Submission and What's in a Name

[Symbrinity]

My fiance and I have been engaged for a year (together for 5 years), and the wedding is coming up very soon. We love each other incredibly, and have no doubts that God has led us to each other to become life-long marital partners.

Unfortunately for my fiance, I have recently become extremely reluctant to take his name. I had always assumed I would take my husband's name, and so this has never been an issue for us until all of a sudden, out of the blue. I had never thought twice about taking my husband's name, but now that the time has come to actually do it, I am starting to panic because I feel extremely averse to the idea.

I don't want to change my identity; I don't want to lose the ethnic heritage in my name; I don't want to go through with the hassle; it's just a cultural convention; the Bible does not address the issue; it's not fair that my fiance doesn't have to do it; I feel like it impinges on my independence and free will; and, most importantly - it's not fair that I don't get a choice in the matter. I'm a grown woman, not a child who is told what to do. I'm an adult and I should be free to make my own decisions, and not even need any reasons to do so.

We have argued about it a few times, and my fiance was extremely adamant that he expected me to take his name. I really started to panic, because if this is what "wives, submit to your husband" is all about, I wanted no part of it. Eventually, after much talking and tears and apologies, my fiance agreed that is ultimately my own decision and it is not right for him to tell me what to do and he will marry me no matter what I decide. What a breath of relief!

However - and this is the issue now - I feel like whatever decision I make, one of us will always be resentful. The decision to change my name has suddenly fallen into my hands and the weight of such a decision is more than I can bear. I of course always try and put my fiance's happiness before my own, which would seem to make the decision an easy one; however, I know that his happiness is also dependent on my own and it would be hard for him to be happy if I choose his name and as a result became resentful.

Furthermore my fiance has pointed out that our children won't have the same name as me, but I feel like in bringing up this point he knows he wins anyway because how I could refuse to not avoid that problem, thus ultimately not really giving me a choice in the end anyway.

All I wanted was to be able to choose my own name for myself but now I'm finding that's not good enough. I just don't know what to do. There are no other major issues in our relationship, just this one little thing that got sprung on us out of nowhere, in the last minute. Any advice or anybody in a similar situation?

BTW - hyphenating would not be an option, it would sound ridiculous and I don't want to be divided like that.

 

[Weasel7711]

Why do you think your view on the subject has polarized so much recently? What changed between then and now?

 

[Weasel7711]

One reason that the Bible doesn't address the issue is because no one had last names back then. There were just known as Bob of Texas or Joseph of Arimathea, of Jesse son of David, etc.

From a neutral stance it sounds like you have held in this resentment about it until now and not told him about it or acknowledged it. You just went along with it because you thought it was the right thing to do. If that IS the case you should have discussed this beforehand.

One thing to consider. A husband and wife are supposed to be devoted to each other. It seems that taking his name makes you feel like you are being pushed around. Now, I don't know your fiance and he may be like this or he may not, but I don't think he is doing this to push you around or show dominance over you. Consider it this way, he wants to share his family heritage with you. It is part of the two of you becoming one. You still can keep your maiden name as your middle name if you want, no one is forcing you to strike it from the record books and lose your identity. But you gain a new identity as his wife and partner and should be proud to carry his name.
Since it IS a cultural norm, the reason he is so adamant about you taking his name is because it may feel like rejection to him. Before you didn't have a problem with it and all of a sudden you don't want to. It's probably a big blow to his ego.

Just take some time to sit and think about why you really don't want to take his name. With God's help you two can come to some sort of compromise.
Anyway, I hope this helped, sorry if any of it seemed judgmental.

 

[Pennelope]

Wise words, Weasel.

I understand how strong feelings might come up if you'd never really looked at the issue before. But it would be too bad to make the decision based on "who wins." It might help to ask yourself the question, "What's important?" and even journal about it. If you are afraid that your identity will get squashed through headship/submission or something, then perhaps you and your fiancee could talk about that specifically. He might value your thoughts on your desire to be really one with him but that you have fears of being "dominated" and would appreciate his reassurance. Or maybe it's something completely different.

From my own perspective, over and above the mine-his issue, I've always thought the power of taking my husband's name wouldn't be in "going over to his side" or something like that, but in having a Family Name. Since in our society it's generally the husband's name . . . well, it is what it is.

But maybe you'd like to talk together about ways to preserve your cultural heritage. Can you address holidays, decorating the house, foods or other things in a way that will make clear to the world and to your children that your culture is an important part of your family unity.

It's late. I'm rambling. Sorry. Hope this helps.

 

[Symbrinity]

Thank for the replies.

I guess my view on the issue has become so polarized as of late partly from reading some intelligent feminist texts and partly from beginning to establish my individual identity as a grown up (I'm 21).

