Name Changing

While this is a heated topic amongst feminists and humanists (those feminists who like to think they would be happy to support men’s rights if the tables were turned), other people have difficulty understanding why it is discussed at all.

Women are raised prepared for the possibility that they will be expected to change their name upon marriage. Men are free to not even consider it unless their future wife brings it up, as the odds of a wife politely suggesting to her husband that he takes her surname instead are still low. This seems unfair for two reasons:

1. Intellectual women agonise over whether to keep or change their name while men do not have to worry

2. It would be regarded as “wrong” for the wife to expect (let alone simply suggest/ask that) her husband to give up his name, yet the man expecting the wife to give up her name is fine.

(a 3rd reason I could put in here as a humanist is that it’s also unfair that men are not given the option of changing their names, and that they are unsupported if they want to.)

While most intellectual women surveyed (on websites such as offbeatbride.com and apracticalwedding.com ) have no tolerance for being called Mrs. HisFirstName HisLastName, and I personally have no tolerance for being called anything other than “Ms.” (or Dr. once I get my PhD) (thank you to Ms. Haupt my married French teacher who pointed out that she didn’t see why it was relevant to employers/electricity companies/students whether she was married or not), there are reasons for: keeping your own name, taking his name, hyphenating, or making up a new name altogether (my prefence). (Although to keep things even simpler, I’m going to try my best to become the next Cher or Madonna [no last name necessary].)

I’m going to skip the obvious reasons against taking his name: it’s a remnant of women being considered property, and it means that matriarchal names die out (and are therefore counted as of secondary importance to the male’s surname). An argument against this that I agree with, is that if you keep your maiden name, at some point you are taking a patriarchal name anyway, and as a sociologist at uni suggested: “To me the choice was between my father’s name (whom I didn’t choose) or my husband’s name (whom I did choose), and I decided to go with the name of the man I chose.” However it still annoys me that women are expected to choose while men don’t.

Keeping your own name also runs the issue of what surname to give your kids, and hyphenation runs the risk of two kids with hyphenated surnames marrying (it just delays the problem). In an ideal world, if I was unable to convince my future husband to come up with a new name for our family, I would like to think that I would give the kids his surname to symbolise his equality as a parent (even if he didn’t carry them around for 9 months). Similarly if I was in a lesbian relationship, I would give the kid the surname of the partner whose eggs weren’t used, to again try to equalise the parenting situation.

However my ideal world situation is that when you marry you and your husband pick a new name for your family. It could be a mixture of your names, mixture of ancestors names, or a completely new name. Then when your kids marry they too pick a new name for their independent family. That way your family unit is being defined by you, not by what worked in 1901. I know a couple that gave themselves the surname “Pixel” due to their passion for graphic design. I also have heard a few rare stories of those brave men who take their wife’s surname because, you know what, it just worked better for them.

In response to the objection that “a rose by any other name would smell as sweet”, unfortunately while genetically you will be the same person regardless of what name you are given, environmentally you will be treated differently depending on what name you are given (ie. you will smell the same but people will act as though you don’t). When you are given the name of only one parent, everything you do (good or bad) is credited to only one side of the family (my preference would be that rather than one side (or even both sides) of the family taking credit, that your decision only reflects upon you as an individual rather than on an identity external to you). If surnames are not important to you, but extremely important to your family, then it becomes even more important that you don’t play their game or you may find your surname being given far more importance than you’d wished (whereas if you choose your own surname your name-worshipping family will want to downplay the importance of your surname).

In response to the wanting to honour your family objection, I don’t think it is fair to only honour your father’s line, while your mother’s, grandmother’s, et cetera lines are completely unacknowledged even though they too are half the reason you are who you are. If you can’t honour everyone who is equally worthy of having their names carried on, then it is only fair to honour no one (and just remember to thank them in acceptance speeches). That way as well, your decisions as an adult reflect on you only, and your family get thanked for the good things you achieve but don’t feel they have any responsibility over choices you make that they think are mistakes (you can’t be guilt-tripped by “bringing shame on the family name” because it won’t be credited to them due to the new surname so it won’t reflect on them at all, it will only reflect on you [as in the end it is your life and thus your final decision]).

