Hyphenated last names

[JackRT]

So patriarchy is more evil then what Hitler did to the Jews?

It was perhaps wrong of me to say that "I regard patriarchy as just about the worst evil that humanity has ever inflicted on itself." How can one compare evils? But patriarchy does legitimize the subjugation of one half the human race to the other half of the human race and thereby demeans both halves.

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

I was thinking about this more and had some more thoughts to get feedback on.

I looked around online about this subject and then talked to another couple about it. The husband is a marriage counselor for about 25+ years now. They said to see the best view on it you should see opinions from five groups of people. Singles, engaged, married and remarried widow, remarried divorce. He says singles will rarely care about the last name. Likely because they aren't to that point of commitment yet that they have really thought about it. But like those that are engaged or married often they are so happy that they are fine with using the husbands last name. He said widows who remarry are a bit more open to keeping their last name since they are often elderly and its the last name they had from their husband their whole life. Though most of the time they tend to choose the new husbands last name.

Then he said in the case of couples who have had a divorce and remarried, they tend to be the biggest group of people that struggle with taking another last name. Sometimes its because they are nervous about another divorce and want their last name not changed. For some its just a case of the hassle of going back and froth through names when you remarry. And some its because they lost trust or are angry and don't want any more last names but their own. And from what I was seeing online it seems to be the case. Most remarried couples who had a previous divorce talk about the last name thing the most. Now he did say this is from an american stand point because other countries do things different, assuming they even have last names.

He also pointed out an article which I'll paste here when it comes to if its biblical or not:

The Globe and Mail recently suggested that women who get married should say "I don't" to changing their name. It cited new research from the Netherlands, which demonstrates that a woman who assumes her partner's name upon marriage is regarded as more emotional, less intelligent, less competent and less ambitious. Moreover, she supposedly will be less likely to be hired for a job and will likely earn much less than a woman who keeps her own name. In my opinion, the research (and the Globe and Mail's foreboding advice) demonstrates more about a prevalent bias against marriage, motherhood, and womanhood than it does about the competence, intelligence and ambition of women who change their names.

First, it's important to note that the researchers and participants of the study were unmarried college students. Since college students have not yet embarked on a career, it's safe to assume that their perceptions are not based on their experience with married women in the workforce, but rather on what they've been taught about the ideals to which women ought to aspire. College students have been taught that if a woman is smart, she will be career-minded, independent, and calculating—a high-earner, who is fiercely intent on reaching the highest rung on the career ladder. They've been trained to believe that it would be a "waste" for a smart woman to spend her life on family rather than career. Those women who value marriage, family, and commitment above career—those who get married and/or change their name, become dependent on a man, or give up anything for him—are regarded by today's students as either less competent, or just plain dumb. Unfortunately, it may take several decades of life experience for it to dawn on them that this simply isn't true. And by then, their course will be set, and it will be too late.

Why should you say "I do" to changing your name when you get married? I think there are five biblically-based reasons:

1. Unity: Scripture says that when you become married, you become one flesh with your husband. Changing your name to his reflects that fact. (Gen. 2:24; Matt. 19:5)
2. Identification: Scripture teaches that it's the man who launches out to establish a new family unit. Changing your name to his, and naming your children with the same name, identifies all of you as part of his family unit. (Gen. 2:24; Matt. 19:5)
3. Commitment: Changing your name indicates that you are making a permanent, life-long commitment to your husband, and will henceforth be identified as being inseparably linked to him. (Rom. 7:2; Matt. 19:6)
4. Roles: Changing your name to his indicates that you affirm the biblical pattern of your husband being the head of your marriage and household. (1 Cor. 11:3; Eph. 5)
5. Paradigm: Since the relationship between husband and wife is a paradigm of the relationship between Christ and the church, Christian women who change their name model and bear witness to the reality of Christ changing our names when we enter a relationship with Him. We—the church Bride—identify ourselves with Him and are called by His name when we become one with Him. Christ's bride is rightly called by her Husband's name. A woman who changes her name bears witness to this part of the gospel story. (Isa. 43:7, Acts 15:17, 2 Chron. 7:14, Rev. 3:12; 14:1)
6. Precedence: Adam named Eve. Twice. (Gen. 2:23; 3:20)

