Double standards

[Rebel]

When I get married, I'm going to simply add my husbands last name on.
It seems stupid to completely lose a name that I've had for nearly a quarter of a century simply because I got married. This way, I can keep my own last name (make it one of my middle names) and still have the same last name as my children and husband. It's what my mum did.
The only thing then is that I'll end up with 5 names all up, more if he has a double last name. It'll become the never ending name, most of them French, Estonian, and Hungarian/Greek. I swear my mum was laughing her arse off when she named me.

In terms of big families, as long as the parents can provide for all their children then I say more the power to them. If not, then they're just dicks anyway and I hope their children get taken off of them (Octomom).
I only really cringe when I think of the damage that each baby can do to the mothers body in large families. But if she is aware of the risk and still willing to grow through with each birth, who am I to tell her otherwise (the Duggars).

[jackfaire]

Saw a major double standard on the bus today. This guy spent a few minutes telling a story of him gay bashing then in the next story telling about how he got pissed when someone referred to him using a racial slur.

[Fryk]

When I get married, I'm going to simply add my husbands last name on.
It seems stupid to completely lose a name that I've had for nearly a quarter of a century simply because I got married. This way, I can keep my own last name (make it one of my middle names) and still have the same last name as my children and husband. It's what my mum did.
The only thing then is that I'll end up with 5 names all up, more if he has a double last name. It'll become the never ending name, most of them French, Estonian, and Hungarian/Greek. I swear my mum was laughing her arse off when she named me.

Sorta like Juan Luis Pedro Philippo DeHuevos Epstein?

[Rebel]

Sorta like Juan Luis Pedro Philippo DeHuevos Epstein?

Pretty much. But a bit more feminine sounding.
Still would be better than my mum's name. Even I can't pronounce her first name properly.

[Lace Neil Singer]

My older brother's carrying the family name on, so it wouldn't really matter if I took my boyf's name. *shrugs* I don't see what the big deal is. Tho, I certainly wouldn't be Mrs His Full Name; I find that extremely sexist, as tho you've lost your entire identity.

[jackfaire]

In my opinion go with whoever has the cooler last name. I have a female friend if we got married I would so take her last name cuz I like it better than mine.

[HYHYBT]

Sorta like Juan Luis Pedro Philippo DeHuevos Epstein?

Will Jill Hester Chester Peter Polly Tim Tommy Mary Larry and Little Clarinda

[Jack T. Chance]

This talk about names has reminded me...

I'll most likely never get to know the joy of becoming a father, but if I ever do, and if I ever have a son, I've often thought it would be fun to name him Lou Cypher!

Another possible choice might be B.L. Zebub!

[Ree]

I find it interesting that this thread has devolved into a joke about names and the whole "should a woman take her husband's name" issue, when that was not actually my point in starting this thread.

Nobody seems to want to acknowledge the double standard of society demanding that a woman has the right to be in control of her own body and reproductive organs in order to have an abortion or use birth control, but if she uses that control of her body and reproductive organs to create life more times than is comfortable for the norm of this society, then it becomes right and proper for society to judge her on how she has used her body and reproductive organs.

[Boozy]

Nobody seems to want to acknowledge the double standard of society demanding that a woman has the right to be in control of her own body and reproductive organs in order to have an abortion or use birth control, but if she uses that control of her body and reproductive organs to create life more times than is comfortable for the norm of this society, then it becomes right and proper for society to judge her on how she has used her body and reproductive organs.

I don't see a double standard in this case, Ree. There are people who judge women for having an abortion, and there are people who judge women for having too many kids.

You're not apt to find people who judge these women equally, because both groups place different externalities on the actions of these women. For the pro-life set, an abortion is murdering a child. For some of the pro-choice set, having ten children is placing additional burdens on an overpopulated planet.

It's not a double standard; it's just a different way of thinking.

However, one thing should be pointed out: There is a well-organized, well-funded movement to remove a woman's right to choose an abortion. This movement has supporters in the upper reaches of government and strong grassroots support in many areas.

There is currently no such movement to remove a woman's right to have many, many children.

So I don't think it a big deal if some people snicker and laugh about the family with 19 children. They aren't going to make it illegal, and they aren't even going to try. The rights of a mother are not endangered.

[Ree]

I don't see a double standard in this case, Ree. There are people who judge women for having an abortion, and there are people who judge women for having too many kids.

Ah, but in today's society, it has been my observation that it seems more socially acceptable to judge the birthers rather than the aborters.

There is currently no such movement to remove a woman's right to have many, many children.

Not in North America, anyway, and not yet...

[Boozy]

Ah, but in today's society, it has been my observation that it seems more socially acceptable to judge the birthers rather than the aborters.

My experience has been otherwise, although I won't discount yours.

It's perfectly acceptable to talk about your six children at a cocktail party, but talking about the abortion you had is taboo.

I'm pro-choice, but even I struggle not to judge women who've had an abortion. I don't think it's morally wrong, but in the back of my head I keep saying to myself "How hard is it to use birth control?" That's probably not fair of me, since there are many instances of women whose birth control failed or had some other situation occur beyond their control.

I don't judge women who have many kids. I like kids, and I can see the appeal of a large brood. My family had four kids, and my siblings are the best friends I'll ever have.

I can't discount concerns about overpopulation and overuse of resources putting a strain on the environment, but I don't think the solution to this is limiting one's right to procreate if they so choose.

[AdminAssistant]

However, one thing should be pointed out: There is a well-organized, well-funded movement to remove a woman's right to choose an abortion. This movement has supporters in the upper reaches of government and strong grassroots support in many areas.

There is currently no such movement to remove a woman's right to have many, many children.

This times 1000. Abortion/reproductive rights are a legal issue.

That's probably not fair of me, since there are many instances of women whose birth control failed or had some other situation occur beyond their control.

And that's why one shouldn't judge a woman who has had an abortion. In some circumstances, she's already been traumatized enough.

Plus, families like the Duggars put themselves out there in the media voluntarily. It's fair to discuss someone who makes their personal life public.

[Ree]

It's perfectly acceptable to talk about your six children at a cocktail party, but talking about the abortion you had is taboo.

That's not exactly what I was referring to, though.

I realize that judging happens with people who have had abortions, and the topic does tend to be more taboo, but those who judge or condemn abortion do tend to come under a lot more criticism for doing so.

On the other hand, some of those same people who will fight tooth and nail for a woman's right to choose that abortion, and will argue that a woman owns her own body and can do as she pleases when it comes to reproduction, will be among the first to condemn the families with more children than is the norm in society.

Abortion/reproductive rights are a legal issue.


And that's why one shouldn't judge a woman who has had an abortion. In some circumstances, she's already been traumatized enough.

Case in point.

It always goes back to the reproductive rights issue as an argument against judging those who have had abortions, yet those same "reproductive rights" don't seem to apply to women who choose to have multiple children.

[the_std]

But, Ree, no one is trying to remove a woman's right to have twenty kids. They can judge her, think she's doing the wrong thing, but no one is trying to criminalize it. People are far more lenient on this issue than a lot tend to be on matters like abortion.