Women who keep their married name YEARS after the divorce.

LilElvis

Jagraf wrote: »

Gosh I worked in HR for years too and I don't think I ever came across a manager saying that, certainly not to my face anyway.

Then you've been incredibly lucky, as have the applicants for jobs at your employers and the female staff there.

I've heard a female HR manager ranting that an employee had taken a week off work (with medical certificate) following a miscarriage. She also !!!!!ed like crazy when employees had the temerity to take their maternity entitlement - she truly believed that women earning 6 figure salaries should be back at their desks after two weeks. Needless to say after she married her chinless wonder of a commodity trader and pushed out little George she somehow never made it back to work (though she took every penny of her generous maternity pay). The other female employees breathed a sigh of relief.

heuchera

Person_one wrote: »

It seems that ugly sounding, difficult to spell names, and bad relationships with fathers are a curse that only happens to women, as i'v never heard of men changing their names for these reasons. Not even the brothers of the women with the misspelt names and the terrible fathers!

I think you're seeing what you want to see. I can think of many men who've changed their surnames for similar reasons, and for other reasons.

Person_one wrote: »

Surnames are for identity purposes, and until fairly recently in the scheme of things most women were identified by which man they were currently connected to/owned by.

Married women couldn't own property until 1870, and could be legally raped by their husband until 1992! So it seems strange to try to argue that marriage has always been the empowering, equal relationship it can and should be today.

1870 was quite a long time ago, though.. and this and the other issue has nothing to do with surnames, or the original topic, which is: why women choose to keep their partners name even when they split.

And of course these days marriages can be same-sex as well.

heuchera

notanewuser wrote: »

:rotfl:

I'm an HR professional. If I had a tenner for every manager I've had to admonish for saying "so and so scored most highly, but she's a maternity risk" after a set of interviews I could probably retire now. Yes, there are anti-discrimination laws, no, we don't put dates of birth on applications or CVs any more, but these attitudes are still highly prevalent in many workplaces (and it's men and women discriminating against women of a certain age).

I have even been asked outright at an interview if I was planning on starting a family :eek: I was in my late 20s at the time, so yes I suppose I would have been a 'maternity risk' (never heard that phrase before!).

I can see both sides though. Yes it is annoying that other people want to know your family planning (!!) and seem to assume that a woman of child-bearing age must want to have children, but equally it must be annoying to employ someone and train them up, only for them to announce that they're up the spout and leaving.

It's not discrimination insofar as men of course aren't going to need time off to have the baby, lol, and are less likely to be home looking after a young infant. Unless of course you're Karren Brady who seemed happy to dump her one-day-old daughter on a childminder while she went off and did more important things :eek:

Person_one

Up the spout? Lovely.

pigpen

tara747 wrote: »

You can change your surname to anything you like. It doesn't have to be your dad's name, your ex's name, your current partner's name. Just choose whatever you fancy. It's quite exciting, I think. .

I know band I agree.. the problem is.. there are so many.. how do you choose?? I love the silly names.. Ramsbottom (sheep-butt) .. wrigglesworth.. higginbottom.. my social media name being 'cup-of-tea' or something like that.. It is exciting but as something I will carry with me and be one of the first things people will know about me.. how do you choose??!!

I am about as decisive as a mushy banana.. 7 years I've been pondering this! It took 10 years to choose kitchen tiles.. I am doomed!!

Pollycat

pigpen wrote: »

I know band I agree.. the problem is.. there are so many.. how do you choose?? I love the silly names.. Ramsbottom (sheep-butt) .. wrigglesworth.. higginbottom.. my social media name being 'cup-of-tea' or something like that.. It is exciting but as something I will carry with me and be one of the first things people will know about me.. how do you choose??!!

I am about as decisive as a mushy banana.. 7 years I've been pondering this! It took 10 years to choose kitchen tiles.. I am doomed!!

From your posts on this and other threads, it's clear that all you want is to take the name of your partner.

mumps

heuchera wrote: »

I have even been asked outright at an interview if I was planning on starting a family :eek: I was in my late 20s at the time, so yes I suppose I would have been a 'maternity risk' (never heard that phrase before!).

I can see both sides though. Yes it is annoying that other people want to know your family planning (!!) and seem to assume that a woman of child-bearing age must want to have children, but equally it must be annoying to employ someone and train them up, only for them to announce that they're up the spout and leaving.

It's not discrimination insofar as men of course aren't going to need time off to have the baby, lol, and are less likely to be home looking after a young infant. Unless of course you're Karren Brady who seemed happy to dump her one-day-old daughter on a childminder while she went off and did more important things :eek:

The thing is that it is quite common for women to be having babies from early teens (not generally a good idea at 13 or 14 but it happens) until mid or even late 40s which is quite a lot of scope for discrimination. Its a wonder any of us ever get a job.

fierystormcloud

Wow, nearly 400 posts on my thread! I am officially impressed. Thanks for all your input folks! :j

I haven't been here all week, and I expected this to have dropped off the board, with maybe 100 posts max! So it's good to see people still discussing the subject I brought up.

Lots of different views and opinions too. This has turned into a very interesting thread. Thank you!

heuchera

mumps wrote: »

The thing is that it is quite common for women to be having babies from early teens (not generally a good idea at 13 or 14 but it happens) until mid or even late 40s which is quite a lot of scope for discrimination. Its a wonder any of us ever get a job.

I do know several women who have had children and whose employer had absolutely no issue with them taking maternity leave, so I don't think it's all bad. One for example is quite high up in the NHS (consultant) and another works in pharmaceuticals. They went back after maternity leave, some part-time some full-time. I suppose some employers are better than others in that regard.

Person_one

Employers aren't allowed to have an 'issue' with women taking mat leave, that would be illegal.