On names, marriage, family
A friend of mine is getting married, and happened to mention that she will be changing her name (same first name, middle and last names changed to husband's). Though I come from a conservative Hindu family, this struck me as particularly odd. It’s probably because every now and then, I play this little mental game of putting myself in someone else’s situation to see what I would have done.
Think about it. Go back a few hundred centuries. Assume that some spunky woman somewhere, sparked off a social revolution which led to a convention where males would change their names after marriage, so I, Mr. X Y Z, after getting married to Ms. A B C, would become Mr. X A C.
The idea makes me shiver. Not because of the implied submission to my spouse's authority. No, its probably because, to me, my full, original name is a proud reminder of my family history, a tribute to my roots. It’s a link to the ingredients that have made me what I am today.
But then again, I do have reservations about how my name works today. It has only my father’s name and his family name in it. No mention of my mother anywhere. Seems very unfair to me. The lady gave birth to me, and should at least get a mention in my name, wouldn’t you think? What if I become the President of India tomorrow? Is it only my father who will be remembered each time I sign my name?
Once I read about an interesting convention that was followed in places like Scandinavia, Wales, Iceland and Denmark. It was called the patronymic naming convention. Very simply put, a person’s last name would be the father’s name, suffixed by “son” or “datter / dotter”. Even more interestingly, Denmark has re-enacted a law that also allows a Matronymic naming convention.
It still doesn’t satisfy me though. My gripe is that only one parent is still mentioned in the complete name.
So, back to the main question. What would I have done, if I were in a matriarchal society and were to get married? Very simply, I would proudly retain my original name. Conversely, if I marry, I would happily insist that my wife retain her original name. On hearing this, another friend asked, would my children be okay with that - having a mother and father with completely different last names? I think they would. I really think they would… It would be a simple matter of getting them used to that convention. Dealing with the strange queries that would pour in from social circles would be a bigger challenge, but, to quote a famous line -- frankly, I don’t give a damn.
Finally, to wrap up: what name would our kids have? I have a simple solution in mind that probably wont hold up well in today's society - Ditch both parents' surnames; give the kids a first name, use one parent's first name as the kid's middle name, and the other parent's name as the last name. It makes logical sense, since a kid is the representation of the union of the parents. At the very least, the kids would not forget half the family tree that was responsible for their birth.
Think about it. Go back a few hundred centuries. Assume that some spunky woman somewhere, sparked off a social revolution which led to a convention where males would change their names after marriage, so I, Mr. X Y Z, after getting married to Ms. A B C, would become Mr. X A C.
The idea makes me shiver. Not because of the implied submission to my spouse's authority. No, its probably because, to me, my full, original name is a proud reminder of my family history, a tribute to my roots. It’s a link to the ingredients that have made me what I am today.
But then again, I do have reservations about how my name works today. It has only my father’s name and his family name in it. No mention of my mother anywhere. Seems very unfair to me. The lady gave birth to me, and should at least get a mention in my name, wouldn’t you think? What if I become the President of India tomorrow? Is it only my father who will be remembered each time I sign my name?
Once I read about an interesting convention that was followed in places like Scandinavia, Wales, Iceland and Denmark. It was called the patronymic naming convention. Very simply put, a person’s last name would be the father’s name, suffixed by “son” or “datter / dotter”. Even more interestingly, Denmark has re-enacted a law that also allows a Matronymic naming convention.
It still doesn’t satisfy me though. My gripe is that only one parent is still mentioned in the complete name.
So, back to the main question. What would I have done, if I were in a matriarchal society and were to get married? Very simply, I would proudly retain my original name. Conversely, if I marry, I would happily insist that my wife retain her original name. On hearing this, another friend asked, would my children be okay with that - having a mother and father with completely different last names? I think they would. I really think they would… It would be a simple matter of getting them used to that convention. Dealing with the strange queries that would pour in from social circles would be a bigger challenge, but, to quote a famous line -- frankly, I don’t give a damn.
Finally, to wrap up: what name would our kids have? I have a simple solution in mind that probably wont hold up well in today's society - Ditch both parents' surnames; give the kids a first name, use one parent's first name as the kid's middle name, and the other parent's name as the last name. It makes logical sense, since a kid is the representation of the union of the parents. At the very least, the kids would not forget half the family tree that was responsible for their birth.
posted by Dream Runner | 10:09 AM
7 Comments:
Is she also going to change her first name? now that strikes as even more odd to me. Imagine being called by a different name when you are used to being called by other for twenty five years.
