It's a Lot of Work for Men to Take Their Wife's Name

I've found a number of articles and studies lately that mention how difficult it is for men to take their wife's name upon marriage. As the paper below notes, while this initially looks like a form of discrimination against men, it really is a form of procedurally imposed discrimination against women; in most states, women are not entitled to have a husband take their name with the same relative ease that they are allowed to take their husband's. By making it so difficult and expensive for men to take their wife's names, even the most liberal men are discouraged from considering such a thing. Thus, the tradition of women only taking their husband's name continues on and on.  [I'm now imagining my Civil Procedure professor shouting out "TRADITION" and dancing in a parody of Fiddler on the Roof he did in class several times]

Some snippets on the subject:

"When I decided to take my wife's last name, I was shocked by how different the process is for men." By James Kosur, Business Insider (Dec. 19, 2015).

"Little did I know, the name change process would not be simple because of my gender.  .... If I was a woman who had been recently married, I would have presented my marriage license to the court, paid a name-change fee, and moved on with my life. A close friend tells me she remembers paying around $60 and submitting a simple form alongside her marriage certificate to change her name. Within weeks her name change was official. I paid $300 for a newspaper ad and spent hours in court and visiting with a newspaper ad sales representative in order to change my name. The change took more than a month to complete."  (Kosur describes the process as it currently exists in Illinois

Vintage Bride/Groom. By Jean L. Used under a Creative Commons License. Available at https://www.flickr.com/photos/yourcastlesdecor/14150266866/.

Vintage Bride/Groom. By Jean L. Used under a Creative Commons License. Available at https://www.flickr.com/photos/yourcastlesdecor/14150266866/.

Deborah J. Anthony, A Spouse by Any Other Name, 17 Wm. & Mary J. Women & L. 187 (2010).

"Currently only nine state statutes explicitly allow a man to change his name through marriage with the same procedures as a woman. Interestingly, it has been allowed in Maine since 1980 by Attorney General opinion rather than statute. California was the most recent to join that group in 2007, as a result of a lawsuit filed by a man named Mike Buday, who desired to change his name to that of his wife but was prohibited from doing so outside of the court process. Rather than fight the lawsuit, California amended its law with the Name Equality Act of 2007, which became effective in 2009. The legislature noted the importance of names in Sec. 2 of the Act: “[T]he choice to adopt or not adopt a new name upon marriage or registration of domestic partnership is a profoundly personal reflection of one’s individuality, equality, family, community, and beliefs.”

It should be noted that some states’ laws are not explicit, but may be interpreted to apply to both women and men, and that male name change at marriage may be allowed at the county level. This results in what Emens identifies as “desk-clerk law,” where the law essentially consists of whatever the person at the desk says it is. This results in interpretations that are incorrect and/or discouraging of unconventional choices, with results being highly inconsistent from one employee, and one county, to the next. 

.... What at first appears to be discrimination against men is in reality discrimination against women: the status quo represents a legal sanctioning of the social norms that subsumed a woman within the husband’s identity. Because taking their husbands’ names at marriage was never really a “right” of women, but rather a requirement, the “right” actually inheres in the man. In essence, women are still denied what men have always enjoyed: the right to have a spouse adopt their name at marriage. This is why, in a society that has almost never legally favored the female over the male, and where men have always had the common law right to change their name whenever they chose, they are nevertheless not permitted to do so at marriage."

Michael Rosensaft, The Right of Men to Change their Names Upon Marriage, 5 J. of Const. Law 186 (2002).

"[C]ourts have gone beyond the restrictions listed in the statutes and rejected name change applications due to public policy or just their own whim. For example, the Minnesota Supreme Court denied the petition of a man who wished to change his name to '1069' for no other reason than the court did not think such a name conformed with their ideal of social norms. With so much discretion given to, and sometimes taken by, the courts, there is no assurance that any application will necessarily be approved. It might be argued that many judges would automatically allow name changes for marital purposes. However, a groom taking his wife's name is not a widely accepted practice, and judges have denied applications where they did not think it fit certain social structures. For instance, some courts have denied gay couples' petitions to have the same last name. This example is not so important because it directly applies to marital name change statutes, but because it shows that giving discretion to courts means that they are free to apply the social norms that they find acceptable. ...And lest one think a judge would always approve a man's wish to adopt his wife's surname, at least one Florida judge was resistant to this idea when he told Dan Cipoletti that he 'needed a better reason than getting married to change his name...'