My fiance is definitely hurt by this and it is definitely a blow to his ego. But his initial adamancy on the issue was also a blow to my understanding of our relationship as a team, as partners - not as leader-follower.

We have discussed what submission means for a wife in a Christian marriage, but I've never really taken it that seriously because it has never been necessary to put into practice in the 5 years we've been together. We've made all decisions equally, like co-partners, or at least decisions were split equally between us, between our various areas of expertise/interest, and this has worked just fine for wedding planning. We are doing marriage prep counseling and our pastor addressed the whole submission thing in marriage but he said he believes there is more than one acceptable way to interpret Paul, and it is up to us to decide what it means for us. I thought, fair enough, I can agree to that. But it appears that putting "submission" into practice is much more uncomfortable than it would appear....

It's hard to talk about what the submission of a wife means because neither I nor my fiance can think of a single situation where it would be necessary for me to submit to my fiance. This is largely because we agree on just about everything and have never been confronted with a problem that couldn't be reconciled with a compromise, or one of us giving in/conceding (but not just me, all the time). That makes me think that that means it's not really necessary. Maybe in Paul's day and age, when women were "out of control" (or whatever it is people say they apparently were), it was necessary, but just like in the 21st century a woman can speak up in church because she has learned how to do so properly, likewise nowadays a woman can make any decision a man can because she has all the same resources and capabilities. Women don't "need" men like they used to - in terms of survival. I don't need the leadership of my husband in order to survive or even have a good life. I'm not exactly sure what it's even for. And if my husband wants to always have the final say in major matters, then why doesn't he just live by himself? That would be the best way for him to avoid the conflicts that inevitably rise from human relationships.

Anyway, my fiance's initial obstinacy re: my name just shot up like a warning flag for me about the whole wife-submission thing, about which previously I was not too concerned. I guess I had better figure it out though.

Does anybody have any specific examples of what the submission of a wife means?

 

[Symbrinity]

Oh, and the ideas about encouraging my heritage in other ways are great ideas too - actually my fiance brought that up himself as an idea, which I really appreciate.

 

[Atlantians]

Being the last heir of my family name I would preffer my Wife do so also.

Lest when I die, so would end my kinsname.
*walks away in nobility*


But... seriously, I don't see how this is that big of a deal.

What cultural heritage is in your name?

You could just change it to: (So-and-so) (Maiden'sname)-(New-Name)

 

[Symbrinity]

But... seriously, I don't see how this is that big of a deal.

If it's not that big of a deal, then why do it at all?

If it's not a big deal, then why do lots of couples fight about it?

Again, hyphenating is not an option because it would sound ridiculous with our two names together.

 

[peanutbutter12]

I can tell you this much. I'm not totally familiar with the history of how this tradition began, but I see it as an important one in marriage.

When I got married, to me, there was no option in her taking my name. If she had requested not to take it, I wouldn't have married her. Here is why:

To me, taking your husbands name is an honourific. For one, it shows that you are becoming one instead of being two separate entities. Two, it's showing respect and devotion on a permanent level to your husband. Three, any kids you have will have the "family" name and can continue the family line... not a big deal to some people anymore, but it is to me.

 

[Symbrinity]

I can tell you this much. I'm not totally familiar with the history of how this tradition began, but I see it as an important one in marriage.

The tradition began in the Middle Ages when a woman became a man's property upon marrying him. Because he owned her, he had the right to name her. So he gave her and his children, also his property, his name.

it shows that you are becoming one instead of being two separate entities.

Agreed that it has that effect. But why his name instead of hers?

Two, it's showing respect and devotion on a permanent level to your husband.

What does that say about husbands then, who don't take their wives' names?

Three, any kids you have will have the "family" name and can continue the family line... not a big deal to some people anymore, but it is to me.

What if that is not an issue? As in, the husband has a popular name that doesn't risk "dying out." And why can't the kids carry the maternal family line? What's the differnce?

These are all good reasons for having the same last name - but they don't explain why it should be the man's.

 

[peanutbutter12]

What if that is not an issue? As in, the husband has a popular name that doesn't risk "dying out." And why can't the kids carry the maternal family line? What's the differnce?

These are all good reasons for having the same last name - but they don't explain why it should be the man's.

Because the man is the head, the leader, the strength. It's only recently that this whole feminist movement has gone on and really messed with people and their whole equal rights and women can do anything a man can do talk. It's women trying to become the head, leader, and strength because they are unwilling to accept what they are... women. It's like, being a woman isn't good enough for them. I don't want to sit here and debate feminism, god knows that could go on forever and get pretty brutal as well.