To give the child the mother’s maiden name as a middle name is a nice lip-service gesture but is NOT equality. The middle name is rarely referred to in our society, so the above issues will still occur. And sooner or later this obsession with keeping genetic surnames for more than one generation (if you want to be equal about it) will result in some names being dropped as dealing with 5 or more names becomes almost impossible. The Spanish system of mothers giving their daughters their surname and fathers giving their sons their surname is fantastic, but inappropriate for Australia because it is not retrospective (it is however still a step towards equality and better than nothing, but because it is not retrospective it will not result in complete equality).

 

So what you can do:

 

1. When you talk about your decision to change/keep your name, make it clear that it was a couple decision not a female decision. “My wife/husband and I both decided to keep our own names” “My wife/husband and I both decided to make _____ the family name.” It makes it clear that both of you thought about changing your name, not just the feminine partner.

2. If you can, refuse to use “Miss” or “Mrs.” unless the woman directly insists on it, always use “Ms”. Otherwise you are helping perpetuate the myth that a woman’s maritial status is relevant to judging her worth as a citizen. (Note that we get along just fine in society despite the term “Mr.” not revealing a male’s maritial status.)

3. Never assume. If a friend is getting married, ask, “So are you and your husband/wife changing or keeping your names?” Even if they respond with, “Huh? Him changing his name? He doesn’t have to,” at least you have put the possibility in their minds for them to consider.

4. If you are male, don’t get offended if your wife doesn’t want to take your name (or even dares to discuss that you change your name), or if your wife is hesitant about giving the children your surname. That same offence that you feel that someone would ask (let alone assume) that you would give up your name is the same offence women originally felt when this tradition was invented (and most women have learnt over the years to not be offended despite the original hurt of the suggestion, so you too can learn how to respond with dignity and openness).

5. If you hear of a male changing his name in marriage (whether it be to a new name or his wife’s name or a combination), encourage and congratulate him on being brave enough to take a step forward for equality (and try to behave like this is a totally normal, rational, reasonable and understandable decision - because it is). He is still a pioneer in this area (one of the brave few who do what they think is right, rather than what is popular, and thus are helping to give others the confidence to step out from following the crowd so that tomorrow’s world will be even better than today’s.)

If women still choose to change their name to their husband’s, it should be an informed choice where they have considered all their options, not a default one.

 

(As a result of this article Kieran has agreed that we will both change our surnames upon marriage so that we will be Kieran and Naomi Web [no need to change internet or twitter handes].  Even if you disagree, please be kind rather than critical towards him, as I think it is brave that he is daring to take a concrete action towards demonstrating equality despite having a strong Italian Catholic family.  Also we want to break it to them gently and slowly in our own time in stages so that they get used to it.)

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Furl
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • TwitThis
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Posted by admin on August 6th, 2010

Filed under Advice, marriage, philosophy | 25 Comments »

On Internet (and Economics)

Sydney Morning Herald is normally much better than news.com.au so I was disappointed to come across Jessica Irvine’s opinion piece:

Read the rest of this entry »

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Furl
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • TwitThis
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Posted by admin on July 18th, 2009

Filed under Advice | 10 Comments »

On Advice

Most of the time I agree with Kate De Brito (aka “Bossy”) on her Ask Bossy advice blog. Here is an example of why her advice wins compared to the advice less enlightened people would give:

Read the rest of this entry »

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Furl
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • TwitThis
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Posted by admin on May 11th, 2009

Filed under Advice | 2 Comments »

On Intro Philosophy Part 1: Descartes

I’m tempted to quit here. I have no credibility. Even if I get 7s in my first semester of philosophy (which I will) no one will care. But on the off-chance that this saves a life, I will put up with the inevitable knee-jerk criticism of writing something that is contrary to popular thought.

