Conference yukon::christian_v7

I know plenty of people who've kept their names, hyphenated their names,
or changed their names.  It is usually a "statement."  It doesn't bother
me (anymore) what others do with their names.  (Remember the guy the used
to call "Prince?"  Isn't it nice not to be able to call him anything?)

How would I have felt?  Being the traditional kind of guy that I was and
am, it may have stuck in my craw.  But the point was moot.  I was one who
chose a mate (and who chose me, too) who wanted to share my life and didn't
mind (and gladly accepted) taking my last name.  In fact, whenyou think about 
it, she got to choose her last name, and I didn't.  In another year or so,
Joy will be a Metcalfe longer than she was a Crawford.

Mark

    I wonder how many countries they do this in.  In Mexico, the maiden
    name is typically hyphenated/concatenated onto the married name.

    For me, it is a source of irritation.  I'm not sure why, but I always
    get irritated when I see or hear of a woman doing that.  It especially
    irritated me when it was Hillary Clinton throughout the election but as
    soon as the election was over, it became Hillary Rodham-Clinton.  Talk
    about being two-faced.

    Also, If a woman is going to hyphenate her name, what about the
    children?  Shouldn't they also get hyphenated names???  And doesn't
    this add a level of confusion for the kids... "my dad's name is X and
    my mom's name is Y-X."

    I think part of my problem is that I view it as a reluctance to become
    one.  It is sort of like the couples who sign the contracts stating
    who owns what property so that "in case" there is a divorce the legal
    battle is minimized.  I see that as setting up a marriage for defeat.
    It seems that if you can't enter a marriage with the expectation that
    it will flourish "all the days of your lives", what is the point of
    getting married.

    Enough rambling.

    Ron

    In Mexico, Hillary would be Clintoon-Robbed'em

>    I think part of my problem is that I view it as a reluctance to become
>    one.

I have a similar feeling, Ron.

Now, for the tough question because someone will ask:  why not take her 
last name and be one?

P.S.  In Mexico, the hyphens don't carry through when the children get
married.

Jose Perez weds Rosa Rojas
The kids, I believe, are Juan and Juanita Perez-Rojas

But when Juan Perez-Rojas gets married to Carla Rodriguez-Himenez
the children are Maria y Marcos Perez-Rodriguez.

So the male's name is still carried on, even though the female's name
is honored by the marriage name.

Marcos

    well, i wouldn't have asked, but i'll take the bait:
    
    o.k. .....why not her name?
    
    Because we live in a patriarchal society?
    
    And because the woman gives up her maiden name (traditionally) 
    and some women feel they are giving up or sacrificing something, is
    there something similar that a man feels, a rite of passage so to
    speak, that a man goes through when he marries?
    
    Karen

>    Because we live in a patriarchal society?

The dreaded bogey-*MAN* phrase "patriarchal society!"   AhhhhhHh!
Restraint engaged.  Comment suppressed.

>    And because the woman gives up her maiden name (traditionally) 
>    and some women feel they are giving up or sacrificing something, is
>    there something similar that a man feels, a rite of passage so to
>    speak, that a man goes through when he marries?

Ron hits on a good point about being one.  Perhaps the *real* solution 
is not to take his name or her name, but to create a new name (which is
the idea behind some of the hyphenated names, anyway).  After all, what's
in a name?

After three girls who would have been named Mark, Jr., I named my
fourth child (a boy), Andrew.  I felt more secure in not naming him
after me, although Andrew is my middle name and Andrew's middle name
is Crawford (my wife's maiden name).  (There wasn't enough room for
two Mark Metcalfes ;-) ).

(My, I'm being surprisingly liberal!  Someone needs to kidnap me and
deprogram me!)

Got to run.  See you tomorrow.

Mark Andrew Metcalfe

RE:                       <<< Note 628.6 by 57742::MOSSEY >>>
                              -< i'll play along >-

       
   > Because we live in a patriarchal society?
    
    
    ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH..thud.






Jim

    I believe that our identity has more depth than
    who wears the pants and has control of the family.  Medical science has
    proven that while our genes come from both mother and father, that our
    blood comes from the father.  By identifying with the father's name you
    are passing down "bloodlines" a heritage of familial ties that borders
    on spiritual, as well as physical.
    
    It is also true that certain illnesses require donations from either
    parents or siblings of the same parents, which furthers the bloodline
    facts.  Taking on the father's name has been away to trace and track
    familial history.  This is also important for things such as
    inheritances and honestly, here in the states if you can prove you've
    got X percentage of native american indian in you, could mean a land
    claim. :-)
    
    I find this name changing phenomenon to be another attempt by women to
    swing that pendulum as far to the left as they can get it; without
    setting the globe on a spin.  It's a radical act to prove a point of
    equality.
    
