Trudeau, Harper, Pearson, MacDonald… the list goes on. Without even giving a first name, it is blatantly obvious that this list of surnames refers to well-known Canadian prime ministers. Surnames act as a key indicator of a person’s identity which, historically, serves to differentiate people not just by their names, but by their status. For women, the status implications of their last name goes past denoting their wealth or position but rather serves to mark a diminishment of their legal personhood.
The history of women taking their husband’s name at marriage stems from the English common-law tradition. Interestingly enough, before the fifteenth century surnames rarely derived from a patrimonial lineage and were gender-neutral in their use (Anthony, 2014, p.79). They were largely derived from a person’s topographical location (e.g. Ford, Hill), individual characteristics (e.g. “fair friend”- Goodchild), relation to a place (e.g. Durham), or occupation (e.g. Tailor, Draper) (Anthony, 2014, p.80). During the fifteenth century, the custom of women taking their husband’s last name at marriage became more and more common until its universality effectively eliminated many womens’ names. It was at this point that women’s surnames no longer referred to their identifying characteristics, but rather became a reflection of their legal ownership either by their father or their husband.
Along the same time frame as it became custom for women to take their husband’s last name, women also began to lose the right to own and inherit property (Anthony, 2014, p.83). Women then effectively became the property of the male class as any belongings they had were held by their fathers until it could be transferred to their husbands. Although women taking their husband’s last name was never a legal requirement in England or Canada, it fell in line with the principle of coverture, where a man and wife assumed one legal identity upon marriage; that identity being the man’s, not the woman’s.
Today in Canada, even after the abolition of coverture, the vast majority of women still choose to take their husband’s last name at marriage. This is comparative to both England and the US, where roughly 85-90% of women change their surname (Duncan et.al, 2019, p.1). With such anti-feminist, patriarchal roots to the history of women assuming their husband’s last name, it begs the question: why is anyone still doing it? Surveyed research seems to suggest that many women who choose to take on their husband’s surname do so out of a habitual continuance of tradition (Duncan et.al, 2019, p.31). While others, like interviewee Denise Hill-Fox who hyphenated her last name, wish to “feel a connection to the family I came from and to the family I have created.” Such hopes of capturing both one’s personal and familial identities in one name have popularized the practice of hyphenation. Most notably, the practice of women hyphenating their last names became widespread in Québec after 1981.
In 1981, Québec passed s.393 of the Civil Code which forbids spouses from changing their last names to that of their spouse’s unless authorization is granted by the Court (Salehi, 2019). This act was put forth as a means of promoting gender equality. However, it has fallen to widespread feminist critique because it takes away a woman’s right to choose whether she changes her last name or not. Regardless of these criticisms, the law remains in place, leaving hyphenation as the only option for women to feel connected to their family through their names. Resultantly, after 1981, hyphenating last names upon marriage, even though it was not legally recognized, saw a mass uptake in popularity (Salehi, 2019). The hyphenation trend has since died down, but it serves to recognize that many women may still wish to be represented by their familial identity.
Just as many women continue to change their last name to link themselves to their new family, others choose to keep their last name and emphasize different aspects of their identity. Interviewee Chantal Jacob recalls keeping her last name because professionally, “I want to be known as myself so that my accomplishments are reflective of my personal identity.” For Chantal, as for Denise, it is evident that “identity” played a large role in her decision of whether to keep or alter her last name at marriage. Whether a woman chooses to remain attached to her “personal identity” or to connect herself to her new “familial identity,” being linked to a certain name plays an integral role in affixing a woman to the identity which she chooses to prioritize.
Another identity that women may choose to represent through their surnames is their cultural identity. As it is a tradition in Canada for a woman to take on her husband’s last name at marriage, we must also recognize that this may not be the case for women of different cultural backgrounds. Interviewee Leonora Mery grew up in Chile and remarks that her decision to not change her last name was largely cultural. In Chile, it is a legal requirement that everyone has two last names: one from the mother and one from the father, making the woman’s last name always present for the children. Thus, for Leonora, even though she was marrying a Canadian man, it was never a consideration for her to change her last name since it was not a part of her culture. For Leonora and other women from similar traditions, changing their last names would seem to disconnect them from their cultural identities.
Alongside yearning for a connection to their personal, familial, and cultural identities, all interviewees noted that their decision to keep or hyphenate their last name was, in at least some part, feminist. The patriarchal ties and historical connotations of being “owned” by your husband seemed to worry all the interviewees, with Leonora noting that she “thought it was wrong that a woman had to stop being who she was until the moment she got married and become someone else. It is as if she was nothing before marriage and her last name was worth nothing.” Leonora brings to light that women may choose to keep their last names upon marriage to remain connected to their feminine identity. Despite the fact that women are no longer “owned” by their husbands, the anti-feminist history of taking your husband’s last name poses a valid reason to not partake in the tradition.
Regardless of whether a woman chooses to keep her last name for personal, cultural, feminist, or other reasons, it is important to remember that she is not any less connected to her family for doing so. Nor is a woman who changes or hyphenates her last name any less of her own person for making that decision. A woman’s right to choose what she does upon marriage is the true marker of feminism and her decisions deserve to be respected as such.
References
Anthony, D. (2014). In the Name of the Father, Compulsion, Tradition, and Law in the Lost History of
Women’s Surnames. The Journal Jurisprudence, 25, 79-83.
Duncan, S., Ellingsaeter, A.L., and Carter, J. (2019). Understanding Tradition: Marital Name Change in
Britain and Norway. Sociological Research Online, 1-31.
Salehi, M. (November 26, 2019). Can You Change Your Name When Getting Married in Quebec?. Mona
Salehi Notaire Inc. monasalehinotaire.com/can-you-change-your-name-when-getting-married-in-quebec/.
Comments