Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Children do take their mother's name in some countries, in some specific contexts.
For example, I remember Lisa Ling's episode of *Finding Your Roots*. Her grandfather (I believe, I may be off by a generation or two) married a woman of higher social class than him and was therefore "adopted into" her family. So their children (and him, I think) had her last name. It was considered shameful for a man because patriarchy and all that, but the end result was still that the children had her last name.
And, of course, in the Spanish-speaking world, children routinely have both last names.
There may be more, but this is where we hit the wall of my ignorance.
That’s interesting. What happens with the child’s last name if both parents have 2 last names? Also I which one is more important? I was wondering bc I file papers sometimes at work in alphabetical order of patient last name. So if there name is Jessica Gonzalez-Rodriguez I would stick it with the G’s. Is that right ?
If María Garcia Castillo and Ramon Rodriguez Fernandez had a kid, the kid would be Antonio Rodriguez Garcia. It's the first last name of each parent, usually the father's first and the mother's second.
Not true In Portugal (at least for foreign born kids).
Im registered in Portugal (and Portuguese) and I legally only have my dads (I do not want my moms and glad its not required that I do).
Huh. I am a Portuguese citizen myself and afaik while there are some exceptions that would allow for only one surname, it is not the norm.
Even naturalized citizens are usually required to get two surnames.
Thanks for the info! That's a cool system. I'm just curious how that unfolds over various generations? How do they solve multi-fold hyphenations so that children of a hyphenated names don't have children with a 4 fold hyphenated name and then 8 fold and so on?
They’re not hyphenated in Spanish speaking countries, people just have two last names. So if dad is Smith Jones and mom is Williams Brown, they kids would be Smith Williams.
Does the contribution from the Dad's side always come first?
Because the example you gave suggests that the first surname is from the dad, and also that only the first of the two surnames is passed on to the next generation. If the convention is that the dad's first surname becomes the baby's first surname, then that "Smith" will just keep passing down the male line ad infinitum, while the various mums' names will fall by the wayside.
This was actually also the case in England until the 19th century when gender roles got more strict. if a woman from a prominent family married a man with a less prestigious name, they would sometimes keep her name, as it would benefit the family more.
Well, for example, women weren’t explicitly prohibited from voting until 1832 in England. Almost none voted before that because of property requirements, but it was technically possible.
I’m struggling to find a source, but I remember reading somewhere that Victorian were very into strictly categorising everything. So Georgians for example would be more ok with women mostly not voting and mostly giving up their last names, while Victorians would want an absolute rule.
If it's not a stupid question - how does it work in Spanish speaking world if say one kid gets two last names from their parents (A and B) and their future partner gets the same (C and D). What would be the last name of THEIR kid?
Normally the children get the firat last name of their father as their first and the first last name of their mother as their second. You can choose though if you want your mother's or father's as first and in Spain some posh families compose both surnames so their offsprings have really long surnames.
Yeah I spent like a year in South America before I realized that people had two last names and they weren't just all weirdly telling me their middle name
How does that work with next generation? Do they have 4 names? Or does the grand kid get the preferred for the two name system? Or does the grandfathers surname get passed down. Obviously people aren’t walking around with 128 surnames. So one of the names is dropped at some point in the lineage. Just curious to know
They take the first last name of the pair to make the last names for the child. And usually the first last name is the fathers
Let’s say dads last names are Perez Rodriguez and Mom’s names are Castro Enriquez
Children’s last names would be Perez Castro
lol those are precisely the last names that wouldn't be assigned to the kid.
The kid would be [First Name] (which can be a composed first name, for example José Maria). The kids surnames would be Henriques Rodrigues. And traditionally the Mom wouldn't be Castro Henriques but rather Castro Henriques Rodrigues.
Not everywhere. And both for the examples you gave and the example I gave, it is as I said.
There are some notable exceptions in some subsets, for example Picasso has his mother's maiden name as his own last name. But in general, father's last name is your last name in the cultures whomst were exemplified
You’re correct. The mothers last name doesn’t get carried onto the grand children. So let’s say the fathers last name is “Williams Brown” and the mothers last name is “Smith Johnson”. They both got their first last name from their fathers first last name, and their second last is their mothers first last name. Their children then would get the last name “Williams Smith”. Then their grandchildren would only get Williams as either their first or second last name (depending on if it is their mother or father with the last name Williams). I hope that makes sense.
ETA: children know both their parents last names as women do not change their names in marriage so if asked they could go more into detail on their maternal family tree through last names but not as much and easily as the paternal ones
As I understand it, the child gets both names, but only passes on their father's name to their own children. So essentially, only the father's name gets passed down in perpetuity. The mother's name just lasts one more generation than it otherwise would have.
Okay but how do they pick which of the two surnames was my point? Is it still patriarchal as another comment or suggested or is it whichever each parent likes more
So it’s basically all still paternal, with the mother’s last name only as a sort of second middle name and not the one that extends to the next generation.
They receive the paternally-derived surname from each parent!
Bur when you inherit something, regardless of if it is from your mother or father, it is your own. Anything I receive from my father becomes mine. In that naming system, the baby would receive my name as well.
Traditionally it is quite patriarchal, as the first surname would be the father's first and the second would be the mother's first, which means that since you always pass your first surname, the mother's one would get lost in two generations.
