Back in the medieval ages when a woman was married to a man, they were basically considered property for my understanding and treated like an extension of the man’s person and family. So it was customary for women to take the man’s last name since they were being joined to his family. But now here in the 21st century women are fully independent and last names don’t really seem to mean much of anything. I mean what is Smith or McGregor or any last name really mean anymore? Especially in the digital age, lots of people have digital usernames like SarahSmith1727373. So the last name clearly doesn’t mean much anymore… Which leads me to wonder, why do the majority of women still take the man’s last name? Especially when some of them have a horrible last name? I have seen some butt ass ugly last names recently, like Fink, Weimer, Slotsky/Slotsky, Hiscock (no joke this is a last name), Hardman… And then you hear the woman’s name and it’s like something way more reasonable and less stupid sounding like Kingman, or Harrison, Walls, etc.
I think the only correct answer will be “there are lots of different reasons”.
My wife took my last name, even though it’s not a good one and I suggested that we pick a new one.
Here are a couple of her reasons:
-
She wanted us to have the same surname.
-
She was very close friends with my cousins growing up, so the name didn’t seem weird to her.
-
Tradition - she’d always assumed she would change her name to her husband’s name, so that seemed the most normal thing to do.
-
It’s pretty helpful for medical emergencies and getting through border police as a family.
I’m actually gonna be taking my girlfriend’s last name. Mine sounds hella stupid and is also slang for an unflattering body part, I got bullied a lot for it growing up so I will spare my children and take her last name cause it sounds super fancy and cool.
That makes sense, Cyberm Ass.
Cyberm would be a silly first name.
It is obviously Cyber M. Ass.
The M is short for My.
The guy was bullied already for his last name, and now you’re calling his first name silly? I am reporting you to the mods, Spankm.
Shame on you for deadnaming!
If the guy gets his MD in proctology he can be Dr. Ass.
Good idea Mr. Taint
I think you’re making a good choice Mr. Beer Belly
Two short answers: Tradition and simplicity.
If you have different names, which one do the kids get? Also, it’s sometimes challenging to fill in school forms when your kid has a different last name than you.
This it the real answer. It’s usually just easier to do it because it’s the expected situation.
Both, that’s what me and my wife did. It was recently allowed here, but it has been common in Spanish speaking countries for example.
Exactly, this is a strange concept to get hung up on. In China and North and South Korea, a woman in a stereotypical heterosexual marriage keeps her name and the children get the father’s name. There are numerous traditions globally.
I don’t really like both as a compromise.
What if your children did the same? And their children too?
After a while you’d have 30+ names in your last name.
They get one per parent, not all of the previous ones. The child of Juan Lopez Sánchez and Ana Heredia Marín would be called Firstname Lopez Heredia. If this child had a child with Luisa Ribera Zapatero the kid would be Firstname Lopez Ribera.
By default the fathers last name goes first, but they can decide to swap the last names to put the mother’s first.
My mother took my father’s surname and kept her maiden name as a second middle name, then they named their children the same way. That ended up being the smoothest way to handle it for official documents.
I suspect a lot of women despite not wanting to be considered property, still place value on belonging with their partner. The western tradition of the man being the figurative head of household is still pretty prevalent. These two factors (and more, I’m sure) likely have some influence.
Pew Research has survey data germane to this question. As it stands, a clear majority (79%) of opposite-sex married women changed their family/last name to their husband’s.
But for never-married women, only a third (33%) said they would change their name to their spouse’s family name. 24% of never-married women were unsure whether they would or wouldn’t change their name upon marriage.
From this data, I would conclude that while the trend of taking the husband’s last name is fairly entrenched right now, the public’s attitude are changing and we might expect the popularity of this to diminish over time. The detailed breakdown by demographic shows that the practice was less common (73%) in the 18-49 age group than in the 50+ age group (85%).
However, some caveats: the survey questions did not inquire into whether the never-married women intended on ever getting married; it simply asked “if you were to get married…”. So if marriage as a form of cohabitation becomes less popular in the future, then the change-your-family-name trend could be in sharper decline than this data would suggest.
Alternatively, the data could reflect differences between married and never-married women. Perhaps never-married women – by virtue of not being married yet – answered “would not change name” because they did not yet know what their future spouse’s name is. No option for “it depends on his name” was offered by the survey. Never-married women may also more-strongly consider the paperwork burden – USA specific – for changing one’s name.
So does this help answer your question? Eh, only somewhat. Younger age and left-leaning seem to be factors, but that’s a far cry from cause-and-effect. Given how gradual the trend is changing, it’s more likely that the practice is mostly cultural. If so, then the answer to “why is cultural practice XYZ a thing?” is always “because it is”.
