Hard News: Who else forgot to get married?
177 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 … 8 Newer→ Last
-
Emma Hart, in reply to
I know a couple who kept their own names and blended them for their children’s surnames. Great idea .
We considered this. But that would have made the children's surname "Dearhart", and I am not that much of a sadist.
-
Lilith __, in reply to
I know a couple who kept their own names and blended them for their children’s surnames. Great idea .
We considered this. But that would have made the children’s surname “Dearhart”, and I am not that much of a sadist.
How Pratchettian!
-
Yamis, in reply to
We considered this. But that would have made the children's surname "Dearhart", and I am not that much of a sadist
Rad Heart ?
The Radar?
Hard Tear?I'm supposed to be insulating under the house... procrastination ...
-
When my partner and I got married we both agreed on a new surname - not a blending of our old names, a new name altogether. One useful consequence is that my old name now functions as a quasi-pseudonym for purposes such as commenting on Public Address...
-
linger, in reply to
The current situation in Japan is a little more flexible than that. Bride and groom do have to be put on the same family register -- which means that for at least some (local government) purposes they are filed under a common family name -- but women can and often do retain their unmarried name for professional purposes. Two of my (30-something) colleagues have got married within the last 3 years. One changed her name; the other (with a little more history of research and publication behind her) didn't.
-
Gareth Swain, in reply to
Professionally, sure. It's very common for people to continue using their maiden names at work, as you say.
-
Sacha, in reply to
almost never do you hear of a couple creating a new surname of their own (which I kind of think would be cool)
It was
-
Lilith __, in reply to
using their maiden names at work
"Birth names" is probably a less archaic term.
-
We got married after several years, but my wife didn't want to change her name yet again (second marriage) so uses her maiden name. Even though I signed school enrolment forms with my own name I started getting mail addressed to Richard White.
We have friends who decided to use the father's surname for child one, mother's for child 2 etc. (they stopped at two sons).
I think the most sensible solution for double-barrelled breeding with double-barrelled is to combine half of each parent's name in the most aesthetically pleasing combination.
Not everyone thinks about it deeply enough, though: I have heard of Plummer + Butt -> Plummer-Butt (!) -
Matthew Poole, in reply to
I have heard of Plummer + Butt -> Plummer-Butt (!)
At least it was Butt rather than Crack.
-
Bart Janssen, in reply to
I don’t recall a single one I’ve attended which included ...
Neither have I, but I strongly suspect, actually I'm damned certain, that my sample is biased. I just don't get invited to standard relious wedding because none of my friends are that way inclined.
-
Bart Janssen, in reply to
Our first-born is Jimmy Rae Brown
Except for the expectation that he will be a blues guitarist.
-
Carol Stewart, in reply to
Plummer-Butt (!)
As opposed to the more aristocratic Butt-Plummer?
-
War Boner.
Who wouldn't be tempted ...
-
Miche Campbell, in reply to
See, it's not "trading one man's name for another" though.
I was 29 when I got married. I'd had my surname for all of that time. After 29 years it was my name, not my father's (thank goodness).
And for the record it's still my name.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
I think the most sensible solution for double-barrelled breeding with double-barrelled is to combine half of each parent’s name in the most aesthetically pleasing combination.
Best example of which I am aware: the Gracewood family. Grace + Wood x Deed Poll.
-
I’m sure I’ve said this before in this forum, but the Spanish system has much to recommend it. Couples don’t share a name, children are hyphenated until such time as they pick which one they want to go with.
Some friends of mine thought up another solution: an invented middle-name for both the couple, intended as surname of future children. So they all share a name, but also keep their birth-names.
-
Three sons, two daughter-in laws
I asked the French one if she was going to take our family name, glad to she said ( I have always thought of her as my daughter anyway) but interestingly in France as a woman your legal name is the one you are born with
Second d-i-l has double barrelled the two surnames
Different strokes for different folks
-
Morgan Nichol, in reply to
I've always thought if Dave Dobbyn married me, I'd never take his surname.
Ok, but from now on I'm going to refer to you as if you did.
-
Sacha, in reply to
Bar owner seems more likely :)
-
Morgan Nichol, in reply to
Of course as a man it is never expected that I change my name and in our case it would have been silly to have either of us mess up our publication record by changing names.
I've always figured that I'll take the opportunity to change my name to my mother's family name. Of course now some shithead is squatting the domain name I'd then have to adopt, so I might not do it anymore.
-
The surname point is interesting - I, too, see no point in one taking the name of the other. I know of several people who took a less mainstream route and chose a new name together - it would make genealogies complicated (although they're historically bloody patriarchal), but it's much less random than the traditional practice. The Swedish actors Noomi and Ola Rapace provide an example of the chosen-marriage-name practice ("Rapace" is French for "bird of prey").
-
Miche Campbell, in reply to
I do know a young man who changed his name to match his wife's when he got married.
After the initial "Oh? Okay," it's been no hassle at all.
-
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
Best example of which I am aware: the Gracewood family. Grace + Wood x Deed Poll.
Or you could go the Torchwood route: Pull out the Scrabble tiles and see if you can come up with a funky anagram of your surnames.
-
izogi, in reply to
I don't understand this. That doesn't mean I condemn it, or that in the least I think women shouldn't be doing it, I just don't understand it.
I don't get it either. I grew up with a mother who repeatedly told me how much she regretted changing her name when she married---not because she disliked her new name, but because she discovered afterwards that she was suddenly anonymous and very difficult for many of her old friends to find. These days, with social networks like Facebook, that specific issue is probably less of an issue, at least as long as social network corporations continue collecting screeds of personal network data about everyone in the world.
We were married in 2010 after 7 years together, as much to keep the families happy as for any other reason, and I managed to convince my wife to keep her name. She added mine as a middle name on the marriage certificate, but after shifting to Australia we discovered that marriage certs aren't accepted as name-change evidence as they are in NZ. Therefore she can't use her new middle name for anything official here anyway... at least without a completely new name-changing process that we couldn't be bothered with during all the other complexities of shifting.
With a baby on the way, about to return to NZ, and with her passport finally up for renewal, she's made up her mind to change her name properly with the new passport. The child surname simplification thing is an excuse, but she's also concerned about either of us having issues being accepted as the parent of a child without having the same name. I wouldn't know if this is actually a significant issue these days or not.
Ultimately though, I think she just grew up in her extended polish and not-very-good-at-being-catholic family, always assuming she'd lose her surname when she married.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.