Last names

[MarxSchmarx]

Are having children use the last names of their father inherently discriminatory? Isn't a wife keeping her "maiden name" somewhat discriminatory, because this "maiden name" is actually her father's last name? What do comrades plan to do for their own kids?

[Lacrimi de Chiciură]

A "maiden name" isn't necessarily a woman's father's last name; it is simply the name a woman was born with. For example, my sister has our mother's maiden name as part of her name, so my sister's "maiden name" is also the "maiden name" of my mother.

It is certainly sexist to use only the father's last name, but there is also a practical necessity to get the name from somewhere, otherwise we would be carrying around all the 16 names of our great-great-grandparents.

Maybe it would be a solution to give children both the names of their mother and father, and then for a father with two last names to pass on just his mothers name and the mother passes on just her father's name. That way everyone would have just 2 last names which are not determined by patriarchy. Or we could allow children to choose their "adult names" at some sort of coming of age ceremony.

[Comrade Akai]

I'm all for hyphening names. I think the children and parents should all choose which last names they want to keep.

[Itis]

I guess the problem with hyphenated surnames is what will their grandchildrens' last names be? four hyphenated names?

[Il Medico]

Since a baby can't pick their name when they are born I suppose it would be up to the parents to decide which last name to use.

[Zolken]

Without substance a name is nothing.

[yuon]

I've sometimes thought it would be good that girls get the surname of the mother, and boys the surname of the father. It would make things some what "fairer".

However, that's a bit of a problem when a person has two fathers, or two mothers (a queer couple raising children), which will not be uncommon come the revolution...

Another option is to simply do away with surnames altogether, and do what was suggested in the Dispossessed. That is, a computer generates strings of characters that can be pronounced, and these are given to the child as their only name. (This would, possibly, do away with people having the same name as well.)

Err, the only real other suggestion is to simply not provide children with surnames, and let them pick them one when they are old enough.

[Module]

Well, the origin of taking the husband's last name was that the wife ceased to be the property of her father and instead became that of her husband, was it not?
That was also the basis of marriage itself.
So, whatever name the child has should simply be for the parents to decide. (Having the hyphenated name of both the mother and father, and then once the child turns 18 or something they can pick their own last name sounds like a good idea, though)

[eyedrop]

Obviously you should always pick the name of the parent having the coolest sounding name. My mate's last name is Rambo so I know which name I would go with if we had a child. Although my last name is pretty cool aswell. (Hint the nick name of a scottish premier leauge team)

[Holden Caulfield]

I'm against double barrelled names because I (culturally) excuate it with the british upper classes.

If myself and my darling gf were to have a child I would suggest something as simple and stupid as both keeping our own names (unless she wants to take mine out of cultural convention keeping/brainwashing) and flipping a coin to choose the childs last name.

[Dr Mindbender]

Meh. You can call yourself whatever you like whenever you become an adult so i dont see it as a big deal.

I agree with HC that double barrelled names are very toffish.

[New Tet]

Are having children use the last names of their father inherently discriminatory? Isn't a wife keeping her "maiden name" somewhat discriminatory, because this "maiden name" is actually her father's last name? What do comrades plan to do for their own kids?

Despite our lamentable 'machismo' (and maybe in response to it), in most, if not all, Hispanic countries married women retain their 'maiden' names.

Moreover, a child who is born to a married couple receives as last names both his parents' so that Carlos, for example, whose parents are Pedro Jimenez and Maria Gomez is named Carlos Jimenez Gomez.

I find that a satisfactory arrangement.

[Eat the Rich]

There's more discrimination with last names in Eastern Europe and Greece. In those countries, the woman gets the last name of her husband, but not only that. If the husband's name is Volkov, the wife's name is Volkova. The English equivalent is John and John's, which means that the last name signifies that this woman is "owned" by the husband. It's Volkova ie. Volkov's [wife].

[Jazzratt]

I'm all for hyphening names. I think the children and parents should all choose which last names they want to keep.

Wouldn't that get incredibly messy after three or four generations (Bob Martins-McCloud has a kid with Linda Jones-Rogers. What the fuck do they call their kid? Basil Jones-Martins-McCloud-Rogers?).

[Mujer Libre]

While I find the fact that the male name becomes the "family" name irritating, and pretty damn sexist; I also see the problems with hyphenated names.

I think the idea of going with the most awesome name, or alternating for the kids might work.

The thought of computer generated names is AWFUL. They would be lacking any meaning, linguistic beauty...:confused:

[Killfacer]

I think the idea of going with the most awesome name, or alternating for the kids might work.


This seems like a pretty good idea. My kids will definatly be having my brilliant surname then.

[Lacrimi de Chiciură]

Despite our lamentable 'machismo' (and maybe in response to it), in most, if not all, Hispanic countries married women retain their 'maiden' names.

