Blahhhh . . . I have to say that I don't really buy the whole "I did it for myself" when it comes to boob jobs. I don't know anyone who decided that their boobs were too small, or that big boobs are sexy, or that big boobs = confidence in a vacuum.

That's kind of off topic, but I agree that this is gross on several levels.

Eh. She may have changed it legally but she'll probably continue to be SMG professionally.

I know a lot of women who have taken their husband's name upon marriage, but didn't bother to legally change it for years. I may be the actual paperwork/license and the not the change that's the surprise.

My insides always sag a little when I hear about women changing their surnames to their partners' upon marriage. It is practically the only 'choice' confronting women that I remain absolutely rigid on saying no to when it comes to calling one's self a feminist. I think it is a practice that needs to die and I have yet to hear/read a smart, solid argument about why a woman should or would choose to change her surname to her partner's upon marriage (or in this case, 5 years after marriage), even on this fabulous blog/forum.

While I honor everyone's right to make their own decisions about their own names, this was not something I even contemplated. I'm glad my husband didn't care, but the only way it would have made any difference would have been if he wanted to change his name too.

As a gift to her husband? It suggests to me that it was something he really cared about. I wonder about that. Why do so many men need women to change their names? It seems so controlling and... in the best possible reading it seems like an unexamined decision. Either it's an unreconstructed paternalistic control measure or I just don't get it.

The only half-way decent argument I've ever heard for a name change was the idea of forging a family identity. In that case though, I don't know why the couple doesn't pick an entirely new name. Barring that, I think the person who cares the most about forging a family identity should be the one to change his/her name. But too often the one who cares the most is him and the one who changes the name is her. Which means it's still a sexist thang.

See, I sort of lost any faith in her judgment when she starred in Scooby-Doo, so I can't be too upset about it.

I wonder if they've decided to have kids soon.

I'm a 51 yo white male and I'm in my second marriage. Both of were to women who were very, very feminist. Who corrected and correct me on any comment they find even slightly an issue (as do my two teenage daughters), who rail in conversation on slights to their gender, who let nothing within earshot slip by. Yet, they both changed their names. I was indifferent to even somewhat against. I figured my mistakes should be my own and I think that I've always been attracted to self confident, independent, women.Yet, they would NOT be deterred. Now, what's up with that?

The poll results related to that story are very interesting: currently at approximately 75:25 in favour of women changing "their names for their husbands".

I don't understand name-changing. I doubt I ever will. If it were gender-neutral I think I'd still be a bit baffled. I know people who've changed their names because of abuse--i.e. they didn't wish to be associated by name with an abusive father--and I can understand that, but the rest of it I don't get.

I must say, I feel a little cynical about this. Mightn't it just be a publicity stunt to drum up attention for Southland Tales, especially because SMG's career has tanked ever since Buffy? If so, I hasten to add, it's still worth analyzing vis-a-vis gender.

Like sgzax, I find myself wondering what kind of man cares so damn much. I also find myself wondering what the hell he got her.

Although I have no desire to change my name when I get married and hate the sexist assumption that all women will change their name, yet if a man wants to it's thought of as weird...still, I don't really want to judge someone on the basis of an anonymous report in a gossip magazine. Maybe she did do it as a "gift" to her husband, in which case that is kinda weird. Or maybe she sees it as representing a deepening of their marital bond, or they're planning on having kids and she wants them all to have the same name, or something.

I'm doing the hypenated name thing, but not "for" my husband. "Forging a family identify" sounds a bit intense, but I did change it because I wanted to mark a change in my life, and myself when I got married. My husband and I had been living together for awhile, and I had this fear that after we got married, it would be like nothing changed (and I think something did change in our relationship). I wanted to do something to mark the fact that my life would be different from then on.

I also added his name because I have a generic, common last name, which I've never liked very much (especially when combined with my generic, fairly common first name).

I worked in a writer's room where one of the women was getting married. She was debating whether or not to change her name and a majority of the men said that she should. She admitted it was really important to her husband that she take her last name and one of the other male writers admitted it was important for his wife to take his name, though no one ever said WHY. The male writer told her she could always keep her name for professional reasons, like a pseudonym, and just change it legally. I just sat their fascinated by the conversation. As the lowest on the totem pole it really wasn't in my best interest to challenge the other (higher) writers so I listened.

I think for a lot of men it's probably the last of their dominance, the men carry the family name remember, and it's an ego boost. Add to that that women are still expected to become "Mrs. John Smith" and your average woman really doesn't want to challenge that. There was a thread about this on Jezebel a while ago and I believe SarahMC was challenging the women there to give a reason as to why they felt the need to change their names that wasn't influenced by our culture and no one really could aside from "I want our family to have the same last name, etc." She pointed out that you could do that by having the husband change his name to the wife's and one commenter said that she wasn't going to use her children to make a "political statement". I thought that summed it up pretty well in that it was extremely telling about the commenter and how far society still has to go.

If I ever get married I am personally never changing my name, cause I like it.

Great post Ann. Writing about name changing is always, always an issue on feminist blogs because (like high heels and make-up) people have a very hard time seperating the societal issues from the personal, examined or unexamined, decisions. I don't know your relationship, I don't know your discussions, and I trust that you made the best decision for yourself at the time, even if it is not what I would have done.
But giving a name-change as a gift is undeniably weird. I was going to echo EG's sentiments and humourously wonder what he got her, but I literally cannot think of anything that compares. Not a pony, not a house, not anything that can be bought. Maybe surgery? A kidney?