Other evidence tends to show that Congress supports the right to control one's name upon marriage. In 1964, Congress passed Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which holds that it is unlawful for an employer to discriminate against any individual with respect to their sex. The Sixth Circuit has applied this statute to marital name change. In Allen v. Lovejoy, the court invoked Title VII when a woman was fired from her job because she refused to go by her husband's surname after marriage and wanted to sign her own maiden name to company forms.  The Sixth Circuit stated that a 'rule which applies only to women, with no counterpart applicable to men, may not be the basis for depriving a female employee who is otherwise qualified of her right to continued employment.' In addition to Title VII, Congress has added a section to the Equal Credit Opportunity Act that is specifically gender neutral and states:'A creditor shall not refuse to allow an applicant to open or maintain an account in a birthgiven first name and a surname that is the applicant's birth-given surname, the spouse's surname, or a combined surname.' Clearly, considering the Sixth Circuit's construction of Congress' intent in enacting Title VII and the additions Congress has made in the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, Congress feels it important that a spouse who wishes to either change their name upon marriage or keep it the same not be discriminated against. While Congress has not specifically addressed the issue of a man changing his name upon marriage, it is more likely that this is due to the practice being relatively infrequent rather than it not falling in line with their aforementioned policies."

This article also has a fascinating Equal Protection analysis of the issue. I highly suggest you read it!

To Change Your Name (A Poem)

A very wise person once wrote that it’s
The choices we make that define the person we are.
The decision you’ve made to change your name
Is one of the most important choices you’ll ever make —
Something no one else can do for you.

Photo by Mike Timberlake (metimbers2000). Used under a Creative Commons License. Available at www.flickr.com/photos/metimbers2000/1409236433/

Photo by Mike Timberlake (metimbers2000). Used under a Creative Commons License. Available at www.flickr.com/photos/metimbers2000/1409236433/


Just like the butterfly that emerges from the chrysalis, 
Changing your name heralds a new stage in your life.
Like the butterfly, may you go out into this world
With pride, with courage, and with the certain knowledge that
Your new name has added meaning and purpose to your life. 

Sharon L Norris

Source: https://www.poemhunter.com/poem/to-change-your-name/

About that Mrs. Thing

I've never particularly liked or understood the reason for using different lead-ins for women based on their marital status. It seemed to be very old fashioned to me, even when I was fairly young. In my previous life as a journalist, I interned a semester at a newspaper in London. Their practice there was to use honorifics on the second reference to a person in a news article; so if John Doe is mentioned once, on the second time, he'd be Mr. Doe. I always hated having to ask women interviewees whether they were married or not just to figure out what honorific they'd use, so I ended up defaulting to using Ms. a lot of the time. In retrospect, I could probably have just asked "What's your preferred title, Miss, Mrs, or Ms?" but I was 21 and awkward and sometimes the simplest solutions don't occur to you until 8 years later when you're in a completely different career.

Made by DefineDesignEtc on Etsy. Available at https://www.etsy.com/listing/491089913/miss-to-mrs-canvas-makeup-bag-bride-gift

Made by DefineDesignEtc on Etsy. Available at https://www.etsy.com/listing/491089913/miss-to-mrs-canvas-makeup-bag-bride-gift

So honestly, because of my own personal dislike for the practice, I'm unlikely to start using Mrs after getting married. However, it's almost certain that at least some people will call me that anyway, whether or not I change my name. People have a nasty habit of assuming such things. I've gotten called "Mrs" on several occasions just in my regular life; once even when a boyfriend and I went to a very fancy restaurant when I was only 18! I got it most recently at a doctor's office. This makes me believe that a considerable number of people don't actually know the difference between the different titles and particularly don't understand its historical context.

