We all know, of course, that most women in this country take their husband's name when they marry. (I have been unable to find any exact statistics, but keeping one's "maiden" name, or hypenating the name, or the husband taking the wife's name, or creating a new surname entirely, all seem to still be pretty rare.)

Is there a reason for this other than tradition? Most women I hear speaking about this issue just say "I love him." Fine; doesn't he love you, too? Why would a man taking a woman's last name seem more eccentric than the other way around?

As you might think, we kept separate names at marriage. This is actually easier in a lot of ways, with less legal mumbo-jumbo to go through. We have no intention of ever having kids, but I think we could deal with the matter of giving them one or another of our surnames without too much trouble.

To be debated: Is the tradition of a woman taking the surname of a man at marriage a good thing, an outdated remnant of more sexist times, or too trivial to worry about?

There was a time that it was illegal for a woman to retain her maiden name. In America, that tradition was first challenged in 1855 by Lucy Stone, because she she valued her own identity. In the 1920s, the Lucy Stone League was formed to help advance the cause of women and men being allowed to retain or modify their names.

In 1971 in the case of Forbush vs. Wallace a woman challenged an Alabama law that required her to use her husband's surname on her driver's license and lost the case. Quite a bit of information about other surname related cases can be found in the argument for Dunn vs. Palermo

In 1979, The United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women advocates the right for women to choose their family name.

The general consensus after many court battles throughout the 70s and 80s in the United States is that a woman can choose her name, and as long as that option is available, my feeling is that each individual woman should choose, based on her own ideology, whether or not she wants to retain her own name or adopt her husband's name.

As far as my own ideology is concerned, I am indifferent, because I don't embrace the institution of marriage for reasons which I have outlined in the Marriage "Contract" thread.

Retaining your maiden name in the military makes life pretty difficult. It is simply easier to have the same name and eliminates extra paperwork. Separate names with children are even more problematic.

If one marries early in life (before the accumulation of many tangible assets), especially if a couple plans on having children, changing one's name is a good thing- good defined as easier in this sense. After the accumulation of assets, switching names might be more trouble than it's worth.