I'll probably take my husband's name when I marry unless it's stupid, or sounds terrible with my first name. If I don't take his, I'll want him to take mine. I know everyone thinks it's so outdated, but I like the symbolism of being one family, not two-- and to answer a previous poster, I wouldn't just "pick an entirely new name" because what would it be? Why go to all the effort to make a new name when there are two perfectly good names with long histories and sentimental value to chose from?

I know I don't want to hyphen my kid's names or preferably not even my own because I've always felt that was a bit like saying "This is my name, that is yours, and we'll pull them apart into two names at the first opportunity" (and that's a personal feeling, so I don't expect others to feel the same, nor do I judge someone for a hyphenated last name, before you jump down my throat).

However, this surprises me because, as many people above have mentioned, female actors usually don't change their names at marriage because name recognition is so important. I can understand why she would want to take his name, and I can even imagine that she waited this long because she was pressured into keeping her own or something (mere speculation of course), but I don't understand why she did, ultimately, since this could potentially be problematic for her career...

Well, part of it, I think, Basiorana, is that at this point, one could conceivably ask "What career?" Back when she and FPjr got married, she was high-profile and looked to be going places. Now...well...damn, what has she been doing?

I used to be Ms. unpronounceable-name-1, and my website is still www.weirdly-spelled-first-nameunpronnouncable-name-1. because my legal name is weirdly-spelled-first-name unpronounceable-name-1 (middle) unpronounceable-name-2 (last). Hyphenating it, or having separate last names just means we correct people twice as much when we meet people or get awards at ceremonies. We were getting really tired of that.

People who know me or interact with me call me either name, and I'm fine with that. I've got the same feminist identity to go with both.

EG-- Heh. You may have a point. Maybe her agent finally said, "You know, I don't think having a new name will hurt you that much after all..."

Also, as for why it is important to men-- because it was important to their fathers, and important to their grandfathers. I've noticed that if you ask most guys why they want a son to carry on their name and want to keep their name they'll say, "Well, it means the world to my dad and he'd be crushed if I changed it/the line died out." When my dad said that was why he had wanted a boy I went and talked to my grandfather and he said, "Well, it would've meant the world to my father and I'd've hated to dishonor his memory," etc, etc. Seems to be a theme. Not the best reason, and probably not universal, but I can't fault people for not wanting to hurt their parent's feelings.

Just for the record Sarah Michelle Prinze dose not roll off the tongue as nicely as Sarah Michelle Gellar.
I know when i get married I'll take my husbands name solely for the fact that my last name is Smith, the single most generic name on the planet and I'm tired of appearing in math problems. However if i had a last name i actually liked, that would be a different story.

As someone else said, taking a critical look at these kinds of traditions, like "asking for someone's hand in marriage," doesn't mean you'll have your feminist card taken away if you follow the tradition. I can see the strong arguments that a woman changing her last name to her husband's has a very strong element of possession, and I don't disagree that SM(G)P's decision to give her identity as a gift to her husband is beyond weird.

Personally, though, I'm none too wild about my last name. It's easy to misspell, hard to pronounce, and an endless source of joke-fodder for the occasional morons I meet. I can't wait to ditch it when I get married.

Is it really any odder to change a name as a gift versus changing it upon getting married? And it appears that she has changed to Prinze (as opposed to Prince, though one of those could be a typo). Not that I would change my name for either reason, but of the two I think I prefer the gifting as opposed to the obligatory tradition.
I think it is interesting that if the difference in spelling is correct, and that she choose a unique but phonetical version of the name it could be a way of signifing association while maintaining independance.

Given the preponderance of screen names are we altering the whole "naming" as identity business anyways?

Not the best reason, and probably not universal, but I can't fault people for not wanting to hurt their parent's feelings.

I really long for the day in which little girls grow up not expecting to take their possible future husband's surnames. I also long for the day that little boys grow up not assuming that their possible future wives will change their surnames automatically upon marriage.

A few comments above have brought up the issue of "what about the children", but I'd like to complicate that a little. We tend to assume that it's somehow a trauma or a slight for kids not have the same name as one or both of their parents. What if the child's preferences are otherwise?

My mother took my father's name when she married him, and I got Dad's last name with Mom's maiden name as a middle. While my parents are not divorced, I am on much poorer terms with my father's side of family, and would frankly rather be overtly identified with my mother's family, if I absolutely must be overtly identified with any family.

I understand that people want to have a family identity, but sometimes that expectation leads to painful disjunct between reality and ideal.

Nah, Prinze is the correct spelling actually (of Freddie's name). So no subversive statement made.

I think it's important to note that other countries in the world have different traditions about how names are passed on through the generations. For instance, I have a friend from Bangladesh, where typically people name their kids whatever they want, usually something symbolic to them, and people don't change their names upon marriage. They will often also be given a 'nickname' that means something else entirely. Anyway, when she and her husband had kids, they gave them her husband's last name to fit in with North American tradition, but she retains her own name.

Also, as for why it is important to men-- because it was important to their fathers, and important to their grandfathers. I've noticed that if you ask most guys why they want a son to carry on their name

But if they opened it up to their daughters passing on their name, then they'd have twice as many chances (depending on how many children they have) to pass on their name and it would truly become a FAMILY name, instead of just the fathers. As it is women are just cyphers for the male lineage. The daughters are just as much apart of their fathers as the sons.

