, second-husband, hyphened mess of first and second husband’s names.
Geeze-um. How am I to figure out who she really is if she hasn’t figure it out for herself.
You guys won’t believe who has a diary bashing Obama’s health sell-out, at Daily Orange Urinal.
Remember a sleaze by the name of “Bob Johnson”? (the name of one of his many HRC bashing sock puppets)
Y’all:
Santeria–ain’t that about Father, Son, and Holy Goats?
ROTFLMAO - oh, that’s a GOOD one!
Do you think that Rev Wright really meant to say “The chickens……..have come home……..to roast.”?
Screw marriage. It’s an institution whose day has passed. Women need to realize that men really don’t view things as they do, and all the prettification they can trowel on marriage doesn’t make it other than a property transaction with the woman as the property in a man’s mind.
I have had a permanent committed relationship with my man for over 17 years now. But I have my own name and it’s my house for which I’ve paid.
If he doesn’t like it he can take a walk right out my door.
lol Go Nom!
Well all right now, NomNom.
I see you!!
This is a really good article, Amy.
It does bother me that women’s identities are lost (and I’m blown away that today there are still women in the US consciously advocating for it!). When I was younger, I thought if I changed my name, maybe I would take my mother’s maiden name. Of course, I then realized that her maiden name was her father’s name. If I went up to my maternal grandmother’s maiden - same thing - it was HER father’s name. Of course, that’s what patriarchy is, lineage traced only through the father.
Basically, I don’t care for anything expected of one gender and not the other. My personal preference would be for daughters to take the mother’s name, and sons the father’s. Everyone should be able to choose for themselves, but it’s really frightening to hear people actually saying that the purpose would be because the woman should lose her identity!
I wonder if it’s common for people to get more conservative when there is so much financial insecurity in the economy….?
i agree with the daughters taking the mother’s name and sons taking the father’s name idea. it seems like the only practical, fair way to do it.
but as far as women who are already given their father’s last name, i think it is still an advance if they keep that name at marriage instead of taking their husband’s. the cycle has to stop somewhere.
Well, that “legal requirement” business just kind of takes the romance right out of it, doesn’t it:
On one extreme we have the repulsive concept of marrying a woman and possessing her like a kind of property (the “trophy-wife” being one egregious form of this, the house-slave being another), and on the other extreme we have the longstanding tradition of the unitary family, with all family members sharing the same last name (the name of the husband), and facing the world together as a cohesive group.
This isn’t a simple matter, and thinking about it leaves me perplexed; it’s a good debate topic. I imagine a lot of folks might be “clinging” to this particular tradition.
Provocative article, Reverend Amy. Well done.
My ex had no problem taking my name, and when we got divorced, she had no problem taking everything else. Ba-dum-bump.
Onofre,
Come over and see all the wonderful republican women on Facebook
I just got done talking with Amanda Carpenter.
Clint Cox…Seattle
You know who else is posting primarily on face book? A certain producer of many aliases that was banned from NQ. It was interesting to see her picture on face book.
You know what Moss, I’ve tried Chemistry.com and match.com, and I’ve experienced nothing but disappointment. It’s tough to find a woman with such extraordinary vision that she could look beyond my monumental dissabilities, and have a rewarding relationship with a disembodied iconoclastic arm. I would have thought that I would be a hot item. Low maintenance, flexible schedule, a good test subject for the latest instant tan product, typing skills, good back scratcher, door stop, and good for a few grisly laughs when attached to the leash of a large dog running through a crowded park. But I’m afraid that the wonderful imagination that drove this country for more than two centuries is fading, and so am I.
Facebook is for adult patriots and is is the new phenomena going forward. All the web sites organizations and people we deal with become friends
Join the revolution!
It’s not about dating but about organization.
At least if you join up you will have a thousand patriots of your choice talking with you.
On Thursday I’m part of a cap and trade forum that was offered to me by someone that found me.
Really cool!
Bettina’s thousand friends are quickly becoming my friends along with all their friends and organizations. Incredible!!!
I had no idea how far reaching Bettina Viviano is and I’m really impressed and thankful that I joined.
Not a moment too soon!
Onofre..I looked more carefully
That was a real funny post.
