Half of Americans Think Women Should Be Required by Law to Take Husband’s Name

socialjusticeichigo:

pleasuremasq:

socialjusticeichigo:

Jan 27 2017

Despite its archaic origins, the question of whether or not a woman should take on her husband’s last name remains relevant. Just ask any of your engaged friends. Researchers have found that more than 70 percent of US adults believe a woman should change her name, and approximately half felt that doing so should be required by law. A study, published in 2017 in Gender Issues, seeks to find out why this belief is so persistent.

“The most common reason (approximately 50 percent of the cases) given by individuals who advocated women’s name change was the belief that women should prioritize their marriage and their family ahead of themselves,” Emily Fitzgibbons Shafer, a sociology professor at Portland State University, notes in her study.

Shafer was interested in understanding how people perceived women based on their last name choice, and whether keeping one’s maiden name could cause backlash. More than 1,200 people from a national sample participated in her survey. Respondents were introduced in a randomly assigned vignette to the fictional Carol Sherman, Carol Sherman-Cook, or Carol Cook, who is married to Bill Cook: “Carol has been spending a lot of extra hours at her office job hoping for a promotion. Bill is starting to feel burdened by her absence, as he is picking up her slack in housework.” Respondents were then asked to rate how committed they thought Carol was to being a wife, and assess what standards they held her to. This was determined by answering how many days Carol’s husband should be okay with her working late per week (zero to five) and rating how justified he would be in divorcing her.

Shafer notes that her results were surprising. “Among women and highly educated men, women’s surname choice seems to have little effect on their perceptions of women as a wife or the standards to which she is held in marriage.” Low-educated men, however, thought a woman who chose a different last name from her husband’s was less committed to the marriage and that her husband would be more justified in filing for a divorce “for her perceived neglect of the marriage (as measured through repeated lateness),” she writes.

it’s a reflection of our cultural views, that women should put their families ahead of themselves: a view that we don’t have for men.

It’s important to understand how people view marital name choices because those attitudes speak to gender attitudes in general, Shafer says. “On a larger level,” she tells Broadly, “there is a body of literature that shows that when women act too agentic—which is to say they act too much like men in the workplace, they act in their own self-interest, if they’re not warm, if they’re good managers—they face backlash in the workplace context. My work shows that women can face backlash at home as well if they’re not acting ‘properly’ as wives.”

Moreover, woman’s decision to take on her husband’s surname is far more than simply a name change, Shafer points out. If that were the case, she says, “why don’t we see even a sizeable minority of men changing their names to their wives’? We still see that it’s the vast majority of women doing it… Clearly, it’s a reflection of our cultural views, that women should put their families ahead of themselves: a view that we don’t have for men.”

When asked what it’s going to take for women to be able to make their own choice—whether they have to do with surnames, reproductive rights, or what have you—without fear of backlash, Shafer says her “pessimistic answer is dismantling the patriarchy.”

Until then, “there’s great work that points to when it’s economically beneficial to women to do things, then people start to accept it,” she continues. “Most people accept that [women] can both work and be a good mom at the same time. That’s because the vast majority of women do it now. Maybe it takes a certain amount of women to do a certain act before people start to accept it.”

If more women simply kept their last names when they got married, Shafer adds, “people would see it as normalized.”

If you think this is depressing…remember that 50 years ago, not taking your husband’s name was seen as “wrong” by the vast majority–well over 50%–of the population.

Amelia Earhart scandalized many, many people when she refused to take up her husband’s name when she married.  (Among other groundbreaking things she did, like being bisexual and polyamorous.)

I guess I just thought (or hoped) we were further along on this shit by now.

Half of Americans Think Women Should Be Required by Law to Take Husband’s Name

afrodesiaq:

nuka-rockit:

working class person: I’m forced to beg for money and am at the mercy of other people’s goodwill as I’m facing serious suffering and/or death because my wages don’t cover the expenses I need to literally stay alive 

friends of working class person: we will scrape together some of our own funds at the possible detriment of our own families because we have no other choice if we don’t want our friend to, and we can’t believe we have to say this out loud, die 

media: This Uplifting Story of Friendship Will Brighten Your Day :)) Look As These Brave People Go On Happy With Their Lives Despite Hardship :)) This Story Proves That Poor People Who Complain About Their Standards Of Living  Are Just Not Trying Hard Enough :)))

this post was sandwiched on my dash between two people’s medical gofundmes and i want to cry

serakosumosu:

incognitoprompts:

midnightlighthowlite:

oursexyking:

whatwouldjessicajonesdo:

hiccstridforever:

durinswrath:

kurtsaunt:

justin-john:

wtfhistory:

jesuisuneetoile:

THIS IS MARRIAGE!!