Without speaking to the specific example of Sarah Michelle Gellar... I completely agree with you about the squicky implications of a woman changing her name as a "gift" to her spouse, and I think that breast implants or liposuction makes a good comparison.

To me the peril lies in the fact that these are actions that, in their way, literally change the person she is, presumably in order to make her more acceptable to her husband or boyfriend. Your name and your body are both you in very literal if very different ways, and to change something that is so fundamentally yours and call it a gift, or a sacrifice... the name is his, obviously. Are the new boobs his? The new thighs? It's treating yourself like a commodity, basically, or at least big parts of yourself -- parts that can change hands, apparently, in exchange for love or approval or whatever it is -- and if that's a little bit iffy when we're talking about strippers and prostitutes, who do what they do for money, then it's a lot iffy for a supposedly equal partner in a supposedly equal marriage.

And every time I see it, I can't help but wonder: What else would she "give" him if she thought it would make him happier, or make him love her more? Her virginity? A kid? Would she convert to his religion? Would she get her tubes tied?

Of course any of these can be real, honest-to-God personal choices, and they happen all the time in real, honest-to-God equal and respectful and considerate relationships, and just because a woman cares how her husband/boyfriend feels about a decision that'll affect both of them doesn't mean she lives for his approval... but so help me, some of the language used sometimes, I swear to God I think of dowries and contracts and those awful personals that you still see all over the place: must not be taller than me, must not be fat, must know how to dress to look good with me on a formal occasion, must not be loud and obnoxious; I prefer brunettes, but blondes are not out of the running if they fit all the criteria. And on and on.

To put it in a nutshell, ignoring those four paragraphs... if you require, expect, or even hope really hard that the person you're with is going to earn your love at some future time by turning into somebody else -- then each of you is with the wrong person.

I fully intend to change my name when I marry because I HATE my last name. I hate being at the end of the alphabet and I really don't like being associated with that side of the family. Unless I marry a Mr. Hitler or worse, I'm changing my name. And I'm doing it for myself.

On a similar note, my boyfriend and I have been discussing engagement. I know a lot of people are against engagement rings, but I think they're lovely (especially when they're not white gold with diamonds - so unoriginal). However, I have one condition... if I get an engagement ring to wear on my left hand to tell the world "I'm taken!" so does he. Fair?

I didn't even think about changing my last name; I knew I was going to. It wasn't that I felt like I ought to or anything like that, I was just sick of having a last name that no one could pronounce or spell, and I was sick of the snarky comments about "was your mother drunk when she named you?" because my full name had an insane amount of alliteration.

Something kind of interesting here, that I think is a little important, is that if a woman keeps her last name (unless she was a hyphenation of both her parents) is still keeping her father's name, not her mother's. So, it is still the paternal line that is continuing. Frankly, I want to keep my last name in honor of my father, who died a few years ago, but was an excellent, kind, caring, and helpful man. It is something very important to me, and I would like my children to have my last name. My fiance's father is a giant asshole who doesn't care about his kids and cheated on my fiance's mom and his new step mom. Yet, my boyfriend's suggestion was, the girls can have your last name and then the boys can have my last name...meaning, when the next generation comes, they will probably lose the last name. Though, we did jokingly talk about adding our names together...but "Gonzeers" is just a little bit too ridiculous for me.

ahh, yes, another post on Feministing where freedom of choice only applies for those that choose to make the same decision you want them to.

This is interesting, and I was also interested in what everyone had to say about this because I am being faced with this dilemma right now... well, not really because I'm keeping my name... and my fiance had already known that. When I sat him down after we mutually decided to get married, I said "I need to talk to you about names." and he said: "I want you to keep your name." He knew already that I wouldn't want to change my name. I really like it and it's who I am. He talked it over with his family, we wanted to make sure that they understood my rationale behind keeping my name and that it was nothing against them and that I really do want to be a part of their family etc. and his family completely understands and is totally for it. Well, I guess I shouldn't say 'for' it, but they really don't care what name I choose. I feel really blessed by that actually, because I was worried... because I know how parents can be about those sorts of things. I have friends whose fathers still insist that if they want to get married, the guy has to ask permission from their father... and I also have friends who think that it's weird that I'm keeping my name, and all in all the 'situation' with my choice not to take my fiance's name seems to be a rather hard one for people to swallow. I'm 23, I graduated from an art school and have a lot of progressive friends as well as a lot of traditional friends, but it's interesting to think that after all the things that the second wave of feminism has done, it's still an 'odd' thing to KEEP your name! A lot of people ask me what we will do with our kids... and we aren't planning on having any actually... which is another TOTALLY WEIRD concept that we will 'change our minds about'. I don't think so. Both of our interests are in careers etc. and we need to be flexible and maybe even live apart at times (I totally got excited about that post about the married couple that live apart...even though they're only down the street) and having children in the midst of that is silly and terrible for the child anyway. Also, we said that eventually, IF (not likely) we ever want to have children, we will adopt (those children need homes more than our biological non existent ones do)... then people say that we won't because we will want the satisfaction or something... of having our own biological little children. I don't think so.... and I really identifiy to many of these responses because I'm living it, and I'm glad to be able to read them! I'm totally confident with my decision(s). But it's still frustrating to have to explain yourself over and over again to people that constantly seem to have a rebuttal... instead of understanding!

