Debate Mansion

   

The surname fuss: A married woman's predicament! (Page 5)

Post Reply New Post

Page 5 of 6

Page 1 Page 4
Page   of 6
Page 6 Page 6

Freethinker112

IF-Sizzlerz

Freethinker112

Joined: 16 May 2012

Posts: 13810

Posted: 13 October 2012 at 4:55am | IP Logged
Originally posted by King-Anu

And where did that existing surname came from? Father or Mother? lol.
 
- On individual scale one still has the right to change their maiden name or not take the surname legally if I am not mistakes
 
- On level of society we cannot go back now as the whole system is built around it. It is like English language which has  became the medium to communicate among different people. Even if we don't like it to change it will be a problem.
 
- On principle, I see your point. lol.

The existing one generally comes from father but they may give a neutral name separate from both the parents.

And is it fair to compare name given by parents who gave you birth to one given by spouse which has equal contribution to marriage as you? I don't think so.

And we can always change. Smile

Dear Guest, Being an unregistered member you are missing out on participating in the lively discussions happening on the topic "The surname fuss: A married woman's predicament! (Page 5)" in Debate Mansion forum. In addition you lose out on the fun interactions with fellow members and other member exclusive features that India-Forums has to offer. Join India's most popular discussion portal on Indian Entertainment. It's FREE and registration is effortless so JOIN NOW!

Freethinker112

IF-Sizzlerz

Freethinker112

Joined: 16 May 2012

Posts: 13810

Posted: 13 October 2012 at 5:00am | IP Logged
Originally posted by -Xaffron-


What is your perspective on women hailing from the rural backgrounds of India who tacitly consent to the changing of their surnames? Do they have a choice? What if a rural woman turns rebellious and goes against the odds, only to be later humiliated and killed? Are we still holding true to our notion of freedom of speech and expression then?

As i said it is their choice. If they are happy to adopt new surname then it is their wish. The thing is, I don't think it is such a big deal. Yes, the tradition was started as dominance of males but I think you can assess dominance by other means too. If a girl finds it conflicting with her identity, she should not be forced. Simple as that. Smile

Humiliating and killing over this matter is just not humane and backwards thinking. They should be punished.

The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

epiphany.

*Woh Ajnabee*

IF-Sizzlerz

*Woh Ajnabee*

Joined: 15 September 2007

Posts: 22866

Posted: 14 October 2012 at 1:52pm | IP Logged
I'm at a loss on this one. On one hand, I do see that accepting your husband's last name as your own is a way to incorporate yourself into his family (going by that, shouldn't he be doing the same though?). It's like that first step of making something your own. At the same time, I, personally, would not want to change my name. I like it the way it is - it's who I am. But if I don't change my name, then my kids will have a different last name then I will (going by the ongoing paternal lineage system in society). And I don't know if I'll be okay with my kids having a different last name.

In that case, I will be on the lookout for a husband that shares my last name but isn't related too me. Shouldn't be too hard. ;-)


Edited by *Woh Ajnabee* - 14 October 2012 at 1:55pm

The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

epiphany.

baz786

IF-Sizzlerz

baz786

Joined: 15 March 2009

Posts: 13775

Posted: 15 October 2012 at 1:26am | IP Logged
The men dont change there surname because its through the male side that your ancestory and lineage continue

In fact in islam its not correct for woman to change there surname when they get married
Its better for them to keep there fathers name so one knows what lineage there from.

Changing ur surname for a woman is a western practice.

Its your children that take there dads name only wen they are born to continue the family lineage