"In the middle of the eighteenth century, 'Mrs' did not describe a married woman: it described a woman who governed subjects (i.e., employees or servants or apprentices) or a woman who was skilled or who taught. It described a social, rather than a marital status. 

Mistress is also the basis of another 'title of politeness' (as the OED terms it): 'Miss', which we use to designate an unmarried woman. Miss is almost as old as Mrs as an abbreviation of mistress and, like Mrs, it was applied only to those of higher social status. Unlike Mrs, which has changed from a social to a marital meaning over time, Miss always designated the marital status of being unmarried. But until the eighteenth century it was only applied to girls, never to adult women." - Mistresses and marriage: or, a short history of the Mrs, by Cambridge University historian Dr Amy Erickson. (This paper is really fascinating - Dr Erickson looked at a ton of old records to see what titles were being used over time)

The use of Mrs for women in authority can also be seen in the use of Mrs for "Mrs Hughes," the housekeeper in charge of all the servants on Downton Abbey, taking place around the time of the first World War. Dr Erickson also notes that the appropriate title for single business women in the 19th century was also Mrs.

Quick sidenote: I've been reading some Jane Austen lately, and this paper also describes the naming conventions used there. 

"Where Miss was used, it followed the conventions of Mr for sons. Where the father was 'Mr Cibber', his sons were 'young Mr Cibber' or 'Mr Theophilus'. With daughters, the eldest unmarried daughter was 'Miss Cibber' with no first name, the younger daughter was 'Miss Charlotte Cibber', or just 'Miss Charlotte'. When she married she became Mrs Charke, or Mrs Charlotte Charke to distinguish her from any other contemporaries who were also Mrs Charkes, notably her mother-in-law"

Surprisingly, the "tradition" of calling a wife Mrs. "Husband's First Name Husband's Last Name" is actually fairly new. Dr Erickson's paper continues snarkily, "Through the early modern period, where Mrs was used and the woman was married, the title was followed by her own first name and her husband's last name. The total annihilation of wifely identity which assigned a woman not only her husband's last name but also his first name only appeared around 1800." 

Awesome Dr. Shirt available over at https://www.amazon.com/Miss-Mrs-Shirt-Funny-PhD/dp/B01FRGK47U

Awesome Dr. Shirt available over at https://www.amazon.com/Miss-Mrs-Shirt-Funny-PhD/dp/B01FRGK47U

Here's the thing: Is it actually appropriate for someone to call a married woman who hasn't changed her last name Mrs? According to several sources, such as Miss Manners and Offbeat Bride, no, as Mrs in this instance literally means "wife of" and actually only makes total sense when used with the husband's complete name.

So since I don't plan to legally change, it sounds like I will not be partaking of any of the fabulous and often glittery "Mrs." themed garb out there. Oh well. There's still plenty of other ways for me to engage in blatant wedding themed consumerism.

Sidenote: I really wish I could find some fabulous MS. NOT MRS. merchandise out there. When I searched for "Ms. T-shirt" I just found a ton of stuff for Multiple Sclerosis.

Anyway, I'll leave you on this note: 

What are Facebook's Policies on Name Changes?

So at first glance, Facebook's policies on name changes look fairly simple. Their help page on changing your name states: "Keep in mind, you can only change your name every 60 days." The Facebook Name Standards page says: "The name on your profile should be the name that your friends call you in everyday life. This name should also appear on an ID or document from our ID list." *

However, real life indicates that it can be a lot more complicated than that. One friend of mine, Christina, said "I've never changed my name before on Facebook (in the 8+ years I've been a member!) and they wouldn't let me change my name when I got married, even when I changed my relationship status to married. I had to send them a picture of my ID."  Another friend told me that she wasn't allowed to change her name because her married name is the same as that of a celebrity's.