Thats right!

Permission to be a bad ass. Nod.

He looks back at the guy like, “SEE THAT? SHE SAID YES. YOU’RE SO FUCKED.”

Like, guys. Sparta was so kick ASS sometimes when it came to women. Spartan women were given these small knives so that if their husbands came home and tried to hit them or assault them, they had a weapon within reach. That weapon was for CUTTING THEIR HUSBANDS’ FUCKING FACES so that when he went out in public everyone would know he was an asshole, abusing jerkface and they would publicly shame him.

LET’S JUST TALK ABOUT SPARTAN WOMEN FOR A SECOND.

In Sparta, women could own land and were considered citizens. THAT IS A HUGE BIG FUCKING DEAL. Why? Because that was RARE AS FUCK and there are lots of places TODAY where women don’t even get that much.

Divorce was totally fine, and a woman could expect to keep her own wealth and get custody of the kids because paternal lineage wasn’t very important. And it didn’t make her a pariah! She could totally remarry, no big deal at all.

Spartan women participated in some fuckin’ badass sporting events, too. And because they were expected to be as physically fit as the Spartan menfolk (who all had to serve compulsory military duties, btw, and couldn’t marry until they finished them at thirty) they didn’t have time for lots of swishy dresses. So they wore notoriously short skirts. According to some accounts, their thighs were visible at all times. HOLY SHIT. 

Also, In Sparta men only got their names on their graves if they died in battle. And women? Women only got their names on their graves if they died in childbirth. THE SPARTANS COMPARED CHILDBIRTH TO FUCKING BATTLE AND IT WAS VIEWED AS A GODDAMN BADASS AND HONORABLE WAY TO GO OUT.

FUCKING SPARTAN WOMEN. THIS DUDE HAD FUCKIN’ BETTER MAKE SURE SHE’S COOL WITH WHATEVER HE’S DOING, IF HE KNOWS WHAT’S FUCKIN’ GOOD FOR HIM.

^^ I throughly enjoyed the history lesson dashed with the colorful adjectives.

I mean, he knew she was Cersei… lol

And the women were trained the exact same way as men were. As children they were equals ; they were not allowed to wear clothing until a certain age and at that point they were sent away to a training camp until they were 18. It was only the men who were sent into the wilderness for an extra two years to ensure their strength for battle. 

Plus the women could marry whomever they pleased and the men weren’t allowed to live with the women in their house until she said so. And they were tough in Sparta but also all about family. To have male offspring was good luck, to have female offspring was an honour. 

This part of the movie was true; King Leonidas really did kill a man because he insulted his wife and he always ensured that he had his wife’s approval. And while Leonidas was away in battle she did rule Sparta on her own. 

Sparta knew what was up. 

#Hiccstrid

As a historian I can confirm all of this is totally true and amazingly badass.

It’s also worthy of note that people like to romanticize Athens because of its democracy whereas Sparta was a hardened monarchy. But Athens was nowhere near as open for women as Sparta was.

I’m sharing this here for those writers who need a touch of history or inspiration

@deadcatwithaflamethrower

dantesaristotles:

“The phenomenon of female anger has often been turned against itself, the figure of the angry woman reframed as threat […] She conjures a lineage of threatening archetypes: the harpy and her talons, the witch and her spells, the medusa and her writhing locks. The notion that female anger is unnatural or destructive is learned young; children report perceiving displays of anger as more acceptable from boys than from girls.”

— LESLIE JAMISON, I Used to Insist I Didn’t Get Angry. Not Anymore.
(via rnyfh)

wolverinedoctorwho:

cenobitic-anchorite:

smarmyanarchist:

marthawells:

escapalization:

sprmint-bkgsoda:

From the mouth of a One Percenter –

Abigail Disney

!!!!!!!!!!!

“Yes, there is a superyachtinvestor.com. Go look at it and it will make you so angry, you could chew glass.”

we stan class traitors on this blog

Abigail Disney has no control or input on the operations of the corporation, she is a Disney heiress and, in that respect, nothing else. She puts her money towards philanthropy, especially women’s movements around the globe and peace organizations like Peace is Loud and the Global Fund for Women. She is a documentary filmmaker who explores these themes as well.