Rene Descartes, George Berkeley and David Hume are three of the bravest philosophers I know. I don’t agree 100% with any of them, and that not the point here: they deserve their arguments to be given proper consideration by all of us. We should put aside our popular prejudices and consider their points of view so as to expand our own minds and our perception of the world (agreement is unnecessary and irrelevant, testing out their theories will improve your mental abilities regardless).

Clear translations (that you can read for yourself) of their Meditations, Three Diologues and Enquiry: Human Understanding (respectively) can be found by CLICKING HERE

Here is my attempt:

Read the rest of this entry »

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Furl
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • TwitThis
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Posted by admin on April 16th, 2009

Filed under philosophy | No Comments »

Ramblings #1

As the excerpt says:

“Ramblings about my plans (academic and employment) for the future, including Teach for Australia and the philosophy of Ian Hinckfuss, and a critique of UQ’s academic tutors (everything else about the uni is fantastic).”

However due to lack of sleep and lack of Kieran to talk to I am pouring out my ramblings here (instead of keeping this journal [I hate the word "blog"] exclusively for treatises, for example “On . . .”) but I’ll try to make sure my next post is back to my usual higher standard.

Read the rest of this entry »

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Furl
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • TwitThis
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Posted by admin on April 2nd, 2009

Filed under study | 3 Comments »

On Politics

I just reread my “Read Me” (About) page, and noticed that I said I’d never vote Liberal. Well, on Queensland’s election on Saturday I did (as a second preference to Greens, of course), because I think for myself and my loyalty towards a party only lasts as long as they actually deserve it.

Labor lost me on two key issues: removing the children’s hospital from the Royal Brisbane, and persisting with the travesty of Traverston dam. Not to mention that they are prepared to keep running Queensland into debt (hey we need some savings for the yearly cyclones and floods that always seem to take the QLD Labor party by surprise and they react to them as a “disaster” instead of already having emergency money set aside) and their answer to when they think they will start paying back their billions of debt is “when we can” (how many banks would accept such a vague answer?). Essentially they are taking a dangerous childish approach (an approach that gets many young people into financial trouble in the first place before they learn to save and budget): spend, spend, spend even though our state is already in debt (What if those in our society already struggling under debt took that advice? They will be even worse off and have less of an emergency savings buffer). (I am so against their policies that I am not even going to tag Anna Bligh or Labor in this post.) Also, why doesn’t Anna smile in her posters?

Springborg had pages and pages of itemised budget showing exactly how and where he was going to cut costs to save Queensland a billion dollars each year and get us both out of debt, and with a savings buffer to survive recessions and disasters. Springborg talked to economists who told him that the predict the recession (and people unlike what Labor scare-mongered you into thinking, right now unemployment is at 5% whereas in the Great Depression unemployment was at 40% - so yes it’s a serious problem that needs to be addressed, but it’s not an absolute disaster) to last three years, and his plan is four years long.

Read the rest of this entry »

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Furl
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • TwitThis
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Posted by admin on March 23rd, 2009

Filed under money | 6 Comments »

On University

I feel like I need to get this out of my system so I will. This is purely my personal subjective opinion (and in this situation I am only trying to praise one thing, but am not remotely interested in criticising its noble competitors who are still good secondary options if my first preferences did not exist) so unfortunately you can’t take my words as scientific fact and its up to you to decide to what degree I am biased and thus whether my words have any importance to you at all. You do not have to accept everything I say here, I admit that some things I say here have more backing behind them than others, so feel free to pick and choose which advice helps you and which does not. I won’t be offended if you decide to ignore my words, and I’m not interested in arguing my points further beyond this argument. As I said, this rant is more for the emotional health of my brain and perhaps after I have gotten these passionate words of advice out of my system I can chill out and stop seeing this as such a crucial issue for year 12 students.