This doesn't line up with what Facebook says might be a reason you can't change your name: 

"You may be having trouble changing your name if:

  • Your name doesn't follow our name policy
  • You changed your name in the last 60 days, or you tried to change it too frequently
  • You were previously asked to confirm your name on Facebook
  • Your name doesn't exactly match the name that appears on something from our ID list"

This is a little bizarre, particularly because we all know that one friend or two who has a name on Facebook which is CLEARLY false (usually involving some form of "danger" or "goddess" or the equivalent) but hasn't had any trouble with it. It doesn't seem like Facebook is altogether good about forcing these standards equally.

Facebook does have a page where you can upload your ID and explain why you're changing your name, over here - https://www.facebook.com/help/contact/1417759018475333

*Sidenote, there can be many other bad unintended consequences of Facebook's name standards, particularly for Trans* people and people attempting to get away from abusers or stalkers. You can and should go read about those other issues and what Facebook has done to address them over here: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/dec/15/facebook-change-controversial-real-name-policy

Changing Your Last Name Based on the Situation

One marital surname choice that's becoming more popular is situational name use, changing which last name you use depending on what context you're within. For example, one woman could go by Jessica Jones (her birth name) at work and while pursuing her own individual hobbies, but then could go by Jessica Simpson (taking her husband's last name) in social situations where they both end up together, like at church or if they're at a PTA meeting or something. One website listed out a few options for when a woman might prefer to use her birth name as opposed to her married name: professional contexts, when you're not quite ready for the name change in social situations (such as when you're meeting old friends), when you're still undergoing the name change paperwork and haven't been fully processed yet, etc.

There doesn't seem to be a ton of information out there on this option, but I did find one study from 2005, conducted by the brilliant Laurie Scheuble (and like, her husband David Johnson, who's an accomplished research in his own right, I just really love Laurie Scheuble!). 

I don't have access to this full study, but I did find a few links with the abstract and one with an excerpt. This is from 2005, so it's hard to know how accurate it is at this time. 

The abstract states, "Overall, 12% of married women reported situational last name use. Women from all last name choices (e.g., changed to husband’s, kept birth surname) reported situational surname use, but the most common occurrence of this practice was among hyphenators. Situational users were most likely to use their husband’s last name in family situations and their birth surname in professional situations. Factors that increase situational last name use included full-time employment, higher levels of educational attainment, and an older age at marriage. Situational last name use by married women can be seen as a manifestation of ambiguity over identity with family and non-family roles."

The study notes: 

"Women may view their birth surname as an indicator of the part of their lives that is separate from their identity as a member of the family into which they married. This would be particularly true of women who change their last name at marriage. Women who change their last name to that of their husband may find situations wherein they feel comfortable using their birth surnames, such as at a high school reunion or around people from their hometown. The same may be true of women who do not change their name at marriage. They may be inclined to use their spouse's last name in situations where family identity has more salience, such as at their children's school or around their husband's family.

No researchers have systematically and empirically investigated the situational surname use of married women, although a number of researchers have focused on the issue of women's surname choices at the time of marriage ... Some of the same social forces that lead to the identity issues and conflicts that have been documented in these studies of marital name choice should also apply to actual surnames women may use in different social contexts. 

Although no empirical data are available to document the extent of such situational use, anecdotal evidence suggests that this practice may be quite common. For example, etiquette books from the 1970s held that, although it was acceptable for women to use their birth names professionally, it was not appropriate for them to use their birth names in family situations "

Married womens' situational use of last names: an empirical study. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research | July 1, 2005 | Scheuble, Laurie K.; Johnson, David R.

 

This option is actually looking like the best one for me right now. I don't want to legally change my name, but I'd be up for going by Rachael Dickson-Lorenzen at social events and like, on Facebook (if they'll let me!). I could see myself really enjoying this option while maintaining my own name professionally.

