There is a movement recently for women that marry to not
take their husband's last name. This is not an entirely new concept at
all. I was listening to a radio program
recently and the host was making the argument that it really doesn't matter if
the bride takes the grooms name. The
main points of her argument were: one
she felt that she should not lose her individual identity just because she got
married and second that she also wanted to honor her side of the family when or
if there were children as a result of the marriage. I'm certainly all for people having the right
to choose whatever they want for their name.
Where I find fault in her argument is the logic of it.
The
first logical fallacy is that she somehow would lose her individual identity by
taking her husband's last name. Does she not know that her maiden name is the same as her father's not her mothers. Further more, is is most likely her great great grandfather's and beyond last name as well. So she is still leaving out all of the maternal representation anyway.
The second fault in the logic in my opinion is where does all of the hyphenation end with regard to the children. After just a few generations peoples last names would have several hyphenations, that is down right silly to me and frankly becomes useless at that point.
The second fault in the logic in my opinion is where does all of the hyphenation end with regard to the children. After just a few generations peoples last names would have several hyphenations, that is down right silly to me and frankly becomes useless at that point.
No comments:
Post a Comment