Wait, why do you think it’s “less feminist” to want to retain the heritage of one’s name? It’s very feminist to say that all of woman’s relationships and heritage matter, not just the ones that flow through her relationship with her husband. Losing those connections is one of the reasons feminists give for retaining their names and objecting to the patriarchal naming convention.

z–in my opinion, it is a Mormon point of pride to mention that you are a _______________ (fill in general authorities’ name) or a ____________ (fill in famous pioneer’s name) and it has little to do with feminism–men and women are equally guilty.

Also, the second reason I give–identifying myself by a former name in order to make connections with people from my past–is useful in small communities, such as the Mormon one, but not so useful in the world at large. For example, among a group of 50-100 Mormon women, I would not be terribly surprised to encounter a woman who served in my mission (and therefore knew me by my maiden name); however, among a similar sized (or even much larger) group of American women, it would be surprising to meet somone who went to high school with me.

Sorry my writing did not make that more clear.

Devyn–I accidentally wrote my maiden name as my surname on a bank form a full year after my marriage–the guy who caught the mistake thought I must be a newly-wed–old habbits die hard. I can understand your wife’s choice–changing my name was not a forgone conclusion for me, but I am happy with the choice. Was it a hastle to go back?

This is common throughout Mormon history. I think historically it stemed from european tradition. My wife, or eastern european decent, was not given a middle name as a child with the expectation that her maiden surname would become her middle name at marriage. She chose not to at the time we got married, but is contemplating legally adding her maiden name back as her middle name.

I don’t care what people choose to call themselves. However, keeping maiden names or hyphenating names speaks volumes about a person and their marriage. This is especially true in traditionalist communities like western U.S. Mormonism.

sorry–I am not adept at codes!

What do you think keeping maiden names or hyphenating says about a person or their marriage?

PDOE – How does either keeping or not keeping your maiden name say anything about your selfishness? All it says is that you are willing to keep to a social tradition and change your name – that is it. There are a myriad of reasons why one would keep a maiden name and selfishness is not one of them. My wife has had so many people try to make her feel guilty for keeping her maiden name, which is ridiculous. As you say it is just a name so why would keeping one you are comfortable with be selfish???

MAC–I am saying that for a Kenyan to name their child Hussein does NOT indicate an affinity for Islam, or worse yet, an affinity for Joe America’s perception of Islam (often quite different than the reality–more like terrorist). The name, for our Barack Obama and for his father who had the same name, is simply a choice of their parents. I don’t think his father could have imagined a–his son being a contender for President of the United States; or b–the different perceptions Americans might assign to the name. Remember that Barack Obama Sr.s’ only American experience up to the birth of his son was in Hawaii where, let’s face it, a lot of people have “funny” names.

But yes, the repeated use of his full name by conservatives IS clearly an effort to emphasize his otherness.

Clearly, while Senator Obama had nothing to do with choosing his name, many xenophobic Americans could blame him for it and not vote for him. Shame on them.

PDoE, I think I side with z and Devyn s. here. A woman maintaining her maiden name as her surname is not simply valuing herSELF, but her entire family of origin. I think you are suggesting that by changing her name to her husband’s surname a woman is demonstrating value for the new family unit. But isn’t she really just being gobbled up into his family of origin? Unless they jointly come up with a new surname for their nuclear family, I don’t think you can criticize a woman for doing what men do.

As for keeping maiden names.

When I meet an LDS women who has not changes her name it indicates the following to me based on anecdotal exp in church councils.

1. has issues with the churches gender teachings
2. has very liberal views
3. has issues with church teachings on sexuality, LOC etc.

4. is more likely to divorce. this is anecdotal but every LDS couple I have known personally not in the bloggernaccle who did this has gotten divorced. 3 couples

Its a badge that indicates I am not on board….. Its sending a signal…….

oh man! No more block quotes for me! You can sort that out, right bbell? I know you can….

bbell – Appreciate the anecdotes but that type of judgmental mindset is a huge problem in the Church across multiple areas. My wife (who kept her maiden name) was getting this type of flak (similar to what you outline) when she was ward Relief Society President and I was a counselor in the Bishopric, and again when she was Stake Young Women’s President and I was in the High Council. I know many strong couples who have different last names and are very dedicated to the Church. So I recommend you come up with something stronger than anecdotes as this is aboslute garbage to infer that someone who keeps their maiden name is likely to get divorced?? That is like saying someone who is for Gay Marriage is a homosexual – complete garbage. I know many couples who have the same last name who have gotten divorced – what does that mean?

ESO tackled your silly badge comment.