On the History of Surnames Themselves

"After the Norman invasion, old Saxon customs, including those regarding names, were replaced with Norman ones. Populations increased and larger cities grew while the list of possible first names was quite limited, resulting in confusion and the increasing need for some other means of identifying individuals. Surnames therefore became more common in thirteenth and fourteenth-century England. Adding to the necessity of more precise names, the state began to require a way to identify and regulate its citizens. Kelly argues that early naming conventions also developed as a way to shape and structure citizens’ lives to correspond with the dominant culture, a purpose which is still extant today.

medieval-wedding.jpg

The use of surnames was quite flexible and inconsistent until the 1500s, however. Names themselves were chosen by the bearer, sometimes according to local laws. A 1465 law, for example, dictated that every Irishman living within specified districts should 'take to him an English surname of one town, as Sutton, Chester, Trynn, Skryne, Corke, Kinsall; or colour, as white, black, brown; or arte or science, as smith or carpenter; or office as cooke, butler.' Names changed quickly and easily through the fourteenth century, and reflected a person’s trade, personal and physical characteristics, or residence more often than their paternity. As a result of this flexibility in name choice, members of the same family would often have different surnames, and those names would frequently change throughout one’s life. John Smith could have a daughter named Maude Weaver and a son named Henry Short, who may also be known as Henry Hill if he lived on a hill, or Henry Johnson as the son of John.

Surnames gradually began to be hereditary in the fourteenth century due to state registration of citizens requiring more naming consistency. As Kelly points out, many of the common English names of today reflect important functions of fourteenth century life. Yet surnames were not universal or firmly established in all parts of England even by the early 1700s. Indeed, the British royal family itself had no surname at all until 1917 when they adopted the name Windsor, apparently as a means of distinguishing the family from the Germans during World War I. Surnames, therefore, developed out of a combination of 'custom, convenience, and law.'

The surnames of women in particular have not been well documented, which essentially writes females out of history as their ancestry is so difficult to trace. Evidence suggests, however, that girls were given names such as Alice Tomsdaughter, but these names were largely lost in time because English custom developed such that women tended to adopt the surnames of their husbands. Yet it is also clear that there were exceptions to the norm; historically, if the wife inherited property, then her husband and children would take her last name in order to attach themselves to the estate. Tuttle argues that the purpose of this was to ensure that the family and future generations might be “deluded” into believing in the consistency of the male line. With time, however, the law imposed further restrictions upon women’s ownership of property, so that eventually only males were permitted ownership by law. This effectively ended the practice of men taking their wives’ names at marriage.

Although westerners tend to think of our naming structure as set in stone and as representing the only reasonable approach, not only did these structures vary within our own culture over time, but worldwide many other practices have abounded. There are still no surnames at all in many non-western societies. “Matronymics,”or the practice of naming after the maternal line, exists in modern Spain, medieval England, and amongst medieval Arabs and Jews. Indeed, in medieval England children were often given the names of their mothers, or assumed them voluntarily, even when they were not illegitimate. In some cultures, surnames are narrative and are neither patrilineal nor matrilineal."

Excerpted from: Deborah J. Anthony, A Spouse by Any Other Name, 17 Wm. & Mary J. Women & L. 187 (2010),

The New York Times' Survey on Marital Name Decisions

'I Didn't Want to Lose My Identity': 16,000 Readers Reflect on Their Surnames
By Hanna Ingber, The New York Times

This is a great read. I particularly identify with the introductory story about Katherine Yuk, who hated her name as a child due to schoolyard teasing but eventually decided to keep it. I, similarly, was teased as a child for having the last name Dickson. I mean, kids can be mean when you have a slang word for male genitalia hanging out in your surname.

"The Wedding Morning" - John Bacon

"The Wedding Morning" - John Bacon

I've also had some fun with automatically generated email addresses that cut off after so many letters; I believe my automatically generated one for law school was along the lines of "RDickso" or "DicksoR." It was bad enough that I called the IT department and begged them to change it for me, but they refused. I'm pretty sure I logged into that e-mail address only once, to set it to forward all my e-mails to my personal e-mail, and then never used it again. 