    How sad that something that once was never meant to demean a woman, is
    now touted as a part of the feminist agenda of equality.
    
    My maiden name was Bradshaw, when I married I took on my husband's name
    of Morales.  I never once felt that the name change meant I didn't
    exist.  As a matter of fact, it really felt wonderful and bonding,  a
    real sense of unity and love.
    
    I had two sons and when I named them they were named Matthew Bradshaw
    Morales and Clayton Bradshaw Morales.  I did this for reasons of family
    heritage.
    
    Nancy
    
    
    

    Tradition in my family is to use the mother's maiden name 
    as the child's middle name.

Before we were married I asked my wife-to-be if she wanted to keep her current
name. She chose to take my name. 

My youngest brothers wife on the other hand has kept her name. 

I think is a matter these days of personal preference.

Peter.

Hazza and Karen BOTH changed their names when they married.  I can't remember 
who had which bit before they became hyphenated.



Chele

 Someone in another conference suggested taking all the letters of each
 last name, scramble them and then see if you can come up with a last
 name out of the combined letters.




Jim

    Re: Note 628.12 by 60600::BURT
    
>Hazza and Karen BOTH changed their names when they married.  I can't remember 
>who had which bit before they became hyphenated.
    
    But perhaps that's the whole idea?  ;-)
    
    Harry Clarke m. Karen Woodward  -->  Harry & Karen Woodward-Clarke
    
    Still Hazza & Kazza to me!

I see the transfer of the name in marriage as a token representation of a
spiritual transfer of commitment and responsibility. 

I see the husband as accepting responsibility for the wife, and giving his
name as a covering, as Christ gives us His Name.  Corresponding to Ephesians
5:23..33.

I see the wife accepting the covering, and in turn indicating her allegiance
to the husband and their progeny, who will inherit the family name they have
united under. 

This may well be totally incorrect by today's state of the world, but it
reflects what I understand from the Word of God.  This is to do with the 
respective and distinctive roles of husband and wife.  They are both 
significant, and by design, serve complementary purposes.

For those not seeing marriage in this light - either because they are not
Christians, or because this is not what they understand from the Biblical
relationship, the choice of name will not have the same significance.  It may
have another, or no significance.  My view is that the relationship would be a 
better one if it could reflect this revelation of its glory.

I was married 25 years ago.  Culture has changed considerably since then.
If my wife-to-be had refused to accept my name, I think I would have felt this 
denoted a personal rejection; some basic doubt as to whether she could align 
with me or my family.  While we never questioned our course on this front, on 
my part, it was because I felt it had a positive meaning I wanted to affirm.

I think that such decisions these days are usually made either by default, or
in a random ignorance, or in rejection of something misunderstood.  Not based
on a creation principle, of what sort of creatures we are! 

Karen, I don't think it at all a strange question to pose in this conferencee
- totally appropriate!  God touches all aspects of our lives, and marriage is
something He, after all, instituted.  

However, while God instituted marriage, He did not lay down any form or
ceremony for it to follow.  So the taking-the-name aspect is strictly a
cultural application, dating, I would imagine, from a time when those making
the laws were significantly more spiritually perceptive (I don't necessarily
say Christian) than are those of today.  It reflects a reality, or the 
structure of society will begin to crumble.

My view is heavily sexist - I believe that the two sexes are distinctly and
purposefully designed (physically, reflecting a spiritual reality), and that
in trying to fight against this, we introduce stresses into our lifestyle 
which make our world a more miserable place....

While He has liberated us to live abundantly. according to the fullness of His
design.


						God bless
								Andrew

    re:  .13  Jim
    
    That sounds OK, until you think about four or five generations down the
    road when the great-great-grandkids have last names 40 or 50 letters long.
    I like the traditional arrangement, myself, and Nancy's idea of using
    the maiden name as the child's middle name is OK.  But if there's going
    to be an overall change in tradition, I like Mark M's idea of just
    picking a whole new name.  Bob Jones and Mary Smith get married and
    become Bob and Mary...mmmmm...Gronofski.  Yeah, that's it.  :-)
    
    
    Steve
    

    
    My son has my maiden name as a middle name also.  I think it is
    a wonderful idea.  When he realized that Grandpa and Grandma had
    the same last name as his middle name he was so excited.
    