This is such a weird one. The taking of the guys name is intrinsically sexist, and yet a common name seems kind of important to the ceremony of union. Establishing a family name for the newly forged family. (I know I'm attaching the expectancy of children to marriage. Sue me.)

I'm one of those guys who feels the need to keep the family name going, especially since I'm actually the last with the name. Name ends with me, if I don't get to making boys, apparently. It does feel like it would be a slap in the face to ditch the name. But it's a slap in the face to impose it too. Whee.

Stil, one of my ex-girlfriends had a much better last name than me, and when we considered tossing rings at each other, I honestly entertained the idea of taking her name. She had a lot of pride in her last name, and really, it so much better rhythmically with me first name than my existing last name.

Hyphenation sounds fine in theory, but I can't get myself over the fact that it simply doesn't work logistically. After five or six generations of people sticking their names together, your last name would take two minutes to write out. We'd have to start abbreviating.

Maybe instead of hyphenation, you just merge the two names. Of course, then the most common last name in America would be Smohnson. Or Johith.

The only thing that seems honestly fair is to create a new name for the new family. Then again, I'm filled with abject terror as to what people would come up with. I'm a complete nerd/geek, but there would be thousands of couples with elvish last names and it terrifies me.

I make light, but honestly, this is a weird one. I've got no idea.

equityforbothgenders, I think if you actually read what is being said, you'll find that's not the case at all.

equityforbothgenders... ???

Could you try reading the responses before you have your knee-jerk response?

We're having a civil discussion about our individual choices and the reasons for them. I'm perhaps the strongest advocate against name change, and I specifically honored people's right to make their own decisions. Just because you feel all worked up for some reason doesn't mean everyone else is.

DrkEyedCajn: I think this part of the post from StringBeanJen:
"It is practically the only 'choice' confronting women that I remain absolutely rigid on saying no to when it comes to calling one's self a feminist."

Kind of seems like someone is saying you aren't a feminist if you want to change your last name.

What about a queer person taking their partners' last name? Is that just being homonormative, capitulating to heterosexual norms, or does it queer the act at all? I don't know anyone whose done that, but I suppose it's possible. I've joked about taking my girlfriend's last name because her last name is better than mine, but we're not ever going to marry, so I guess it's a non-issue.

I met my (male) best friend in a class because his first name is the same as my last name. So, the first time we spoke to one another, he announced excitedly, 'If we got married, I could take your name and be John John!' (not my real name, but ya know).

I have a very common (first and last) name that I don't love but don't dislike either. If I hated it, as some people do, then I would not wait for marriage, I would change it now.

I would never change my name if I get married. If it means that much, then he can take mine. I would consider blending names or choosing an entirely different one (I hate hyphenation just because I think it's a pain), but since I will have my PhD by then and will be publishing, I really wouldn't want to give mine up.

jonquill - Your comment cracks me up. Johith and elvish names? Sounds amazing.
A terrible dilemma if I decided to combine my name with my husbands? "Wood" would have to be in there somewhere... I can just imagine the jock-obscenities created!!!

It is practically the only 'choice' confronting women that I remain absolutely rigid on saying no to when it comes to calling one's self a feminist.

I guess I'll have to turn in my feminist card because I'm planning to take my fiance's last name when we marry. For the longest time, I didn't think I would but I eventually decided that, between my father's last name and my fiance's last name, I'd rather take the fiance's as an indicator of making my life with him. I understand that it's a sexist practice and I respect every woman's decision to do what's right for her. For me, this was the decision I made. I'm grateful that I get to make this choice in the first place.

FemiDancer - anyone - give me a good, feminist argument for why a wife-to-be should or would want to take her husband-to-be's surname! Do you think boys grow up into men (who aren't the feminists on this forum!) who have these thoughtful discussions on if they should or should not take their partner's surnames? Do you think many even think about it if they hate their surnames (and it bothers me how many of you do hate your surnames or even given names; it's been a part of you since birth) No.

Like I said, I long for a day when it is not a given that a wife will take her husband's surname upon marriage.

Well, this is definitely interesting!

When I was married, I took his name. Didn't really think about it, why I did, or even considered keeping mine. It just didn't occur to me. When we were finally divorced I changed my name back as quickly as I could because I didn't want a constant reminder of the physical abuse I endured.

Now, I am quite certain that I want to hang onto my last name because I love it.
Sham Payne - I understand your point of view completely, as my name is Smith too. But after years of hating it for being so "common and normal", I decided there were an awful lot of benefits to having a name like that. For example, it's a lot of fun checking into hotel rooms and such because a lot of people think you're giving a fake name for some clandestine reason. (My life isn't really all that exciting, so a little pretend cloak-and-dagger stuff gives me a giggle now and then.) Also, you never have to spell your name for anyone. WELL, I shouldn't say "never" - some people still ask me how to spell Smith, believe it or not. (And yes, I have seen it spelled "Smyth" but 99% of the time it's pronounced with a long 'I' sound so I still find it ridiculous when I am asked how to spell my name.)
Plus there is a certain amount of anonymity with a name like mine, which I find comes in handy a lot.