It also doesn't help that I have the less common spelling of a fairly popular last name, so my entire life, I've had to fight people spelling my name as Dixon, or alternatively, Dickens or Dickinson. (Nope. Fail.) It's become enough of a problem that if I don't receive an e-mail I'm expecting, I call and make sure they had the right spelling of both of my names (oh yeah, my first name is the less common spelling of a fairly popular first name as well, so that just adds to the fun). But as I get older (I'm 29 now), I've grown to embrace it more. I wouldn't call it my identity, but at the same time, I'm not certain I'd recognize myself by a different name. Dealing with the problems that go along with my name are just part of the package, to me now.

I'm actually a bit disappointed in this NYT article. The stories from various women about their choice is truly lovely but that's all there is. Give me some statistics, people! Did you survey 16,000 women and then not come up with numbers about how many kept their name vs. changed vs. combined? How many gave their own names to their children? How many women in homosexual relationships responded? What trends showed up among those couples? Really, this seems like a failed opportunity. I'm very much hoping that there are more installments in the future that provide more information from the survey. 

Laurie Scheuble: Marital Surname Guru

Laurie Scheuble is a fabulous sociologist at Penn State who researches a number of topics but most interestingly to me, marital naming. I'm sure I'll be mentioning her many many more times on this blog, so I wanted to start off by giving her a proper introduction! I came to know of her through her appearance on the "What would a feminist do?" podcast but you'll also see her quoted in many many news articles on marital name trends; she's pretty much the expert* on marital surnames these days.

By Jenn and Tony Bot, Used under a Creative Commons license.

By Jenn and Tony Bot, Used under a Creative Commons license.

Just as a few examples:

"Maiden Names, on the Rise Again" By Claire Cain Miller and Derek Willis, New York Times, June 27, 2015

“The pressure [to take their husband's name] is huge,” said Laurie Scheuble, who teaches sociology at Penn State and studies marital naming. “This is the strongest gendered social norm that we enforce and expect.”

She said the resurgence in keeping names could be because women now go to college at higher rates than men, celebrities often keep their names and couples commonly live together before marriage.

“When they do get around to marrying, they’ve already lived in a household with two names, so maybe it seems normal to them,” Ms. Scheuble said.

"A bride-to-be asks about keeping her last name" By Barbara Brotman, Chicago Tribune, April 13, 2015.

I was so certain, when I got married 31 years ago, that the tradition of a woman adopting her husband's name would become a relic of a dusty past, a sexist oddity one step removed from the "Mrs. John Smith" references that once erased women's first names, too.

I was so wrong.

Even back in the name-keeping heyday of the 1970s and '80s, the majority of women — including some of my most independent-minded, professionally accomplished women friends — were taking their husband's name.
...
The social conventions are just too strong, said Laurie Scheuble, senior lecturer in sociology at Pennsylvania State University. She is co-author with Penn State sociologist David Johnson — her husband, whose name she did not take — of a study that showed 82 percent of female college students said they intended to take their husband's name if they married.

"I don't think it's ever going to change very much," she said.

"A Marriage Proposal Can Bring Up Question of Identity" By Carol Guensberg, VOA News, December 24, 2016

"Ninety percent of women still change their names upon marriage, though 20 percent keep their birth surname as their middle name," said Laurie Scheuble, a Pennsylvania State University sociologist who has studied marital naming conventions for three decades. "It is, in fact, the normative thing to change your name to your husband’s."

According to Scheuble, "women who retain their birth surname tend to be well educated." They have careers, lower levels of religiosity, nontraditional gender roles and "husbands who are well educated, too, because it’s the whole tolerance factor." She has found no link between name retention and commitment to marriage. "There’s no differences in divorce rates among people who change their names or not." 

The researcher kept her surname when she married, as did another sister, to prevent it from dying out, she explained. When she and her husband had a daughter, Scheuble became the girl’s middle name. 

"Women get lost, women have always gotten lost" to historical records, Scheuble said. 

You can find some of her articles online - though most of them are behind paywalls - but I've really enjoyed reading the one article I can find available online for free.  I particularly find some of the hypotheses contained within fascinating. 