Why a woman should not take her husband's surname ar - en - fr I have read your responses to the following questions 2537 and 4362 concerning a wife
retaining her father's name upon marriage. The Ayaat mentioned from Surah Al-Ahzaab states
that adopted sons (and hence daughters?) should not be called as sons of the step-fathers.
However, how exactly does this apply to a wife simply changing her name for marriage; as
she is not actually claiming to belong to her husband, but just taking his name. If it is a
question of lineage, I would appreciate specific references from the Qur'an and hadith. Thank you for your help and clarification.
Jazak'Allah Khayr. Praise be to Allaah. The effects of imitating the west in naming ourselves are many. One of them is the way in which people have got used to omitting the word 'ibn' (son of) or 'ibnatu' (daughter of) between their own names and the name of their fathers. The reason for this is, firstly, because some families have adopted children and given them their surname, so that the adopted child is called Foolaan Foolan [where 'Foolaan (=So and so)' stands for a name] and their real children
are called Foolaan ibn Foolaan (So and so the son of So and so). Now in the fourteenth century AH, people have dropped the word 'ibn' or 'ibnatu' – which is unacceptable according to linguistics, custom and sharee'ah. May Allaah help us. Another effect is the habit of women taking their husband's surnames. Originally, the woman is So and so the Daughter of So and so, not So and so the wife of So and so! Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): "Call them (adopted sons) by (the names of) their fathers, that is more just with Allaah…" [al- Ahzaab 33:5]. As it is in this world, so it will also be in the Hereafter, as the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: "On the Day of Resurrection, each betrayer will have a banner raised beside him, and it will be said, this is the betrayer of So and so the son of So and so." (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 5709, and Muslim, 3265). Shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd (may Allaah preserve him) said: This is one of the beauties of sharee'ah, because calling a person by his father's name is more appropriate for knowing who is who and telling people apart. The father is the protector and maintainer of the child and his mother both inside and outside the home. This is why the father mixes with people in the marketplaces and takes risks by travelling to earn a halaal living and strive for their sakes. So the child is given the name of the father, not of the mother who is hidden away and who is one
of those whom Allaah commanded (interpretation of the meaning): "And stay in your houses…" [al-Ahzaab 33:33] (Tasmiyat al-Mawlood, 30, 31). On the basis of the above, there is no blood tie between the husband and wife, so how can she take his surname as if she is part of the same lineage? Moreover, she may get divorced, or her husband may die, and she may marry another man. Will she keep changing her surname every time she marries another man? Furthermore, there are rulings attached to her being named after her father, which have to do with inheritance, spending and who is a mahram, etc. Taking her husband's surname overlooks all that. The husband is named after his own father, and what does she have to do with the lineage of her husband's father? This goes against common sense and true facts. The husband has nothing that makes him better than his wife so that she should take his surname, whilst he takes his father's name. Hence everyone who has gone against this and taken her husband's name should put matters
right. We ask Allaah to put all the affairs of the Muslims right. Islam Q&A Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid

krystal_watz

IF-Sizzlerz

krystal_watz

Joined: 10 August 2009

Posts: 10518

Posted: 15 October 2012 at 9:29pm | IP Logged
Ideally speaking, the concept is feudal and proprietorial. But now that it has been well-ingrained into our sense of being, I think a world devoid of last names and consequently, family trees, would cause confusion and a sense of rootless-ness. A certain Jolie and Pit or Beckham or Cruise fancying the 'no last name' trend is okay, but I don't think the greater society is going to accept it anytime in near future.

Edited by krystal_watz - 15 October 2012 at 9:36pm

The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

LeadNitrate

Rehanism

IF-Dazzler

Rehanism

Joined: 07 August 2010

Posts: 3458

Posted: 16 October 2012 at 8:09pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by Polki_Zofi



Changing surname is not sign of weakness, but it is sign of tradition. We in Poland do it too, and women wish it so much that some keep it even after a separation. Having husband's name is a sense of starting a new family unit.

Men without spines and integrity are not what women really like, at least in my part of the world (Slavic countries). I thought it was same world over, but it seem now its different in India (surprising to me). A man with spine don't mean he will not help in home, or give equal value to wife, but he should be strong enough to fulfill his role as a husband and protector of the household. His wife is the gardener of this home. It has spiritual and traditional aspect to it. Men can be very emotional, but giving up name and identity is sign of weakness and not emotion. Weak men are not important.

2. When you love, you should be ready to adjust. Changing name is not big deal. It is matter of some hours before all other names in all other document are adjusted. Maybe more in India, but that is problem with Indian government.

When born you took name of the father, later its the husband. There is not much difference. If it keep the family a cohesive unit then why not? It keep confusion low and makes the husband feel more responsible.

