Amazon.com Widgets
  • Traditions Are For A Reason

    I have some rental houses by the college. I encourage men or women not both. The reason, when ever it is mixed, there is always trouble for me. House repairs are higher, immaturity is higher, promiscuity causes lots of unintended consequences. Tried and True Traditions occur for a reason, because they work, it avoids long term problems of which can be avoided if you follow them. The push for women to keep their names in marriage went along with the high divorce rate, the high promiscuity, the high selfishness, the high amount of me, me, me. If the man and the woman are truly in love and they truly want to have a family and be a team family, then they follow the traditions. Those that choose to not follow the traditions are in a whole other set of statistics that have high divorce rates, high selfishness rates, high children mental illness, and that is the price of thinking about yourself. Why even get married if you are only interested in your self in the first place. When I got married to my husband, I took his name, and he did not even really expect it due to the changes in cultures. But like the others, he responded in a way that proved that he was willing to work at our marriage until the end of time. Taking your husbands name is an honor badge. Those women that keep their own name, at least the ones that I have met, are selfish beyond reason, it is all about me, me, me with them. When someone questions them about having a different last name, they get excited in an unreasonable fashion thinking that the world should bow down to them, and the world should know that they are married but just kept their name. Well, the world has no idea, because the tradition is for a
    real family, to all have the same last name. Life is short, when you were a child, that was the time to be selfish, when you are an adult, that is the time to grow up.

  • To Demonstrate True Love

    Thirty years ago, it was already occurring that women would keep their name. When I got married, my wife changed her name. That very act took me aback. I really did not fully appreciate my marriage until my wife changed her name. I knew then that my wife really loved me. She was willing to make the change, and I said to myself, my wife really means it, I better prove to her that she made the right choice with me. It was a kick in the pants for me. It made me start reading books on how to stay married. It made me have great respect for my wife. It made me realize that my wife meant business, that she was here to stay. Without her changing her name, I would never have taken marriage as seriously as I did. After time, I realized that my wife changing her name, made the biggest change in me from a boy to a man.

  • A nice cultural tradition

    I don't think that any woman should be forced to take her husband's name, but if I woman asked my opinion, I would generally advise her to do so. For one thing, it's somewhat easier on other people to understand who is related to whom when a couple shares a last name. If they have children, there is less confusion as to what they will be called, and those children's friends will have an easier time knowing how to address them. I also think it's a nice way to show respect and solidarity. A marriage is often seen as two people becoming one. Sharing a name is a good way to symbolize that. It doesn't matter so much that it's the man's name as that the two share a name. I just think it's easier for it to be consistently one gender or another (once again, for ease of sorting out family relations and the like). I don't find it sexist or offensive for a woman to take her husband's name- I see it as a gesture of mutual respect, actually, because they are willing to share the name. It also would be easier and more consistent if couples continue to use the male's last name, which is already tradition.

  • Woman get "husbanded" in a Christian marriage, not "owned"

    When a woman agrees to take the man's name she agrees to be "husbanded" by him. That term does not mean owned, but taken care of. That a man would get on bended knee and promise to love and cherish her forever should make her want to have his name.

  • Yes Of Course

    Women are desperate to get married because if they don't settle down before they are old and ugly (age 30), then no one will want them. They will end up being alone forever. Women are the ones who want to get married. Men do women a favor by marrying them. So the least a woman can do is submit herself to the man and take his name.

  • Although it's not necessary, it is preferable

    I understand that I am a man and that I don't understand the struggle of identy surrounding a name change at marriage. I don't think it's necessary to change the name, but I would prefer she take my last name after marriage. I don't believe that a name defines a person. I don't have a problem with the man taking his wife's name or her choosing to hyphenate the name, but it is the overwhelming tradition for the woman to take her husband's last name. A shared last name makes the family unit seem more cohesive. Women often keep their maiden name as their middle name so her name is not completely gone or erased.

  • Sense of family unity in regards to family, in-laws and their children

    I'm not saying it's a requirement that she take his last name but, other than as a career choice, why not?
    Having to explain to children can leave them feeling "why is mommy's name different?
    The children can be viewed as illegitimate and mom can be perceived to be "step-mom" instead of biological mom.
    A sense of family unity supports security and stability for the children and family as a whole.
    There may be a number of reason why she should take his last name that seem to be petty or of less importance, but it's undeniable that the pros for accepting his last name outnumber the other completely.

  • It is right

    It shows the woman is really allowing herself to be his wife. If she is not.Comfortable with his last name how can she be comfortable as his wife, aswell as allowing her children his last name, it just makes sense. I dont see how it would work otherwise as a relationship

  • Mutual respect, love and unity.

    The "family unit" should all have the same name to distinguish them from other families. Both parents should have the same last name as their children. Whether a wife takes her husbands name or he takes hers, there should be the mutual respect between the two, who in marriage have become one. It has nothing to do with feminism or the man being the head of the household, it is a mans name whether it is her husbands name or her fathers name.