    I agree with Andrew that taking the last name of your husband
    is symbolic of coming together as one.  Others may not see
    it the same way but it was very important to me.  Also,in the
    culture that J. grew up in a woman truly left her family.  She
    was only allowed to visit when chaperoned by her mother-in-law
    and even then was expected to show favoritism to her mother-in-law
    and 'apathy' to her biological parents.  In effect, when she
    marries, she becomes the child of the husband's parents.  If I
    had not taken his name, it would have been a slap in the face.
    His parents, however know that I do not agree that I must 
    forsake my parents and they approve of that decision.  Actually,
    they get along with my family well when they come to visit.  When
    Nathan is adopted he will also take the So family name (actually
    we are discussing just keeping Montgomery due to some cultural
    discrimination we have already experienced but we have made
    no definite decision about this)
    
    Also, I want to share with you an example of my ex's family's
    names.  They have adhered to no cultural rules in his family
    with regards to last names.  
    
    Parents:  Nilton Pereira Rodrigues and Zita Soares Rodrigues
    
    Children:  Dilva Soares
               Dalva Soares
               Delma Soares
               Delcio Soares
               Delcimar Pereira
               Homero Pereira
               Humberto Pereira
               Euzilene Rodrigues
               Lucilene Rodrigues
               Mauro Rodrigues
    
    It's just plain confusing, I think!

I was born Paul Frederick Weiss Jr, after my father of course.  As I grew up,
I was part of TWO extended families - the Weiss family, and the Kitson
family, my mother's family.  The ties ran deep on both sides.

When I married Ellen McCahon, thankfully she was willing to take my last
name.  I'm glad of that, not only because of oneness issues, but also because
different names or hyphenated names are just a constant hassle.

But as she took my name as a formal indication of her acceptance and
inclusion in MY family, I also wanted to formally indicate my acceptance and
inclusion in HER family.  So I changed my name too.  I had never had any real
attachment to being "Jr.", nor did the middle name "Frederick" have any
particular meaning for me.  It was my dad's grandfather's name, but I never
knew him.  So I added her name as a middle name, and while I was changing my
name, added my mother's family name at the same time.  So now my name
includes my first name, my mother's family, my wife's family, and my father's
family, making me:

	Paul Kitson McCahon Weiss.

If YUKON is showing nodenames today, you'll see that this note comes from
PAULKM::WEISS, which is me.  :-)

Paul

    re: .15
    
    thanks for your thoughtful reply, Andrew.  I concur with the 'oneness'
    sentiments that you and many others have expressed here.
    
    re: .18 Paul's name change
    
    I have to say that really surprised me - I did not expect a christian
    male to be so liberal!  Just goes to show the pre-conceived ideas that
    we (I) sometimes hold..... 
    
    When I married, I kept my original middle/baptismal name instead of
    using my maiden name as my middle name.  For legal purposes, I am Karen
    Marie Mossey, but when I write I use my maiden name, Karen Therrien
    Mossey.  I have questioned myself as to why I thought this was
    necessary.  I'm not sure I have it all sorted out, but part of it has
    to do with the fact that the sum of my life experiences didn't start 
    when I got married and felt I needed to recognize this through my name. 
    I am still very much a Therrien (i.e., personality traits - that didn't
    change with marriage!) and am as proud of identifying myself with that 
    clan as I am to identify with the Mossey clan.
    
    So we can say, what's in a name? but part of our identity is wrapped up
    in the label of a name.  It is not *the* definition who we are, but it 
    is part of what defines us as a whole.
    
    Karen 

    In my family, which tends to be very traditionalist about a lot
    of things, the women take their husband's last name, and change their
    middle names to their maiden surname.  
    
    So Kathryn Mary Chavez should have been Kathryn Chavez Aragon, if I had
    followed the tradition.  I didn't.  Where we live there are a bizillion
    Kathy/Cathy Chavez's and not a lot of Aragons, so when
    I got married I wanted a name that
     
    1.  would be like my future children's name, to avoid confusion
    
    2. would be less common than my maiden name.
    
    
    Now I consider taking up a new name in marriage representative
    of taking up my new identity in Christ when I accepted Him.
    
    
    ...Kathy

	There's a new name writen down in glory...
	   And it's mine 
			(yes it's mine)
	   Oh yes, it's mine 
		(yes it's mine)


    To him (generic) who overcomes, I will give some of the hidden manna.  
     I will also give him a white stone with a new name written on it, 
       known only to him who receives it.
							Revelation 2:17


Now *there's* a family worth belonging to, and being named for.... ;-)

							Andrew

    Thanks Andrew, you posted an excellent note.  
    
    When I married my first wife, we were very young and did not think
    about doing anything other than her taking my name.  We had a great
    deal of fun, calling her "Mrs. McClusky" and she enjoyed this as much
    or more than I did.  I was the leader, we had a wonderful marriage and
    I was so proud that she was Mrs. McClusky.
    
