I found this
article about women who did not take their husband's surnames upon marriage
interesting and I do agree with it to some extent. I took my first husband's
surname. That marriage ended in an ugly divorce. I kept my maiden name when I
married my second husband, and we're going strong over 20 years later. Take all
that as you like.
I kept my maiden
name because it's my name. I am already known well by that name. I used it for my past political and feminist
writing. I am aware of the irony of my maiden name coming from my father –
another man – but I didn't sign over my identity by changing my name upon
marriage. That's how I see name changing for me personally. I already have an
identity and I didn't want the hassle of changing a multitude of legal forms. I
could have taken my maiden name as my middle name and my husband's name as my
married name but I rejected that, too. I did that for my first marriage.
Switching back and forth before and after that marriage was a pain in the ass.
The problem is that
the description of men whose wives do not take their surnames as being
perceived as being "less masculine" in the article from the Independent seems to
be seen as a negative thing. Far from it. How do we define what is masculine?
The traditional definition seems to me to be somewhat harmful to men. Some
positive attributes considered masculine include being assertive and ambitious.
However, "real" men are also strong who keep their emotions in check.
Big boys don't cry. Brute force is a positive thing. And what's wrong with a
man being seen as more feminine? A balance between stereotypes would go a long
way towards showing more humanity.
Those who decried
the research (the term "hostile sexism" was thrown about) thought of
men whose wives did not take their surnames were "disempowered as a result of their wife’s
decision." That's a load of crap.
This statement also intrigued
me: "A woman's marital surname choice therefore has implications for
perceptions of her husband's instrumentality, expressivity, and the
distribution of power in the relationship," explains lead author Rachael
Robnett. My marriage is not traditional. The power is evenly distributed
throughout our relationship. There is no God-ordained leader in my household. I'm
not submissive and when I'm upset or angry I feel free to express myself
without repercussions, unlike my first marriage. That's not related to whether
or not I took my husband's name but due to the nature of each marriage.
I also kept my maiden name
upon my second marriage because I had taken his surname for my first marriage.
I had done it once and didn't see a need to do it again. I also didn't have a
traditional white wedding for my second wedding. We had a nondenominational ceremony
in our backyard with me in a green lace dress. The town clerk officiated. Our
sons and my son's best friend attended. Then we went inside, had my chocolate
sachertorte wedding cake I had baked and watched Hellraiser. Hey, there are newlyweds in that movie! It's
appropriate!
I am probably viewed as
non-traditional in my marriage, my actions, and beliefs. According to previous
studies, "women who violate the marital surname tradition are viewed
differently from others. They are described in terms of instrumental traits
that in a gendered society are typically assigned to men. These include having
a higher status, wielding more power, being more self-focused, ambitious and
assertive. These traits contrast with the expressive characteristics that are
typically assigned to women, such as being more nurturing, kind and having less
influence and power." My
husband freely expresses his emotions like sadness and insecurity as well as
anger. Why is anger seen as a masculine emotion? I see why nurturing is seen as
feminine since women traditionally have raised children, but that is not an
exclusively feminine characteristic.
My point in this rambling
post is that keeping my maiden name was a personal choice between me and my
husband with my feelings being paramount. Maybe it reflects the dynamics of my second
marriage, maybe not. I just know that traditional definitions of masculinity
and femininity can be harmful to both men and women. It's time we viewed
ourselves as individual human beings with our own wants and needs and not be
held hostage by stereotypes.
