I think I've burned me bra...

[caddyman]

The text conversation started with my darling sister asking for Furtle’s surname so she could address a Christmas card. Then she followed it up with something along the lines of, “of course next year it will be Mr and Mrs Lea”. Sometimes my sister can be a little opaque, so when I texted back to say that that hadn’t been decided yet, she responded with “what hasn’t?”

And so it began.

There are several factors at work here: firstly, she never knows when a text conversation has ended; secondly, she never properly reads a text and thirdly, if challenged she immediately drops onto the defensive and displays unparalleled gifts in passive aggression. I’m used to it. Furtle less so.

Having explained the reasons, it boiled down for her to a) it’s traditional (it shows commitment) and b) there’s no point getting married if you don’t change your name…

I have to confess that I found myself at something of a loss. Having made a playful jibe about her not being up on feminist principles, I found myself trying to argue from a feminist viewpoint and not really getting anywhere, including pointing out archaic and outdated ideas on ownership, the one-sidedness of it all and so on ad nauseam. It all pretty much ground to a halt when I was pretty much told that it’s political correctness gone mad and that the family couldn’t possibly be expected to understand because they are just traditional country bumpkins…

It makes me weak, it really does. I could really have done with some input from someone more learned in the field. Anyway, there was a little more following my ‘no, not really’ but that’s essentially where I left it.

Directly afterwards, being a little bemused by the whole thing, I mentioned it casually to Ann, my boss and to Victoria (of whom I have written before). Ann, as I expected understood the point I had been trying to make, but Victoria came in on my sister’s side. In her view it is the woman’s duty to change her name, so I asked why and here we get the so-called biblical angle, “Well in the Bible, God created Adam first and…” I had to cut her off at that point. I managed to stop myself after pointing out that “with all due respect, that argument is rot”.

Happily she didn’t take me treading on her religion badly, but frankly that argument definitely is rot.

Talking to Furtle about it later, she made the point that I wish had occurred to me at the time (and which I am not likely to have the opportunity to deploy): Adam didn’t have a surname (nor, now I think of it, did any Old Testament characters – though I am sure I’ll be corrected on that) and Eve was never known as Mrs Adam.

Who’d have though that it would be me trying to put over (albeit hamfistedly) a feminist viewpoint to two women and failing to get through the weight of tradition..?

Comments

[glassfinger]

I was unaware that there was a biblical precedent for a woman taking her husband's name, though my wife would probably point out something that I ought to know, having been a Christian for 17 years. I thought it was merely tradition? Whatever the reason, if Elle is happy keeping her name and you're both tickety-boo with it, what's it matter to anyone else?

[caddyman]

I couldn't swear to it, but I'm pretty sure there is no actual Biblical precedent; I think instead, it's one of things that certain denominations infer, like purgatory and stuff.

As to the general principle, as I say (and I'm willing to be corrected) there are no surnames in the Old Testament and relatively few if any in the new - I'm not sure if Pontius Pilate is a name or a title with a name after it. (I wonder what a Pontius might have been..?).

In England, surnames were something that didn't really exist before the 14th century anyway, which means over 1,300 years of marriages with no-one taking anybody's surname!

[glassfinger]

The nearest thing to surnames in the bible is bar-this and bar-that. There is, for instance, Simon-bar-Jonah, which as I'm sure you'll guess means Simon son of Jonah. The murderer who was released in exchange for Christ being crucified (if that's the correct way to put it) was Barabbas, which means that he was a sort of everyman because his first name is not given, he was merely the son of some chap named Abbas. The reason for this was explained to us once in a sermon but heck if I can recall it. It's odd that there are careful genealogies in the bible, in spite of, or possibly because of, none of the poor chaps having a surname.

Isn't that how surnames came about, though? I'm sure you know this, well-read lad that you are. Johnson obviously means son of John, McDonald being son of Donald, and all those spiffing foreign prefixes like de, van, von and so on (though a lot of those referred to place names, didn't they? Like Marie de Guise, etc). In some countries they still use the patronymic, and in Iceland that odd girl Bjork is Björk Guðmundsdóttir, Gudmund's daughter.

