Login/Sign Up




Is it Sexist for the Woman to take the Man's Name in Marriage?
People

frankiej4189
May 02, 2009
10 votes
17 debaters
4
4
2
2
1
1
1


+ Add Argument

2
Yes, it is Sexist


littleminx
May 03, 2009
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: jonjax71 Show

I agree.....i think it is a matter of choice.

My aunt's cousin got married to her husband who's name is Billy Cilly (sounds like silly) ...and her name is Christina. LOL, it sounds really funny, especially since we always called her that since she is a bit of a blond.


 
apathetic
May 03, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
I think one spouse should take the others last name but not necessarily the women takes the mans. I think it should be done by how they sound.

For example in a few weeks I will be going to a wedding of two old friends of mine. Without giving away too much the guy's last name is Cummins. When given to a girl it sounds like a porn name. But her last name starts with the same sound as his first name, making him sound like a super hero alter-ego. IMO they should take her name.

 
denverdannydee
May 03, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
It is Biblical and Christian for a woman to submit to the man and take his name, that is the moral way

 
swtlilsoni
May 03, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
half of the arguments on the other side are missing the point. it isn't considered sexist because the couple is adopting one last name in the place of two. it is considered sexist because it is tradition for the woman to do so rather than the man.

 
nonconformist
May 04, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: ccme09 Show

Sexism is rooted in tradtion, as are many other "isms"

 
patti
May 08, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
It is extremely sexist for a woman to take a man's name. First of all, why can't women take their own names?
Or men take the woman's name instead ???

Expressing the man's name is only allowing his dominance over the wife, and it is retarded for people to do it.

 
+ Add Argument

8
No, it is not Sexist


sandifromlargo
May 03, 2009
4 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: denverdannydee Show

AND what was Eve's last name???????
Also where in Scripture does it say it is biblical and christian for a woman to submit BY taking his last name? And what is so moral about it or immoral if you don"t? Read scripture more or question your Pastor, because somewhere you have interpreted or been told or taught incorrectly.

 
thales
May 03, 2009
3 convinced
Rebuttal
I like to think of it as pragmatic.

You're becoming each other's family, so a shared last name is appropriate. Hyphenated last names are a pain in the neck, and creating a whole new name just for the happy couple isn't for everybody: you lose the whole sense of history that comes with last names and tick off family members, and that doesn't even address the number of people who'll want to know: with all the names in the world to choose from, why on Earth did you pick that ugly thing?

So then it comes down to: he changes his name, or she changes hers. Leaving aside the fact that most places it's still considerably easier and cheaper for the woman to change her name, the argument for the other side mostly goes like this: "You do it, because it's unfair for me to have to do it just because I'm a woman." Which, if you think about it, doesn't hold up to scrutiny at all and is, in my humble opinion, a rather ugly harbinger of future arguments.

 
wiseoldunicorn
May 03, 2009
2 convinced
Rebuttal
It would only be sexist if the woman HAD to take the man's name, and had no choice in the matter. As it is, I don't think it's sexist at all, it's just tradition. As long as the woman wants to take the man's name, there's nothing wrong with it, any more than there is the man taking the woman's name, or both keeping their own.

 
ccme09
May 03, 2009
1 convinced
Rebuttal
As long as the woman is happy to do so, then no (and if they weren't then there are those with doube-barrel last names). I'd say that it is more a traditional matter than a sexist one.

 
jonjax71
May 03, 2009
1 convinced
Rebuttal
I married my wife of 35 years in 1974 after we had been shacking up for the previous 2 years, this was the height of the "Women's Liberation" movement. I recall fondly talking about what she wanted to do about her surname and mine, I told her it was up to her as she was marrying me, not my surname. She opted to hyphenate my surname after hers so if we should divorce all she would have to do is drop the 2nd half. Both of our children's surname are hyphenated as well and when our daughter married 2 years ago she opted not to take her husband's surname and our son's wife took dropped her surname and changed hers to the hyphenated surname

In other words all of this goes to my point, it is a matter of choice, each case decided individually

 
xanthippa
May 03, 2009
1 convinced
Rebuttal
In my 'culture of birth', the custom is for the family to use one common family name.

This can EITHER be the 'husband's pre-marriage family name' OR the 'wife's pre-marriage family name'. And, while it is usual to take on the 'husband's' family name, this is by no means automatic - taking the wife's last name as the unified family name is not unheard of or 'strange'.

The key here is that the 'nuclear family' ought to have a 'unified' FAMILY name: it is - in my never-humble-opinion - psychologically damaging for the nuclear family unit!

In Quebec, the mother never has the same 'family name' as her husband and children: and, statistically speaking, Quebec has almost twice as high divorce rate as SOME (not all!) parts of Canada, with the areas where nuclear families have the highest percentage of unified family names having some of the lowest divorce rates.

Think of the psychology of the situation and draw your own conclusions!!!