    Now, I must tell you about my present wife.  She was also married
    before, and had taken her husband's name, but when they divorced, she
    legally had her name changed back to her maiden name.  When we decided
    to get married, I was hesitant to ask what name she would use.  Because
    several of her friends were using hyphenated names and because she had
    displayed some of the feminist tendencies and had changed her name back
    which was unusual I hesitated to ask.  Finally, I approached the
    subject and the response was wonderful,"Do you want me to be Mrs.
    McClusky?  I knew how you loved Happy and I thought you might not want
    me to take your name.  I would be proud and happy to accept your name."
    
    That was not a bad wedding present.  As we talked, I realized that she
    saw a symbolizm in taking my name, regarding giving her self to me. 
    She also made it clear that I was accepting responsibility for her. 
    For an old guy like me, it was exciting, important and helped us both
    restate the commitment to each other.  I think that other arrangements
    tend to rob the partners of some very special commitment and reward.
    
    

Thanks Daryl.  I find that so very touching.  It was wonderful.

							Andrew

This topic has always seemed to me to be a little like the one about God 
making a stone he can't move.  Personally, I would have liked to discard
Gulick at marriage in favor of a name everyone could spell, and I have
accused my daughter of marrying a Tucker for that very reason.

Now then.  Here is the dilemma I see: If a woman keeps a maiden name, they
are simply moving the choice back to that of taking their father's name.
If they take their mother's maiden name, that just moves it one more back,
and so on, ~ad infinitum~.

Perhaps a choice made at marriage would be OK, but then that would certainly
create ill will at times.

Lew

    Just for general info, it isn't accurate to say or imply that a person's
    'blood comes from the father' (and not the mother.)  
    
    A family where the father is type A and the mother is type B can have 
    two kids without either of these specific blood types.  One child could 
    be, for example, type AB - and the other child could be type O. (I know 
    of a family who had this precise arrangement, actually.)

    When it comes to the Rh factor, both parents could be Rh+ and their
    child could be Rh- (in certain situations.)

    Physical 'bloodlines' are passed down from both parents (the mother and 
    the father).  The spiritual heritage could come from either parent,
    both parents or neither parents.

Hi Karen,
	(and to -.1 for drawing my attention to this)

	Now I can 'defend' myself personally in this (I noticed my name taken in
vein (bad pun) by 'Chele and James earlier ;')

	Yes, Karen and I did indeed change both surnames to a concatenated
hyphenated surname (I was 'Clarke', she 'Woodward').

	There were several reasons for this. I am divorced, and Karen didn;t
want to be 'Mrs Clarke the Second' - understandable.

	For a while there, I was going to change my name to 'Woodward'. 2
reasons, 1 - there are only 2 girls in my wife's family - i.e. the line 'ended'
with her father. 2nd, the above reason for not wanting 'Mrs Clarke II' - so a my
changing my name to hers seemed in order. The last thing we wanted is for our
children (and we were pregnant at the time of getting married) to have the
surname Woodward (from her) and 'daddy' to be called Clarke.

	As an aside - my parents were *very* hurt at my suggesting that I would
change my surname to Woodward. They felt that I was rejecting them (not true) -
they were quite agro - threatening to 'drop me from the will' [big deal! - my
motivation is not to be in or out of the will].

	After much thought and prayer, we decided that a compromise position was
in order - 'Clarke-Woodward' sound "ugh!", so "Woodward-Clarke" was created ;')
Occassionaly we get 'smirks' (viz W-C <- WaterCloset -> toilet) but, eh, that's
*their* problem, not mine.

	Mum still insists on addressing letters to me as 'Clarke' (she uses my
middle name too, as my dad is also 'Harry') {sigh}

	An aside to close - after Karen and I came back from our honeymoon, we
went to the Motor Registry office to have our Driver's Licenses changed to our
married names. She was in line before me, and on production of her Marriage
Cert. had no trouble changing from Woodward to Woodward-Clarke. Me, on the other
hand...
"Men don't do that!"

"Why not?"

"You just can't!"

"Why not, you just changed my wife's licence!"

"But that's different!"

"Why is it?"

"It just is!"

"Are you discriminating against me on the grounds of sex?"

"Uh, yes."

"Thankyou"

enter the Anti-Discrimination Board... the Motor Registry people were as nice as
pie after that ;')

	h :*]

.25 S_CONLON

She's right about the blood.  I'm type B.  My dad is type AB and my mom is 
type O (or is that typo?).

(I guess that actually gives me BO.  Boy does that pun smell!)

Now, BALDNESS is passed down through the mother in an odd quirk of fate.

Mark