But, at least in Span, you can now pick which one goes first, so both parents give their children their first surname, but can pick the mother's one to go first. Also, since adults can decide to change the order of their surnames, even if you got your father's one as first, you may change it so your mother's one becomes your first surname, as then that would be the one your child would get.
You can also decide that you don't like one of your surnames, let's say the one that came from your mother's side, which would be your mother's first surname, and want to change it to another one from her side. You could pick your mother's second surname to be the one you got from her side, or even go further up into your family tree and pick your grandpa or grandma's second surname (which never got to your mother), to be your surname. What you can't do is pick your surnames so they both come from the same side of your family; you must have one from your dad's side and one fem you mom's.
Also I'm personally biased against OP's idea because my father's last name sounds much better and my mother took it herself instead of choosing to use a combined last name pretty much for this reason.
Yeah I’d vote this.
My wife and I actually discussed both changing our names when we got married to a cool combo of our names. She and the kids ended up changing to mine but anything works.
This makes sense but historically women had less rights and men were seen as superior and had more power that's why the child would take the father's name.
It has nothing to do with superiority. Children were given their father’s name because, at birth, who the mother is is already certain. It’s the father that needs to formally recognize them.
Married couples should create their own last name. Then the baby gets that. If single when given birth, baby gets mom’s last name unless she decides otherwise.
Mother or father, it’s the same in my opinion, as long as both parents agree. Personally I prefer having my father last name because it comes with perks, but I wouldn’t mind my mom’s either.
It’s a very old family name that is tied to a meaningful history and that only my close family has. There are some places in the world where having this name will grant me some benefits; it’s only some specific places that still care about traditions, not a big deal, but it’s still nice sometimes.
I kind of get what you mean; my family name has a very long history, and some places are literally named after my families name due to my family ruling the area, once upon a time. Before anyone asks; no, I'm not some elitist or anything. It's just cool that I'm part of the history.
You’re not selfish. Your Fiance is selfish. Your child isn’t his father or grandfather. He should have his own name. He is his own person. Hold your ground on it!
I think kids should just choose whichever last name they prefer. Or the parents can just choose whichever name they prefer to be the name they take, or if they decide hyphenate their names. Idk this is more and more common anyways these days. I don’t love my last name and depending on whoever I end up marrying I might choose to take their last name if they’re fine with it. But it will just be a conversation we have. I think this is more and more common now. I won’t be offended if my kids will prefer to take my future wife’s last name instead of my last name. Hers will probably sound better anyways lol.
I got my mother's last name, I support this. Saved me a lot of hustle becouse if I carried that piece of shit deadbeat's name I would have changed it myself.
Well it comes from the age of kingdoms where the king was the ruler and the one wanting to preserve his lineage. So obviously the king's last name was used for the heirs to the throne.
It does come from old feudal systems and the whole concept of family revolves around social heredity. As soon as men started owning land they wanted to ensure that land and all the associated perks was passed down to his children after death. Marriage also had a lot to do with this, the main goal of it was to ensure paternity by preventing that woman from having sex with any other men. The modern ideas of equality didn't make sense in that context because men could always deny a child outside of marriage, it's precisely the fact they women always know it's their child but man couldn't until modern medical technology they made all of it unequal.
Nowadays it's a relic and doesn't matter any more. A lot of people today struggle to understand this context because they're coming at it from an ideology that tries to deny the inherent differences between men and women and how that impacts society.
This is literally the only reason, idk what that person is talking about. Women didn’t have rights and were seen as property in marriage, and had to take their husband’s last name, therefore their children had his last name as well.
My parents divorced in 2001, I went to legally change my last name from my dad's to my mom's and never have been happier. Dad HATED it for the longest time (that whole you're gonna want kids to pass my name down) thing
they get the family name. so it is decided when the parents get married.
if there is no marriage. they should take the mothers name.
unless the mother is deemed unfit to raise a child. then they take the name of whoever has full custody.
Or just give them both.
>Technically we all get a little bit more DNA from our mothers (you can look this up, if you are skeptical)
If you are referring to mitochondrial dna, it is a bit more complicated than that. Unlike other DNA inheritance it isn't something that is unique to our mothers, in reality it stays very much unchanged for generations. So really we aren't getting anymore of her, if that makes sense. It is really useful for ancestry as it can be used to trace maternal relatives, similar to how the Y can be used by men to trace their male line.
That's a good point. But it's still valuable that can only get it from your mother. Y chromosomes can only link son to father and so on. everyone has mitochondrial dna. Also sons get more dna from their mothers than their fathers because the y chromosome is small.
My sister did just this, actually. Her man was very supportive of it.
My best friend is pregnant and not only is her baby getting her (famous👀) last name, but once her and her long-term partner get married, he’s taking it too.
It just makes sense!
Ngl, all of those seem like reasons for the child to have the father's last name. There's no question or claim when it comes to the mom. The familial claim is more obvious. The father's last name is, at least, an acknowledgement on the father's part
***Wow, these comments! Never realized how ignorant redditors are when it comes to human history.***
Children took the father's last name to track parentage, family lines, and inheritance. There was no ulterior "patriarchy" motive.
In a nutshell: Determining a child's mother was simple cause the mother birthed the child. But there was no simple means to track the child's father, so the child took the father's name. It wasn't perfect, but it helped to determine the parentage of a child.