I have actually friends where 'he' is from Quebec (and would not wish to deprive his wife of her pre-marriage identity), while the wife is from an immigrant family where accepting the husband's family name is 'automatic' for the wife.... This created a bit of tension - in 5 of the couples. They each had a 'creative' solution....from the wife using one 'family name' professionally only, and a different one at all other times, to the couple having created a NEW family name from BOTH of their pre-marital family names. 2 are 'hyphonated' and include both the family names.

Still, my MOST favourite one is a last name which is NOT hyphonated, but decided upon a name which was simple, short, but encompassed 'bits' (ones which they found important to their selves) of their family names, forming a brand new word of its own: their reasoning was that since their union crossed cultural barriers, and created a whole new nuclear family - they also needed a new 'label' to describe this new family.... one which represented not just the two individuals and their lineage, but also their new family and its reality.

I have always liked what they did!

 
thales
May 04, 2009
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: swtlilsoni Show

In fairness, it's sexist in both directions. There's pressure for a woman to take her husband's name, and there's also pressure for her husband not to take hers.

In one state--I think it's CA, but I could be wrong--it costs something like $300 and a court appearance for a man to change his name due to marriage (an application that can be denied), while all a woman needs is her marriage license. I recently got away with a $100 credit-card purchase for which my only ID didn't match my only credit card because I shrugged and said, "Marriage." Think my husband could pull that off?

In other words, while there are certainly elements of sexism, when both sexes are penalized more or less equally the implications feel much less sinister than in your run-of-the-mill, old-fashioned, oppression-style sexism.

 
ccme09
May 04, 2009
1 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: nonconformist Show

Although that is true, in a modern day society the fact that a woman usually takes the man's last name is not because of those opinions on which the traditions are based, but rather the traditions that have been made as a result.

 
baybeex
May 03, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
No its not sexist. It connects you together to show that you are now part of he same family. It also is easier, say there were 2 boys and 2 girls in a family, then half will keep the name and half will take on a new name. This means that both familys keep the name on-going. It is also easier when naming the children as they wont have to pick between last name. Hyphinated names would also become difficult when 2 people with hyphinate names got married and wanted to hyphinate there names. And it would keep on going untill you had, for example Anne smith-johnson-macdonald-stewart-baxter-hughes-adams-white. It wuld just get rediculous.

 
theaccusative
May 03, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Somebody's gotta take somebody's name. If it's sexist for the man's, then it's sexist for the woman's as well.

Luckily, it's not sexist. XD

 
teachme
May 03, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: denverdannydee Show

Well said, Sandifromlargo...AMEN to that! :)

As for you, Denverdannydee...what a twisted comment! It's almost funny, but too derogatory and demoralizing. Is this a cheap thrill you get, when you spew such sh*te?!

I think you might want to "submit" to de-programming. As Sandi said...something's not quite right there! ...Good luck, you'll need it!

 
teachme
May 03, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
I'm divorced, but kept my maiden name as my middle name, and added on my former husband's with no hyphen. (In other words...I used both of our last names, with no hyphen.)

This way, I kept a part of my past, family heritage, and individuality, so to speak...and people who knew me before I was married, could still identify me. My mom did the same thing...so, you could say that I followed in her footsteps.

When I divorced, I just dropped his last name. If we had children, they would have had my last name as their middle name, as well.

I don't see it as sexist...as was mentioned, it's more of a tradition than anything...but, I do admire those who dare to be different, by honoring both family names. :)

 
thevenerablerob
May 23, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
amd besides, think of the complications politically. lol If a couple broke the trdaition and took the woman's name, it would be extremely hard to remember this and find the couple. lol If you think our address/phone books ar complex right now, imagine if soem couples took the man's name and some took the woman's? It'd be similar to the confusion in parts of Scandinavia where the last name is typically the father's name and 'son' or'daughter'. : )

 
thoughtcriminal
May 23, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: denverdannydee Show

That in itself is a great argument against women taking the man's name, as what is Biblical or Christian has nothing to do with what is moral. Submission is for BDSM nuts, not regular people.

 
thoughtcriminal
May 23, 2009
0 convinced
Rebuttal
Rebuttal to: swtlilsoni Show

It's sexist if it's seen in terms of "tradition" and "submission".

 


Use these tags to find similiar debates

abortion africa Alcohol America animal animals bad Barack battle better birth born bush Canada Celebrities change charity Cheney children choice christmas Convince convinceme convinceme.net crime culture dating death Debate debator education evil facebook faceoff family fat feminism fight Frankie Fun gay Girls god good Government gun healthcare heartbreak help Hillary Homosexual homosexuality hot human humans husband intelligence internet iran iraq judge action language Law legal lies Life love man marriage media Men morality Murder Muslim Nature obama opinion parenting parents Peace people philosophy Politics porn propaganda race racism relationships religion romance sex sexuality sexy site society tech terror terrorism VanCam veto violence vote vs war Weed wife woman Women world