Carrying on surname really important to men?

123578

Comments

  • DojiDoji Posts: 195
    Forum Member
    Under Ice wrote: »
    I repeat: balderdash

    It's unsavoury at best
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 79
    Forum Member
    Doji wrote: »
    It's unsavoury at best

    There's nothing unsavoury about my children. They are lovely, happy, and well-adjusted. Would you rather they hadn't been born as I am not married?
  • DojiDoji Posts: 195
    Forum Member
    Under Ice wrote: »
    There's nothing unsavoury about my children. They are lovely, happy, and well-adjusted. Would you rather they hadn't been born as I am not married?

    You should get married before you have children, it's doesn't look good.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 79
    Forum Member
    Doji wrote: »
    You should get married before you have children, it's doesn't look good.

    You didn't answer my question. And I don't care how it looks.
  • RogerBaileyRogerBailey Posts: 1,959
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Under Ice wrote: »
    There's nothing unsavoury about my children. They are lovely, happy, and well-adjusted. Would you rather they hadn't been born as I am not married?

    Some men find it a lot easier to walk away if they are unmarried. Not all of course. It doesn't seem a proper family if the parents are boyfriend and girlfriend imo.
  • DojiDoji Posts: 195
    Forum Member
    Some men find it a lot easier to walk away if they are unmarried. Not all of course. It doesn't seem a proper family if the parents are boyfriend and girlfriend imo.

    Exactly
  • November_RainNovember_Rain Posts: 9,145
    Forum Member
    Doji wrote: »
    You should get married before you have children, it's doesn't look good.

    It doesn't look good to whom? As far as I can tell most folk don't give a stuff these days. This isn't the 1940s.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 79
    Forum Member
    Some men find it a lot easier to walk away if they are unmarried. Not all of course. It doesn't seem a proper family if the parents are boyfriend and girlfriend imo.

    Married men can, and do, walk away. My family lives and does exactly the same things as a 'married' family. And I don't consider my partner of 11 years as my 'boyfriend'. I'm not a teenager!
  • MuggsyMuggsy Posts: 19,251
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Some men find it a lot easier to walk away if they are unmarried. Not all of course. It doesn't seem a proper family if the parents are boyfriend and girlfriend imo.

    Many, many men seem to find it easy to walk even when they're married.
  • DojiDoji Posts: 195
    Forum Member
    Muggsy wrote: »
    Many, many men seem to find it easy to walk even when they're married.

    I think what the person means, is that if you're married you have taken a vow to stay together for better or for worse, and just walking away from a marriage isn't as easy as it is ina relationship because you not only have a comittment to your children but to your wife as well, and also to yourself consiously.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 79
    Forum Member
    Doji wrote: »
    I think what the person means, is that if you're married you have taken a vow to stay together for better or for worse, and just walking away from a marriage isn't as easy as it is ina relationship because you not only have a comittment to your children but to your wife as well, and also to yourself consiously.

    I have total commitment to my partner.
  • DojiDoji Posts: 195
    Forum Member
    Under Ice wrote: »
    I have total commitment to my partner.

    Marry her then, what you scared of?
  • MuggsyMuggsy Posts: 19,251
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Doji wrote: »
    I think what the person means, is that if you're married you have taken a vow to stay together for better or for worse, and just walking away from a marriage isn't as easy as it is ina relationship because you not only have a comittment to your children but to your wife as well, and also to yourself consiously.

    Vows matter to some people more than others and whether that vow has been certified by the law or the church isn't going to make much difference to them in my experience.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 761
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    With unmarried couples, children over here normally get the mother's surname because she is automatically the one who has custody.

    My parents have been together for 32 years now, never married, and my sister and me have my Mom's surname.
  • Pumping IronPumping Iron Posts: 29,891
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    :cool:
    orangebird wrote: »
    Well, call me old fashioned/owned, but I'm a huge believer that husband/wife & children should all have the same name.

    For me personally, I agree. I have been with my partner for several years, but we wouldn't have thought about having kids till we were married. Now we are, we can't wait to start a family.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 4,095
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Doji wrote: »
    You shouldn't have children before you're married, it's immoral.
    Doji wrote: »
    It's unsavoury at best
    Doji wrote: »
    You should get married before you have children, it's doesn't look good.

    You don't half speak some silly stuff. You need to think before joining grown up conversations.
  • pickwickpickwick Posts: 25,739
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    sweh wrote: »
    My brother's the only male on my paternal side, a lot of responsibility rests on his shoulders.
    This is another reason I don't like the tradition, actually - it's unfair to men! What if he doesn't want kids? What if he can't have kids? What if he personally doesn't care about his surname, and his partner wanted any kids to take hers, but he felt a responsibility to his family?
    jra wrote: »
    In other words, nowadays, there are lots of options available.
    Yeah, but it's not a free choice, there's a lot of pressure. You can see in this thread how outraged some people get if you choose to buck tradition. It is getting easier for couples to choose not to use the father's name for the kids, but they still get a lot of crap from the RogerBaileys of the world. (Imagine what he'd be like if he had a son whose family took his wife's name. FAMILY DRAMA AHOY.)

    I just want it to be people's own choice :(
  • ffawkesffawkes Posts: 4,495
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    geniusgirl wrote: »
    Why?

    It used to be tradition to do many things, but we have developed.

    We kid ourselves that we have but most of the time we are moving backwards
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 4,095
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    ffawkes wrote: »
    We kid ourselves that we have but most of the time we are moving backwards

    Examples?
  • ffawkesffawkes Posts: 4,495
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    geniusgirl wrote: »
    Examples?

    Go figure.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 4,095
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    ffawkes wrote: »
    Go figure.

    So you have none. That's fine, but don't go making a statement you can't back up!
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 3,680
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Ds is a hotbed of liberal dreamers imo. I have not once in all my years heard of kids taking their mothers name.

    Well you must not get out much then, I know loads of couples that have done this. :D

    I kept my own name nearly 20 years ago now and the kids have both of ours officially but in reality I guess mine gets used the most. Hubby couldn't care less.

    Virtually all the women I know have kept their own name on marriage, some husbands have taken their wives names, some have come up with brand new family names (as they do in other cultures) or a even mixed version of both.

    Its a completely outdated and pointless throwback to insist that a women changes her name. If she wants to out of choice then great but not because its the done thing to do.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 3,680
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Tubtui wrote: »
    With unmarried couples, children over here normally get the mother's surname because she is automatically the one who has custody.

    My parents have been together for 32 years now, never married, and my sister and me have my Mom's surname.

    Trust to Germans to be practical :D

    This makes so much more sense to me as in this day and age of marital breakdown with the kids more often than not going to the mother it is the most practical solution I guess.
  • Eater SundaeEater Sundae Posts: 10,000
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Faggy wrote: »
    Maybe follow the spanish system of the child taking the first surname of each parent's double barrelled name to make a new surname.
    It's worked for them for hundreds of years.

    Another convention. Why would that be any better than the convention we already have?
  • LuverlyAJLuverlyAJ Posts: 673
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    kimindex wrote: »
    The idea is a deeply sexist tradition, whatever excuses people come up with to justify it. It denotes ownership, the passing on of a woman from one man to another, subservience and that the man is the head of the household.

    I know that's not how it manifests itself in how people operate within their families now and people do do it because they don't want to be seen as being awkward, different or alternative (and some men and women do believe in male supremacy, still, of course) but that's the indisputable root of the cosy little tradition (as I'm sure everyone knows but some don't feel comfortable acknowledging it for whatever reason).
    Yeah well now its just deep in tradition.
Sign In or Register to comment.