Moreover, a child who is born to a married couple receives as last names both his parents' so that Carlos, for example, whose parents are Pedro Jimenez and Maria Gomez is named Carlos Jimenez Gomez.

I find that a satisfactory arrangement.

But this system still favors men, putting the father-line name ahead of the mother-line. For example, say Mr. Jimenez Gomez marries Miss Sandoval Lopez, their child's last name is going to be "Jimenez Sandoval" thus Lopez and Gomez, the names of the kid's grandmothers, are the names eliminated.

A system similar to the one used in Spanish-speaking countries could be that the couple from the example pass on the names Gomez and Sandoval (or) Jimenez and Lopez (one paternal name and one maternal name without favoring one line over the other and it eliminates the build up of pretentiously long hyphenated names.)

[New Tet]

But this system still favors men, putting the father-line name ahead of the mother-line.

True, but only as mere formality. The placement of the name doesn't really affect the rights women may or may not have in relation to their male counterparts, or does it?

[cb9's_unity]

When/if I marry I will be keeping my surname. My significant other can choose whatever name she wishes.

However I couldn't begin to tell you how my child would be named. Mainly because I have no clue who I will be having that child with, and what customs or beliefs they will have about surnames.

[kharacter]

(Having the hyphenated name of both the mother and father, and then once the child turns 18 or something they can pick their own last name sounds like a good idea, though)

I think that would be a wonderful idea. I'd absolutely love to pick my own last name, and I'm sure many would enjoy having one that their parents picked and one that they picked. It'd be hard though, because it'd be stuck onto you forever. A name like "Cienfuegos" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camilo_Cienfuegos) would be majestic; it means one hundred fires.

[kharacter]

Um, to all those who saw the original unedited version of the post above, my most sincere apologies. I do believe it was a very innocent joke that would not have hurt even the most sensitive of people, but that doesn't stop it from having been stupid and a waste of time. I feel embarassed for having even considered writing it. Sorry if I was a disturbance for anyone.

[bromide]

I think that would be a wonderful idea. I'd absolutely love to pick my own last name, and I'm sure many would enjoy having one that their parents picked and one that they picked. It'd be hard though, because it'd be stuck onto you forever.
I'm in the process of having to pick a new last name because I was given the last name of my dead-beat dad. To be honest, I've been mulling it over for the past 10 years, and I've basically given up and decided to go with my mother's maiden name (even though it's ugly, which deterred me in the first place), just because I can't come up with anything better that actually has any meaning to me that doesn't sound cheesy.

I think that going with a hyphenated name is the best bet on it. When I adopt kids, they will be getting hyphenated names. If you want to get rid of the sexist origins of the mother's maiden name, you could do it Icelandic style with the mother's name, e.g. Maryson or Marydottir. Dottir looks a lot cooler than daughter imo.

[Die Rote Fahne]

Are having children use the last names of their father inherently discriminatory? Isn't a wife keeping her "maiden name" somewhat discriminatory, because this "maiden name" is actually her father's last name? What do comrades plan to do for their own kids?

I don't see the problem. If the women has no problem I don't care, if the Women has a problem and the man is glad to take her name, whatever, if they both want to keep their last names, I still dun care.

[The Bear]

Um, to all those who saw the original unedited version of the post above, my most sincere apologies. I do believe it was a very innocent joke that would not have hurt even the most sensitive of people, but that doesn't stop it from having been stupid and a waste of time. I feel embarassed for having even considered writing it. Sorry if I was a disturbance for anyone.

no big deal , relax :D

anyway i would like to move to UK and change my name to a common English one

anyone has good ideas . i deffinitely like name Jeremy , is it too classical ?
what would be a fitting surname ?


and about the acctual topic , ye , everyone picking his own surname would be nice :cool: . but i dont mind keeping fathers name... after all it is a long tradition , i dont think changing it would acctually benefit women much or make up for many years of disscrimination backwards

[bromide]

The Jeremy that pops to my mind is Ron Jeremy, I don't know if you really want to have that reference...

[The Bear]

dont even know who the bloke is :(

[Ahmed]

In Arabic speaking countries women keep their names and don't take on their husband's. However their surnames are their father's. The problem with naming everyone "fairly" is that you get too many names as well as families not sharing one name which can be confusing both on a personal/social level as well as for the purposes of record keeping. In Islamic tradition it is said that in the afterlife people will be called by their mother's name as in X son of Y where Y is the mother's first name.

[9]

I think the parents ought to decide ahead of time, and when the child reaches a certain age (13, 16, 18, whatever), the child can choose whether to keep which ever parent's last name they have been going by, or can opt to instead switch to the other parent's name. Personally, I would have preferred my mother's surname "Jakob", as my father's - which I will not disclose - causes many people an irritating degree of difficulty with regard to pronunciation.