My fella and I have talked about the name thing, and he knows that I don't want to take his name if we ever legally marry, and he doesn't mind. He's even said that he's like to think about doing the pick-a-whole-new-name thing because then we could pick out something that "sounds REALLY cool!" LOL... That's when we came up with the name Stilletto (misspelled purposely) which we both use as internet handles, because we thought it sounded kinda bitchin'. :)

P.S. equityforbothgenders - I have no idea which thread you were reading, but I don't think it's this one.
So, um, *psst* I think your bitterness is showing; you might wanna, you know, like, go ahead and tuck that back in.

By the way, I just meant that I'm grateful to have the option in society at large, not that I'm grateful to my fiance for being benevolent or anything. He doesn't give a rat's ass what I do about my name.

Well, from reading all of these responses I can't say I've seen a specifically feminist good reason to change a name, but I certainly sympathize with people who hate their names and want to take advantage of an odd cultural tradition to shed them. Of course, I don't get why people who hate their names don't just choose new names for themselves independently of marriage. Probably because that's what I did. I picked my own name when I was 18 and then declined to change it again when I got married. I love my name.

Maybe there's a slight social stigma against random name change? I say fuck it though... if you hate your name change it. Waiting for an excuse that is based in patriarchal notions of ownership is a far worse excuse than "I just felt like it." For me, anyway.

im not married and when i do get married, i dont plan on taking my partner's last name. i like the way that my name sounds and i have a connection with it...always telling people how to pronounce it correctl has actually grown on me.

i was raised muslim, and in islam, women are actually encouraged to keep their last names. however, whether or not she actually does that is up to her. so thats pretty cool.

my parents have been married for twenty five years and my mom didn't take my dad's last name until my older brother was born (she felt that she wanted her children to have the same last name as both of their parents...and using her name was too radical of a notion for them i guess)...i just found out though that she never legally changed her last name until very recently, when she lost her social security card and had to get a new one.

it was weird because even though she went by my dad's last name for the past 25 years, she expressed a bit of sadness that she had actually made it legal.

When I got married I changed my last name to my husband's and I didn't really think about not doing it. I had converted to Judaism and had changed my first name at that time -- and the conversion really wasn't for my husband or for the marriage. And changing my last name just seemed to make sense. It doesn't make sense now, just because of the whole idea that my identity would be subordinate to his, and I think I would never do it again. To be fair to my ex-husband he might not have had a big problem with it if I had not wanted to do it.

My issue now is whether I should change my name back now that I'm getting divorced. I feel like having the name is part of my history, plus it's my daughter's last name. So really I doubt I will change it back or change to yet another name from my family history, though it doesn't seem like a very feminist decision

My dad's name definitely "died out", at least his "branch" of it, because I'm the last one and I'm not having any more kids to try to name after me or him. But as far as I can tell he really doesn't care a bit.

More on topic, I'm not sure what to say about Sarah Michelle Prinze or why this would be a gift to her husband. It just seems so creepily possessive to me, yet I'm not going to read a gossip magazine and then think I understand all about a person.

EG: I think this may be to create distance between her and Southland Tales, if the critical reaction I'm reading is correct.

Do you think boys grow up into men (who aren't the feminists on this forum!) who have these thoughtful discussions on if they should or should not take their partner's surnames?

I think boys can grow up into men who think about these matters. I think that's a goal of feminism. Some boys I know HAVE grown into men who discuss these matters... and they don't read feministing... they just have a great sense of what it means to be equal.

And for the record, we've discussed taking my name... but then my SO would have the exact same name as my father. Don't try to tell me that's not creepy.

ps. i was thinking about what the implications would be if women and men TRULY had freedom in choosing their last names...

think about female infanticide rates in some countries...think about how many people just want to have a son...why? to carry on the family name.

if we could all choose, and if names were not so politicized and gendered, things would be a lot different in our world...

just a thought.

jonquill -

double last names only becomes unwieldy if everyone keeps every last name. You could always go with the Spanish tradition of droping one of the hyphenates and taking one of the spouses. (if both partners do it and mothers pass on their names too it becomes pretty egalitarian)

as for SMG/SMP, maybe she wanted to change her name and was also too lazy to go shopping this year

When it comes to the topic of women taking their husbands' names and whether or not that is feminist, this blog by Amanda Marcotte says it all.

I don't see why we can't keep the choice of changing vs. keeping one's last name as an open one. Why does it have to be one way (patriarchy) or the other (feminism)? It's less limiting. Frankly, I don't like either side arguing over what my last name should be. Were I to take my husband's name, it's no-one else's concern; same as if I chose to keep my maiden name.

As it is, I hyphenated my last name and now have a delightfully unpronounceable one that forces people to call me by my preferred name: Jen.

I have to agree with FemiDancer. When I contemplated what I'd do about the last name thing.. I just thought.. "Well I'd just be keeping my father's last name." It's still not really "mine." I just see it as being a big pain in the ass if I hyphenate my name, and I don't want any confusion.

As an independent contractor, I do some work with the company my husband works for. It's in an area entirely independent of Mr. SoM's work; he's not even in the office when I'm there, since he takes care of the kids while I'm working.

When I started working with the company, there was much confusion on the part of Mr. SoM's coworkers. My marketing materials display my name very prominently, and with my unusual first name, they were pretty sure that I was "Mr. SoM's wife", but... "You don't have the same last name? Y'all are married, right?" (Neither of us wears wedding rings. It's pretty much impossible in our lines of work.)