I figured I would get flamed but I have had this conversation with multiple bishops and SP’s in 2 states and they all agreed with my comment. So I am gonna stick with it.

bbell,

We have GAs whose wives have retained their maiden names.

Based on that fact, I conclude that the bishops and SPs you have conversed are either poorly informed or just plain stupid. Just anecdotal, but there you go.

Mark IV – well said. I wish I were that succint and articulate.

Devyn, Oh, no! I was just going to apologize to bbell for being offensive!

bbell – sorry. I could have said what I meant in a different way. It appears to me that those with whom you have conversed are working with a very limited data set because, as I noted above, even some GA’s wives choose to be known by their maiden name. There are all kinds of good reasons for a woman to do so, and it really is none of our business if she does. If we have time to discuss things like this in our church council meetings, we have waaaaay too much time on our hands, and not nearly enough important things to do.

Hey guys, I never said it made *sense.* It’s just the impression that I get.

I deliberately didn’t say I thought they were selfish because I don’t. Their sense of “self” seems to trump this tradition. This does say to me that someone isn’t completely invested in the unit but that doesn’t mean that they are “selfish,” if you can follow my meaning.

Regardless of anything else, it really can’t be denied that a couple having different last names is terribly unromantic; like marriage is some kind of business partnership.

Yeah, nothing says romance like perpetuating a relic of male ownership of women, with a little bureaucratic hassle to top it off. Last time I checked, sameness is not the same thing as romance.

PDOE – I think I get your drift and that is an interesting perspective.

Eric – Not sure how names equate with romance? That link makes no sense whatsoever.

How in the world could you not see it as unfair? Even if you think there are good (enough) reasons for it, at least admit that men are getting a much better deal, name-wise. They get to keep their names, not be thought to be un-invested by folks like PDOE, and pass their name on to ALL of the kids. What are women getting, name-wise, that is comparable to those privileges? It would have to be something really good to make up for the bureaucratic effort that’s required. Do you have an actual argument that it’s fair? I think denying the significance of the disparity is very disrespectful of the sacrifice made by so many women in this matter.

As to everyone else, it’s just not that difficult to figure it out. Fairness to women is worth the effort.

Idle thoughts:

Two days before my wife and I got married, my grandmother told me that if my wife *really* loved me, she’d change her name. I told her it was bunk.

Then again, my wife opted to change her name anyway, even though she hated my surname initially.

I have this feminists make the statement that if they were going to take a man’s name, that it be better to be one *they* chose than one their *mother* chose… (hehe).

As far as bbell’s position … it’s obviously a small sample size. But he’s not *wrong* in that often, women who do not change their names have some of those characteristics. In fact, I think that if we looked at every Mormon woman in the UNITED STATES was was already active before she got married and did not change her name upon marriage (how’s that for a qualifier) … his description would apply more times than not.

z- I don’t think men *are* getting a better deal, that’s why not. By getting so worked up about something as simple as a name (do you think it’s going to matter in the eternities whether you were Lisa Johnson or Lisa Pinecone?) you’re *giving* it power and weight. It’s your own response that upsets you.

Genesis 2:24:
Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

It doesn’t matter that much to me who does the name changing. (Though non-standard name changes probably make genealogy a bit more difficult, just by being deviations from the norm, whatever the norm in that society is.) As long as SOMEone makes the effort at unity.

And for the record, my own opinion of and reaction to people keeping their names is not opposition to them doing so. In the best sense of the feminist tradition, I don’t care if they do what they want. I don’t agree with it. But I won’t deny them their choice to be different anymore than I want them trying to shove their ideas down my throat.

CatherineWO, I never said that hyphenated names were confusing to the kids, just a mess once you move beyond the first generation. I would not, btw, be at all comfortable with a teacher who addressed people by first names without invitation or who invited her charges to address her by first name. That barrier of formality makes a difference.

I’ve been married three times—my last name was Gardner for, oh, 9 years total. Bill and I have been married 26 years. I still get called “Arlene Gardner.” I answer, and usually I don’t even notice.

I’m with PDoE. I get the impression of self importance with a hyphenated name. I think if a woman simply kept her maiden name, I wouldn’t think of it at all. Although it would be confusing in a ward setting if Jim Jackson’s wife called herself Marilyn Smith. You know she’d still be called Sister Jackson. She’d have to do all that correcting and then people would think she was pretentious and stuck up.

You know, Eso, I think, in the long run (of the election process), Obama’s name will get him more positive appeal than negative. The Republican emphasis on his name this early will get people used to it and after they pause, they’ll just shrug and by the time the voting comes around, nobody will care.