Whether a woman uses her husband's name is a cultural practice- but culture cannot be separated from ideology. A culture's practice is based on that culture's belief system. The reason our culture is deviating from the practice of a woman adopting her husband's name is due to a devaluation of marriage and emphasis on woman's independence from man. More and more women are keeping their names, or hyphenating their names, or negotiating with their husbands to change both names to a new, blended name. Although the Bible doesn't directly address this issue, I believe there are strong reasons for a woman to take on her husband's name when she gets married. Contrary to popular media opinion, saying "I Do" to changing your name may, in fact, be more intelligent than saying "I Don't."

He said what I did about when a challenge comes up that people may not like the answer to, often people will resort to the age old line of "Well it doesn't say specifically in the bible <insert thing you think you can do>!" He said part of out nature thanks to sin being in the world is to be rebellious (great word, I should use that more often) at times. Living up to everything we have to do according to the bible can be hard. Especially when something we want to do may contradict what is biblical. We find a loophole or some reason to still do what we want to do deep down. He brought up inappropriate contentography addiction in marriage. He said many of the men will have out of the world logic to excuse why they are into inappropriate content such as "Well its biblicaly ok to look at inappropriate content if your wife is abusing your needs. Its not as bad as cheating on her with a real person! So God would understand!".

He really just reconfirmed my views on this subject. Lastly I thought about what someone mentioned (can't recall who) that keeping your name is about being an individual, you want to be yourself. But how can you be an individual and married? Marriage is about equality. So wanting to keep your name because of being a "individual" is like saying you want to really remain single at heart. In other words why marry if you want to be an individual? I know plenty of single men and women who want to be individuals and stay single because of that. They find marriage to be to hard to want to do because it means giving up their individuality and operating as one unit.

 

[ValleyGal]

How can you be an individual and be married? Because two become "as" one - as in one unit. Just like the Godhead is made up of three distinct individuals, marriage is made up of two distinct individuals. I did not lose my individuality when I married. I still have my own mind, my own will, my own desires, tastes, preferences, thoughts, ideas, values, faith.... You should read the book "Boundaries" by Cloud and Townsend. It talks very clearly about where you end and your spouse begins.

As for the other arguments:

Why should you say "I do" to changing your name when you get married? I think there are five biblically-based reasons:

1. Unity: Scripture says that when you become married, you become one flesh with your husband. Changing your name to his reflects that fact. (Gen. 2:24; Matt. 19:5)

Already discussed. We become as one...not one literally. A name has nothing to do with the process of becoming as one, either. Gradually over time, couples start to take on each other's characteristics, think alike, etc, whether either of them has changed their name or not.

1. Identification

   : Scripture teaches that it's the man who launches out to establish a new family unit. Changing your name to his, and naming your children with the same name, identifies all of you as part of his family unit. (Gen. 2:24; Matt. 19:5)

Family units are not that simple. I took my first husband's name and we gave that name to our son. Husband ran away from home; I married someone else. I did not change my name - we were only married a month because he beat the tar out of me, so it's a good thing I didn't change my name. I married my current husband. I do not take his name in part because that would leave my son without a sense of connection to a family name. His father has nothing to do with him. His father abandoned him. I am not going to abandon him in name. That would be a double-whammy. So what to do, when family does not fall into your little box of husband wife and 2.3 children according to the American dream?

1. Commitment:

   Changing your name indicates that you are making a permanent, life-long commitment to your husband, and will henceforth be identified as being inseparably linked to him. (Rom. 7:2; Matt. 19:6)

This offends me to no end. I have the integrity to keep the vows I made to God and to my husband, regardless of what my name is. No name has anything to do with my character aside from what my character gives to my name. Changing my name does not "prove" commitment. There are a lot of people out there who do change names and still end up divorced and there are a lot of couples out there who stay married where she did not change her name.