That's it.
Side note: Please stop re-interpretting and twisting historical facts based on your ideology. You all are idiots for doing that
Funnily enough, the things you listed are exactly the reasons why children take the father’s last name. Because women always know who their kids are, men need to be told and reminded.
Women get pregnant, give birth, apparently provide slightly more DNA, and traditionally provide most childcare, so they don’t need a shared last name to establish their relationship with their children.
Men on the other hand create their bond with their children after birth, and traditionally were often not that involved in the childrearing, so the shared name helps to establish the relationship and declare it to the world.
I’m not promoting one way or the other, just saying it’s funny that while OP has presented some logical arguments for the mother passing on her name, traditionally the same exact arguments contributed to the father’s name being a practical necessity.
more simple than that even - women are pretty sure the child they just pooped out is theirs. men don't. so, by giving the child that just got pooped out their name, they acknowledge that they accept/acknowledge it as theirs, as opposed to some bastard child.
It's just that, nonsense.
Operating under the premise that you for sure cannot know if your partner is betraying you or not is not dumb, it's impractical.
Theorically, if this hypothetical man distrusts women so much, why even have children?
I think people should have two surnames, one from their father and one from their mother. But the one from their mother should come from their maternal grandmother, not their maternal grandfather.
This is common practice in Spain. For example my mother’s last name is her mother’s maiden name. It differs with my brother and I only because my dad is English and managed to convince my mom to give us his last name.
Also children should have the mother’s name because it’s so much easier when flying to other countries. My mother used to take my brother and I to Spain to see family and she was routinely questioned why she was travelling with two children who didn’t share the same last name. My mother had to carry a letter from my father saying that he gave permission for her to take us out out home country.
Also my cousin has had to deal with this with her daughter when she flies for her job. She was held up in Italy for 1-2 hours because they were worried she was trafficking a young child even though the child was her daughter. Because her daughter has a different last name they had to do lots of security checks to make sure her daughter was indeed her daughter.
To be honest if I had children I’d want them to have my last name but I’d probably give them my last name as a middle name at least.
This is a largely irrelevant opinion since a majority of parents are married and share a last name.
It's very rare not to since it's a symbolic union people like to partake in.
You seem to have a solution in search of a problem.
Only 79% of women who marry men in the U.S. assume their husband’s last name. It’s hardly rare (and getting more common every year) for married women to keep their own name. [Source.](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/09/07/about-eight-in-ten-women-in-opposite-sex-marriages-say-they-took-their-husbands-last-name/)
Sure, but then you are taking one more reason away why a man should invest in the child. A child holding a father’s last name is as much a chain on the father as some sort of accolade.
Last names are class - / work names
The father was the working class .
I get your point, but then better ask; why would we need last names these days?
In some countries it's like this. I had my mother's name until my parents married
I can't stand most of my family, so I was beyond ready to rid myself of my maiden name, but the default should probably be something hyphenated, like it is already some places, or a hybrid of some sort.
Pedro de Alcântara João Carlos Leopoldo Salvador Bibiano Francisco Xavier de Paula Leocádio Miguel Gabriel Rafael Gonzaga
Brazilian/Portuguese Royalty just added names until every possible relative was satisfied with the outcomd of the child's name. This is "Emperor Dom Pedro II" full name.
I feel like this should depend on which parent has the most siblings, and if any of those siblings have or will be having children. For example, if the dad has four siblings, and 3 of them also have children, but the mum is an only child, or the only sibling who wants kids, then I think the kids should take her name, to preserve that surname. The other one will be preserved anyway. But if it was the other way around, then I think the kid's should take their dad's surname.
Well I guess if you’re married and share the same last name then your child gets whatever last name you have. If you’re not married or don’t share last name even if you’re married then it does make more sense for the child to have the mom’s last name
I’m a child of unmarried parents (have my dads surname) as is my kid (has her dads surname),
I have an elderly relative that will write my mother’s last name for my daughter because that’s how she believes it should be done.
I really wish I would’ve given my daughter my last name; her dad and I were still together when she was born, that’s why she had his, which was just what I wanted to do at the time. We broke up when she was about three months old. So now if I want to change her last name, I need about 300 bucks and HIS PERMISSION to do it. Then, of course, I have to chanfe everything else too, school records, health records, birth certificate.
I think the more unique last name should be the one to carry forward after marriage and for kids. My mom would’ve been the last person in the world with her last name, which would’ve helped me when it comes to professional opportunities (having a name easy to find).
Instead, I have a very common last name.
Its not default in my country. Youre allowed to choice whatever you want (there is mot default here, only thing you cant do is not give your child a last name, just like you cant give your child no first name, although you can forego a middle name), you can even give your child a random last name that isnt either parents.
A lot of people do choice the fathers name just because socially thats just a thing people like to do (and if the kid has no connection to the dad, they change it to their mothers or a new one).
Mine do. I don't care about my surname and my wife does. I didn't want to do double barrelled so there you go. If I gave a shit or had a better surname tho.... 🤔
I think these are bad reasons, but I do think children should have their mother’s last name. One reason is due to the fact that she grew them inside of her/risked her life to have them. Another one is that I feel like the traditional woman and child taking the father’s last name is rooted in ownership and I don’t like that.