There are problematic family investments she earns money from that, legally, she cannot divest from. Instead, she donates these profits to charities that counter to those investments.

Reblogging this version because I needed to read this after watching the video

ekmanlarssons:

alright here’s the deal: obviously getting rid of Patrick Kane would be net good for the hockey community as a whole but that in no way would redeem the blackhawks even little bit. I get how if you’re white or non-native in general you could personally see how that would make you feel less bad but I got some news for you!!! They’re still a racist organization and it wouldn’t be totally chill to like them even if they dropped their rapist!!!

Did you know that there are NO federally recognized reservations in illinois despite the fact that one of the largest groups of indigenous people lived there pre european contact? Did you know that Illinois is an algonquin word? Did you know that most of the state’s highway system was built from native trade routes and trails? Did you know that the state’s agriculture system was built up from land already cultivated from native farmers?

Did you know that the illinois natives were forced off of their land? Did you know chicago probably would not exist as we know it if it hadn’t been for the hard work and progress the natives there made? The work that was stolen from them? The trail of tears passed through illinois. The blackhawk war to reclaim land that had been stolen took part in northern illinois. The entire state of illinois is soaked with native blood.

And how do we memorialize this?

The funny thing is that war bonnets belonged to the plains indians and Black Hawk was a woodland indian. The team can pretend that it’s “honoring” Black Hawk all the want, but it’s an empty lie as long as that racist caricature is worn on those jerseys. The team isn’t even named after Black Hawk himself, it’s named after a US infantry division that was named after Black Hawk.

lets also compare what the actual Black Hawk looked like versus the logo:

This wasn’t made to honor an individual, it’s a generic caricature. Don’t even get me started on how the US decides “good” indians from”bad” indians in history. Which individuals were ~noble worthy adversaries and which ones were villains that needed to be exterminated.

“But Dana! the Black Hawks aren’t as bad as say the Redskins or the Inidians!” like you’re theoretically correct that the blackhawks are doing the bare minimum of not using slurs as their team names but let me lay something on you:

This shit actively and continually hurts us. It hurts native children who already start off disadvantaged in this world. It hurts all of us when no one takes us fucking seriously because our cultures and our sacred traditions are reduced to spot rituals for profit. It doesn’t matter if the blackhawks are “less racist” than other teams. Racism is racism, especially on this scale especially when the franchise makes an astronomical amount of profit on the sale of their merchandise.

So yes, I’m sure if you aren’t native it’s easy to say “well if they fired this one player, it wouldn’t be so bad!” I’m sure most of hockey tumblr agrees with that statement! But you’re wrong and this is why. The blackhawks org is a product of a culture of murder and rape a theft and it’s a reminder to all of us native people of the abuse of our people.

This isn’t about being ~woke~ since I know so many of you are chomping at the bit to be hawks fans now that strome is over there. This is about native folks literally begging you to have some empathy for us and our centuries worth of trauma. Don’t just performatively hate the blackhawks because you’re supposed to, listen to us and really consider the implications. Consider that the org won’t even so much as change their logo, which is like the absolute bare minimum they could do. Think about WHY they won’t do that. Think about how this franchise profits off our our dehumination and stop minimizing that.

black-equals-mysoul:

theconcealedweapon:

You’re able to call your parents “Mom” and “Dad”. They were not born with those names.

You’re able to call your teachers “Mr” or “Mrs” and their last name. You’d get in trouble if you addressed them by first name.

You’re able to call a celebrity by their chosen stage name.

You’re able to call your friends a shortened version of their name, their middle name instead of their first, or a completely random nickname.

You’re able to call a married woman by her husband’s last name, even though she was not born with that last name.

But when someone’s transgender, how does calling them by a name they were not born with somehow become a hassle?

SAY IT LOUDER FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE BACK

FUN FACT

inthroughthesunroof:

transgenderpsiioniic:

livebloggingmydescentintomadness:

livebloggingmydescentintomadness:

some people who are ill and/or disabled CANNOT DO WHATEVER THEY SET THEIR MIND ON! some people are LIMITED by their bodies and their health and they are UNABLE to “"just choose”“ to do something! you can’t STOP being disabled by DECIDING to have a ”“good attitude”“! I am PREVENTED from doing whatever I want because I am D I S A B L E D!! 