"Marital Name Changing Attitudes and Plans of College Students: Comparing Change Over Time and Across Regions" Laurie K. Scheuble, David R. Johnson and Katherine M. Johnson; Sex Roles, February 1, 2012.  [Internal citations removed to increase ease of reading]

"Practices may be indicative of social norms, but do they adequately reflect attitudes? There is evidence that social expectations for women in relation to work and family life have changed substantially over the last several decades and become much more progressive found that, over time, there have been higher levels of support for women's rights and less agreement with survey items that have a more restrictive view of gender roles. Why have these changes in norms not been reflected in an increase in the percentage of women who retain their birth surname upon marriage?

One potential explanation of this issue arose in a study by Nugent (2010): she conducted a content analysis of 600 internet posts on the topic of children's surnames. Although women sometimes had preferences to keep their birth surnames (and give these names to their children) partners, relatives, and others “enforce[d] the cultural mandates of single shared surnames." As such “cultural reality” thwarted women's “egalitarian agendas” because women are often held accountable to different standards than men when making sacrifices for home and family life. This justifies viewing attitudes as separate from plans or practices for marital naming and suggests that women's attitudes about marital naming may be more progressive than their actual plans. This is consistent with the theory of cultural lag that some elements of culture change far more slowly than others and that norms may change more rapidly than actual behaviors. While women are accepting of other woman retaining their birth surname when they marry they do not plan to do so themselves."

Other articles quoting Laurie Scheuble or featuring her research: 

"Not taking Hubby's Name? You May be Judged Harshly" By Stephanie Pappas, LiveScience, February 23, 2012

"Japanese women want to keep their surnames, but legal hurdles still remain" By Motoko Rich, New York Times, October 24, 2016

"Millenial moms making their last name a child's first name" By Alison Bowen, Chicago Tribune, October 27, 2015

"What's in a name? Hillary Clinton knows more than most" By Lisa Lerer, Associated Press, December 5, 2015

 

*Sidenote: I love seeing what areas academics become known as experts in. When I was a journalist, I always enjoyed combing through my undergraduate university's Media Sources Guide and finding the most unusual expertises possible. Some of my favorites: the science of happiness,  the history of death in america, vehicle safety devices, the history of nuclear weapons, using technology in natural environments, job satisfaction, and proms. I would LOVE to learn about the history of all of these things, quite honestly. 

The Survey in Which All Married Women Naturally Have Many Different Opinions

Are you a married woman who'd be interested in answering some questions about your background and surname decision? The survey's over here:  https://goo.gl/forms/ooeztPKzWrPOqlT73

As an overanalyzer and loving collector of All The Data, I naturally put together a survey to get the opinions of all my friends and family as soon as I came up with the idea to do this blog. All the married ladies, anyway. Don't worry, there will be SO many other surveys coming in the future, including those looking into the opinions of married men, unmarried people in general, and LGBTQIA folks (married or unmarried) in particular. 

Now, keep in mind that I'm completely untrained in the art of surveying (As always, this entire project is definitely a work in progress so constructive criticism is always welcome.). The answers I've received so far also came almost entirely from my friends and family, which lends itself to a bias since I'm naturally friends with and/or related to the best, most fabulous women ever.

That being said, I've received a ton of different thoughts and opinions from all over the map. I've heard so many different reasons women have for changing or not changing their names. These amazing women have at various turns delighted me, surprised me, shocked me with stories of their experiences, and really made me think.

Photo by Julochka on Flickr, used under a Creative Commons license -

Photo by Julochka on Flickr, used under a Creative Commons license -

Here's a selection of some of my favorite answers so far. Don't worry, there will be more to come!

On what influenced their decision: 

Religion, Spirituality or Change of Faith

"I am a practicing Roman Catholic. God calls us each by name according to my faith and therefore, I kept the name given to me first, middle and last at baptism."

