.

for real tpia, that's all really.

@ topic

What are his reasons?



PS: I even thought of adding my granny's name to mine but that woould make it a total of 3 surnames and 2 names!

Reverse the question - whats wrong with dropping your name to take your husband's name?

JustGood:

Reverse the question - whats wrong with dropping your name to take your husband's name?

Nothing, unless its something ive always wanted.

touchmeder:

Nothing, unless its something ive always wanted.

Its probably something that the husband always wanted for his wife to take his surname

And the circle keeps going round. i think m over this topic

, but it's her name, not his name,

.

Keeping your fathers name might be interpreted by some to reflect a deeper notion of not being fully assimilated into the marriage and trying to cling to a level of independence.

Personally, my wife can't keep her maiden name, because most women I know with compound names are more of the 'independent woman' types and seem less committed to their marriages.

Its the norm and I feel tradition should be respected.

tpia:

the real question should be when did surnames start in Nigeria. And by extension when did women start bearing their husband's surnames. I'm sure the practice started within the last 100 or so years.

I'm not against a woman bearing her husband's surname but as usual una wan carry matter for head too much. You people dont have to feel threatened everytime a woman demonstrates an opinion.

The notion of surnames (or any form of family identification) has been in existence in all societies for several centuries.
In patriarchal societies, as is common in most parts of Africa, the wife is assimilated into the husband's family and thus inherits the name (or surname or reference) of the husband.

PS: I even thought of adding my granny's name to mine but that woould make it a total of 3 surnames and 2 names! Shocked

umm this is plain awkward, i doubt any man would be fine with this.

All i can say is lol , since he's refusing to your suggestion, i guess you've got no choice, give your name dream and let it go!

.

.

i see everything wrong in it from the african content and even the Holy Book. Once married means the man is the head and u bear his name.

What is so important about your father's name as woman that you cant let go for the peace of you relationship?

Not bearing your father's name doesnt mean you dont love him/family.

poster, it's an abomination in some part of Naija o

I dont see any problem with a woman who wants to keep her family name. She should just find a man who doesn't mind it.

To try and say a man is wrong for wanting his wife to take his own surname is what I dont agree with.

The man has a right to have expectations as much as the woman also has the right to aspire to keep her family name.

.

tpia:


that's all.

I didnt see anyone saying the man is wrong for wanting his wife to take his surname. If I recall correctly, women were being attacked and called negatively independent for asking questions.

once again, no one is arguing with that.

Good. therefore, poster should go and find a man who doesn't mind her keeping her family name

.

i wonder why women  like making a big deal out of nothing,if it were sthg like "he said i shuld be an housewife till forever" then i will consider dat a big deal

if d guy does not want ur fathers name then drop it,haba its as easy as ABC

i was even thinking it was one serious issue like "MY MAN SAID WE MUST BE HAVING SEX EVERY SECOND OF THE DAY,LIKE MARATHON' even if u cant do the marathon,wat r housemaids(ekaete,ufong,mfuo,ikongi),prostitutes,best friends e.t.c for?

like seriously,is dis a big deal

tpia:

she can do that or the man can also stop raising his BP by making a minor thing into a major issue.

So you are the determinant of what is minor and major to every human being

JustGood:

So you are the determinant of what is minor and major to every human being

are you?

I dont see where I have said it is either a major issue or minor issue. I have stated all along that if it a major issue with either of them and they cant find a compromise, they should go seperate ways before alarm blows

tpia:

sorry, you're wrong.
Surnames were introduced to Africa.  People didnt commonly bear last names prior to colonization. Neither did women have the title "Mrs". Rather, they were more likely referred to as mama somebody. I'm not sure about northern Nigeria or Muslims, but for the pre-Christian south, this holds true. Especially with the rampant slavery, warfare and whatnot going on.
rather than surnames, what people most likely used were place of origin, tribe, village, or birth identifiers like feet first, six fingers, location of the umbilical cord, etc.
If you have statistics to the contrary, then lets see them.

I said 'the notion of surnames or any form of family identification'. A surnames or last name is a family descriptor/identifier. The writing of surnames came after colonization (required being lettered), but the practice of a family having a descriptor far precedes it.

Family identifiers were usually based on the occupation or religious practices of the family. For example, in the southwest, the ayan's were drummers. A man was allowed (or sometimes required) to continue the family name, particularly when the family plays a key role in the societal structure e.g. a spiritualist, but most often was free to adopt his own name as a descriptor for his family.

A married woman was described by her first name, followed by the husband's chosen family identifier. For example, Ifedayo the wife of Ayanwole or Ifedayo a wife in the house of Ayanwole. Often the wife's first name is dropped, and she is addressed solely as the wife of another e.g. the wife of Ayanwole. She is not addressed by her maiden family descriptor e.g. her father's name.

Children also adopted the father's defined family descriptor.

In the southwest (not sure of the east), using her first child's name to reference a married woman is an informal way of addressing her, and implicitly requires she has children.
While there were no Mrs. or Miss, the Yoruba society had identifiers for a married woman (Iyaafin) as opposed to a single lady (omidan).

The use of birth circumstances was (and still is) for first name purposes.

Tribal origins were identified by using tribal marks

your surname must be foreign for you to like it so much.

~davidylan:

your surname must be foreign for you to like it so much.

boke!

.

tpia has it right as far as I'm concerned.

I just find it funny that someone said that the women he knows that have compound names (I wonder how many people that is anyway), all seem to be less committed to their marriages, all because they have compound names. Please. Don't focus on your marriage o, be determining someone else's level of commitment in their marriage.

And I'm sorry, we can't just say someone's issue is minor just because it's not something we care about. The OP simply asked a question and gave her reasoning for why she wants to add her husband's name to her current name. She's not even simply just keeping her current name. If it's minor, why isn't it minor to the guy?

The Bible did not say anything about changing one's name abeg, please let's not add what's not there into it. I'm pretty sure, they did things according to whatever their culture was in the different parts of the Bible. People forget that there were different cultures in the Bible. Not changing one's name or hyphenating one's name doesn't mean that the OP (if a Christian) doesn't think her husband is the head of the household. One thing doesn't have to mean the other, some things are not as drastic as we think.

The simple fact is this is how it's done in our culture and most people want it to remain this way simply because this is how it is and this is what we know (tradtion). That.is.all. And that's fine. We don't need to add that the Bible says it has to be this way too. Let's just be confident in our personal beliefs that we just prefer it that way.  There's nothing wrong with that.

tpia:

I think you just want to argue for the sake of arguing.
In the olden days, names were descriptive, so different generations of the same family didn't necessarily have the same names. Many of the names we're calling surnames today , were some ancestor's first name which he was given at birth.
A name like Ifatoyinbo, for instance, rose out of some special circumstances which the family considered before giving it to the child.
Most people rarely ventured too far from their villages back in those days, so having a surname wasnt as necessary as it is now.
Iyaafin and omidan werent used in the sense of Mrs and Miss as you're trying to imply.

Its not an argument, though it seems that you are missing the crux of my presentation.

The crux is not about the source of the name or family descriptor, but rather that the wife is assimilated into the husband's family in a patriarchal society, and thus the wife's adoption of the husband's surname is a continuation of this tradition (even though explicit surnames weren't available then).

It seems your position is based on the technical definition of surnames, while I prefer broadening it as part of the general process of assimilating the wife into the husband's family.

Anyways, to each his own. We all view life through our own paradigms.

@Poster
Best of luck

.