Remember, Eve was made from Adam. She was placed as a companion to Adam. When she ate from the apple, God created the hierarchy within a marriage which placed Adam as the head.

“I will greatly multiply your pain in childbirth. In pain you shall bring forth children; yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you,” (Genesis 3:16)

And again, Paul makes it clear that the man is head of his house:

"For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man; 9 for indeed man was not created for the woman’s sake, but woman for the man’s sake. 10 Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels," (1 Cor. 11:8-10)

As for your questions about having a popular name, for me, it's more my line of that name than the name itself. I have a fairly common last name, but it's important to me to continue to have that name.

As for the man not taking the womans name, again, it goes back to him being the head and leader of his house which I just explained. Any further argument on that should be taken up with God.

 

[Symbrinity]

Because the man is the head, the leader, the strength. It's only recently that this whole feminist movement has gone on and really messed with people and their whole equal rights and women can do anything a man can do talk. It's women trying to become the head, leader, and strength

That's not what I'm interested in...that just sets up a new hierarchy in place of the old one. I'm interested in shared leadership, and flexibility of roles. Sometimes my husband's my shoulder to cry on, sometimes I'm his. Sometimes I'll cook dinner, sometimes he will. Sometimes I'll make decisions, sometimes he will. Sometimes I'll be disciplining the kids, sometimes he will. etc.

because they are unwilling to accept what they are... women. It's like, being a woman isn't good enough for them. I don't want to sit here and debate feminism, god knows that could go on forever and get pretty brutal as well.

Remember, Eve was made from Adam. She was placed as a companion to Adam. When she ate from the apple, God created the hierarchy within a marriage which placed Adam as the head.

“I will greatly multiply your pain in childbirth. In pain you shall bring forth children; yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you,” (Genesis 3:16)

And again, Paul makes it clear that the man is head of his house:

"For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man; 9 for indeed man was not created for the woman’s sake, but woman for the man’s sake. 10 Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels," (1 Cor. 11:8-10)

As for your questions about having a popular name, for me, it's more my line of that name than the name itself. I have a fairly common last name, but it's important to me to continue to have that name.

As for the man not taking the womans name, again, it goes back to him being the head and leader of his house which I just explained. Any further argument on that should be taken up with God.

I'm just wondering what your opinion is on female leaders in the public? In politics? Companies and organizations? What about those women who don't ever marry? Can they meet their potential, without the leadership of a man in their lives, or is the leadership of Jesus Christ sufficient for them? I'm honestly curious. I've just never quite heard such a strict view of the role of women before. Yes, I've read the Bible, but there are other rules regarding women which are not adhered to anymore (at least not prevalently) - such as speaking up in church and wearing jewelry. I'm the last person to say that the Bible is "culturally relevant," but I've yet to hear an explanation as to why some things that Paul talks about regarding women are still embraced today yet others aren't.

If women aren't meant to be leaders, what are these women doing in the Bible?

Deborah - prophetess and judge
Philip's daughters - prophetesses
Miriam - prophetess
Huldah - prophetess
Euodia and Syntyche - evangelicals working with Paul
Phoebe - deaconess
Priscilla - evangelical working with paul
Junia - evangelical

Granted there are far more male than female leaders, but that was also the culture back then.

THere is also Galations 3:28 which is interesting.

Also - the Bible advises slaves to submit to their masters, in his passive, peace-promoting approach. But now that that hierarchy has been abolished, we do not follow this command anymore. What is the difference with the husband-wife dynamic?

 

[Blank123]

without continuing on the debate of submission/women in leadership which i don't think was your main intent in starting this thread, out of curiousity is your fiance very much aware of your views on submission? it sounds like this is a fairly new point of view you've taken to and choosing a name is a small part of married life, in that a name is a name is a name - its not changing who you are to change your name. but its also a big deal because as you seem to have already discovered it sets the course for the marriage. If you're unwilling to submit by taking his name, then chances are you won't be willing to submit in other areas of life (where to live, spiritual matters, etc...) it says a lot about how you view him as a husband.

If you haven't discussed, and i mean really discussed, what your views are on submission then marriage might be something you'll want to wait on. Its too controversial an issue and too important to put on the back burner and hope it solves itself. Now is the time to sit down and figure it out between yourselves. This isn't about womens rights or feminism this is about you and your fiance and figuring things out between the two of you. You two are the only people that matter in this situation.

 

[peanutbutter12]

I agree with little_tigress on this. The feminism discussion is for another time and place. This is about your relationship with your future husband which is beyond all that.

 

[Symbrinity]

Actually I find it hard to separate my personal beliefs from my relationship - the two spill into each other.