I actually could use a good scratch but I won’t ask you to do the honors LOL…
I guess I’m a little intimidated by facebook, I can’t seem to find a photogragh of myself without a ton of dirt under my fingernails. Sigh.
Your the toughest guy around bro!
Use a patriots picture like
Don’t tread on me, or the constitution or Galt or something anti Obama or whatever
I use my sign picture because it’s the only half way decent picture of me and shows I was at a tea party.
Almost every tea party participant levin supporter or Palin fan is somehow connected. In a year i will have 10,000 friends all linking great sites and commenting and organizing and becoming real friends in the long run
When I’m picking friends many of them don’t use a real pictures but one that shows their beliefs front and center.
Actually the ones with images I’m more likely to choose
Perhaps I could use some footage of the cameo role I played in “Jurassic Park” as Samuel L. Jacksons arm. What a hoot! I think that the Academy dissed JP in the make-up catagory. As a method actor, I was amazed that when I was in black-arm, the make-up was so good that I forgot my Scottish-Norwegian heritage, and actually felt some different roots. That’s GOOD make-up.
Oh I went into spam??? Guess my humor is not going with the flow here
Hey Justme,
How’s my favorite English Woman tonight.
I was telling the folks here that you weren’t a troll last week when you were making your case about health care
Was that you or did you get Blogger Snatched.
It was me…. I know a lot about English health care but at this point what could I say !!!
No one would believe me…. LOL I would just be a troll.
I defended you just like I always do…
What else could I do for a neighbor from Woodley!
Well I am glad, we Woodley folk have to stick together
Well darn JustMe, I hope your comment gets dug out, unless of course it is so hideously disgusting that it would make Satan barf. Of course, making Satan barf might be a GOOD thing. Hmmmm?
Please release JustMe’s comment if only to satisfy my curiosity, and of course, to make Satan barf.
I guess I’m a little intimidated by facebook, I can’t seem to find a photogragh of myself without a ton of dirt under my fingernails. Sigh.
and I said :-
LOL I would sign up quick Onofre’s arm u may find a good manicurist
That’s all ……
Why don’t you use this phrase
From my cold dead arm!
“I’m not dead yet!” From Monty Python’s “Holy Grail”.
Speaking of heritage, here are three of my grand mothers who were fearless.
and
http://www.womeninworldhistory.com/heroine2.html
and my personal favorite
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_romana/britannia/anglo-saxon/flowers/godiva.html
Somewhere in all of our lives stories we all hold a heroine in our blood. Some well known and some unsung, but they make up our will to overcome.
Legend has it that Adams first wife was a woman named Lilith. He put her away because she thought she was equal to Adam and liked to “be on top”. She was then declared to be a demon. So if this story is true the oppression of woman started with Adam.
LOL I would sign up quick Onofre’s arm u may find a good manicurist
It’s ironic, Amy, that Muslim women keep their family name after marriage–always!
Amazing! We had clients from African countries and it was truly confusing as we couldn’t tell the wives and husbands by their last name.
But trust me, it wasn’t becuase these poor female souls were liberated! by far!
I have no problem remembering or LOVING My wifes Family name..
It Was BECK……..
And she is Proud to now carry My last Name..
and she has read and disagrees with”REV” Amys comments and has read My Comments…and AGREES..
TOTALLY..
so why weren’t you proud to take HER name?
Because she CHOOSE to take MY last name..
okay, whatever. but no thanks, i’m not interested in buying that bridge you’re selling…
RADICAL ROUSER “REVEREND” AMY…
It my Free Speech Opinion…That YOU Have gone Way over the Top with this FEMENIST RANT of Yours..
The Stuff you say and Your Comparisions are just Plain SILLY Blatantly ANTI MALE SEXISM..
Not Surprising to see that you Were a Universal Unitarian “MINISTER”…The Church that embraces every New Age thinking except the TRINITY and Divinity of Jesus Christ..
I was a Hillary Clinton delegate, I Support Womens Rights and Equality..and I Proudly wrote Hillarys Name on My BALLOT instead of Voting for that other Univeralist OBAMA…
You Amy, are a Blatant Propoganist for the Femenist Group..Thats another Subject in a Class of its own..