  • Respect of Civil Society

    The goal of women's lib, is a communist movement to break apart the family. The Facts are to abundant to dismiss. . When a woman takes her Husband's name, it shows respect for the Civil
    world. It shows that Family-extended family, are of prime importance. Not Self. The goal of keeping one's own name is selfish. The family is a team, with extension through life. By taking the husband's name it shows real commitment, that the man and woman are now joined and together want to work as a team for their family through time. I see women who keep their name and they get mad when people do not get it. It has made a walking on glass situation, it adds only irritation, un-trust-able interaction, and high infidelity. If you want to get married, changing of the woman's name is binding, it forces the man to realize that he now has commitment, it forces the woman to be committed. As a physician, when a woman comes to the clinic with a child, and the child's last name is different, I am obligated to ask what their relationship is. The women get pissed off, and yet, it was their choice, to put themselves into a untrusting position and in their
    lack of commitment and their selfishness, they get mad due to their own immaturity. The only reason to keep one's last name is if they are NOT Committed, and they have selfishness on their mind.

  • HELL NO! Never

    I will never change my last name. Weddings, white dresses, walking down an aisle are an ancient ceremony which degrades women and makes you seem like a property transfer/dowry being sold off. I am anti weddings and changing last names. I think it's insulting to even suggest it. Get with 2014 and be independent women!

  • It's easier not to.

    If someone wants to change their name, that's their decision, and they probably have thought about it and found it to be the best option for them. But honestly changing your name invokes so much paperwork, and then you have to make sure everyone knows, and if you are already established under your own name, it can undermine that. So I would say do what you want, but if someone wanted my opinion I would say that keeping your birth name would be less of a hassle and avoid more confusion.

  • Down to principles

    If you believe in equality, then you can't support the idea that women should be expected to take a man's name, whether it is her father's or her husband's. Every person, man or woman, should have the choice to take the name of their choosing, and they should be able to do so without the threat of being judged or social persecution. Culture and tradition is not an excuse for perpetuating a fundamentally unbalanced social institution - a reminder that many of our recent ancestors regarded Africans as less than human and women as less than "persons," so one must be careful making arguments based on tradition. Tradition comfortable, but if you believe in the principle of equality of all human beings then you must reject this practice.

  • It's not about should, it's about culture.

    There is no "should" in this situation. Whatever a person's reason for taking or not taking their husband's last name works for them. This is a cultural tradition in the United States, and most people seem to follow tradition on this issue. However, if they decide not to, it may eventually get slightly confusing, but the risks are minimal.

  • No. There's NO need.

    A lot of men say if their wives refuse to take their husbands' last names, they'd doubt their committment to their marriage. It simply doesn't make any sense to me. What does that have anything to do with committment or trust or love? Why do men refuse to take their wives' last names then? Thats sheer hypocrisy. Also if they really want to preserve the "unity" why should only women change their names? Why not the men? Even if the man is the bread-winner of the family and the woman is a housewife, things don't change. Nobody gets to belittle the job of a housewife.

  • No, women should not take their husbands' last names.

    I believe that women should not take their husbands' last names when they get married. If they want to take their husbands' names, then they should hyphenate it with their maiden name. I think a woman's maiden name is a critical part of her identity and should not be lost just because she gets married.

  • No. It's an outdated social construct.

    If you no longer think men should be the breadwinners of the family, there is no reason for women to take their husband's name...As this "tradition" was centered upon men being the head of the family and the breadwinners. If one "tradition" fades away, so too should the other. Everyone should keep their original names and offspring names should be hyphenated in alphabetical orders. So if Mom's name is Cranston and Dad's name is Katz, the child would be "Billy Cranston-Katz." It is the blending of two people that made the family and the child..Not the man. Wake up, ladies...You're letting these men get away with too much.

  • No, it's a tradition as outdated as men being the breadwinners

    This archaic principle dates back to when men were the head of the household. The bread winners. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that expectation no longer exists. Neither should the other traditions that came along with it. Everyone should keep their original name and the kids names should be hyphenated in alphabetical order. So if her last name is Katz and his is Cranston, the kids names would be "Julia Cranston-Katz."

  • Why should they?

    Why? Why should they? What does it accomplish? If the husband and wife and their friends and family can't acknowledge the importance of the marriage bond without a surface name change, then the bond isn't strong to begin with. Women who do this won't admit that they do it because they secretly believe that this will somehow protect the marriage from social pressures, and that their husbands will love them more if they aren't threatened by a wife with her own name identity. It's sad, in this day and age. If someone can give me a reason why a woman should change her name, besides the fact that she "wants" to (and won't say exactly why, except it "feels like the right thing to do for my husband," or some twaddle like that), or that her husband wants her to, I've never heard it, even now. Even my "feminist" friends who changed their names won't talk about why or what it really means.

  • Marriage should not be about a transfer of property

    Taking your husband's last name after marriage seems like a property transfer. One is being transferred as chattel from their parents to their new spouse and is being named accordingly. I dislike this idea from both a feminist and civil liberty perspective.
    Women not taking their husband's name and giving their children their own surname will not lead to the degradation of society. It will, at best, eschew outdated morals that seek to restrict a woman's place in the world. These are the same morals that made spousal rape legal in many developed countries until the mid 1980's and dictate that women earn 77% of a man's wage.
    To do away with these morals we have to understand the power naming has. Don't ask a woman to give up her identity.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.