Eugene Lee (Janelle)

Professor Frances McCue

Honors 205
November 30, 2014
Word Count: 1466
Refuse Change to Make a Change

Many times on Facebook have I seen women change their last names overnight,
following the day of their wedding. In every such occurrence, I was taken aback to see a stranger
on my newsfeed until I realized that she had just gotten married. This custom of women taking
their husbands surnames upon marriage has been one of the many societal norms that have gone
by generally unquestioned. I, however, have always wondered whether such a practice is
necessary or, even, appropriate. In this paper, I will argue that married women should keep their
maiden names.
To clarify, I am not positing that the United States government should pass any legalistic
document officially putting an end to the practice of female marital name change. Rather, I am
arguing for my claim in hope that more women would come to see the importance of keeping
their maiden names and would start to act upon that realization. A womans maiden name, the
surname that she has from birth until it is legally changed to her husbands at marriage, is
significant in that it represents a womans heritage and family line. I believe that it is better for
women to keep their names unchanged throughout their lives because doing so establishes
equality and promotes self-respect.
By law, men and women are equal, so a woman should not be expected to do something
that her husband is not. The tradition of marital name change originates from a time when
women were considered property of their husbands and had no property rights themselves.
Marriage for a woman meant giving up her identity and merging her legal existence with her

husbands. Recently, however, the law has established equality between genders, giving a
woman her own separate identity from her husband and the right to own her own property. After
a long struggle for gender equality in America, the accomplishments of which can be shown by
the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment and the increasing number of women in more
masculine career fields such as politics and in engineering, the nations law has come to
incorporate the principle that American men and women have equal rights and should be treated
the same without discrimination. So, if it is trueor, to say the least, legally established by
American lawthat men and women are equal and a woman has her own identity apart from her
husband, than why is it that America still expects women to change their last names to match
their husbands? Why has not the old tradition based on the very belief that women are inferior
to men been rooted out of contemporary society? In a nation founded and governed by laws such
as the United States, anything established by law should be practically applied and made
apparent in peoples daily lives. Since modern America legally grants women equal standing as
their male counterparts, it would only make sense that its female citizens keep their maiden
names in marriage.
Moreover, a womans last name is an essential part of her identity that she ought not to
relinquish. Identities matter, and names are powerful. The name we give something is a part of
how we make it real and give it meaning. A name is far more than just a word used to address a
person; a name bears a persons life story and reflects his or her sense of identity as an
individual. The cultural assumption that women will change their names upon marriage
diminishes the female genders sense of self-worth, or the perceived importance of ones own
existence. When women think of their names as temporary and see that a part of being a woman
is incorporating her identity to her husbands, they naturally, and often unknowingly, come to

doubt the fact that as individuals they have value and are already whole. Therefore, a womans
choice to keep her name is a form of self-respect, or the act of treating herself as a person who is
worthy of honor and dignity just like any man. By retaining her maiden name, she is choosing to
recognize herself as an independent being who does not have to exist as someones wife. She is
choosing to respect all the meanings and associations that her name carries, including her family
history, the numerous accomplishments she has made under that name, and the people who hold
her name close to their hearts. Any person deserves respect from him or herself as well as from
the society he or she belongs in. A woman is rightly esteemed according to her worth when she
keeps a central part of her identity, her maiden name.
A potential objection to my claim is that although traditions persist over time, the
meanings and suggestions they carry often change. Just like the custom of marital name change,
there are several traditions in this nation as well as worldwide that trace back to certain beliefs
that are no longer valid or appropriate today. However, many of such traditions have lost their
original implications and have assumed new significances that are not harmful to contemporary
society. An example is the celebration of Halloween. Halloween originates from ancient pagan
celebrations of ghosts, based on the Celtic belief that the dead could walk among the living on
the 31st of every October. Some Celts would wear demonic costumes so that the evil spirits
would simply pass over them, mistaking the costumes as their own kind. Others would offer
sweets to the demons to avoid their ill will; hence the tradition of trick or treat emerged. These
practices are clearly outdated now, and would cause much religious contention if they were to be
brought back today. However, Halloween is still celebrated every year, not for the original
purpose of connecting with evil spirits, but rather for letting children dress up as their favorite
Disney characters and get away with eating loads of candy. Its original devilish significance has

faded away. Similarly, one could say that marital name change for women, though originally
practiced in a way that showed womens inferiority to men, now has a benign purpose of
representing the union between a husband and a wife.
While this objection presents sensible arguments, it has some holes that weaken its force
against my argument. First of all, we cannot neglect the origin of something simply because it is
not directly apparent. How a tradition begins defines more or less of how it is going to be from
then on, and any initial belief that helped form the custom will always underlie it in some way or
form. Halloween, for example, still retains some of its original implications in that it involves
ghosts that threaten to trick humans if they do not give out treats. Aside from the fact that
ghoulish rituals have been replaced by childish play, the theme of human-ghost interaction still
remains. Similarly, even though the custom of marital name change is no longer explicitly based
on the belief that women are property to men, the sense of inequality still remains with the
tradition, however subtly.
Second of all, the new purpose of marital name changeto signify the lifelong
commitment between a man and a woman in marriageholds sexist assumptions. I do not
question the idea of a husband and a wife becoming one in marriage; but why must it be the wife
that changes her name? Under the principle that men and women are equal, it is not reasonable to
expect the wife to abandon her maiden name to show her dedication to the marriage while
expecting nothing of the sort from the husband. Even this new benign purpose is not so benign
in that it suggests gender inequality. Therefore, the above objection fails to have a serious force
against my argument.
The contemporary era is one of equality and individualism, when all sorts of unorthodox
ideas are brought forth and actions are taken against tradition and convention. Equality across

genders, social classes, and races is being advocated for and has largely been accomplished. The
individual is viewed as a sovereign entity with certain unalienable rights, and the interests and
worth of the individual is emphasized over collective control. In such an era, with all sorts of
liberal advancements, how is it not baffling that the outdated practice of marital name change is
still prevalent? How is it not being more largely recognized that the fair treatment and respect
that women deserve are being taken away by societys expectation of them to take their
husbands names upon marriage? Considering these, I believe the only sensible choice for
women is to keep their family names that have identified them since their birth. Such a decision
would simply be another step toward the egalitarian and free society that we all strive to attain.