Are you married..?? Have you ever been Married…Why do you seem to hate Men..?? Why do You compare Male and female relkationships in the United States with Extreme Abuses in FOREIGN Countrys.?
There is No Surprise at the 70% Voting in the Poll on this Subject..I doubt if Only Folks In UTAH Voted on this..
The REST of the good folks in the Uited States are Not that far Left or in the DUMPSTER on these CLOSET Issues..
Most Americans still believe in GOD and the Sancitimony and Goodness of a Marriage..(UNION)between a Woman and a Man..
MANY Women INCLUDE thier Maiden Names in thier public Married Names..
HILLARY RHODAM CLINTON…
I have been coming to NO QUARTER
since LARRY First started it After 9/11 Happened..and all through the Invasion Of Iraq..and I was Grateful for Larrys Input and Information and for Him Starting No Quarter so people Interested in National security, Intelligence and Government policys and actions could be Have a Forum for INFORMATION and debate…
All those Origional Posters Have left long ago..because there is little debate here on National Security..or Administration Policys and Operations..
I, for One, am sorry to see this Great Blog turned over to the RANTS of a FEATURE WRITER Like You..AMY, since you have your OWN BLOG and WEB SITE..where Your Followers can go..
I am expressing My OPINION, Just like you Do AMY, I Love my Country, I Love Liberty,Support Womens Rights, and EQUALITY..and I LOVE My WONDERFUL Wife of 41 Years and My Children and Grandchildren…who would not be here except for the UNION of a MAN and WOMAN..The ONLY Thing that Insures the Preservation of the Human RACE ..
I am glad to see that some women I respect here have NOT Supported Your RANT Amy..and
AMY…
If You Run this web Site and want to Ban The Horrible Parick Henry..GO AHEAD..
Patrick,
Women on this blog know how passionate both you and me have been in the support and advancement of women in politics especially in regards to the presidency.
We have taken a stand to stop the blatant sexism which we all saw that brought us all together on this blog.
Like the far left who have made it open season on white men we now see some deciding it’s time to attack men right here on this blog despite all we have done.
Folks with agendas against white males really don’t get how severe the backlash will be.
Whether it be blacks constantly playing the race card
or gays burning churches or intimidating beauty contestants
or now playing the sexist card against traditional men who are married to women that love traditional men those that have these agendas will be on the outside looking in climbing under rocks scared as the right wing republican revolution stampedes right over their little self righteous foolish heads.
Kind of like biting the hand that feeds you.
We as white men extended olive branches to minorities of all types and what do we get…
A good slap in the face!!
This crap against white men is coming to an end. Either you are on the right side of this backlash or you can climb back underneath that rock for a very long time.
In the history of the world women have only had total rights for about 100 years because men with the blueprint of freedom and the constitution behind them willed it to be…
At the rate things are going
It could just be a flash in the pan idea!
Wow, guys! I know this is Amy’s to answer but how did I miss the anti-white male screed that you’re referring to? I think I’m fairly astute but I thought this essay was about:
Choice.
The choice for a woman choose to take her husband’s name or a hyphenated name or retain her married name pressed against the study where 50% of women in this particular study indicated that women should be “required by law” to take their husband’s name, pressed against women in other cultures who have no rights at all.
Clue me in to how that diminishes white men, who marry diverse women with diverse opinions? Obviously, this sort of thing is generally brought uo before the marriage and couples agree or disagree or compromise between themselves.
But this isssue on its face is racist? Sexist?
I don’t get it. Traditional is fine. I’ve been married forever since I was way too young to be married. I took my husband’s name. Never bothered me. I know who I am. And my maiden name is part of who I’ll always be.
But I have no problem with other women doing something different.
The word is choice. It’s not “what” we choose; it’s the act of choosing itself. And with a partner, we negotiate if we have a different point of view.
But it always comes down to . . . choice. And choice empowers women. And men.
Peggy Sue,
We can leave the white part out I guess..I’m just pissed!
lately I feel as a white traditional male to be constantly under siege by everyone around me. Makes me want to take a stand for who I am.
Folks,
You can find me over at Facebook along with many others that used to be on this blog.
Clint Cox/Seattle
The world is really big over there and the revolution against Obama and his socialist’s is accelerating exponentially along with the thousands people I network with.
http://www.facebook.com
Seattle, I wouldn’t like to see you leave. I’m sorry you feel attacked in the world right now. But aren’t you able to have a marriage with a wife who took your last name? Aren’t you living the life that you want to?