Either that or people were named for their professions, like cooper, weaver, wain, archer, fletcher, falconer (therefore Faulkner). I love all that stuff.

According to that paragon of accuracy, Wikipedia, (t)here are several possible origins for the cognomen Pilatus. A commonly accepted one is that it means "skilled with the javelin". The pilum (= javelin) was five feet of wooden shaft and two feet of tapered iron. Pontius Pilate's family name signifies he was from the tribe Pontii, an ancient Samnite name.

So there we have it. I love the Internet.

[caddyman]

A lot of surnames arose from locales, trades, professions and even nicknames, I believe. The de, von, vans of foreign extraction are all marks of nobility, so I suspect they started off as titles and became names as the person's line of decent grew further from the actual dukedom or such. I'm not sure how it operates (or operated) abroad, but I do know for example that in France the King could ennoble a family without actually giving them a title, by allowing them to use the 'de' before their surname.

It is interesting stuff all round, but my original point rests: it's Adam and Eve, not Mr & Mrs Adam, so Victoria's point of view is, respectfully, utter rot.

[furzepig.livejournal.com]

Kudos for sticking to your guns though! I've been becoming increasingly aware that I'm very lucky in my friends, in that most of them are open minded and 'get' this kind of thing without having to have long debates about it.

My family and my work colleagues (outside of my team) demonstrate how lucky I am by providing a more narrow-minded contrast, and my family is actually a pretty open-minded one in comparison to others.

Naturally I do entirely get what you're talking about when it comes to the name thing. It should be down to the choice of the partners (regardless of gender) and what works for them. The whole thing is about their commitment to each other and how they want to display it to society as a whole, and it should be as laid down by them, for them.

Marriage just doesn't work for me, but that again is a personal choice. In part down to the whole 'ownership' points you touch on above, as well as my views relationships in general.

[mr-h-r-hughes.livejournal.com]

I'd broadly agree with you but Amy and I still get some strange looks from people when we tell them we are never getting married and teh number of people who are in a similar position seems to get smaller every year.

[furzepig.livejournal.com]

Well, amongst our circle of friends that will get smaller as folks decide to 'settle' with someone they've lived with for a while, or decide it is for them after all. Likewise having kids (a whole other topic). There are also apparently financial/legal improvements from getting the certificate.
I rarely have the discussion with anyone as it opens it up to a multitude of linked topics, some of which few people really seem to 'get' unless they've already come to similar conclusions for themselves. Plus it's something very personal for me that I've put a lot of thinking into, and it's not easily defined. In essence: I don't want to 'own' anyone and don't want anyone to feel they 'own' me ('own' being an overly simplistic term for what I mean).

[mr-h-r-hughes.livejournal.com]

Obviously it's all a personal choice. It's when people try and justify things to us (I'm not sure why it matters to them) we really get confused. There's much talk of 'commitments' and 'declaring commitments before your family and friends' and our attitude is always 1) any commitment we have is between us and nobody else's business. 2) we have a massive mortgage together and a child, if that doesn't give some clue that we are a bit serious then I dunno what does. Maybe we are weird.

"There are also apparently financial/legal improvements from getting the certificate."

I've not come across many biggies but if there are any I'd love someone to let me know.

[furzepig.livejournal.com]

Well, in Scottish law a shared house, the share of the dead person automatically goes to the spouse, or parent if no spouse (unless otherwise bequeathed). If you have divorced parents (like me) that's worth sorting out. May be different in England though.
Another one is the pensions - a spouse will get the pension pay-outs, but not if not married. Or something. Likely varies according to the pension agreements. I've not looked in depth as the idea's never appealed to me regardless.
But yes, there's often a societal defensiveness about such things. "It's traditional", "it's for the kids", "it's to show you're committed", "If you're not married there must be something wrong with you" etc. I've heard them all or had them implied, and had them preached at me. Bunkum, really. It's personal choice and should be a shared decision. Also shouldn't be limited to particular genders, IMO.
If I want a party where you dress up - which is another part of the wedding thing - I'm happy to just have a party, and am doing so next year. Just coz. It's the closest I'm likely to get to holding anything like a 'wedding'. Maybe I should make a point of wearing a wedding dress and marrying myself? ;-)
(Though really - not sure I would want to be lumbered with me forever :-P )

[mr-h-r-hughes.livejournal.com]

I think the self-marriage is a marvellous idea.