1. Roles:

   Changing your name to his indicates that you affirm the biblical pattern of your husband being the head of your marriage and household. (1 Cor. 11:3; Eph. 5)

I affirm the biblical pattern of mutual submission according to Eph. 5: 21, which fits into the overall expectations for husbands and wives who love each other like Jesus calls us to love each other.

1. Paradigm:

   Since the relationship between husband and wife is a paradigm of the relationship between Christ and the church, Christian women who change their name model and bear witness to the reality of Christ changing our names when we enter a relationship with Him. We—the church Bride—identify ourselves with Him and are called by His name when we become one with Him. Christ's bride is rightly called by her Husband's name. A woman who changes her name bears witness to this part of the gospel story. (Isa. 43:7, Acts 15:17, 2 Chron. 7:14, Rev. 3:12; 14:1)

I'm offended by this, too. Jesus gives us his authority, but if ANYone tries to call me by Jesus' name, I will put them in their place. I identify as a Christian and that I belong to him, but the idea that we will be called "Mrs. Jesus Christ" is absurd.

1. Precedence:

   Adam named Eve. Twice. (Gen. 2:23; 3:20)

Adam and Eve didn't have last names.

ETA I don't know what happened to the formatting, or how to fix it. Sorry.

 

[Dave-W]

Adam and Eve didn't have last names.

True. In fact, before the fall Eve did not even have a name separate from Adam.

 

[Dave-W]

6 Precedence: Adam named Eve. Twice. (Gen. 2:23; 3:20)

The first one was not naming HER per se but naming the female of the species. In the Hebrew the Gen 2.23 is interesting.

Man is Ish, woman Ishah (from man); but in Hebrew there was no vowels, so the spelling of ish is exactly the same as aish, which is fire.

Why is man called "fire?"

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

I did not lose my individuality when I married. I still have my own mind, my own will, my own desires, tastes, preferences,

Well thats true of course, I didn't mean we aren't individuals. We have our own thoughts, own likes...etc. I guess I meant it like you can still be yourself but also admit your also part of a unit. Hence you take the last name out of being equals. Though one could also saying being equal would mean keeping your last name. But at least in america I think it would just make for confusion when a married couple has two different names.

So what to do, when family does not fall into your little box of husband wife and 2.3 children according to the American dream?

Well I'd say stick with what most do. When married take the new name. If divorced go back to your old name. Although obviously I could go into the subject about not believing in divorce but thats way to hard of a topic because its sounds like being condemned for something you didn't chose to do. And I don't want it to sound like that since only Jesus/God could argue it best and obviously is the one people that others would listen to.

Adam and Eve didn't have last names.

True. They didn't. Which if I recall is why everyone just said "I am son of so and so, who was son of so and so (begot, begot, begot). But now that we, or at least in some countries have last names I say stick to the name of the person your marrying. And if you chose not to, then really thats fine to. I wouldn't think less of someone who kept their last name. Now would I really judge them like "Sinner!!" because its not a sin and honestly at the end of the day is near the bottom of the list of things to worry about as a christian.

As always we can all agree to disagree because obviously our own personal views on it are our own and we can't expect other to conform to them, regardless of if they are bible based or not.

 

[ValleyGal]

You use the phrase "I say..." a lot. Of course you are entitled to your opinion, but that entitlement does not make you any more "right" than someone who marries and chooses to keep their own name, and this issue is not addressed in the Bible, so that would suggest God is leaving the decision up to us.

 

[Albion]

You use the phrase "I say..." a lot. Of course you are entitled to your opinion, but that entitlement does not make you any more "right" than someone....

People level the same charge against me because I tend to use the expression "I think" a lot. However, this is intended to convey exactly the opposite message from what you're thinking.

Such wording instead acknowledges the possibility that I/we may NOT be right but that what's written is, nevertheless, according to my best judgment.

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

Well I agree of course it is up to us what to do about it. Like I said its not a sin so it doesn't really matter if someone takes their spouses name or not. Just like it doesn't matter if I legally change my name to "Iluv Pizza".