No one is proposing a law that women NOT be allowed to take their last name. In the article, it was just the opposite, some people said they’d like a law which would FORCE a woman to take a man’s last name.
It’s women’s choices which would be under attack in that situation. But your right to marry a woman who takes your last name wouldn’t be attacked. So, stay…..
Lorac,
You’re a cool guy!
No I’m not leaving. I have discovered something that’s amazing over on facebook. To actually talk to the people that we have been linking to and have your own page like a blog is fascinating and empowering.
Depending on your interests all of a sudden there is thousands of like minded folks like us and it doesn’t stop with just regular folk but those in top positions of power.
AS a libertarian conservative I respect and champion your right to choose.
I just feel that everything that i took for granted in this life is under threat!
Hey Moss, don’t you think that Lorac might be the reverse of Carol, and that she’s not a guy, but a gal. Or maybe I’m just being overly observant. Not that it really matters.
lol Yes I’m a woman, I haven’t hidden it! My real name is Onofre’s leg!
OMG..Your giving me tingles now!
Hey Lorac, we need to get together.
I think I’d get the better deal. You could give me a leg massage or a tickle, but all I could do is kick you or step on your hand!
All you need now is Thing from the Adams family and you can give me a nice back rub.
Don’t downplay the talent in your toes! If Tom Delay can get on “Dancing With the Stars”, just imagine the sensational response by viewers if a multisexual arm-leg entrant were to be considered. Of course, we might have a better chance of winning if we could find the rest of our body.
You really are observant Onofre!
Okay Lorac..Time to tell us!
Wait a minute! You can’t be observant, you’re an ARM!
Hey! Ever heard of Braille???
Well, I think I understand. Certainly with BO “in charge”, it feels to many of us that our country is being changed, is under threat. I’m glad you found a site where you can talk with famous people who are working to make a difference - that sounds cool!
That’s all I’m saying
We need the tools to combat the threat that is Obama
Obasma had his acorn revolution and now we have ours.
NQ is wonderful for close knit relationships and I intend to stay because of it’s intimate qualities.
Facebook takes you to a new level of community and knowledge and activism and is what’s driving this backlash revolution.
Join up and add me as a friend and see what happens..
Clint Cox
Bettina Viviano
Jane Milhans
Amanda Carpenter
Sarah Palin
etc..
SM, traditions can just as easily be bad as good; you can’t just fall back on “tradition” to justify women being expected or even FORCED to take their husband’s name. since men aren’t willing to take their wives’ names, they can hardly cry sexism if women don’t want to take their husbands’ names. that seems pretty simple.
MOSS…
I understand the POINT you were making..and your Frustration and Concerns for what is happening in the United States..and threats to our Constitution and Freedoms..
I too, think of thee hundreds of Thousands of Caucasian People who have worked so far for Freedom and Equality for Races and genders and died on Battle Fields since the American revolution,Civil War and many other wars to preserve Our DREAM of Freedom for ALL..
That includes the work of so many Great Americans, like John and Bobby Kennedy..and the White Civil Rights workers who joined Hands in Freedom marches..
Now, I think every day of the RANTS of Racist WHITEHATERS like Jeremiah Wright..who OBAMA Embraced for 20 Years..and Bill Ayers who Bombed the Pentagon ..but was Embraced by OBAMA…who got APPLAUSE today from the VFW..and Amy whose rant here was Clearly Anti Male Sexist and Feminist Propoganda..in my opinion..
No matter how hard we WHITE Folk, or Men, try to support Freeedom..or Civil Libertys..it is NEVER enough for Some..or even Apparently Appreciated..Some people Just HATE White people and Men and Blame them for every thing..
the Town hall meetings prove there is a Growing BACKLASH against EXTREMISM in this Country..
Now, the DEMOCRAT Party is being Dismantled..
and the will be an even Greater CONSERVATIVE Backlash SOON in this Great Nation ..
I too, have had enough..I miss the opinions of the Good MEN who used to come here to No Quarter and Comment..Like You..They were PATRIOTS..