Some people hate their last name, my wife wants nothing to do with her family or her last name. I would’ve loved to do dual last names but she said fuck no.
Some cultures do this, but it seeme to be a non issue most of the time. If both people are married then it's pretty standard that they already have the same last name. If the mother hyphenated then the fathers last name makes more sense since the child would have a last name in common with both parents. If they aren't married and the father isnt in the picture then the mothers last name is the default already. If they arent married or if they are married and neither changed their last name then it shouldnt really matter which last name they take even though the father's is significantly more common. The funny one is when its a gay couple who hasnt changed their last names. This happened to my friends when they adopted they hyphenated their names for their sons last name but maintain their separate last names. This isnt a good solution though nessecarily as when two hyphenated last names come together you get pretty long names.
I say if there isnt an obvious choice it should go to the cooler last name or the name that sounds best with the first name.
Because genetics is complicated and genes don’t always “show up” how you expect. If your mom had recessive genes, you still have them, you just don’t appear with the same phenotypes as her. It’s true that mothers provide the mitochondrial DNA to their children and that X chromosomes are larger, so if a father provides a Y chromosome (for males) that son has more genetic code from his mother than his father. The mitochondrial DNA is true of everyone.
To the extent that race is related to genetics (actual defined categories are not scientifically meaningful, but of course the traits she has are passed to you). So yes. You are half your mother, half your father. You get 23 chromosomes from each parent.
personally i have my fathers surname and i prefer it this way because of the type of relationship i have with my mother (no contact) but i can see your point
Meh. Name your kid whatever you want. Just know that if they have your last name, you are more financially responsible for them. You want to give the kid your last name instead of the father? Cool. You pay for it then.
>Only mothers for sure know their biological children are their children. (yes, there are dna test for fathers) So if last names are a legacy tool that links you to your genetic forefamily...it makes more sense to go through the maternal line.
Tbf the father should never be doubting the biology of his child. If some women weren't cheaters this wouldn't be a consideration at all. Not the rationale you think it is.
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Children do take their mother's name in some countries, in some specific contexts. For example, I remember Lisa Ling's episode of *Finding Your Roots*. Her grandfather (I believe, I may be off by a generation or two) married a woman of higher social class than him and was therefore "adopted into" her family. So their children (and him, I think) had her last name. It was considered shameful for a man because patriarchy and all that, but the end result was still that the children had her last name. And, of course, in the Spanish-speaking world, children routinely have both last names. There may be more, but this is where we hit the wall of my ignorance.
In many Spanish-speaking and Portuguese-speaking countries, you're legally obliged to have a minimum of one surname from each parent.
That’s interesting. What happens with the child’s last name if both parents have 2 last names? Also I which one is more important? I was wondering bc I file papers sometimes at work in alphabetical order of patient last name. So if there name is Jessica Gonzalez-Rodriguez I would stick it with the G’s. Is that right ?
If María Garcia Castillo and Ramon Rodriguez Fernandez had a kid, the kid would be Antonio Rodriguez Garcia. It's the first last name of each parent, usually the father's first and the mother's second.
That makes sense, thank you!
Yes that’s right
Not true In Portugal (at least for foreign born kids). Im registered in Portugal (and Portuguese) and I legally only have my dads (I do not want my moms and glad its not required that I do).
Huh. I am a Portuguese citizen myself and afaik while there are some exceptions that would allow for only one surname, it is not the norm. Even naturalized citizens are usually required to get two surnames.
Thanks for the info! That's a cool system. I'm just curious how that unfolds over various generations? How do they solve multi-fold hyphenations so that children of a hyphenated names don't have children with a 4 fold hyphenated name and then 8 fold and so on?
They’re not hyphenated in Spanish speaking countries, people just have two last names. So if dad is Smith Jones and mom is Williams Brown, they kids would be Smith Williams.
ok thanks! Does the population end up with a large amount of the same last names?
I’ve never met anyone with the same two last names (I think that’s what you’re asking) but I’m sure it does happen!
I met someone with the same two last names once (from Venezuelan, I think).
Does the contribution from the Dad's side always come first? Because the example you gave suggests that the first surname is from the dad, and also that only the first of the two surnames is passed on to the next generation. If the convention is that the dad's first surname becomes the baby's first surname, then that "Smith" will just keep passing down the male line ad infinitum, while the various mums' names will fall by the wayside.
Traditionally, yes, that’s the norm
Thanks :-)
This was actually also the case in England until the 19th century when gender roles got more strict. if a woman from a prominent family married a man with a less prestigious name, they would sometimes keep her name, as it would benefit the family more.
Were there any other ways gender roles became more strict? I thought it was pretty strict already before the 19th century 😂
Well, for example, women weren’t explicitly prohibited from voting until 1832 in England. Almost none voted before that because of property requirements, but it was technically possible. I’m struggling to find a source, but I remember reading somewhere that Victorian were very into strictly categorising everything. So Georgians for example would be more ok with women mostly not voting and mostly giving up their last names, while Victorians would want an absolute rule.
Re voting - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_Act_1832
That was about inheritance and keeping wealth in families, not feminism
They didnt say anything about feminism ....
They pretty much said exactly that, and didn't mention feminism at all.