We have seen West European ideals applied in our societies across Europe, and now none of our marriages work and the men are drunk looser. Better to adjust tradition on its good values and remain with it. Being wife and having family compares to nothing.

Indians have such social systems so good and working still that they want to find flaw and experiment. You may do it but we tasted already, so maybe my "other side of coin" comes from that Embarrassed. Ofcourse woman and man are equal, but I like the name sharing and common features in the family. Role of different family members being different.

I hate men who are weak and find excuses or behave like woman. Men should be men, a
nd men can be very kind and sacrificing too. Instead to take their advantage, if we support them and compromise a little on us maybe the family can stay?

It is my thought.


It appears you apply different standards to men and women..You seem to suggest that its not a big deal, but a mere adjustment for the sake of love, for women to change their surnames; but when it comes to men you think such behaviour is a shameful weakness!!

Also you seem to have some strong patriarchal stereotypes in your mind about the roles and behaviours of genders...You find the idea of man behaving like a woman to be very abominable..Let me tell you, its not just you but a hell lot of our kind that thinks this way. I find it rather disturbing when people say this to a boy "Don't cry like a girl. Don't be a pussy"...If a woman is docile or spineless, that's acceptable, nay, desirable; but if a man even sheds a drop of tear, that's a stain upon his manhood. This insinuates that women are lesser creatures and being like them is degrading for a man's honour..In the society I live men are expected to be assertive and flamboyant in their demeanour while women are supposed to be modest and submissive and suppress their desires and sacrifice their individuality to qualify as 'virtuous women'; and as you said they are always expected to 'adjust a little'. That means if a man slaps his wife, thrashes her or rapes her, its to be passed off as his manliness and women are not to take it seriously (He's a man after all!!); but if a woman is assertive - if she registers a complaint or seeks divorce then she's a spoilt woman and
she's responsible for destroying her family..

Lets stop pretending that we believe in equality of sexes, because we do not. As long as we continue to have these ridiculous stereotypes about 'manliness' and 'virtuous woman' or these antediluvian models of "Man is protector and woman is gardener of home"- as long as we continue to apply different standards to judge the sexes we can never have equality of any degree in our societies..




Edited by Rehanism - 16 October 2012 at 9:35pm

The following 3 member(s) liked the above post:

LeadNitrateANNMT.epiphany.

epiphany.

IF-Sizzlerz

epiphany.

Joined: 01 July 2010

Posts: 20230

Posted: 17 October 2012 at 12:06am | IP Logged
Originally posted by krystal_watz

Ideally speaking, the concept is feudal and proprietorial. But now that it has been well-ingrained into our sense of being, I think a world devoid of last names and consequently, family trees, would cause confusion and a sense of rootless-ness. A certain Jolie and Pit or Beckham or Cruise fancying the 'no last name' trend is okay, but I don't think the greater society is going to accept it anytime in near future.

'No Last Name' doesn't have to be a trend. Ideas accepted in hopes of being in the trend hardly compare with the actual dilemma that a woman faces whilst deciding whose name to keep, father's or husband's. In its entirety she still cannot have an identity that has nothing to do with any one of the men in her life. Ermm

krystal_watz

IF-Sizzlerz

krystal_watz

Joined: 10 August 2009

Posts: 10518

Posted: 17 October 2012 at 12:29am | IP Logged
Originally posted by Rehanism

Originally posted by Polki_Zofi

<font color="#FF0000" face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif">

Changing surname is not sign of weakness, but it is sign of tradition. We in Poland do it too, and women wish it so much that some keep it even after a separation. Having husband's name is a sense of starting a new family unit.

Men without spines and integrity are not what women really like, at least in my part of the world (Slavic countries). I thought it was same world over, but it seem now its different in India (surprising to me). A man with spine don't mean he will not help in home, or give equal value to wife, but he should be strong enough to fulfill his role as a husband and protector of the household. His wife is the gardener of this home. It has spiritual and traditional aspect to it. Men can be very emotional, but giving up name and identity is sign of weakness and not emotion. Weak men are not important.