NOT EXTREMIST..who are Blinded by HATE..and thier OWN Forms of Predjustices..
I will join you MOSS Over at Facebook..
Patrick Henry
I just got done talking with John Bolton,Cal Thomas and Tammy Bruce. Yesterday I talked with Rudy and Bernard Kerik on facebook
Thousands of patriots all equal as foot soldiers in the need save this country.
Clint Cox..Seattle
Patrick, I was on my way to bed. This name thing is giving me a migraine. But I have question.
What is it about this particular essay that got such a rise out of you? Seattle was willing to admit that he could throw the racist card overboard. But obviously, you feel this thread is terribly sexist.
What is it about a woman deciding to retain her maiden name, hyphenate her name, whatever that offends you so? You mentioned religion. Is it the traditional vs the modern? Or is it Amy’s unapologetic declaration that she is, in fact, a lesbian?
I’m not trying to bait you here. But if we’re ever going to get beyond this explosive mindset, we need to start talking to one another, rather than pulling into “us and them” trenches.
Look, I’m white, a straight female married for a gazillion years. I took my husband’s name without a second thought. I know who I am.
But other people’s choices have never bothered me. As I said to Seattle it’s not what we choose, it’s the fact we have the choice. And that’s important in this country, perhaps more than any country in the world. We have choice. Amy’s life is hers to live as is mine, as is yours.
So what is the tender spot, the place where we cannot meet one another as equals?
As I said to Seattle: clue me in because I just don’t get it.
Amy, I had a spam gobble. I’ve sent a requisite email.
“Clearly Anti Male Sexist and Feminist Propoganda..in my opinion..”
if equality is “Clearly Anti Male Sexist and Feminist Propoganda” i guess we’re damned if do, damned if we don’t, aren’t we, Patrick?
My impression was that all the women supported Amy’s
rantessay. People agreed or disagreed with different points, but they seemed to agree that it’s a decision a woman must make, and she should have a choice.I don’t believe that any of the women feel it was an anti-man essay; rather, it was soley focused on women and their choices. Most women want to keep their identity, not be swallowed up by a marriage. Some women feel the way to do that is to keep their own name, while others have said they can do it without keeping their own name. People are different.
How does it hurt men, if their wives have their own name? You do understand that the tradition of women losing their name and taking their husband’s originated because women were chattel, and therefore had to have the same name as the head of the household, just as the children chattel did.
How does it hurt men to have their wives be people with their own identity, no different than how the husband has his own identity? I guess I don’t get it….
But I’m certain that Amy had no intention of making you two guys feel like the subject was meant to attack white, heterosexual, married males…..
you’re wasting your time, lorac. to some people, equal rights IS “anti-male.” well, then so be it.
You are correct, Iorac. Nor did I say anything of the kind. Not even close. It was much more the assumption that women should be relegated to invisibility by “losing themselves” to their husbands and their husbands family. I think I said that quite clearly.
And whether a woman CHOOSES to take her husband’s name should be her CHOICE, not a law. I said that quite clearly, too.
Patrick Henry, we typically do not ban people simply for disagreeing with the writers. It is when people attack us PERSONALLY that they can get banned. You are getting close with the major one above, but we are loathe to ban people, especially regulars. I am going to assume you were having a hard day.
That being said, considering some of your other very positive comments regarding other posts, I am taken aback by the level of vitriol in your comment to me. I don’t deserve that, neither does this blog.
All I can say is that you, and Seattle Moss, have completely missed the point of the post. The hurt feelings you are expressing are real, I know, but I did not write what you seem to think I did. Take a deep breath, and read it again, please. And try to not lash out at me again, please. Thanks.
Patrick, I wish you should stay, too. Honestly, no one here was trying to cut down white men. It was a conversation about women. And I know it wasn’t about national security, but it WAS about politics, because women’s rights are human rights, and the personal is the political (and those are the only slogans I can remember right now!
) But I personally did not consider this article a “feature article” (what is that, anyway, something suited for Redbook or the “Hair and Nail Magazine”?)
I suppose it’s only fair that women be the ones who decide what they need for their lives, self-respect, self-identity, etc. (And different women will decide in different ways). Traditionally (think of Burqas), men have made those decisions for us. It’s really more right that we make them for ourselves.