Thanks for providing this really detailed and interesting reply. Lots of good insight here. For the ‘Postgraduate degree’ group, I wonder if they’re dramatically higher due to the frustrating problems associated with name changes? Like if you publish an academic paper with your full name, you can’t easily go back and change it, so that may affect it… huh.
I have friends who published before being married, so now professionally still use their own last name (for continuity) but socially will go by their husband’s last name.
Well, my last name isn’t my mom’s last name, it’s my dad’s, and her last name was her dad’s, then her husband’s. So why do I care, I don’t get a matrilineal name anyway.
I hyphenated, because we both had kids when we got married, and it made it easier to deal with the school stuff for my stepkids.
Otherwise, I really just don’t care because my family name is my dad’s name and it was only my mom’s name because she changed hers to his. Not that I didn’t care about my dad, was closer to him than my mom. I just mean I don’t feel like it means anything.
ETA: as the OP says, though - I really, truly don’t understand it when a lady has a cool last name and the man an awful one and they still use his. I used to work at a payroll place and saw this happen over and over, someone would be calling up for us to change their last name from, say, Valiant or DeLeon to Assing, or Fuckler or something . Really, why wouldn’t he be the one happy to change in that scenario?
To all the people here arguing that it’s easier to have a family name, especially with children: It’s also possible that the husband takes the wife’s name. But from anecdotal evidence in my acquaintance, most men are very opposed to this idea. So if the woman wants a family name she has to change her name or have endless fights about it. That’s why most women I know did it.
Having one name is easier for social reasons. Going with the man’s name is easier for social reasons.
It all comes down to social pressure to keep the status quo. I even offered to take my wife’s last name and she declined and took mine instead.
Having one name (at least in common, using hyphenation) is easier for legal reasons too. If you have kids, and one parent doesn’t share a last name with them, you’ll have headaches at school, maybe crossing a border, unless you brought some extra legal documents with, etc.
In Sweden, a couple can choos to have a new last name not related to either.
You can choose another last name when you get married in the US too, but people just don’t choose to for the most part. The marriage license name change is a shortcut to a regular name change that can be made through the courts.
One other reason I imagine is to establish a single family name, especially with children in mind. I’m not sure it actually works better than a double damily name, but it probably seems so to some.
At least for my ex-fiancée it was about the link between husband and wife, plus tradition. It was basically “I’m married, you see?”. Just like a ring.
(We talked a fair bit about this stuff, as back then I was planning to add my maternal surname to my legal name. She was OK taking either surname.)
My husband and I were not married when our kids were born. I wanted to have the same name as my kids So I gave them my maiden name. I never really liked that name and I wasn’t particularly close to my dad, so when my husband and I got married, we all changed our names to his.
I also took my husband’s name when I got married. I personally am not a big fan of hyphenated names. For those that like them, fair enough, but they’re not for me. To me, the problem with hyphenated names is that while they seem a way to avoid the “whose name do we give the kids” problem, they just kick the problem down the road a generation. If you have a hyphenated name, and you marry someone who also has one, are you both going to start using a 4-part surname? How about the generations after that, are they going to use an 8, 16, or 32-part name?
Of course not. At some point, now or in the future, someone is going to have their surname dropped. It either happens when you get married, or it happens when your children or grandchildren themselves get married and have to decide which names to drop. Rather than putting that burden on your kids or grandkids, I think it’s better to make those hard decisions yourself. Better to just come up with a shared name for both partners and move forward together.
I think each woman has her own reasons (some people actually like traditions) but I have the impression that, globally, women are not the same as what we see online. I think today the taking of a surname does not indicate ownership or property, at least to most modern women (and men).
I don’t think any woman thinks like that anymore, or perhaps not many, so the motivations would then also be obviously different.
A. Many men would not marry a woman who didn’t take their name.
B. Makes parenting more difficult in social settings by not sharing the last name of your kids. I.E. Picking up your kid at school or making medical decisions about kids and having a different last name as the child forces you to jump through a lot more hoops.
C. Women tend to grow up knowing they are going to change their last name it’s not even an afterthought. My girlfriend told me her and her friends would often talk about what their name would be if they married a guy they liked.
D. In some states it is very difficult for a man to change their last name but for women the processes is already in place.
Regarding B, the way we do it in the latin world is just by having 2 last names, one per parent. So the child of Jose Perez and Irene Martinez is named Alberto Perez Martinez (the fathers last name is the first by default but you can change order). Its not a problem when picking up children from schools or whatever.
This conversation is so white and western culture centric. Many cultures have different norms. Centering on this as the normal/accepted route is strange given how international our societies have become.
True, for instance in Québec, Canada, it is illegal for a woman to take her husband name.
