Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site bunkerb.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!decvax!ittatc!bunkerb!mary
From: mary@bunkerb.UUCP (Mary Shurtleff)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: Re: Name-changing and "identity"
Message-ID: <557@bunkerb.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 17-Sep-85 09:04:50 EDT
Article-I.D.: bunkerb.557
Posted: Tue Sep 17 09:04:50 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 19-Sep-85 05:19:19 EDT
References: <510@osiris.UUCP> <255@nrcvax.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: Bunker Ramo, Trumbull Ct
Lines: 54

> There is also the aspect that when a woman takes the man's name, or
> vice versa if you prefer, it means that the "family" as a whole has
> one name.  This tends to unite the family as a group, giving it a
> sense of unity, which hopefully will *keep* it a family.  When each
> individual in the family has a different name, there is an element of
> unity missing, which has a tendency to split up the family.  And there
> are already enough elements out there waiting to split up families.
> 
> I also had property in my name, credit cards, a profession, etc., when
> I got married.  I changed my name to my husband's name to signify my
> unity with him.  I preferred not to hang on to that element of
> individuality.  Many others I did hang on to, but that one presented
> to the world at large our unity as a family, and that meant a lot to
> me.  I wanted the world to know--not that I was his property--but that
> he and I were joined in a common cause, creating an enduring family
> unit.
> 
>                                                        Terry Grevstad

I did likewise when I got married, and for the same reasons.  While I was
debating whether or not to change my name, my husband asked me to take his,
because we would be members of one family, and he felt that as such, we should
share the same name.  That was the ONLY argument which I would have accepted as
reasonable for changing names.  I essentially added his name to mine, and use
the first letter of my birth name as a second middle initial in most instances
in which a signature is required.

I feel in no way any less an individual due to taking on an additional name.
If I had felt extremely strongly about the matter, my husband would not have
objected to my keeping my birth name.  However, his concern for us as a family
unit indicated to me that he harbored none of those "You're MY wife, and you'll
have MY name!" attitudes.  BTW, at my 10th year high school reunion, all the 
married women were asked to put both birth and married names on their name
tags.  My husband put my birth name on his name tag and then his, so we were
both "Regalbuto Shurtleff"s.  He did this without my prompting, and without
indicating to me beforehand that he was going to.

I don't mean by this to indicate that women have to change their names on
marriage if they feel strongly about it.  I would, however, like to point
out that there are those of us who still consider ourselves feminists, who
believe in careers and equal opportunities, etc, who have made a reasoned
choice to change names.  That choice should not be disparaged, and we should
not be thought of as somehow succumbing to the pressure of tradition or
losing our individuality.  I don't feel that I have.

Mary JR Shurtleff
-- 

Mary Shurtleff                        ....decvax!ittatc!bunker!bunkerb!mary

                            <---***--->
"And now for something completely different, a man with three legs."
"He ran away!"
                            <---***--->


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com