Men make all kinds of decisions in their lifetime about what kind of man they want to be, they shape their identity in the way they want to, and they basically do it without having a woman telling them what to do. Why is it any different for women to do the same thing….? It’s honestly not an attack on white men. It’s just women being human beings. And this essay was about women having a CHOICE in how to go about that….
You should definately stay Patrick.
This is America.
Why I like America is that things are not zero-sum here, the people generally do not have that mindset (as they do in most other places I have lived). The mindset is more that everyone can win here, we can all grow and better ourselves without robbing each other.
This includes women, who should be free to conduct themselves as they see fit as far as their personal lives go.
The ex-PsychoSpouse from Hell continued to use my family name when it got her something (better seats at the symphony, appointment to some nitwit Board or another - my clan was big in Podunk and neighboring Speed Bump) but used the one on her birth certificate when it suited her.
Mortimer Tort, JD, sent her a little pre-Cease and Desist missive,cleared that up for three billable hours.
I have since refered to her as “Defendant.”
I am a person, with my own identity and I own my own life. I exist, not as an extension of a tribe, clan or relative, but as myself. Fully actualized and fully aware. I expect equality under the law and when I dont get it, I am as angry as any other person.
I am also a woman.
Being pro woman is not being anti man. It is the amazing concept that women deserve equal consideration. Chew on that because most people really dont seem to get it.
I never took anyones name but my own, and if I had children I would insist they had my name (I would hyphenate for the right guy). Why do fathers automatically expect to “own” the offspring? Why do other women think this should be the law?
Thanks for the article. I agree with what you say and I am sorry not everyone sees the importance of it.
What I don’t understand is how so many women say “I’m going to keep my name if I get married.”
Our last names come from our FATHERS. Our “maiden names” are not women’s names; they are another man’s last name.
Go ahead and try to find your true woman’s last name, good luck. Where is it? Been gobbled up by different men’s names long ago.
Probably the only way to have an *actual* woman’s last name is to go ahead and make one up and change it legally and then pass that down with a strict condition that the children keep that last name going.
Otherwise, there is NO SUCH THING as a “woman’s last name,” or “keeping my maiden name [to prove a feminist point].”
This is all from long ago, back when women were passed on to husband from the father, from one guardian to the next.
Doesn’t this have to do with property? The son’s kept the name so that they could retain father’s property and the woman would not inherit same dad’s property so she was handed over to live on another man’s property and make sons so they could then carry on the next name and etc and so forth.
I HAVE thought of the irony in keeping one’s “maiden” name. It is a man’s surname, the name of one’s father.
When I took my maiden name back, it was with the full understanding that I was taking back my father’s name. He was the most honorable, ethical, hard working, individual I ever knew. He thought for himself and often “marched to the beat of a different drummer.” He gave us so much laughter, too, as we were growing up.
As I said, I changed my name back to his after my first marriage. I didn’t take my second husband’s name–he, who I soon found out was a raving narcissist. He was angry that I didn’t use his name; he found ways to force it on me by taking out credit cards in his name and putting my first name and his surname on them. It angered me as it took forever to disentangle myself from him. My current man never once asked me to use his surname.
Basically, though, I am proud to be my father’s daughter. I love all four of my grand parents and know their names and their parents’ names.
As I said, at some point people choose their names. Everyone should honor the choices people make.
I do not respect someone who will use another person’s surname name for some kind of personal gain.
And I really feel that there is some kind of “magic,” so to speak in choosing a first name for a baby. It’s a very important decision.
Diana–the huntress goddess–I could never imagine myself as anyone else. That is why I could not come up with a clever cover name for his site.
Onofre’s Arm–I have tried, but I can’t find the reference behind your name. Please explain.
P.S.
My partner’s surname is Russian, and almost no one who sees it for the first time pronounces it right–just as most people cannot pronounce my last name the way our family pronounces it. His mother’s maden name was Smith, and that is his middle name.
Every time we make a reservation, we choose to make it in the name of Smith because we know they will pronounce it correctly when calling us to take us to our table.
My surname became my name when I was born with it. Its my name. I dont need to reach back to find some mythical “woman’s last name”. Thats not the point at all. I am who I was born and I am not obliged to change this because I change life partners.