2. When you love, you should be ready to adjust. Changing name is not big deal. It is matter of some hours before all other names in all other document are adjusted. Maybe more in India, but that is problem with Indian government.

When born you took name of the father, later its the husband. There is not much difference. If it keep the family a cohesive unit then why not? It keep confusion low and makes the husband feel more responsible.

We have seen West European ideals applied in our societies across Europe, and now none of our marriages work and the men are drunk looser. Better to adjust tradition on its good values and remain with it. Being wife and having family compares to nothing.

Indians have such social systems so good and working still that they want to find flaw and experiment. You may do it but we tasted already, so maybe my "other side of coin" comes from that Embarrassed. Ofcourse woman and man are equal, but I like the name sharing and common features in the family. Role of different family members being different.

I hate men who are weak and find excuses or behave like woman. Men should be men, a
</font><font color="#FF0000" face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif">nd men can be very kind and sacrificing too. Instead to take their advantage, if we support them and compromise a little on us maybe the family can stay?

It is my thought.
</font>

<font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif" size="2">It appears you apply different standards to men and women..You seem to suggest that its not a big deal, but a mere adjustment for the sake of love, for women to change their surnames; but when it comes to men you think such behaviour is a shameful weakness!!

Also you seem to have some strong patriarchal stereotypes in your mind about the roles and behaviours of genders...You find the idea of man behaving like a woman to be very abominable..Let me tell you, its not just you but a hell lot of our kind that thinks this way. I find it rather disturbing when people say this to a boy "Don't cry like a girl. Don't be a pussy"...If a woman is docile or spineless, that's acceptable, nay, desirable; but if a man even sheds a drop of tear, that's a stain upon his manhood. This insinuates that women are lesser creatures and being like them is degrading for a man's honour..In the society I live men are expected to be assertive and flamboyant in their demeanour while women are supposed to be modest and submissive and suppress their desires and sacrifice their individuality to qualify as 'virtuous women'; and as you said they are always expected to 'adjust a little'. That means if a man slaps his wife, thrashes her or rapes her, its to be passed off as his manliness and women are not to take it seriously (<font size="2">H</font>e's a man after all!!); but if a woman is assertive - if she registers a complaint or seeks divorce then she's a spoilt woman and </font>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif" size="2">she</font><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif" size="2">'s responsible for destroying her family..

Lets stop pretending that we believe in equality of sexes, because we do not. As long as we continue to have these ridiculous stereotypes about 'manliness' and 'virtuous woman' or these antediluvian models of "Man is protector and woman is gardener of home"- as long as we continue to apply different standards to judge the sexes we can never have equality of any degree in our societies..

</font>




I like your post for the entire length of it but for the bold part. A man is considered "manly" if he hits his wife or so much raises A FINGER ON HER? I always thought it was the other way round. If a man hits a woman-- "Yeh mard mard hi nahi hai. Auroto par haath uthane wala mard nahi hota."
If a woman slaps a man-- "Ha! Atta girl!" or, "Hehehehe...maar kha gaya bechara". Nobody screams different standards there I see. Tongue

Post Reply New Post

Go to top

Related Topics

  Topics Topic Starter Replies Views Last Post
What is the point of getting married?

2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 12 13

WhipCreamPantie 98 6746 26 December 2011 at 10:18am
By Heart
Cheating is healthy for married couples

2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 27 28

4teen11 220 9129 28 January 2010 at 10:43pm
By 4teen11
whats all the fuss abt women drivers ?

2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Showbizz 59 3200 10 April 2009 at 2:54am
By rogna
changing surname after marriage uknaik99 7 569 19 January 2009 at 11:32am
By raj5000
Married Heros vs Married Heroins

2 3

TheRowdiest 17 1381 06 May 2007 at 2:27pm
By mermaid_QT

Forum Quick Jump

Forum Category

Active Forums

Debate Mansion Topic Index

Limit search to this Forum only.

 

Disclaimer: All Logos and Pictures of various Channels, Shows, Artistes, Media Houses, Companies, Brands etc. belong to their respective owners, and are used to merely visually identify the Channels, Shows, Companies, Brands, etc. to the viewer. Incase of any issue please contact the webmaster.