[Revulero]

dont even know who the bloke is :(

He's a porn star

[Revulero]

How about if parents combine their surname and pass the combined surname to their child :confused:

ex. Jones-Mosley= Jonesley

[yuon]

I think some people are making things too complicated. How about just letting the child choose? That would be one of the simplest, and fairest, thing possible.

[Led Zeppelin]

I actually want to get my last name changed but can't due to the idiotic regulations. It is arbitrary and stupid to not allow people to choose their own names. Sure, when you're born it's a bit hard to do, but there could be a rule allowing people to do so (if they wish) when they reach a certain age, say 18.

Now, I can change my name theoretically, but I only have two options (switching from my father's to my mother's last name). Not much of a choice at all. Oh well, there are always pseudonyms.

[RedAnarchist]

People should use the surname they want, regardless of marital status or their birth name. It's a part of their identity.

[Revy]

I've always been a fan of the idea of combining last names. I don't think people should even feel obligated to change their name after marriage, but I think with children that's where the decision really has any importance. I don't think hyphenated names are the answer because the last name usually ends up what they are referred to, or if you have two people with hyphenated names they are going to name their children with 4 hyphenated names and it's going to be a mess.

[Outinleftfield]

In some countries like Japan the couple chooses a single last name usually from one of them but it doesnt have to be the man. I found that out after I saw an anime where a man said that his last name was different because he got married and then I looked up Japanese surnames.

[mel]

A couple could just agree on a completely new last name when/if they get married that does not belong to either of their families, and is not a combination of their two names. Their children could do similarly once they are no longer in their parents care

[MarxSchmarx]

In some countries like Japan the couple chooses a single last name usually from one of them but it doesnt have to be the man. I found that out after I saw an anime where a man said that his last name was different because he got married and then I looked up Japanese surnames.

Sometimes this happens if the father's family has other male heirs, but the mother's doesn't, in which case the son in law is formally "adopted" into the mother's family.

[TC]

Any convention is going to be arbitrary, but if I was going to come up with an arbitrary social convention, it would be that people keep their birth names regardless of marriage and children of both sexes take the mother's name. The mother invests astronomically more in their creation and maternity is always uncontroversial whereas paternity is sometimes not. I know of some instances of this in leftist circles.

However the most sensible solution I think is the Spanish one - people have two last names but only commonly use one, and only pass on one or the other of them to their children. When Raul Castro Ruz and Vilma Espin Guillois have a child, their child is named Mariela Castro Espin and both "Ruz" and "Guillois" are dropped.

[kharacter]

For the first one: I believe that method, however, is exclusive with regards to male homosexual couples, or any couple adopting. Under the traditional circumstance of a relationship, I would never oppose it, but for a child to bear the name of the someone who did not raise her/him, or even abandoned them, I would not be comfortable with.

For the second one: The male name is nevertheless written first, which I don't consider fair.

[yuon]

For the first one: I believe that method, however, is exclusive with regards to male homosexual couples, or any couple adopting. Under the traditional circumstance of a relationship, I would never oppose it, but for a child to bear the name of the someone who did not raise her/him, or even abandoned them, I would not be comfortable with.

For the second one: The male name is nevertheless written first, which I don't consider fair.

Thanks for pointing out that not all relationships that raise children are "male/female". Indeed, I would suspect that in a future anarchist (communist/socialist as you prefer) society, in some cases there will be more than two people raising a child. Let alone, right now, there are many cases of single fathers raising children (yes, those children had mothers, however, it is possible for mothers to abandon children).

I don't see the need for any arbitrary system such as mentioned in TC's post.

Again, flip a coin, or let the child choose.

[TC]

For the first one: I believe that method, however, is exclusive with regards to male homosexual couples, or any couple adopting. Under the traditional circumstance of a relationship, I would never oppose it, but for a child to bear the name of the someone who did not raise her/him, or even abandoned them, I would not be comfortable with.
lots of people have shitty parents though and renaming a kid when it changing hands treats a child like property.


For the second one: The male name is nevertheless written first, which I don't consider fair.
according to the most trusted source on the internet, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_name#Spanish-speaking_countries) Spanish people are able to choose which order they want their names to come in (and which order to give their children). This strikes me as the most obvious egalitarian solution: the choice can be arbitrary except insofar as the couple picks the order that sounds the most pleasing when said outloud.

[kharacter]

To the first: Thank you. I didn't think of changing a child's name while alive ever, but I suppose that was a given with what I was proposing. However, I mean this for couples who adopt a child on paper before birth, and the only connection they have with their mother is the day she spawns them. I don't think it's be correct to name the child after that someone who is out of their life almost entirely.

To the second: I recognize this as a possibility, and if so, I'm all for it. Unfortunately, most Spanish-speaking countries (such as Mexico, where I come from) always take the father's name first. This however, through education and propaganda, could be changed, and in result, you'd have a reasonable naming system.