I would super appreciate it if healthy/abled people reblogged this post, because when people say these things it is so harmful to disabled, chronically ill, and mentally ill people

also! saying “I can’t do this because im disabled” is NOT “negative self-talk” or a “bad attitude”!!

In practical terms it often comes down to “if I do this then I won’t be able to do x” where x is another thing I want to do, or something I have to do, or just being able to walk tomorrow. I could do that extra series of jumps and spins in dance class, but then I’d have to sit out rehearsing our dance later. Or I could do both, and plan to spend the rest of the day in bed recovering. Or I could do everything, and risk puking myself into another ER visit. There are some things I might risk an ER visit for. But on an everyday basis? Nah. I can’t do that.

I’m my own worst critic on this topic, so this is a good reminder. Limits are real. Fuzzy limits are real, hard limits are real, invisible limits are real. Tradeoffs and decisions are very real. Hard work and determination looks like rating your activity for the best possible outcome, which looks like a whole lot of saying “I can’t.”

cricketcat9:

elodieunderglass:

cipheramnesia:

deliriumcrow:

hrefnatheravenqueen:

exerian:

hrefnatheravenqueen:

This is from an ad for gender-neutral baby clothes, btw.

WHERE IS THE AD OP?!?

@exerian :  There you go —

Ooh, I know someone with an occupied uterus who would appreciate these! They’re actually really cute!

from now on the only gender is goth

Next step: use Celine Dion’s healing goth sparkles to put out the devastating wildfires caused by people Revealing the Gender of their unborn children. I think.

I wasn’t a big fan of Celine, until now

zdartstuff:

fuliajulia:

bugchat:

the word ‘bisexuality’ is a taboo

it isn’t said on tv. orange is the new black, for example, features a bisexual protagonist who points out the biphobia at one point in assuming she can’t be attracted to multiple genders, but no one Ever says the word and she is ignored and referred to as a straight girl or a lesbian depending on the situation

other bisexual characters later turn out to have been Really Monosexual All Along. or are attractive, promiscuous women with commitment issues

this isn’t a coincidence.

people who are attracted to multiple genders, when asked about it, often describe themselves as “Fluid”. “I’d rather not label it.” “I don’t need to define it.” “It’s just whatever.” as if people are afraid of even implying the b word

this isn’t a coincidence.

the word ‘bisexual’ gets you different reactions in different places. straight people think you’re either faking for attention or a deviant. straight men are afraid of bi men and think bi women are just particularly promiscuous straight girls who want to have threesomes with them

gay men accuse bi men of being in the closet. lesbians accuse bi women of being straight girls going through a phase. and the ones who don’t do either of these things still often assume bisexuals are promiscuous, indecisive, and can’t settle down.

the theme throughout is that bisexually is illegitimate, deceptive, and always a front for something else.

this isn’t a coincidence

people are constantly encouraged to ‘settle down’, to ‘just pick one’, to ‘not be greedy’. abandon bisexuality. you’re really gay. you’re really straight. you’re too young. how can you know you’re bisexual at 16? 18? 20? 25?

this isn’t a coincidence

the word ‘bisexuality’ is constantly, persistently manipulated, by people who aren’t bisexual at all. the meaning twisted on shallow rationale. accused of being transphobic, or of being exclusionary. this has been happening for over 20 years now despite the existence of outspoken trans and/or non-binary bisexuals. whatever they can do to make you not say the word. pick a different one.

this isn’t a coincidence

bisexual people – whether implied or literally, deliberately saying they are bisexual using the word – are constantly rewritten as gay or as straight. gay icon. he was never interested in men. bi actor comes out? headlines say ‘came out as gay’, or articles outright ignore it

it’s never, ever a coincidence. bi erasure is a constant, ongoing thing.

I never thought this was a thing, but it totally is.

When I told my best friend (who is gay) that I’m bi it was like I had to prove myself to him as not simply gay and too afraid to admit it.

I mean, can’t you just take my word for it???

this is why i feel the scene in brooklin nine-nine where rosa says “im bisexual” and his dad says “there is not such a thing as bisexual” is important because she answers with this:

believe it or not, like the show or not, it was a sincere moment and one that all bisexuals go trought at some point

we all talk about representation, but we need more of it, in all fronts, bisexuals exist, we are alive and we dont have to explain ourselves to everyone