Read the rest of this entry »

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Furl
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • TwitThis
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Posted by admin on March 19th, 2009

Filed under study | 15 Comments »

On Values

Or perhaps this post should be titled “On Tolerance” or “On Acceptance” or even “On Supporting Other People In Their Lives Without Judgement”. It’s in the “God” category because, guess what, I think God gave people their values. And because people are different, it follows that God gave different people different values, so that hopefully they wouldn’t all live their lives exactly the same way and thus he wouldn’t end up with a bunch of teachers or a bunch of artists etc.

Read the rest of this entry »

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Furl
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • TwitThis
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Posted by admin on March 8th, 2009

Filed under God | 6 Comments »

On Weddings

So I got engaged, and finally allowed myself to buy those wedding magazines. I hate to admit this but I did not naturally question all the things you are told that you need as part of a wedding. The things advertised in wedding magazines are really expensive, but also quite repetitive. First thing I realised was that almost every wedding dress was strapless and had a train, and most of the men’s suits were plain black.

I thought I would enjoy the process of going wedding dress shopping. Nevermind that I normally hate trying on clothes (let alone metres and metres of fabric), finding a fairytale dress is the dream of most little girls. We went to The Bridal Centre in Queen St Mall (I am not going to link them as I do not recommend them). I said I didn’t want a strapless dress, and they behaved like I was almost asking the impossible. I found a style of dress I liked, asked how much it would be to order it in, and they told me they couldn’t order it in.

Finally I tried on a fairly simple white dress, and it just did not suit me at all. We then went to Elizabeth de Varga in Broadway on the Mall. I tried on the first dress that fit my criteria, and it was perfect. Having realised that I was not having fun shopping, I was sold and had no desire to try on another dress. Elizabeth de Varga I do recommend because the price includes everything (they do six fittings and alter details of the dress in any way you like) whereas some places you order the dress in in the closest size and then pay hundreds extra to have it altered to fit. It is cheap compared to the dresses in wedding magazines, but you can definitely find dresses for a lot less.

Then thanks to God my path crossed with Definatalie who recommended that I visit the website OffbeatBride.com and, now having been there, I will stay as far away from other wedding sites as possible. And if I ever find out a friend is engaged, I will tell them “before you do anything else, visit offbeatbride.com” and I’ll buy them Ariel (the site owner)’s book. I am not exaggerating when I say (in agreement with other regular readers) that Ariel’s site set me free.

Read the rest of this entry »

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Furl
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • TwitThis
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Posted by admin on February 26th, 2009

Filed under marriage | 7 Comments »

On Economics

Click here to read an article where an expert says the same thing I’m saying, and gives actual references.

I am a fan of philosophy because it encourages questioning what you are told, rather than just blindly accepting what “everybody knows”. Galileo, Copernicus and Einstein would have all been labelled as crazies simply for having questioned “science” and come up with a different conclusion that has more evidence behind it than the current accepted answer. Over time the majority have accepted their conclusions as truth, and the next person who dares to question their premises and discovers overwhelmingly contradictory evidence will again be labelled as a lunatic until people are educated in a new way of thinking.

This irritates me no end. Rather than labelling anyone who dares to question something accepted as an idiot, particularly if they’ve bothered to do some research and are happy to provide their evidence and logical reasoning for their opinion, perhaps we should pay them enough respect to question our own beliefs along with theirs.

I love economics but I unfortunately can’t think rationally about whether or not any of these handouts are a good idea now that I’ve been told that I might be receiving $900. I think I’m scared to question this policy because I sense deep down that it might not be in line with my economic values of the past, when all I really want to do is be grateful and celebrate free money (compared to the amount of work I’d normally have to put up with to make $900). Before anyone jumps down my throat and declares that because the government came up with the idea it must be more right than my opinion because they’ve had more formal training in economics than I have (without even bothering to question the government’s idea), well I recently read Henry Hazlitt’s famous Economics in One Lesson and was relieved to discover that his opinion is what I’ve always suspected was the real truth:

Read the rest of this entry »

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Furl
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • TwitThis
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Posted by admin on February 25th, 2009

Filed under money | No Comments »