Historically women changed names at marriage because women (and children) were the property of the husband, just like furniture and livestock. I consider myself a person, not clan property and not the property of my husband.
Americans are happily free to call themselves whatever they like. I am surprised anyone would have a problem with this fact.
Its not inconsequential or just a cute tradition that women are the ones who change identity at marriage. It DOES mean something about how society views women. Especially when people think women SHOULD change name, and that there should be a law compelling them to do so.
My maiden name is in the blood, wrapped in my DNA. Yes, it’s my father’s name but I have my mother’s chromosones, too. I can trace my family back to the the American Civil War, both sides, and if I wanted to spend the time and energy I’m sure I could find links far beyond that–female, male. Who cares?
I’m female. I’m a woman.
If you know who you are the name is secondary. For the life of me, I cannot understand what the big deal is. We have the choice to retain our maiden name, hyphenate our names, or take our spouse’s name. We can even change our names. We have the choice to do that.
Does it change who we are? I don’t think so.
I am more than my first name, my last name, my married name, my maiden name, my middle name and my confirmation name. I am more than any name you could come up with.
We all are. Men and women, we are more than our silly names.
The fact that we’re here at all, breathing in and out is the miracle, the mystery.
Our names? Irrelevant.
It’s time to go to bed.
Hey! Ever heard of Braille???
Sorry… forgot to say great post - can’t wait to read your next one!
Are you sure? The handle for that user was Just Me and the email was different and his/her tone toward NQ was unfriendly. Watch out there are justme impersonators.
Who u talking to pm317? I am ~~Justme~~ been posting a NQ for months was away for a while there is also another Just me…. we discussed our names months ago so I added ~~ JustMe~~ to my name?
I did post last week on the post of Larry’s I am originally from the UK?????? I could say a great deal on healthcare but at this point what it will do but bring out the ones who would never believe what was said on UK healthcare…and I do not want to get into a brawl……I have seen some of the comments here regarding the Brits etc.
However my 78 yr old mother has great care. Dialysis 3 times a week been on it since she was 70 they do not as advertized here throw them to the gutter at 70 in the UK.
My friend’s mother was on it here they never got the shunt to work correctly…… had to make her own way to treatment she was in constant pain, hence came off it and died 3 weeks later. Just one comparison to healthcare here and there.
Both countries have amazing Drs but what u all get told here is not what I have experienced/seen/know in the UK.
Wow. I would have never guessed that sooo many American felt this way.
Maybe this is why Hillary caught so much heat for keeping her name when she was First Lady in the 90’s.
Half want it to be legal requirement to take the husband’s name??
damn.
I didn’t know it was like THAT!!
geeez.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SodofMU5pEs&eurl
video of Afghanistan women protesting Karzai’s evil law being mobbed by psychos who like the law
this survey prompts all sorts of thoughts. i do think it may accurately
reflect women of this generation in perhaps even northern cities. based
on the sexist rants of the boys on the blogs during the 2008 primaries,
these are the young men young women encounter. and may date. yuk,
but it may influence their thinking.
since they are so into Obama and wow isn’t electing a black man great
for our country,perhaps they will find it ironic that taking the name
of a man upon marriage comes from the English custom of taking
a man’s name because you became his property in marriage. yuk on
that too. slavery for women, economic powerlessness (which Stephen
Douglas wrote about in conjunction with working with women on
abolition of african american slavery issues), all are held as symbol
in the now custom of taking a man’s name. laws may vary by state as
to actual economic state of women. I’m not a senior citizen and within
my adult lifetime, marriedwomen have struggled to maintain their own credit
status. that’s still economic enslavement. and laws used to vary by
state as to requirement for taking a man’s name upon marriage. In
Illinois there was a group called the Center for a Woman’s Name.
maiden name…..let’s just eradicate that term. what’s the corresponding
term for men? right, there isn’t one. because maiden name means name
when she was a maiden, as in virginal, and that is just crap, women
being held to a sexuality standard. birth name. birth name. birth name.
it applies to anyone, man or woman.
sometimes they call me by my husband’s last name, his birth name. sometimes I challenge, sometimes you are in a hospital waiting for
his parents. Read Anna Quindlen’s beautiful essay on a woman’s name. she
really says it all.