We have talked about this a lot, and it is not by any means a dealbreaker issue for us. We have had an amazing 5 years together, and we're not about to lose that. We're both pretty sure that we want a mutual submission dynamic in our relationship. I guess my major problem is that if I submit to him on the name issue I'm possibly going to have to deal with feelings of regret. I would really like to take my maiden name as a second middle name, but it just sounds ridiculous and I know I would never use it... so there's not really any option for compromise here.

 

[Weasel7711]

Actually I find it hard to separate my personal beliefs from my relationship - the two spill into each other.

We have talked about this a lot, and it is not by any means a dealbreaker issue for us. We have had an amazing 5 years together, and we're not about to lose that. We're both pretty sure that we want a mutual submission dynamic in our relationship. I guess my major problem is that if I submit to him on the name issue I'm possibly going to have to deal with feelings of regret. I would really like to take my maiden name as a second middle name, but it just sounds ridiculous and I know I would never use it... so there's not really any option for compromise here.

There is the option of you compromising to please him.

 

[Symbrinity]

There is the option of you compromising to please him.

A compromise requires sacrifice on both people's part.

If only I compromise, I have to deal with possible resentment, which I've already said several times.

 

[peanutbutter12]

You would resent having the name of the man you love? I would seriously question whether or not you truly love this man if that's the case.

On a serious note, I highly suggest marriage counseling. If you're letting something as simple as this become so difficult, then think of what could come from something more serious of a situation. I think you need to meet up with a pastor who can work with the both of you and discuss these matters at length.

 

[Cordy]

There are many wonderful and godly married couples that do not share the same last name, or have some other arrangement than simply the woman taking the man’s name. Having separate last names, or using other name options, does not make you any less unified or any less Christian. In some places, women are not allowed to change their last name (in Quebec, Canada, or Iceland, for example). In other cultures, children take the mother’s name. The name issue is a cultural issue, and something that each couple and individual chooses -- not a one-size-fits-all for Christians. It certainly should not be connected to the issue of submission; I think doing so creates a legalistic approach which results in spiritualizing cultural ideals.

Although some men might be great guys in many ways, I think many have never had to consider how one-side some things are when it comes to expectations on gender.

I understand the desire to keep your cultural heritage and sense of identity. When I got married, my parents gave me a pamphlet on all sorts of choices couples could explore with the name issue. Instead of thinking of it as “what you want” vs. “what he wants”, try to approach it as an adventure together – a time where you can find a solution that will represent both of you as a unified couple as well as and your individuality. I no longer have the list of suggestions that my parents game me, but here are a few off the top of my head:

(Let’s say the names are Mary Rodriquez and John Powell)

Hyphenating: Rodriquez-Powell (although you don’t think that will work for your names)
Making one last name a middle name: John Rodriquez Powell and Mary Rodriquez Powell (the same middle name can be given to children, too)
Combine the names: Rodwell, Poriquez, Rickwell etc. … You can play with the various letters and syllables to find something that you like. You may be surprised at what works. Give yourself time to get used to the different sounds.
Maintaining separate names: Mary Rodriquez and John Powell. Depending on where you live, you can decide whether your kids take your name or his etc.
Husband takes your name: John and Mary Rodriquez
Take each other’s last name as a middle name: John Rodriquez Powell and Mary Powell Rodriquez.

There are many options, and some may require thinking outside the box. My advice is to bring this to prayer together and sincerely seek to honour God in the direction you take. Focus on trying to please Him, and love each other, which includes respecting each other’s individuality. By each of you feeling loved and respected in the choices you make, you will be drawn toward unity with each other. Do not let cultural pressure be your spiritual compass. Seek God’s direction.

 

[overit]

Well, even though you feel the weight on your hands, he has agreed it's your decision. It's your name, as you say...your identity. You should choose how to keep it. As a believe in the egalitarian model of marriage and a feminist myself I see nothing wrong with keeping your name and him keeping his, and the kids can carry both, or his (even if it sounds ridiculous-plus it only sounds ridiculous until you get used to it btw).

I took my exh last name, then with my career it became part of my identity, when we divorced I honestly didn't feel like dealing w/the hassle of changing it back, and my children (yes I did ask their opinion) asked me to have the same name as them, my ex was also ok with me keeping it. It had been a part of my identity the last decade and it was no longer my ex's name but my childrens name.

I'm still thinking I might change it back to my maiden name eventually, and if I ever remarried I don't think I'd take his name but most likely change it back to my own.

I don't see why both genders shouldn't be able to carry their family name and lineage. If a man insisted I carry his name I wouldn't marry him period. You guys can talk it out, and again don't put it past you the hyphenating part because it may sound odd now but once you get used to saying it it won't be. Or again, keep your name, keeping your name doesn't mean you love him any less or are less commited as a wife to him at all.