Wife taking surname

Tabbytabitha

Callie22 wrote: »

For me, as a woman, I am 'judged' on my title much more than a man would be. A man is 'Mr' from a fairly young age and that doesn't change (unless of course they get some kind of professional qualification - Dr, Reverend, Captain etc etc) - there isn't any baggage associated with that title as it really just means 'a bloke' nowadays. For women, we are first known as 'Miss' and this title becomes more problematic the older you get. There are lots of slightly negative connotations with being a 'Miss' once you get beyond a certain age and it almost becomes a bit of a joke. We can use 'Ms' but again this has a lot of connotations with it - people assume you're either a divorcee or, if you're choosing to use it, an angry feminist. And then there's 'Mrs', which you can take once you're safely married. Either way, female titles tend to define relationships (or not) with men in a way that a men's titles don't - men don't change their titles on marriage, for example.

For me, my 'proper' title would be Miss but I don't feel comfortable with that anymore, given my age and partnership status! I don't use Mrs as I'm not married so I tend to use Ms now in situations where I need a title. I wish I had enough money to pursue a doctorate so that I could just be Dr and have done with the Miss/Ms/Mrs dilemma!

The only connotation that comes from using Ms is the fact that you're female, everything else is in your mind, I'm afraid. The option of using this title has been available for over 40 years and many if us have used it all that time, whether single, married, divorced or widowed.
Your attitude is creating a problem that doesn't exist.

selement

Sorry OP but I don't think not wanting to change her surname makes her not interested. I struggled with the decision to cha he wheb I got married... i wanted us to have the same surname as most traditional families do but felt it was unfair for me to be the one to give up my name. My husband said he didn't mind what I did but he wasn't changing his name. So I was left with different names or take his. I did decide to take his, but I have a friend in a similar situation who didn't take her husband's surname and I think that's fine too. She is dedicated to him and loves him but identifies strongly with her surname.
It's a bit old fashioned now to make a big deal of women not taking their husbands name tbh. Why should your name be more important than hers?

LilElvis

Now I can explain to my husband that the reason I wanted an engagement ring costing the price of a new car was that it needed to be big enough to make it clear to other Mums in the school playground that I am married to my daughter's father despite the fact that we have different surnames.

I now need a 5 figure eternity ring just in case the engagement one isn't getting the message home. I also need to spend a similar amount on a "commitment ceremony", or whatever you want to call it, so that our daughter isn't confused about the discrepancy between our surnames and is happy that we are legally married because she wasn't in Las Vegas the first time round. ...... and I want another honeymoon too :T

Seriously though, I can't see what the issue is. We've been together 16 years (exactly today!), married for 11 - we know it, our families know it and our 7 year old knows it. The fact that I have a different surname to her doesn't matter because she knows that we are connected and she sees my surname linking her to my parents, something which would have been lost had I taken her father's name.

consumers_revenge

selement wrote: »

Sorry OP but I don't think not wanting to change her surname makes her not interested. I struggled with the decision to cha he wheb I got married... i wanted us to have the same surname as most traditional families do but felt it was unfair for me to be the one to give up my name. My husband said he didn't mind what I did but he wasn't changing his name. So I was left with different names or take his. I did decide to take his, but I have a friend in a similar situation who didn't take her husband's surname and I think that's fine too. She is dedicated to him and loves him but identifies strongly with her surname.
It's a bit old fashioned now to make a big deal of women not taking their husbands name tbh. Why should your name be more important than hers?

Hi,


Didn't say mines more important but I know what you mean ;-)


I came here to see peoples opinions, some have been helpful.


We only gain knowledge by listening to others but we are also entitled to our own thoughts. My curiosity has been answered.


As I said I'm not right shes not wrong lol.


Cheers,


CR

UKTigerlily

Callie22 wrote: »

For me, as a woman, I am 'judged' on my title much more than a man would be. A man is 'Mr' from a fairly young age and that doesn't change (unless of course they get some kind of professional qualification - Dr, Reverend, Captain etc etc) - there isn't any baggage associated with that title as it really just means 'a bloke' nowadays. For women, we are first known as 'Miss' and this title becomes more problematic the older you get. There are lots of slightly negative connotations with being a 'Miss' once you get beyond a certain age and it almost becomes a bit of a joke. We can use 'Ms' but again this has a lot of connotations with it - people assume you're either a divorcee or, if you're choosing to use it, an angry feminist. And then there's 'Mrs', which you can take once you're safely married. Either way, female titles tend to define relationships (or not) with men in a way that a men's titles don't - men don't change their titles on marriage, for example.

For me, my 'proper' title would be Miss but I don't feel comfortable with that anymore, given my age and partnership status! I don't use Mrs as I'm not married so I tend to use Ms now in situations where I need a title. I wish I had enough money to pursue a doctorate so that I could just be Dr and have done with the Miss/Ms/Mrs dilemma!

I hate titles & have no idea why they are needed at all. I also have no idea why Mx etc is needed (as surely if transitioning to female, a female title would be fine?) . . I just refuse to put one & if no choice put Dr (again, i'm not one but if they insist)

Callie22

Tabbytabitha wrote: »

The only connotation that comes from using Ms is the fact that you're female, everything else is in your mind, I'm afraid. The option of using this title has been available for over 40 years and many if us have used it all that time, whether single, married, divorced or widowed.
Your attitude is creating a problem that doesn't exist.

I don't have an 'attitude', or if I do I know it's shared between me and many of my friends. Let's agree to disagree!

moneyistooshorttomention

Spider_In_The_Bath wrote: »

I'd go for Admiral :rotfl:

or I could use "Lord" and with my feminine first name that would really confuse them:rotfl:

moneyistooshorttomention

UKTigerlily wrote: »

I hate titles & have no idea why they are needed at all. I also have no idea why Mx etc is needed (as surely if transitioning to female, a female title would be fine?) . . I just refuse to put one & if no choice put Dr (again, i'm not one but if they insist)

Personally I think the title "Mx" is needed to denote someone who refuses to be defined by the gender of their body.

But don't feel I can change my title to that in case people came to the conclusion it meant I was transitioning from one sex to another (as I was born in a female body - and am okay about staying that way). Maybe that sort of connotation will have gone in 10 years time/I'm guessing it will almost certainly have gone in 20 years time (but by that time I'll be that old/nearly in the "departure lounge" that I won't care personally).

System

I think theres no higher honour than taking a mans surname after marriage... HOWEVER.... if he had got a vile surname like Boggs, Cockburn or Pratt i would stick to the surname i have.

Pixie5740

LilElvis wrote: »

I would be interested to know, as the OP seems to be so keen on tradition, why they chose to have children outside of marriage? If he has been happy for the mother of his children to have a different surname to the rest of their family unit for all this time then why does it suddenly become an issue post-wedding?

The “traditionalist” OP never did answer why he chose to put the cart before the horse and have children outside of wedlock given that he is such a traditionalist.