We're going to have a big party on our 10th anniversary which handily alligns with my 40th : )

[furzepig.livejournal.com]

Uh-huh. That must have been a good 30th birthday then!

I will almost certainly insist on wearing a big fancy frock, having really enjoyed doing so for the Andrews-Cooke ball. It may end up being white, if I feel that silly nearer the time. Or it may just be the same one, which was terribly comfy and unlikely to get another airing otherwise. I have a year to think it over - loads of time.

[caddyman.livejournal.com]

Wear white with raggedy red hem.

Carry an axe...

[mr-h-r-hughes.livejournal.com]

Sorry there were so many big frocks flying around and I had no glasses on, remind me which was yours : )

[furzepig.livejournal.com]

Brown with gold swirly bits, long bronze sleeves, bird mask. Just realised this isn't friend-locked, or I'd link direct. You've seen Chi's photos from the event though, yes?

[caddyman.livejournal.com]

It's friends locked now if you want to link. ;-)

[furzepig.livejournal.com]

*Happy Dance!*

http://www.flickr.com/photos/futility-and-spirituality/6345539800/in/set-72157628120762914

(I'm just wary of openly linking personal details, like pics - thanks!)

[caddyman.livejournal.com]

From a legal perspective the rights and protections in a 'common law' marriage are pretty much non-existent.

Quite apart from the romance of it all (altogether now, 'Ahhh'), once we're married, Furtle is my legal next of kin and if I walk under a bus the day after, she can be sure of keeping the house without a legal fight.

In our case in addition to the commitment etc, which is pretty obvious anyway, there's peace of mind. Oh yes - my pension as it stands, is not payable to her if I die, but will be after we are married (with a reassuring clause to say that if she offs me she gets nowt!). ;-)

[mr-h-r-hughes.livejournal.com]

Ah my pension, will etc all have provison for a nominated partner so all is well...good job too as I have a good pension.

[furzepig.livejournal.com]

"with a reassuring clause to say that if she offs me she gets nowt!"
You are wise indeed, sir!

[caddyman.livejournal.com]

I think Monica Fuddle is a good name, Rum.

[kt-peasant.livejournal.com]

'Adam was created first' always tangents me into 'so he was the beta release then?

It does sound as though your sister isn't at home to the logic bunny though (saying nothing about Victoria!), so you may have to just have 'I will use the surname I want to use, Elle will use the surname she wants to use' on a piece of paper by the phone (or somewhere easy to c&p into texts).

She'll always be Ms Furtle, anyway ;-)

[caddyman.livejournal.com]

Doctor Furtle!

[caffeine-fairy.livejournal.com]

Having had this argument many, many times, both before and after I chose to change my name, I can assure you there is only one right answer-" it's none of your damn business"...

[jfs.livejournal.com]

You changed your name to Eric?

I mean, I know I was pushing quite hard on that, but I hadn't realised you'd taken the final steps :-)

[jfs.livejournal.com]

... You resemble that remark? :-)

[caffeine-fairy.livejournal.com]

Actually I changed my name to Gary O'Connell, and he changed his to Emma Waite, but noone has noticed yet.

