Quote:
Originally posted by DoggyStyle82:
MIDWESTDIVA, SOLORHO and ECLIPSE: maybe I did not make myself clear. It is not bad to be financially and emotionally independent. One should always be that. Nor should marriage or a man validate a woman. My point is that this attitude is not conducive to a good marriage on the whole(my name, my money, I can go anywhere, do what I want attitude). I am sincerely glad that it works for you Eclipse (truly) Whether a woman can stand on her own two feet should the marriage dissolve is secondary. As it is for a man. A woman keeping her name is an ego thing. I'm a traditionalist, don't go much for "new wave". I would never take a womans' name, but I wouldn't knock a man that would. I have no problem with a woman keeping her professional name either (just good business sense). However, in our home, all correspondence, introductions, invitations, will say Mr. and Mrs Same Last Name. If you still want to be Ms.Jones, you don't need me, so there is no need to bear "our" children, share "our" home, or "our" income. The Latin argument is specious, because that is another culture. American born Latinos have one last name, if married, it is the husbands.
|
DoggyStyle82, I think you are making an assumption that a woman's desire to keep her maiden name is indicitive of an 'attitude' of my name, my money, etc. I think it is important to realize that each person's reasons for making this 'nontraditional' choice is different. As a man, no one has, nor probably ever will, ask you to change your name, which as been a part of you since birth, to 'prove' that you committed to your family. As a matter of fact, this culture does not require men do a whole lot to prove that they are 'spoken for' (i.e. engagement rings for women, etc.).