The current media frenzy about the latest female celebrity to replace her last name with that of her new spouse is sure to infuriate longstanding feminists who have fought long and hard for women to keep their maiden names ... or not. You see, this time, the rules have changed, and they have been forever changed by Portia DeRossi.
The 37-year-old actress has filed a petition in a Los Angeles court to change her name from DeRossi to DeGeneres, the last name of her much more famous same-sex partner, giving birth to a new debate about whether taking a spouse's name is, in fact, a feminist issue, when that spouse is, in fact, of the same gender.
On one side of the debate is Assemblywoman Fiona Ma, who has recently put forth a bill that would make California the seventh state to give married spouses and domestic partners equal opportunity to take their surname of choice. Ma says the proposal is really about "equality in relationships."
But would pioneering feminists like Lucy Stone, the 19th century women's rights champion who advocated for women to retain their own names after marriage, necessarily agree? Quoted as saying that "A wife should no more take her husband's name than he should hers ... my name is my identity and should not be lost," the Lucy Stone League, which carries on her work, proclaims that when women take their spouses names it is considered "name-abandonment," but that this is so much a part of U.S. culture that few recognize it for what it is: a powerful instance of sex discrimination that has a major effect on women's lives and work.
The issue of sex-discrimination is obviously obliterated when referring to same-sex couples, but it can still be similarly damaging to ones career. Journalists, for example, build their careers, reputations and even brands based upon their bylines, so changing one's name can cause much confusion, particularly in today's new media world where content is shared at lightning speed, with little or no time for consumers to read the fine print. But it doesn't stop there.
According to a European study published earlier this year entitled, "What's in a Name? 361.708 Euros: The Effects of Marital Name Change," women who took their partner's name appear to be different from women who kept their own name on a variety of demographics and beliefs. A woman who took her partner's name or a hyphenated name, for example, was judged as more caring, more dependent, less intelligent, more emotional, less competent and less ambitious in comparison to a woman who kept her own name.
A woman with her own name, on the other hand, was judged as less caring, more independent, more ambitious, more intelligent and more competent, which was similar to how unmarried women and men (married or not) were judged in the study. Finally, and perhaps most significantly, a job applicant who took her partner's name, in comparison to one with her own name, was less likely to be hired for a job and her monthly salary was estimated €861,21 lower, or $1109.32 in U.S. dollars.
But somehow, in the case of the new Ms. DeGeneres, I don't think this will necessarily be the case.
Lori Sokol, Ph.D., is the President of Sokol Media, Inc., and host of the weekly radio show, 'Juggling Act,' on 1490AM WGCH. She can be reached at lori@sokolmediaonline.com.
Follow Lori Sokol on Twitter: www.twitter.com/lorisokolphd
Anne Peterson: On Taking His Last Name
Today the issue is only whether a spouse of either gender should be allowed to choose the name of his or her partner if he or she wants to do so.
There is no comparison.
But I do think this is a complicated and serious issue, even if individuals think it's not.
I am married and did not change my name. Like many of my peers, I felt there was no need to and had absolutely no pressure or assumption from anybody that I would.
The complication for us is with our daughter. I ended up giving her my last name as her middle name and my husband's name as her last name. I don't like this particularly but it seemed the best option. My husband did consider changing his name to mine... But in the end we kept our own names.
My reasoning, was that as a teacher I know that kids with last names different to their fathers were more likely to be assumed not "their" children. I know it's kind of sucky logic, but neither of us wanted a hyphenated option as it only creates more chaos down the line...
I don't like that we don't all have the same name, but I am always happy to sign my name that was always mine and will always be.
but if we all started hyphenating our names...it will take forever for our children to sign checks and birthday cards.
for example...jane smith-jones marries john adams-thomas...so her name is now jane smith-jones-adams-thomas? -- hyphenation needs to be rethought for sure!
Not that complicated. Seriously.
Stop letting society tell you who you are. Define that one for yourself.
one can show respect to their husband without recognizing him as the patriarch of the family. a lot of families are more egalitarian, especially when both partners work, or when the man is the stay at home parent.
if the man stays at home and performs the traditional "wifely" duties, then according to you, she should have the right to name the house. and therefore he should take her name.
Which adds a twist to the example in this article -- Portia DeRossi is a stage name....
neither side traditionalist or feminist should really get a say in the matter
However let us not forget that changing one's name upon marriage is a women's issue like abortion, voting rights, birth control and no-fault divorce. The heart of feminism is about women having the RIGHT to choose, not WHAT she chooses.
The fact that so many women here reject the idea of taking their father's name, but not their mother's (until they realize their mother's name was her father's name) speaks to misandry, pure and simple. Unless they are, in fact, owned by their matriarchs...