This study is ridiculous
It may be the other assorted wedding stresses getting to me, with a week and a half to go, but this USA Today article about a "study" regarding whether or not brides should take their husband's name about pushed me over the edge, possibly because I'm getting married in less than two weeks and still haven't decided what name I'll be using to sign the marriage license. No, I'm not kidding.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-08-11-change-name_N.htm?loc=interstitialskip
Okay, first of all. 815 people is an absolutely pathetic sample size, particularly if a large portion of the sample size is from Utah, as the author of the article seems to imply. (Researchers from the University of Indiana and the University of Utah are responsible for the study.) No offense to the state of Utah, but that particular population is hardly representative of...well...most of the rest of the country. And this is coming from someone who tends to lean slightly conservative much of the time.
Second of all, why is it anyone else's business whether or not I choose to change my name? I've spent the last two and a half years going back and forth on this issue.
On the "for name change" side, we have the fact that I'm only 23 and haven't really established myself in a career too deeply under this name, combined with the further fact that I'm a relatively traditional type of person who had expected all along to totally just change my name when I got married. And then, honestly, the only one that has much of any sway with me -- I'd really rather not have to explain to the teachers of my eventual kids that, yes, these are my children, and no, we don't have the same last name. (However, based on what many of my college classmates are doing, I doubt this will be as much of an issue by the time our generation starts having kids in school. Purely anecdotal evidence, I have no research to back this up...or even "research.")
But on the "against name change" side, we have the fact that I actually really like my name. A lot. (And I definitely like it better than Josh's, a fact which he's fully aware of.) It's the one that's on my college diploma, not to mention about a year and a half worth of published articles and graphics. Plus, it seems like a ridiculous amount of work to have to have my entire identity changed over to a last name that, quite honestly, even my fiance isn't terribly attached to -- for a couple different reasons, it's not even the one he was using when we started dating. Shallowly, I also don't care much because either way I'll still have to spell it out every time someone needs my last name. (But when your name is Caitlyn or a variation thereof, you get used to that anyway.)
And then there is the lovely "screw it, I'll just hyphenate it" approach that I am seriously considering, because it lets me keep my name and solves the whole issue of not having the same last name as eventual kids. However, I'm still not so sure about that, either.
I fully accept that there will be relatives who, regardless of my choice on this matter (and yes, it is my choice, and Josh told me he absolutely doesn't care what I decide as long as I still marry him), will call me by his last name. It really doesn't bother me.
Third, and finally, this is the part that disturbs me:
Hamilton says that about half of respondents went so far as to say that the government should mandate women to change their names when they marry, a finding she called "really interesting," considering typical attitudes towards government intervention.
It sounds to me like half of the respondents of this survey need to butt out. If I don't want to change my name, that discussion is between me and my fiance. If I do want to change my name, that discussion is between me and my fiance. The government has no place in it and it kind of creeps me out that people think they should. If we wanted to change our names to Caitlyn and Joshua Awesome (with their kids Totally and Freaking, obviously; oh, HIMYM), that's our business.
Some of the comments on that article also disturb me...the ones along the vein of "if you don't take my name you'd better give back my ring," in particular, and start sort of making marriage seem like a property exchange. Because it's totally still 1500, you guys.
Anyway, to sum up my ridiculous, overlong rant, USA Today's journalistic standards are disappointing, this study is disturbing, and I'm 95% certain that when I wake up on August 23, I'll still have the same name that my parents put on my birth certificate. I mean, there's always a chance I'll change my mind on that, but the point is, I'm the one changing my mind.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-08-11-change-name_N.htm?loc=interstitialskip
Okay, first of all. 815 people is an absolutely pathetic sample size, particularly if a large portion of the sample size is from Utah, as the author of the article seems to imply. (Researchers from the University of Indiana and the University of Utah are responsible for the study.) No offense to the state of Utah, but that particular population is hardly representative of...well...most of the rest of the country. And this is coming from someone who tends to lean slightly conservative much of the time.
Second of all, why is it anyone else's business whether or not I choose to change my name? I've spent the last two and a half years going back and forth on this issue.
On the "for name change" side, we have the fact that I'm only 23 and haven't really established myself in a career too deeply under this name, combined with the further fact that I'm a relatively traditional type of person who had expected all along to totally just change my name when I got married. And then, honestly, the only one that has much of any sway with me -- I'd really rather not have to explain to the teachers of my eventual kids that, yes, these are my children, and no, we don't have the same last name. (However, based on what many of my college classmates are doing, I doubt this will be as much of an issue by the time our generation starts having kids in school. Purely anecdotal evidence, I have no research to back this up...or even "research.")
But on the "against name change" side, we have the fact that I actually really like my name. A lot. (And I definitely like it better than Josh's, a fact which he's fully aware of.) It's the one that's on my college diploma, not to mention about a year and a half worth of published articles and graphics. Plus, it seems like a ridiculous amount of work to have to have my entire identity changed over to a last name that, quite honestly, even my fiance isn't terribly attached to -- for a couple different reasons, it's not even the one he was using when we started dating. Shallowly, I also don't care much because either way I'll still have to spell it out every time someone needs my last name. (But when your name is Caitlyn or a variation thereof, you get used to that anyway.)
And then there is the lovely "screw it, I'll just hyphenate it" approach that I am seriously considering, because it lets me keep my name and solves the whole issue of not having the same last name as eventual kids. However, I'm still not so sure about that, either.
I fully accept that there will be relatives who, regardless of my choice on this matter (and yes, it is my choice, and Josh told me he absolutely doesn't care what I decide as long as I still marry him), will call me by his last name. It really doesn't bother me.
Third, and finally, this is the part that disturbs me:
Hamilton says that about half of respondents went so far as to say that the government should mandate women to change their names when they marry, a finding she called "really interesting," considering typical attitudes towards government intervention.
It sounds to me like half of the respondents of this survey need to butt out. If I don't want to change my name, that discussion is between me and my fiance. If I do want to change my name, that discussion is between me and my fiance. The government has no place in it and it kind of creeps me out that people think they should. If we wanted to change our names to Caitlyn and Joshua Awesome (with their kids Totally and Freaking, obviously; oh, HIMYM), that's our business.
Some of the comments on that article also disturb me...the ones along the vein of "if you don't take my name you'd better give back my ring," in particular, and start sort of making marriage seem like a property exchange. Because it's totally still 1500, you guys.
Anyway, to sum up my ridiculous, overlong rant, USA Today's journalistic standards are disappointing, this study is disturbing, and I'm 95% certain that when I wake up on August 23, I'll still have the same name that my parents put on my birth certificate. I mean, there's always a chance I'll change my mind on that, but the point is, I'm the one changing my mind.