Relatives ask me casually if my fiancee is going to change her name after marriage. Ofcourse not, people. She should not.
N
No, she's going to mostly keep her first name, and just change her middle and last name to her husband's names.
Quite interesting post... I also always wanted to have my mother's name as part of my name but could not do that... :(
I would like to share my experience on this subject about changing name after marriage.
I got married last year and did not want to change my name (neither first nor last). I was quite firm on my decision. Well, it is nothing to do with my ego or anything... but just that I don't want to lose my identity... that's it.
Recently we applied for our marriage certificate and you wont believe but the advocate was not ready to submit our application with my original name. He kept saying that since you are married, your last name should be same as your husband's. I tried to explain him that I don't want to change my last name but he didn't listen. He said that your application will be rejected if you don't change your name. He even said that there would be many problems in future if you don't change your last name.
I wonder why is it such a BIG problem if the girl doesn't want to change her last name. If the marriage certificate says that 'Ms. A B C is married to Mr. X Y Z'.. isn't that sufficient? But they don't have any trace of the girl's original last name in the marriage certificate at all.... which is quite weird. They write 'Mrs. A X Z is married to Mr. X Y Z'... now who that 'A' is? It could be any 'A * *'. So, finally, just to have a trace of my original name, I requested them to write it as 'Mrs. A X Z, daughter of Mr.B C, is married to Mr. X Y Z'..... phew!! I am not at all happy with this kind of a system where you don't have right to decide upon your own name... grrrr!!
SK
As far as administrative purposes go, it's better to change your name post marriage. It's our system. And you don't want your kids having the same problem do you? just imagine the horrendous mistakes that could appear on marksheets, certificates etc. I do not think it's losing your identity. You're just taking on the name of the family you're marrying into. Also once married, you are part of a new family. You can't deny that. Maybe i'm a bit conservative, but that's just me.
In response to the latest comment, I would like to say:
It finally depends on the person. What's important is, "what does the person want". This post was written keeping in mind those women who wish to retain their family identity upon marriage, and my personal preference to have my mom and dad both part of my name.
I would understand if the latest comment offered a reason like "I want to change my name because I *want* to use my husband's name, as my personal choice". Thats perfectly fine.
Instead, it seems that the administrative machinery of India, and the mistakes it would make is being stated as the only reason for making such a change, and that is *not* a good thing. Bureaucracy and government are supposed to make life easier for citizens, not harder.
If a citizen wishes to make a change, they can always file a PIL (Public interest litigation) issue a show-cause notice to the government.
Finally, here's a thought: America is also a democracy, yet it upholds the right of women to retain their names after marriage. So why is the Indian government and society so stuck up with enforcing jsut the opposite?
basic information on PILs in India:
http://citizencentre.virtualpune.com/html/file-pil.shtml
My wife is a Filipina. When we got married, the first thing she did was move her last name to her middle name and change her last name to my last name. In assembly language, SHIFT LEFT. Our daughter has her own first name, and her middle and last name are the same as my wife's. That way both family names are included.
The problem with this from the US immigration point of view is they are confused as to why my wife has to change her middle name as well. Just as the way they are confused when they see Indian names where with more than 3 words or where the person's last name is the father's first name. This has led to additional paperwork with the USCIS (its not resolved yet).
During the birthing classes a few months ago, we met a Hispanic couple, the husband was Peruvian and the wife Argentinian. They had a conflict about what they would name their son when he was born. The wife's culture was similar to the Filipino culture - wife's family name becomes the middle name and the husband's family name becomes the wife's last name. But the husband's culture was the wife's new middle name should be the husband's LAST name and the wife retains her last name as the last name. I haven't followed up with them on the name, but they should have a baby boy by now.
If, after marriage, you want to retain your maiden last name in honour of your mother's family, please do so. If you want to retain your old last name, please do so. It doesn't matter what people say, really. At most you'll have to correct them when the teacher sends you reports addressed to "Mr and Mrs LASTNAME" or addresses you by a common last name.
Post a Comment
<< Home