I feel that in business, at least in my dealings with Mr. SoM's company, I'm taken more seriously with my own last name. I'm not "Mr. SoM's wife." I'm me, with my own business, separate from his work entirely. It's not the reason I kept my name when we married - I wasn't even dreaming of owning my own business at that point - but it has been an unexpected benefit. I've never regretted keeping my name.

Just for a slight change in perspective...

Does anyone here consider that before she changed her surname to her husband's, she had her father's surname?

From a patriarchal standpoint, women are screwed. I think there are a few cases for single mothers that have their children carry their maiden names, but for the large part, children carry paternal names.

So if SMG wants to become SMP, what's the deal? She's got a man tacked on the end anyway?

(Disclaimer: Re: above... not sure how much of that I believe or not, but it does offer something new, don't you think? Personally, I'm thinking about getting a name change all on my own just to make my name more acceptable across the ocean where it might be considered offensive. Since I'm never going to marry a man...)

And for the record, we've discussed taking my name... but then my SO would have the exact same name as my father. Don't try to tell me that's not creepy.

bubble, I'm going to assume your SO has the same first name as your father, but it's creepy(ier) if has your last name? Why isn't the first name alone creepy to you? It is your father's name.

And I know I'm nitpicking:)

Clever quip at the end of the main post about Romijn, but I think when she married Stamos he was the better known name. Her star eclipsed his before they split.

My wife kept her last name and it didn't bother me a bit. We were about 30 at the time and she was already established in her career with her name (and her father's as others have pointed out). Even if we had been younger I didn't expect her to change her identity just because we chose each other as mates. But I don't judge folks either way. I find the hyphenated solution cumbersome, but to each his/her own.

Lunalelle... I made my name up. Now there's a completely non-patriarchal solution open to any man or woman who wants to use it.

TrailerPark... thanks for that Amanda Marcotte link. A brilliant summation of the issue.

"Well I'd just be keeping my father's last name." It's still not really "mine."

I don't get this, would it be any more "yours" it it were your mothers?

"Well I'd just be keeping my father's last name." It's still not really "mine."

I don't get this, would it be any more "yours" it it were your mothers?

This seems so completely bizarre to me. My mother didn't change her name when she married, and while my brothers and I have our dad's name, our mom's last name is a second middle name for each of us -- the two would have been hyphenated if it wouldn't have been uber-German and impossible to fit on any official forms. So for a long time as a kid I didn't even realize it was more or less the norm for women to change their names upon marriage, and when the subject comes up I still tend to have a ". . . wait, people still -do- that?" reaction. I can't imagine changing my name.

That said? It made me kind of sad to read this, because my automatic association with Sarah Michelle Gellar is Buffy the Vampire Slayer. And while it wasn't perfect, damned if that show didn't have a lot of kickass female characters, including Buffy herself -- I mean, come on, the girl rose from the dead to save the world -twice-. While I can't blame anyone for living in the world we've got, it's disappointing to hear.

What I always dislike most about this discussion is that somehow keeping your name always=feminism. If we're *really* talking about subverting patriarchal structures and forging identity here, then isn't the truly feminist position to create your own name, on your own, whether or not you get married? I haven't done this, but I bet a lot of others haven't either. I don't usually have a problem saying one thing is "more feminist" than another, but if we're doing that here then I would say that keeping your father's name is *not* the most feminist option available -- creating your own, on your own, is.

Do you think boys grow up into men (who aren't the feminists on this forum!) who have these thoughtful discussions on if they should or should not take their partner's surnames?

Indeed. I have nothing against the choice changing or carrying on the family names, etc. but the pressure is never there for the menfolk to do the same. What about MY family line? Is it any less important than HIS?

From a patriarchal standpoint, women are screwed. I think there are a few cases for single mothers that have their children carry their maiden names, but for the large part, children carry paternal names.

This is true, but it never hurts to start now. I'm really into researching my family tree, and marvel at all the "maiden" (shudder) names that have been lost through the years...Pommier, Tousignant, Fifarek just to name a few. But I guess those all originated with men somewhere as well. This is even more of a reason to really THINK about why you're changing your name at marriage.

My rule: only change your name if he is just as willing to do so. If he is, then maybe you guys should examine both names and pick that which is more awesome (though I do understand the bad association reasoning - they get a pass).

Also, what's the harm in not legally changing your name, but using each other's last names for informal occasions? This way you can get it out of your system!

Ultramagnus - You're right on with your assumption. My SO and my father share the same first name... and yes, that's totally weird. My extended family enjoys throwing Freud at me.

However, I don't call my father by his first name, so in my thoughts, Dad and SO have different names... but if SO had Dad's first AND last name, I don't think I'd be able to shake it.

Another example of actresses that name-changed and then the marriage went wonky: Jamie-Lynn whatsherface from The Sopranos. Changed her name and the marriage was over what, within a year?

Some actresses take the husband's name on private stuff, but still keep their public identity as it was. Sounds reasonable.

Frankly, I think it makes more sense to have your father's last name, or your mother's, or both (some parent, period), than some guy you married. Unless you really loathe the parent that gave you the name, anyway. *shrug*

My sister in law changed her name to her husband's name for a Christmas present. This was after several years of marriage. Blarf.

My good friend changed her name she she got pregnant, also after several years of marriage. Not that I care so much, but she told me that she "had" to now that she was pregnant, even though she knows that I have kids and never did. "Had" too? Huh?