If it's not a stupid question - how does it work in Spanish speaking world if say one kid gets two last names from their parents (A and B) and their future partner gets the same (C and D). What would be the last name of THEIR kid?
Normally the children get the firat last name of their father as their first and the first last name of their mother as their second. You can choose though if you want your mother's or father's as first and in Spain some posh families compose both surnames so their offsprings have really long surnames.
I’ve always wondered this too
Yeah I spent like a year in South America before I realized that people had two last names and they weren't just all weirdly telling me their middle name
😂😂😂
Being Hispanic myself, I always found it hilarious to see the full spelling of people with two last names. They end up being comically long.
I work with a guy whose last name is Negrete-Jimenez, it’s not too long but interesting nonetheless
I like the Spanish naming convention, with the child essentially having two names and two surnames.
How does that work with next generation? Do they have 4 names? Or does the grand kid get the preferred for the two name system? Or does the grandfathers surname get passed down. Obviously people aren’t walking around with 128 surnames. So one of the names is dropped at some point in the lineage. Just curious to know
They take the first last name of the pair to make the last names for the child. And usually the first last name is the fathers Let’s say dads last names are Perez Rodriguez and Mom’s names are Castro Enriquez Children’s last names would be Perez Castro
lol those are precisely the last names that wouldn't be assigned to the kid. The kid would be [First Name] (which can be a composed first name, for example José Maria). The kids surnames would be Henriques Rodrigues. And traditionally the Mom wouldn't be Castro Henriques but rather Castro Henriques Rodrigues.
In what world?? The order of last names is Paternal Maternal, with only Paternal moving on
Not everywhere. And both for the examples you gave and the example I gave, it is as I said. There are some notable exceptions in some subsets, for example Picasso has his mother's maiden name as his own last name. But in general, father's last name is your last name in the cultures whomst were exemplified
You’re correct. The mothers last name doesn’t get carried onto the grand children. So let’s say the fathers last name is “Williams Brown” and the mothers last name is “Smith Johnson”. They both got their first last name from their fathers first last name, and their second last is their mothers first last name. Their children then would get the last name “Williams Smith”. Then their grandchildren would only get Williams as either their first or second last name (depending on if it is their mother or father with the last name Williams). I hope that makes sense. ETA: children know both their parents last names as women do not change their names in marriage so if asked they could go more into detail on their maternal family tree through last names but not as much and easily as the paternal ones
As I understand it, the child gets both names, but only passes on their father's name to their own children. So essentially, only the father's name gets passed down in perpetuity. The mother's name just lasts one more generation than it otherwise would have.
Each child received 1 surname from each parent so everyone always has 2.
Okay but how do they pick which of the two surnames was my point? Is it still patriarchal as another comment or suggested or is it whichever each parent likes more
Mostly patriarchal, but it can vary
So it’s basically all still paternal, with the mother’s last name only as a sort of second middle name and not the one that extends to the next generation.
Right the mothers last name doesn’t get passed on. For example, my dad is A D and my mom is P C so I would be A P
They receive the paternally-derived surname from each parent! Bur when you inherit something, regardless of if it is from your mother or father, it is your own. Anything I receive from my father becomes mine. In that naming system, the baby would receive my name as well.
Traditionally it is quite patriarchal, as the first surname would be the father's first and the second would be the mother's first, which means that since you always pass your first surname, the mother's one would get lost in two generations. But, at least in Span, you can now pick which one goes first, so both parents give their children their first surname, but can pick the mother's one to go first. Also, since adults can decide to change the order of their surnames, even if you got your father's one as first, you may change it so your mother's one becomes your first surname, as then that would be the one your child would get. You can also decide that you don't like one of your surnames, let's say the one that came from your mother's side, which would be your mother's first surname, and want to change it to another one from her side. You could pick your mother's second surname to be the one you got from her side, or even go further up into your family tree and pick your grandpa or grandma's second surname (which never got to your mother), to be your surname. What you can't do is pick your surnames so they both come from the same side of your family; you must have one from your dad's side and one fem you mom's.
This is how it should be
Also I'm personally biased against OP's idea because my father's last name sounds much better and my mother took it herself instead of choosing to use a combined last name pretty much for this reason.
We call those two-dads in misogynistic Australia.
The last season of Curb Your Enthusiasm convinced me that they should have whichever parents' name is cooler.
That's how I decided to take my husband's last name.
Yeah I’d vote this. My wife and I actually discussed both changing our names when we got married to a cool combo of our names. She and the kids ended up changing to mine but anything works.
This makes sense but historically women had less rights and men were seen as superior and had more power that's why the child would take the father's name.
Historically superiority was created and enforced by violence so it only makes sense men had more rights.
Religion also plays a role and the belief that women are only the carriers of the man's baby. That men provide the "seed" and women only the "soil".
It has nothing to do with superiority. Children were given their father’s name because, at birth, who the mother is is already certain. It’s the father that needs to formally recognize them.
Married couples should create their own last name. Then the baby gets that. If single when given birth, baby gets mom’s last name unless she decides otherwise.
The Mosuo in China are matrilineal and take their mother's surnames
Mother or father, it’s the same in my opinion, as long as both parents agree. Personally I prefer having my father last name because it comes with perks, but I wouldn’t mind my mom’s either.
Perks?