[mr-h-r-hughes.livejournal.com]

"I was pretty much told that it’s political correctness gone mad and that the family couldn’t possibly be expected to understand because they are just traditional country bumpkins…"

That's hardly an excuse, my experiences of my mum's rural family and their local villages have shown me that the bumpkin is not remotely concerned with that sort of thing and barely cares if people are married (possibly because it's hard to keep up with who in the local area hasn't shagged who) full stop. Ditto with lots of other things, I'm not sure where the idea that rural types are conservative and city folk are dreadfully open-minded and live-and-let-live comes from ??? : )

[mr-h-r-hughes.livejournal.com]

I once knew a Mr Higgingbottom, he married a Miss Groves. After the wedding he became Mr. Groves...I think there is wisdom in this. Not that I'm dissing the name Higgingbottom which I thinks ace but I can see what they were doing and I approve, hell if I was to marry and the good lady had a cooler surname, I dunno, something like Cassowary-Bumblethorpe, I'd take it in a second.

[caddyman.livejournal.com]

I'd jump at Cassowary-Bumblethorpe.

[mr-h-r-hughes.livejournal.com]

Well in that case maybe we should get married, take me away from all this Mr Cassowary-Bumblethorpe !

[caddyman.livejournal.com]

I'm so happy; I thought you'd never ask!

[mr-h-r-hughes.livejournal.com]

My sort of bishop !

[agentinfinity.livejournal.com]

Occasionally I find myself totally stumped by how old fashioned people can be. Some people I work with have very surprising views on a whole variety of things, which is a bit worrying for people dealing with members of the public to such a degree. The fact that I work and have a young child, for example, just plain confounds some of them. I also found myself quite surprised by comments like "I like gay people, they're so funny" and "Oh you've got a tattoo, I think they're disgusting".

But I think sometimes people hold beliefs and viewpoints because they've just never stopped to think them through and when something or someone comes along that challenges them (even accidently), they don't really know what to make of it because it's totally out of their experience. At least, that's what I think when I'm feeling charitable.

I recall Rob Tomkins and Louise told me something about how people used to keep their own names when they married - I think the practice of a woman giving up hers might have been a Victorian invention. But I couldn't swear to it as I didn't really have a personal interest in storing that fact for later use. Might be worth looking up if you need ammo.

[jfs.livejournal.com]

Well - it's really common in academia for people who've started a research career to continue publishing under their pre-marriage names, even if they do change them.

So I'd have thought Bry's relatives might accept 'Her PhD is under Furtle' even if they don't accept the 'It's none of your damn business' argument.

[nyarbaggytep.livejournal.com]

We had some shenanigans about names when we had M, due to not being married and all. M has my surname, some members of R's family groused about it. We said "we're sorry you're upset" and didn't change anything. People can be very emotional about names. Even other people's names.

Well done for sticking to your guns.

[ladkyis.livejournal.com]

I think you are getting married because you want to and you can call yourself what you like as long as you don't change your name for illegal purposes. YOu will always be Caddyman and Dr Furtle to me (If I pause and breathe in slowly I can remember forenames) Making property secure and pensions payable to the right person is worth the price of the certificate and let's face it there's only three times in life when you can get certified and still be sane - although I know someone who can get you sections if that's what you want...

[pax-draconis.livejournal.com]

We are still talking about options. Were it not for the fact it sounds like an instruction eiuther way round, we would probably have double-barrelled.

I am lazy and used to my name but it being a stepfather's surname I have no hereditary attachment to it. I suspect I may end up choosing to add T's surname as a middle name by deed poll.

[caddyman.livejournal.com]

Actually, you've given me an idea to do similar; I could take Furtle's surname as an additional middle name without double barrelling.

It's blitheringly obvious, really. I wonder if it can be done as part of the wedding or whether like you, I would have to deed poll it..?

[mr-h-r-hughes.livejournal.com]

Marlowe has 'Hall' as a middle name (coincidently I believe that 'Hall' is what the H in William H Macey stands for)

[littleonionz.livejournal.com]

When my Dad shrugs off this mortal coil I'm losing the surname. All manner of reasons but one is the whole patrilineage thing. I use Davies a fair bit these days because I really rather like my 'partner' (how I most often refer to mi spouse, it sounds dynamic and teamy weamy) and Davies is somehow easier to grasp than 'Reay'Also hyphens are devillish difficult for some peeps to grasp. Well done on attempting to liberate your sister and co-worker from the brainwashing of centuries...comrade ;)