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myself trying to argue from a feminist viewpoint and not really getting anywhere, including pointing out archaic and outdated ideas on ownership, the one-sidedness of it all and so on ad nauseam.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

[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.