Look, I know that as a woman who is choosing not to relinquish her name when she gets married (I’m hyphenating, if you’re interested), I am in the minority. Something like 80 – 90% of women change their names to their husband’s. I know that a lot of women don’t even consider this an issue (oh, but it is! It’s really important. Your name and identity is important!), if they even consider it at all. And though that makes me really rather sad, I think what’s even worse — in fact, *the* worst — is women trotting out this stupid bloody argument, paraphrased thusly:
What difference does it make if a woman keeps her name or changes it to her husband’s, since her name most likely came from her father, and he’s a man? Joke’s on you, feminists!
Can we get rid of this ridiculous straw-man argument already?
Never mind the idiotic ‘feminism = anything male is evil’ assumption inherent in the logic. The important thing to understand is that men aren’t the only ones whose names belong to them. I know that’s hard for a lot of people to grasp, so I will reiterate: Yes, my surname came from my father, but it’s not his name — it’s mine. I was born with it, I’ve had it for 34 years, I’ve stumbled through life with it, accomplishing things (some more dubious than others) and leaving a mark with it. It’s who I am. It belongs to me and I’m fucking keeping it. I’d never ask my fiance to just ditch his identity, which I assume is just as important to him as mine is to me, so why should I ditch mine?
That’s not a rhetorical question. Can anyone give a good reason why?
My decidedly non-straw-man argument is that there isn’t one.