Author superconductor Posted August 30, 2006 Author Posted August 30, 2006 Taking the surname of the H is actually a tradition which shows ownership. Actually, that's not accurate. It has nothing whatsoever to do with ownership. See the book, Reproducing the State by Jackie Stevens. In fact, it had to do with legal legitimacy, especially regarding inheiritance and nationalism. ...(I)n the 11th century, minions of William the Conqueror created surnames in the midst of a census to codify inheritance rules and thereby bolster tax revenue. Later in Europe, surnames were used to control and homogenize various ethnic groups. As well, Stevens writes:Studies of blood types in the 1940s revealed by accident that as much as 10 percent of children were not the children of the man they called father... They were not genetically related.I don't imagine too much has changed.
a4a Posted August 30, 2006 Posted August 30, 2006 Twisty turny ways to look at why some women would maybe like to keep their own names intact even with their children Women were forced to hand over any inheritance they had in the USA to their husband upon marriage. The woman was absorbed by her husband so to speak and carried his name alone because of property laws, inheritances, and rights.... marriage basically stripped her of her rights and made her husband in charge of her in all ways.......thus owned in a way. From About.com (Jone Johnson Lewis) Before married women's property acts were passed, upon marriage a woman lost any right to control property that was hers prior to the marriage, nor did she have rights to acquire any property during marriage. A married woman could not make contracts, keep or control her own wages or any rents, transfer property, sell property or bring any lawsuit. Before 1848, a few laws were passed in some states in the U.S. giving women some limited property rights, but the 1848 law was more comprehensive. It was amended to include even more rights in 1860; later, married women's rights to control property were extended still more. <end> ***Now if it comes to who has more rights to name the child after their family (no hyphen)...... that is up to the individuals involved.... I don't see why any person would care so much if a couple chooses to do one or the other.(make it into a federal court case literally ) If the couple is not married I would think if you named the child with the fathers surname it may actually cause more problems as the single mom would have a different last name then the child and the child with an abscent father, the child may not feel as part of a family??? This is regarding single moms.... by choice or not, with an totally abscent father. The child is named after a person that is not in their life at all. May as well just pick a last name outta the phone book and slap it on the kid. If a woman were to use a sperm bank and use her own name with the child then what This is my child Bobby John Doe Sample #456746 I would imagine that there are many children walking about with the wrong surname attached to them for various reasons. Maybe I just don't get why it is so important for a man to thrust his name upon another individual..... unless it of course is to identify that individual does indeed belong to him...... owned in a way. (adults entering marriage) When it comes to a child perhaps they should indeed carry both surnames... I think that is fair and gives the child a good link to both families and heritage. It adds to it in a way, it does not harm. IMHO. But it is anyones business expcept for the individuals that are naming their children....... and I gotta laugh about making it a precedent in court again to force this to happen.... ... how narrow minded is that, and again thrusting ones personal beliefs via the law when it has no bearing on the person who would attempt to force their beliefs via the law. :rolleyes: Hey Audmc: Bet ya peek out your mini blinds to see what the neighbor is doing and if you approve of it too. :lmao: Mind your own business... and wtf, is good marriage is not based on surname selection of a couple for their children? I always thought it only mattered if the man was taller than the woman...... if a man is shorter the marriage is doomed....... :lmao:
Recommended Posts