"I read a lot (A LOT) of articles prior to my decision, spoke with people whom I respected who hadn't changed their own name, and dealt with a lot of backlash from my close family because it wasn't a "Christian" thing to do. I was raised religious, and am convinced it did a lot of damage to me, so I didn't want to consider that cycle of hurt in my life. I imagined myself signing my name "MyFirstName HisLastName" and just shuddered because it would have felt like giving up a part of me. I also chose to make my wedding as egalitarian and feminist as possible within reason (i.e. not wearing a veil over my face, having a female officiant, not having her say "who gives this woman away" to my dad, saying "You may now kiss each other" instead of "kiss the bride"). I didn't want to hyphenate because that was just another concession as a woman that my husband wouldn't have to make and would still make me feel like his property."

"I used to be Mormon, or LDS. It's an extremely conservative religion and feminism was a bad word. I felt a tug between what was expected (changing my name) and what I wanted (keeping my name). As I had a faith crisis and transition I became more feminist and more independent.

"I was raised a Christian, and while there was an expectation from non-Christian friends that I would change my name (simply due to societal conditioning), the expectation within the church that I would change my name was stronger, and I had many conversations with people where I had to strongly defend my decision."

Photo by Julochka on Flickr, used under a Creative Commons license

Photo by Julochka on Flickr, used under a Creative Commons license

Family Culture and Experiences

"My desire to keep my surname stems from my feminism, and that is my own family culture - I was raised a feminist, as was every other descendant of my maternal grandmother."

"My name change is ultimately based on what I wanted to do. My fiance would have been fine if I hadn't changed my name. I like the idea of the names matching purely because of the tradition to do so. Silly as it may be, I like the sound of Mr. and Mrs."

"My grandmother had a job and owned a business in a small town where that was not normal. A pastor preached a sermon that my uncle's polio was because she had a job. That background rather lets you know you can do what you believe is necessary and proper."

"I had somewhat of an identity crisis before I was married. My husband and I had been dating since 2007 (senior year of high school) and we knew in college that we wanted to get married once we both had stable jobs. We were engaged in 2013 while he was finishing law school. For a period of about 5 years I already felt like we were "married" because of our discussions and promises for the future. So taking my husband's surname was liberating for me because I had felt like we had already been married for a while. I also just really liked how my husband's surname sounded with my first name over my maiden name!"

Photo by julochka on Flickr, used under a Creative Commons license.

Photo by julochka on Flickr, used under a Creative Commons license.

On The Practical Implications of Their Decision:

"My surname is much easier to spell and pronounce now and it's just more convenient on paperwork etc to have the same surname as my husband. It's made my life a lot easier in a practical sense."

"I received maybe a little judgment from some of my feminist friends, but changing my name hasn't kept me from having my own identity outside of being a wife."

"I am proud of keeping my name and surprised how few issues it creates. I expected challenges with international travel once we had children. It has been a breeze. Sometimes I joke, that if I were implicated in a crime ...then I would use my husband's last name. (He doesn't find that joke very funny!)"

"Changing my name hasn't affected my life, really. The only effect really is that my in-laws feel pleased and proud that I carry their name and my husband feels honored."

"There are some irritations when checking into a hotel room/rental car to remember who booked it (me or him) and what name it would be under. Sometimes it feels like I am lying "The name is ______. Oh you can't find it? Well, try ______ instead." Occasionally, on a holiday card or a place setting at a wedding -- they will put just his surname. I think that is more out of expediency/convenience as we both have really long surnames. There was one incident at a charity race, where I checked in for my race packet. Then I said, I wanted to pick up my husband's packet. The volunteer said - he's not registered. I got a little testy, because I had registered us both at the same time. She said, "Well, there is only one person with your name." I replied, "I decided to let him keep his own last name when we got married." She blushed and then found his race packet when I gave her his surname."

"I kept my first married name after we separated because I wanted the same last name as the children. It's less controversial at PTA meetings and doctor's offices to have to explain different last names. Just more simple and fewer people intrude. I.E. no one ever asks "Why did you take his name?" But seems like women have to constantly explain if they don't."