I don't really understand the whole "you just have your father's last name anyway" meme. It sounds to me like what that's saying is that women are incapable of having their own names. I received my first, middle, and last names at the same time: my parents gave them to me on my birth. And when you give something to somebody, it becomes theirs. So my last name is as much mine as my first name and middle name are. Why would "E" be mine but "G" somehow still my dad's? I share a last name with my dad, certainly--but it's no more his than it is mine. He got it at his birth, just like I got it at mine.

Plus, that concept seems to willfully ignore the number of kids born to unmarried women who do, in fact, have their mothers' last names. To say nothing of matronymics. My last name, as I've mentioned on this site before, is a matronymic. What that means is that if you were able to trace it back far enough, it would most likely originate with a woman. It's not wildly unusual in matrilineal cultures for names to be matronymic.

To everyone complaining about it being a "gift"-- I imagine it's a lot like buying oneself sexy underwear for one's partner's birthday. Something both partners want. If I were her I might do that just to get out of gift-shopping for a year.

Many people are not as attached to their surname as they are, say, their virginity or their religion. I for one don't care one whit what follows my last name as long as it's not embarrassing. I do know I would not want to have a different name from my children, especially if that different name was my husband's. And people are going to call me "Mrs So-and-So" anyway.

String_Bean_Jen: If you wish to have a lineage (and many people do) why not do a paternal one? And I've found most parents don't make those requests of their daughters because they did not have such a request made of women in their own generation. If a father has no sons and is really hurt that his name will not continue, maybe then his daughter might push for her children to carry on her family name. This is the kind of thing that should be decided by couples, based on their own and their families' wishes, and most people simply default to the old standard because the husband cares and the wife does not, or wants to take his name.

thenakedcat: Why can't you or any other child change your/their name? A friend of mine had an estranged father and changed his name to his mother's. In that situation, there is no longer any concern for the parent's feelings in the matter, so who cares what their name is?

UltraMagnus: I would predict that if a man expected both genders of his children to keep their name, and their spouses' parents expected the same thing, SOMEONE would get their feelings hurt... Not that someone couldn't do that, just that it would not solve the problem of hurt feelings form name-changes.

sgzax: Most people consider it a bit of a hassle to change a name when people don't expect it, because everyone assumes something terrible happened-- the guy I knew who took his mother's name after a falling out with his father was constantly fending off stupid questions like "Are you hiding from the mob?" Maybe someday this will change, but for now, the only time people can "get away with" changing their names without everyone assuming something terrible happened is at marriage.

If it was really free choice, maybe the majority of society would acknowledge that I even have a choice. Most just started calling me Mrs. Hislast without even asking me what I would prefer. Those that did know, ignored me, insulted me, or started making asstastic assumptions such as I am an uncommitted slut, controlling bitch, or just plain don't love/respect my husband.

And the idea that a family can have only one "family name" needs to die. I'm incredibly proud to be the Mylast & Hislast family. I think it's so beautiful to see both of us coming together symbolically to form a new family, not me leaving mine and joining his.

Yes women have a choice. By law. But in fact, the patriarchy places so much pressure on women to make one particular choice, so in fact 90% of them do even when it hurts their careers, or is something they don't even want to do but feel pressured by a man who has been taught he is whipped if the family isn't all named after him.

so when i got married, i wanted to keep my name. i was very close to my dad, and my daughter had it, so i wanted to keep it. my (now ex) husband was so upset, and said it emasculated him...except he wouldn't use that word...but i am digressing...when we divorced it was such a pain in the ass trying to get it back to my maiden name. plus, i joined the military w/ his name...so that was an added pain. but i finally got it back, and my daughter and i have the same name again...live and learn.

the man i am w/ now is awesome...and we have discussed marriage, but we just don't know. we did, however, talk about names. he doesn't have a dad (ok well of course he has one...but has never in his life met him) so the father's last name thing doesn't matter, since he has his mother's name. we both have short last names, and i offered up hyphenation...on the condition that we both do it...and he really liked the idea. we will share both names, i get to keep the name my daughter has, and it still gets to show solidarity as a couple, if that is what we are going for. and if we never get married, we might do it anyway. married or not, we are still a family.

IF i get hitched, i want to change my name just to mark a change in my life. I've decided to take my mom's maiden name, which is also my grandma's maiden name- grandma was a harlot. (I figure it'll eventually fuck with some future great grand-nephew who is into geneology).

quick sidenote- i think the theory that a family needs one name to become a family unit is bothersome. if your family bond isn't strong enough to uphold different names, you're probably in trouble anyway.

azliza - You kick ass. That is all. Great comment.

azliza: It's symbolism. Which is all names usually are anyway. By having one name people are symbolizing that they are all one family. They would be a family without it, but that symbolism is very important to some people, because it tells the WORLD they are a family.

If names are not symbolic and family members shouldn't have to all have the same name, why bother with surnames at all?

I think for me, the biggest thing is (as string_bean_jen said) is that, regardless of our individual choices, there is still a HUGE societal expectation that women will automatically change their last name to their (male) spouse's.

I got hitched this summer, and I actually did waffle on the name question. I decided to keep my last name. While most people had the foresight to ask before assuming that I was Mrs. Spousename, I actually got quite a bit of mail from family (even my own f*cking family!) and friends addressed to Spouse and Johanna Spousename, or worst of all, Mr. and Mrs. Spouse Spousename. ACK! None of these people even bothered to ASK me about MY name! When spouse and I put our wedding announcement on the class notes of our alma mater's website, the announcement widget not only changed my last name in the announcement, it also changed my last name in my profile. Automatically! I had to log in and change everything. Twice.