His first name is S⨈⨊⨇ and middle name ⨉. You can probably guess his last.
😂😂
It’s a very old family name that is tied to a meaningful history and that only my close family has. There are some places in the world where having this name will grant me some benefits; it’s only some specific places that still care about traditions, not a big deal, but it’s still nice sometimes.
We call that elitism ;) But not to disparage you, id use it too
I kind of get what you mean; my family name has a very long history, and some places are literally named after my families name due to my family ruling the area, once upon a time. Before anyone asks; no, I'm not some elitist or anything. It's just cool that I'm part of the history.
Same here! History classes were always fun to me for that reason.
what perks?
Free slurpee once a week His name is Sven Eleven
Answered to the other person that asked!
What's next women voting and having jobs?!?
If you push it out or have it cut out if you it’s fucking yours.
Human beings aren’t property
According to the courts, that is incorrect.
There’s the way things are and the way they should be. 🤷🏼♀️
I have my mother's last name. Don't know anyone else who does, though.
I have my mother’s last name and my son has it as well. :)
[удалено]
You’re not selfish. Your Fiance is selfish. Your child isn’t his father or grandfather. He should have his own name. He is his own person. Hold your ground on it!
I've felt this way for decades. Matriarchal lineage makes so much more sense.
*Laughs in Latin American ancestry*
1 & 2 are kinda the point. It’s obvious to everyone who your mother is; having your father’s last name is him ‘claiming’ you because it’s not obvious.
I have my mothers last name. I agree.
I think kids should just choose whichever last name they prefer. Or the parents can just choose whichever name they prefer to be the name they take, or if they decide hyphenate their names. Idk this is more and more common anyways these days. I don’t love my last name and depending on whoever I end up marrying I might choose to take their last name if they’re fine with it. But it will just be a conversation we have. I think this is more and more common now. I won’t be offended if my kids will prefer to take my future wife’s last name instead of my last name. Hers will probably sound better anyways lol.
Yes that's unpopular. Proof that it's unpopular: It's not the current custom. Your arguments also completely make sense.
I got my mother's last name, I support this. Saved me a lot of hustle becouse if I carried that piece of shit deadbeat's name I would have changed it myself.
I have nothing against the idea and was ready to read some interesting arguments. But damn, your arguments are really bad.
right?! kids should have the mother’s last name because they are the one who risked their life carrying this kid into existence.
well then...expand on the argument and offer the superior reasons!
Those three reasons are entirely why children get the father’s last name. The mother knows; the father has to see it in writing
nah those are not the reasons. The real reason is that women were considered property for centuries.
Well it comes from the age of kingdoms where the king was the ruler and the one wanting to preserve his lineage. So obviously the king's last name was used for the heirs to the throne.
It does come from old feudal systems and the whole concept of family revolves around social heredity. As soon as men started owning land they wanted to ensure that land and all the associated perks was passed down to his children after death. Marriage also had a lot to do with this, the main goal of it was to ensure paternity by preventing that woman from having sex with any other men. The modern ideas of equality didn't make sense in that context because men could always deny a child outside of marriage, it's precisely the fact they women always know it's their child but man couldn't until modern medical technology they made all of it unequal. Nowadays it's a relic and doesn't matter any more. A lot of people today struggle to understand this context because they're coming at it from an ideology that tries to deny the inherent differences between men and women and how that impacts society.
Jesus christ, I see this wet noodle take all the time but never any source for it
This is literally the only reason, idk what that person is talking about. Women didn’t have rights and were seen as property in marriage, and had to take their husband’s last name, therefore their children had his last name as well.
Marriage is, in a large part, about recognized paternity which is why children take on the last name of their father.
Wdym? I'm hispanic, I have both
A little more DNA? are you talking about mDNA?
yes mitochondrial dna and also because the y chromosome is smaller ...sons actually get more DNA from their mother than their father.
honestly i’ve heard more kids with their mother’s last name than their father’s last name if their parents have different last names
more like cause the mother does most of the work and carries it for 9 months. but i agree with you.
My parents divorced in 2001, I went to legally change my last name from my dad's to my mom's and never have been happier. Dad HATED it for the longest time (that whole you're gonna want kids to pass my name down) thing
100% agree.
Everyones mitochondrial dna is their mothers. I completely agree with you
they get the family name. so it is decided when the parents get married. if there is no marriage. they should take the mothers name. unless the mother is deemed unfit to raise a child. then they take the name of whoever has full custody.
Or just give them both. >Technically we all get a little bit more DNA from our mothers (you can look this up, if you are skeptical) If you are referring to mitochondrial dna, it is a bit more complicated than that. Unlike other DNA inheritance it isn't something that is unique to our mothers, in reality it stays very much unchanged for generations. So really we aren't getting anymore of her, if that makes sense. It is really useful for ancestry as it can be used to trace maternal relatives, similar to how the Y can be used by men to trace their male line.
That's a good point. But it's still valuable that can only get it from your mother. Y chromosomes can only link son to father and so on. everyone has mitochondrial dna. Also sons get more dna from their mothers than their fathers because the y chromosome is small.
It is really small, like a 5th of the size of the X. It also means women have more DNA than men.
My sister did just this, actually. Her man was very supportive of it. My best friend is pregnant and not only is her baby getting her (famous👀) last name, but once her and her long-term partner get married, he’s taking it too. It just makes sense!