As for how I say things, I don't really care. I'm brain injured and grammar/spelling is not a area I'm that great at. Often people take everything thing I say and twist it around to make it out like I am saying certain things with a certain intention. Such as when I say You're instead of Your. Or Johns instead of John's. If it makes people feel better "I think this is what I believe about last names".

 

[ValleyGal]

Taking what he said in context of the whole thread, it seems that he is saying his way is the best way because it's how it's always been done and how dare we feminists try to change that, as though we are "less than" because of our decision to maintain our name and identity, as though we are taking something away from their manhood. I maintain my assertion that there are different perspectives and different ways of doing things that are just as "right" as whatever traditional way worked for a few decades.

 

[Albion]

Taking what he said in context of the whole thread, it seems that he is saying his way is the best way because it's how it's always been done and how dare we feminists try to change that, as though we are "less than" because of our decision to maintain our name and identity, as though we are taking something away from their manhood. I maintain my assertion that there are different perspectives and different ways of doing things that are just as "right" as whatever traditional way worked for a few decades.

Yes, but I was addressing only the habit of a poster to use the expression "I see."

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

Taking what he said in context of the whole thread, it seems that he is saying his way is the best way because it's how it's always been done and how dare we feminists try to change that, as though we are "less than" because of our decision to maintain our name and identity, as though we are taking something away from their manhood. I maintain my assertion that there are different perspectives and different ways of doing things that are just as "right" as whatever traditional way worked for a few decades.

I was saying what you are. Not sure your your offended since my opinion is simply an opinion. You are the one that keeps bringing up "less then" and "feminists" and "manhood". Your putting words into my mouth. If you disagree with my opinion then thats fine. Just as I can disagree with yours. But I never said "My view is the right one!". THough you keep saying yours is so....

 

[LinkH]

The first one was not naming HER per se but naming the female of the species. In the Hebrew the Gen 2.23 is interesting.

Man is Ish, woman Ishah (from man); but in Hebrew there was no vowels, so the spelling of ish is exactly the same as aish, which is fire.

Why is man called "fire?"

If I'm not mistaken, there is a yodh between the aleph and shin in the word 'ish', which is not present in the word 'aish'-- so two different words.

 

[LinkH]

One can't accept or not accept biblical patriarchy. It is an historical fact. Biblical patriarchy is just as evil as any other form of patriarchy. In fact, I regard patriarchy as just about the worst evil that humanity has ever inflicted on itself.

Rejection of patriarchy is evil. There may be evil versions of patriarchy. But God is the Father, and patriarchy is rule by the father. The creation is patriarchal.

 

[ValleyGal]

I say my opinion is "right" because I leave everyone with the freedom to make the choice that is "right" for them without accusing of being feminist, hating men, thinking men are controllers, ignoring personal freedoms and the right to choose, the right to self-determination, or going against some outdated tradition. I do not "should" on anyone because it is not a moral issue, yet you seem to think it is.

 

[LinkH]

There is no command about a woman taking her husband's name in the Bible. There can be different motivations for wanting to hyphenate a last name. In many cultures, women don't take their husband's last name, but don't have a problem with the husband being the head, they commit for life, and aren't trying to make some kind of ideological statement about identity, equality, etc. by not taking the name. It's just not their culture.

 

[LinkH]

It was perhaps wrong of me to say that "I regard patriarchy as just about the worst evil that humanity has ever inflicted on itself." How can one compare evils? But patriarchy does legitimize the subjugation of one half the human race to the other half of the human race and thereby demeans both halves.

Modern ideas of equality are evil to the extent that they contradict revelation from God.

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

I don't think its a moral issue. Its just a name. Not sure why you keep bringing up all you are. I take it you just can't say anything without having a sarcastic reply after it. I think maybe the issue here is not me.

 

[ValleyGal]

Is that what you read into my posts is sarcasm? Way off... sarcasm is behavioural contempt. I have no contempt towards you, although maybe somewhat sorry that you seem so misguided.

btw, I don't keep "bringing up all you are" but simply respond to the things you keep bringing up.

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

That may be an accurate statement. I'm not the best at online talking with my brain injury. I get confused or misunderstand things sometimes. Whatever the case my apologies if I said anything offensive.