In the 1850s in Massachusetts, a suffragette named Lucy Stone decided to keep her name when, at the age of 37, she married an abolitionist named Henry Blackwell. In 1921 The Lucy Stone League was founded in New York; a circle of forward-thinking women devoted themselves to the preservation of women’s names. In 1925, a journalist wrote snidely ‘some of its resulting confusions are indelicate and therefore may merely be hinted at. Many moral hotel clerks are troubled at the assignment of rooms to the traveling Lucy Stoners and their husbands.’ But until the feminism of the 1970s brought a resurgence of interest to the issue, almost all women changed their names to their husband’s when they married.
Now that women marry later it can feel unnatural to assume another name when they marry, even for women who do not consider themselves feminists. There is the option to hyphenate two surnames, which is perhaps the most egalitarian solution – though only when both parties chose both names. There is also the option to invent a third name from the melding of both. Now that more and more enlightened communities are embracing gay marriage, I am interested to see how this reconstituted concept of marriage evolves and new ways of thinking emerge; especially when we get around to people formalising their love in whatever way works for them. Polyamory particularly, would make this debate fascinating don’t you think?
I do understand that this ‘to change or not’ business is one of those nuanced, emotional moments that rarely fit into the categories rigidly set out by the purest forms of feminist ideology. I am just not sure this is a feminist issue for me anymore. There doesn’t seem to be anything particularly liberating about retaining my fathers name for the sake of a perceived independence. My identity is not so bound up in my birth name; ever since Little Brother could talk I have been ‘Sas’ to my loved ones (only my Gran and work colleagues have ever called me Sarah). The claiming of my self – knowing who I really am – this is based deep in the Id, where taxonomy doesn’t matter. But it is the outward facing self that is required (by law) to choose a family name.
And that is why I am choosing to take his name. Because simply, he is my family and this is an active choice that matters to me.
I will of course, always and forever, be Ms.
Comments
trackbacks
Ms Sas, this is another stupendous post from a stupendous woman. xx
Super post. I am glad that choice prevailed Ms Sas! I did not take my husband’s name as 5 years previously I had chosen to relinquish my dad’s name in favour of the middle name he had given me at birth – namely that of an inspiring lady from Tudor Britain.
The surname by which I have always been known is not my father’s surname and, without going in to the long, boring story, was used purely as convenience and so I didn’t feel ‘left out’ or different. The christian name by which I’ve mostly been known in adult life is, in fact, my father’s surname. I have chosen to take my husband’s name as for the first time it feels like I have a ‘proper’ surname which I’m truly entitled to. Surprisingly, (well. I’m surprised) I’m more than happy to be Mrs.
I love your reasoning for taking Ash’s name. It was the same for me too (after H said his Nana Rata would hunt me down and kill me if he took my surname, as I had been cheekily suggesting. He is the only Grandson she has with the Rata name). It wasn’t so much giving something up, walking away from my own and losing myself into a position of “Mrs H R Rata”, but a decision to join forces and to create our own family unit. In saying that, I also respect other women who keep their names, if they are important to them. How fortunate are we to have the choice! ;)
sas Replied:
yes – creating a family unit – I totally get that. the putting a wrapper around everything. NOICE!
Having had my surname for 43 years, it was very strange to think of relinquishing it when I married last month….I wanted to take my husbands name, though, and after many years of being Ms I am also very happy to call myself Mrs. I am however, changing my name by deed poll to include my father’s surname as a middle name. In this way I will keep the connection to my family, and especially to my 19 year old son, who also has this surname.
Lovely post Sas!
It’s obviously a cultural thing as well. I was surprised to find my Swedish friend’s husband took her surname when they married – it’s apparently very commen to take eithers, keep your own or swap. Cool huh?
sas Replied:
The Swedes have always been so forward thinking.
Given most of my best ideas have come to me in the bath, I like to think their genius is down to all the naked-in-a-sauna time they build into their days.
I’m always surprised when someone thinks I am making a feminist statement by keeping my last name. It’s my name, that’s all there is to it.
Loved this. I wanted the same name as J no matter what a mouthful it is. Plus it’s nice to have the same last name as Emily. I still like my email having my maiden name though just ‘cos a part of me will always be Miss W. Agreed J9, it’s so great to have the choice!
sas Replied:
I do hope that Emily has recorded the family answerphone message :)
once upon a time, my wife and I were in an english police car when we had to give our surnames.
we have our own names.
on finding that my wife did not have my surname, the officer eyed me cautiously and said:
“sir, are you all right with that?”
“i am all right with that”.
by the way, sas, you clearly have not been told that your future husband’s surname means “king’s chief porridge stirrer” in cornish gaelic.
mull on that one before signing the register.
sas Replied:
I need more details about how you found yourself in an english police car.
And that porridge stirrer thing seems weirdly appropriate (not dirty).
i agree. it’s a very personal decision but i must say… i think you’ve made a very lovely choice :)