I, personally, am totally cool with everyone figuring out how to navigate the name question in their own lives. However, I am pissed as hell that society-at-large thinks it can make that decision for everyone. Without asking our permission. And that something is wrong or defective or less true about our marriage because I don't want to be Mrs. anything.

PS-When spouse and I moved into our new digs at my grad school, everyone (hilariously) assumed that since we were married, we must have the same last name, so we had to run around and correct a bunch of stuff that listed him as Spouse Mylastname. Ha! ;)

For what it's worth... I agree with the commenters who ask, why is it more feminist to keep your father's name than to take your SO's father's name? Besides, from what I'm aware of, the tradition is to take one's maiden name as one's middle name... ie, Mary Sue Smith marrying a Mr Scott would become Mary Smith Scott. That is what was expected in my family, anyway, to the point where it only just now occurred to me that other families might not do it that way.

When I got married, I gave my name some serious thought. I had a serious falling-out with my parents for not conforming and embarassing the family all through my teenage years and, when the chance came to change my name, I decided I would much rather belong to my husband's family than my parents'. So I dropped my parents' family name altogether and took his.

If his family had been as unpleasant, I probably would have pushed for us to just take a new one altogether rather than let myself still belong to my parents' family.

If names are not symbolic and family members shouldn't have to all have the same name, why bother with surnames at all?

You're assuming that "names have symbolism" is the same thing as "families should all have to have the same last name." But that's wrong. Names have an amazing amount of meaning. Surnames can symbolize family unity, as you suggest, and as seems most important to you. Surnames can signify membership in various ethnic communities and traditions. Surnames, like first names, can symbolize individual identity; that's important to me. Surnames can mark membership in families of origin, and not everybody wants to trade that in.

Why does your judgment of what the most important meaning/element of symbolism in a surname is trump everybody else's? Of course names have symbolism, and that's why many women want to keep them. Are you really arguing that family members should have to have the same surname? Or what? What, exactly, are you going to do about it if I marry a man, keep my name, and have children with varying surnames? Check your prescriptive language.

In any case, none of that really explains why, if family unity is all that important, men are queuing up to drop their last names.

I will never understand the whole "I want us to be one family!" thing. I have one last name, my husband and daughter have another, and we feel pretty damn much like one family to me.

When I was a child, I found out that many women changed their names when they got married. I asked why this was done and the best answer I have gotten is to pass on the family name.
When I got married, my wife wanted to change her name to mine and I asked her the same thing. I have no interest in passing on a family name: it is pretty nonsensical to me. She still has some small desire to change her name even though she has not after a few years.
While I do not understand the desire to change one's name or someone else's, I also do not understand the opposition to it.
The idea that your identity=your name or your body (as someone previously mentioned) is equally unjustifiable.

If names are not symbolic and family members shouldn't have to all have the same name, why bother with surnames at all?

I believe, Basiorara, and maybe someone can back me up here, that surnames came around in popularity when people started keeping property and tax records. And women and children were considered "property"

UltraMagnus: I would predict that if a man expected both genders of his children to keep their name, and their spouses' parents expected the same thing, SOMEONE would get their feelings hurt... Not that someone couldn't do that, just that it would not solve the problem of hurt feelings form name-changes.

Forgive me if I roll my eyes and go "boo hoo" for those poor men who get their feelings hurt.

The question is still why is it that women are the ones who have to acquiesce to their husband's wishes and change their names when it's not expected of men to? What I'm saying is that if we ever had a society where, once you were married, it was a valid choice for either the husband to change his last name to the wife's or vice versa, then there's wouldn't be so many "hurt" feelings unless one partner was trying to dominate the other, which for a lot of men, it is a show of domination, as in this is now "my" family because they have "my" last name.

It's okay for a woman to essentially lose her identity and "become" her husband, (i.e. when people say Mrs. John Smith, not even Mrs. Jane Smith) but it's not okay for the husbands feelings to be hurt?

In most states, like CA, it is extremely difficult for a husband to change his name to his wife's, (there was even a post about this earlier this year I think) where as for women not so much. One has to sit back and question why that is.

The idea that your identity=your name or your body (as someone previously mentioned) is equally unjustifiable.

Actually, it's pretty justifiable. If I'm at a party, and someone says to a friend of mine, "Hey, who's that?" and that friend says "That's EG," then they've just identified me. If you want to find out what I'm doing, you can google my name--that'll lead you right to me, which is one of the reasons I don't use it on this board. If somebody writes about me, in a blog or a letter or something, the way that the person they're writing to knows it's me is because that person uses my name. My name identifies me. It is inextricably bound up with identity. That's...why we have names. In order to identify ourselves.

As to bodies--I don't even understand your point. What else would I be if not my body? If somebody punches me in the shoulder, I say that he or she hit me. When I have an asthma attack, I say that I can't breathe. How is my body not my identity?

Hi everyone, I'm new here. I've been reading for a while though.

The name taking thing is always interesting to me because of the "think of the children!" issue. I've gotten in a lot of conversations with people that have told me how much trouble and confusion it would cause the kids to have a different last name from their parents. And then I tell them I have a different last name, an