-
Website
http://www.drbethsnow.com/ -
Original page
http://www.drbethsnow.com/2008/02/01/614/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
jodyreale
1 comment · 1 points
-
todmaffin
1 comment · 1 points
-
amoosefloats
4 comments · 1 points
-
ceeinbc
1 comment · 1 points
-
BarbaraDoduk
1 comment · 1 points
-
-
Popular Threads
1. Did you get pitched on “Why Do Beautiful People Have More Daughters", or did I point the PR person in your direction, or did you acquire it all on your own?
2. Ms. Steinem is, deservedly, an intellectual and political giant, and deserves all the plaudits she receives, but attempting to ban "American Psycho" was not on. I've read it, and it's not a very good book, but it certainly doesn't constitute hate speech. But then, I'm very anti-book-banning. If we're afraid of an idea, we should make it freely available to be debunked. Consider what a lockdown Scientology keeps on its core ideas. That's something to truly fear.
3. I don't know about your friends, but among me and my wife's female friends (all university-educated and at least middle class, I should add), 90% of them changed their name when they got married.
I feel like feminism lied to me a little on this point when I was growing up. I graduated from university assuming that many, nay most, women would keep their own name as a recognition of their hard-won independence. I know it's irrational, but I'm a little dismayed that so few actually did.
1. You pointed the PR person in my direction. And I'm glad you did - it was a very interesting read! Thanks!
2. I completely agree - I've read American Psycho and seen the movie and don't feel it constitutes hate speech at all. I personally thought it was an thought-provoking commentary on the vapidity of 80s culture (sorry, I couldn't resist using the word "vapidity"). I'm also very against book banning.
3. Most of the women I know changed their last names when they got married, myself included. My ex and I talked about whether I would change my name, he would change his (yes, he did seriously consider it) or neither of us would change our names. At the time, I didn't really like my last name (I was young and stupid!) and that, coupled with what I felt was the futility of changing vs. not changing (I mean, do I take my husband's last name or keep my dad's last name? Either way, I'm choosing a man's name!) led me to change it, but I changed it back when we separated and have totally been kicking myself for changing it in the first place. What really irks me about the whole name change thing is that men never have to deal with it. Women are confronted with it if they marry - some people get mad at you for not changing it, others get mad at you for changing it - and men just don't even have to deal with that situation at all.
2. Word again.
3. You make a good point it being a man's name in either case. The only workaround here, it seems to me, is for women to increasingly keep their own names. If that became de rigeur, then the issue would go away.
May I ask what your married name was? Because I think 'Snow' is a pretty excellent last name, especially when paired with "Elizabeth". I favour names that don't have the same number of syllables.
I can't go into my issues with feminism because I've already tried articulating them here three times and it's not making much sense. But Gloria Steinem - cool.
So it would be different if the man and woman getting married got together and engaged in some kind of egalitarian name-determining exercises (like which sounds better to them) but of course that's not how it would play out in real life.
So really the only solution to this is the Kalev patented solution to gendered last name selection, which is that the married couple hyphenate their names in an aurally-pleasing manner and boy children get the father's last name and girl children get the mother's last name. There we go... all solved! I'm fixing the situation in the Middle East next week.