Did anybody notice Jon Stewart’s joke about a black president or a woman president? He said that only happens in movies about an asteroid hitting New York and that’s how you can tell that “it’s the future” because only “in the future” will a black man or a woman be the president.

I guess the future is almost here.

Anne Osborn Poelman, The Simeon Solution — The author is a world-class medical specialist and the wife of an Mormon General Authority. She finds in the story of Simeon in Luke 2 a paradigm for reconciling faith and reason. But does her thesis fit the Biblical story?

The link to a review on her book: http://www.irr.org/mit/bookpage.html

So Ann Osborn retained her maiden name when she got married later in life. Big deal. It does nothing to refute my comments which are based on active LDS cultural patterns and watching along with queno inactivity and divorce amongst those that do not follow the cultural norm.

I was also comps with E Poelmans grandkid or kid in the MTC FWIW

6) I’m sorry for not replying sooner. I left work right after posting my comment and didn’t have an opportunity to respond until now. Please note I specified western U.S. Mormons. This is a very homogenous, traditionalist group. Hyphenated and retained maiden names are undeniably not the norm. Western US Mormons also tend to conflate church and social norms. “I know green Jell-O is true. I know that my wife will share my last name.”

As to the volumes a maiden or hyphenated name speaks:

In western US Mormon culture, this is considered very feminist. Remember, feminism in western US Mormon culture is generally felt to be BAD. It says I am liberal, and thus, not like most of you. I am more enlightened than you are. I refuse to be oppressed by “the” man, or my man. I am not bound by our cultural traditions, and view all traditions as suspect. Your traditions don’t work for me.

By extension, one might perceive the hyphenator/retainer views patriarchies are bad. Since the priesthood, and by extension the church, is patriarchal in nature, it is not to be trusted by the hyphenator/retainer. Taken to an extreme, the hyphenator/retainer might not even like funeral potatoes.

I suggest that if a couple really wants to damn the man, they should both choose a new name when they marry. Don’t bring either or the surnames into the union. That’s the only way to be “fair.”

In seriousness, I don’t care what people do with their names. It’s their names. When you make a statement of bucking tradition, though, expect people to have opinions about it. Expect some of the less tactful to actually speak their opinion on it. That’s part of making a statement.

ESO, you are correct. Rosa Parks only wanted to sit down on the bus without having to walk all the way into the back. I believe I read somewhere that she just wanted to be left alone.

For attitudes to change, the gauntlet has to be thrown down whether intentionally or not.

good heavens, what a tempest in a teapot.

i’m a liberal. i’m semi-feminist. i’m also happily temple married (13 years now) and have been active in the church all my life. i’m primary chorister right now. you catch your breath and get a drink of water now if you need to. guess what? i’m anecdotal, too!

i wanted to keep my name. it’s a rare name, a name i’m proud of, a name i shared with some really cool people. i know my family’s history, grew up learning their names, they shaped me and molded me and i think they’re fantastic. i really didn’t want to take my husband’s extremely common and semi-anonymous last name. so when i floated the idea to him, i was unprepared for the look of hurt that would result. we were so young, and so in love, that i did it for him. i did offer him my name, but bless his heart i knew he was too traditional to take me up on it.

i agree there are very practical reasons why dual names don’t work well. One name makes everything less complicated, and i like things to be less complicated. but the facts are that even though i gave up my cool maiden name, i still mostly run the show around here. i’m not dominated. it was a minor sacrifice i made for love – and not for anybody’s ridiculous ideas about badges or conformity or other falderal. bah phooey.

Z, I don’t even know what you’re talking about anymore and I would appreciate it if you would back off. Can you even grasp the irony here? You, clearly a hard-core feminist, are flipping out because I don’t march lock step with you. I thought feminism was about choice and freedom. A question was asked about my impressions and opinions and I gave it. I did not say “all maiden-name-keepers are selfish snots who are going to divorce and go to hell.” I said such people don’t strike me as very committed to the unit. It’s no more skin off their nose than it is skin off of mine when people like you assume that, because I changed my name, I’m some oppressed and deluded.

Um, Bbell? Ann Osborn DIDN’t keep her maiden name.

my 2 cents: I am getting married this September at the age of 35. I am keeping my maiden name and adding his name. I have X for 35 years and I am not giving up that part of my identity. It helps that my fiance thinks that taking his name is shouting “I own you”.

Also, when my younger sister gradutated from college she had just gotten married. She graduated with her married name and my mom was abit put out as it was not my sister’s husband (or his famiy name) that had put her through college but my parents.

The funny thing is that a woman keeping her maiden name is still under the male hiearachy as that is her FATHERS name not her mothers. Not really feminist in the leteral sense if you think about it.