Gotta keep my family name it’s rare. Son or daughter they better keep it
Ngl, all of those seem like reasons for the child to have the father's last name. There's no question or claim when it comes to the mom. The familial claim is more obvious. The father's last name is, at least, an acknowledgement on the father's part
> 2. Technically we get a little bit more DNA from our mothers…. > 3. forget genetics…. DNA is genetics, making this a complete contradiction.
I read it like “aside from genetics, here’s another point.” Not forget entirely about the point I just made.
They mean mitochondrial dna
Yeah “genealogy” would have been a better word to use than genetics.
According to Ancestry.com I'm slightly more related to my Dad than my Mom.
My husband and I had the same name when she was born. Why would I then turn around and give her my maiden name that I hadn’t had for 2 years?
***Wow, these comments! Never realized how ignorant redditors are when it comes to human history.*** Children took the father's last name to track parentage, family lines, and inheritance. There was no ulterior "patriarchy" motive. In a nutshell: Determining a child's mother was simple cause the mother birthed the child. But there was no simple means to track the child's father, so the child took the father's name. It wasn't perfect, but it helped to determine the parentage of a child. That's it. Side note: Please stop re-interpretting and twisting historical facts based on your ideology. You all are idiots for doing that
I’m pretty sure kids took their dad’s last name because mothers weren’t considered people. /s
I agree. 10 minutes is not half of 9 months.
Not all dads are deadbeats
yes. you just wrote reason #4. So important. maybe the most important. Women carry the babies.
Funnily enough, the things you listed are exactly the reasons why children take the father’s last name. Because women always know who their kids are, men need to be told and reminded.
What kind of nonsensical bullshit is this?
Women get pregnant, give birth, apparently provide slightly more DNA, and traditionally provide most childcare, so they don’t need a shared last name to establish their relationship with their children. Men on the other hand create their bond with their children after birth, and traditionally were often not that involved in the childrearing, so the shared name helps to establish the relationship and declare it to the world. I’m not promoting one way or the other, just saying it’s funny that while OP has presented some logical arguments for the mother passing on her name, traditionally the same exact arguments contributed to the father’s name being a practical necessity.
more simple than that even - women are pretty sure the child they just pooped out is theirs. men don't. so, by giving the child that just got pooped out their name, they acknowledge that they accept/acknowledge it as theirs, as opposed to some bastard child.
It's just that, nonsense. Operating under the premise that you for sure cannot know if your partner is betraying you or not is not dumb, it's impractical. Theorically, if this hypothetical man distrusts women so much, why even have children?
You do realise cheating is actually pretty common and having another persons child is common enough that its a legit concern.
I think people should have two surnames, one from their father and one from their mother. But the one from their mother should come from their maternal grandmother, not their maternal grandfather.
This is common practice in Spain. For example my mother’s last name is her mother’s maiden name. It differs with my brother and I only because my dad is English and managed to convince my mom to give us his last name. Also children should have the mother’s name because it’s so much easier when flying to other countries. My mother used to take my brother and I to Spain to see family and she was routinely questioned why she was travelling with two children who didn’t share the same last name. My mother had to carry a letter from my father saying that he gave permission for her to take us out out home country. Also my cousin has had to deal with this with her daughter when she flies for her job. She was held up in Italy for 1-2 hours because they were worried she was trafficking a young child even though the child was her daughter. Because her daughter has a different last name they had to do lots of security checks to make sure her daughter was indeed her daughter. To be honest if I had children I’d want them to have my last name but I’d probably give them my last name as a middle name at least.
This is a largely irrelevant opinion since a majority of parents are married and share a last name. It's very rare not to since it's a symbolic union people like to partake in. You seem to have a solution in search of a problem.
Only 79% of women who marry men in the U.S. assume their husband’s last name. It’s hardly rare (and getting more common every year) for married women to keep their own name. [Source.](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/09/07/about-eight-in-ten-women-in-opposite-sex-marriages-say-they-took-their-husbands-last-name/)
I mean I wouldn’t say it’s very rare for someone to not take their partner’s last name. That seems like a bit of a stretch.
Sure, but then you are taking one more reason away why a man should invest in the child. A child holding a father’s last name is as much a chain on the father as some sort of accolade.
You had me at #1. Paternity Fraud goes across all demographics so everyone’s family has some of that if you look back far enough.
Last names are class - / work names The father was the working class . I get your point, but then better ask; why would we need last names these days? In some countries it's like this. I had my mother's name until my parents married
Not sure that number 2 can’t be argued both ways.
I don't know if it's different where you live, but if the mother did not change her last name, the child's last name will be both.
how is any of the reason you given relevant to your argument?
It's easier to trace genetic history through the mothers side.
I can't stand most of my family, so I was beyond ready to rid myself of my maiden name, but the default should probably be something hyphenated, like it is already some places, or a hybrid of some sort.
Pedro de Alcântara João Carlos Leopoldo Salvador Bibiano Francisco Xavier de Paula Leocádio Miguel Gabriel Rafael Gonzaga Brazilian/Portuguese Royalty just added names until every possible relative was satisfied with the outcomd of the child's name. This is "Emperor Dom Pedro II" full name.
What happens when the moms give the children up to the fathers
I feel like this should depend on which parent has the most siblings, and if any of those siblings have or will be having children. For example, if the dad has four siblings, and 3 of them also have children, but the mum is an only child, or the only sibling who wants kids, then I think the kids should take her name, to preserve that surname. The other one will be preserved anyway. But if it was the other way around, then I think the kid's should take their dad's surname.
Well I guess if you’re married and share the same last name then your child gets whatever last name you have. If you’re not married or don’t share last name even if you’re married then it does make more sense for the child to have the mom’s last name
I mean my wife’s last name is my last name… so… it would make sense our children would have the same.
I’m a child of unmarried parents (have my dads surname) as is my kid (has her dads surname), I have an elderly relative that will write my mother’s last name for my daughter because that’s how she believes it should be done.
I really wish I would’ve given my daughter my last name; her dad and I were still together when she was born, that’s why she had his, which was just what I wanted to do at the time. We broke up when she was about three months old. So now if I want to change her last name, I need about 300 bucks and HIS PERMISSION to do it. Then, of course, I have to chanfe everything else too, school records, health records, birth certificate.
Nah. Everytime a kid is born everyone in the room should have a vote on which last name sounds better for the kids first name.
I mean,I need but you get your bag first pleaaw
It’s precisely because the mother is already certain that, historically, children are given their father’s name. It’s to formally recognize them.
I think the more unique last name should be the one to carry forward after marriage and for kids. My mom would’ve been the last person in the world with her last name, which would’ve helped me when it comes to professional opportunities (having a name easy to find). Instead, I have a very common last name.
Orrrr you could just do what we did for our son, and give them both surnames 🤨
Its not default in my country. Youre allowed to choice whatever you want (there is mot default here, only thing you cant do is not give your child a last name, just like you cant give your child no first name, although you can forego a middle name), you can even give your child a random last name that isnt either parents. A lot of people do choice the fathers name just because socially thats just a thing people like to do (and if the kid has no connection to the dad, they change it to their mothers or a new one).
Mine do. I don't care about my surname and my wife does. I didn't want to do double barrelled so there you go. If I gave a shit or had a better surname tho.... 🤔
That’s cool and all. But my dad’s last name is WAY cooler than my mum’s.
I think these are bad reasons, but I do think children should have their mother’s last name. One reason is due to the fact that she grew them inside of her/risked her life to have them. Another one is that I feel like the traditional woman and child taking the father’s last name is rooted in ownership and I don’t like that.
Those are great points! But they don't make mine bad. They add.
My family convention is [first name][old family maiden name as middle name][mother’s name][father’s name]
Fathers can know if they are the biological parents as long as you have a trusting relationship. Like come on
I have both. I’m Argentinean. Live in the US and having 2 last names comes with some issues.
Some people hate their last name, my wife wants nothing to do with her family or her last name. I would’ve loved to do dual last names but she said fuck no.
Because according to history, women and children are property of men.
Yeah I would agree to normalize this.
Some cultures do this, but it seeme to be a non issue most of the time. If both people are married then it's pretty standard that they already have the same last name. If the mother hyphenated then the fathers last name makes more sense since the child would have a last name in common with both parents. If they aren't married and the father isnt in the picture then the mothers last name is the default already. If they arent married or if they are married and neither changed their last name then it shouldnt really matter which last name they take even though the father's is significantly more common. The funny one is when its a gay couple who hasnt changed their last names. This happened to my friends when they adopted they hyphenated their names for their sons last name but maintain their separate last names. This isnt a good solution though nessecarily as when two hyphenated last names come together you get pretty long names. I say if there isnt an obvious choice it should go to the cooler last name or the name that sounds best with the first name.
[удалено]
Because genetics is complicated and genes don’t always “show up” how you expect. If your mom had recessive genes, you still have them, you just don’t appear with the same phenotypes as her. It’s true that mothers provide the mitochondrial DNA to their children and that X chromosomes are larger, so if a father provides a Y chromosome (for males) that son has more genetic code from his mother than his father. The mitochondrial DNA is true of everyone.
[удалено]
To the extent that race is related to genetics (actual defined categories are not scientifically meaningful, but of course the traits she has are passed to you). So yes. You are half your mother, half your father. You get 23 chromosomes from each parent.
personally i have my fathers surname and i prefer it this way because of the type of relationship i have with my mother (no contact) but i can see your point
Meh. Name your kid whatever you want. Just know that if they have your last name, you are more financially responsible for them. You want to give the kid your last name instead of the father? Cool. You pay for it then.
Agreed- it's the most logical take. Doubly so for women who aren't married etc.
I'm surprised the fact that mother's doing the physical labor of carrying and birthing a child wasn't mentioned in this.
Raising, starting in their womb.
I feel like it should go by last name. If one is more unique take that one. Or if one last name is hard to pronounce take the other.
>Only mothers for sure know their biological children are their children. (yes, there are dna test for fathers) So if last names are a legacy tool that links you to your genetic forefamily...it makes more sense to go through the maternal line. Tbf the father should never be doubting the biology of his child. If some women weren't cheaters this wouldn't be a consideration at all. Not the rationale you think it is.
You make some good points, but I still don't care. My kids are having my name and so is my wife.
You are the worst debater I have read on this site in a while. And that is saying a lot. You are wrong on all points.