Penis in the Surname: Are We Ready to Discuss this Yet? ~ Paula Grace Watkins
This is a rant about the penis in the surname: the practice of giving children the surname of their father.
Are we ready yet? Are we at the point where we can have a sensible discussion about this?
Officially, this archaic tradition is known as patronymic naming. It’s entrenched in most Western societies—but it wasn’t always this way.
Historically and today, not all cultures see a necessity for surnames at all. However, in many parts of the world, growing populations and the evolution of highly political societies meant that some means of identification, standardization and nationalization were deemed necessary.
The history of naming is beyond the scope of my rant; however, as it relates to the penis in the surname, we can move along quickly to the middle of the twentieth century when men were largely running the show. Primogeniture—the rule of descent in which first sons inherited their fathers property, and coverture—a women’s loss of legal identity after marriage, reigned supreme. Patronymic naming did, too.
Time and time again, I see intelligent, unconventional and feminist women choose to give their children their male partner’s last name. I also see intelligent, unconventional and feminist men expect (or at least not question) it.
Of course that’s personal choice, and doing something traditional does not mean you’re not a feminist. But what’s weird is that most don’t even want to talk about it or they offer quick-fix responses: “Oh, his name just sounds better,” or “I didn’t really care so we went with his name?”
Hmmmmm, okay.
Why is this issue so ignored?
It’s no longer radical (though it still remains the minority) for women not to change their surname when married, so why are we wimping away from a decent debate on patronymic naming? Let’s not keep pretending this doesn’t matter.
I don’t believe it’s radical to suggest we retire all aspects of the patriarchal paradigm.
When I suggest a change to patronymic naming I’m often met with this argument:
“It’s about tradition. What would life be without maintenance of tradition?”
Indeed, ritual and symbolism play important roles in the rich tapestry of human life. But tradition for the sake of tradition?
Traditions are there to serve us and not the other way around.
We dismantled the tradition of sexist property laws. Are we still served by other traditions based on sexism? Do we want to keep practices based on past (and current) inequality?
And if we want to get really practical here, it kind of seems more sensible to use a mother’s surname.
Why? Firstly, maternity is never in doubt and according to evolutionary biologist, Helen Fisher, a study of blood types in the 1940s revealed that as much as 10% of children were not the biological children of the person they identified as their father. Secondly, mothers are, even today, usually the primary parent.
What’s the solution? I don’t have children, but sometimes I wonder what I’d do if I did. Here are some of my thoughts:
1. Hyphens are not the solution: Or rather, hyphens are a temporary solution. They work for about one generation, maybe two. But beyond that, they’re cumbersome and ridiculous (“Hi, I’m Jenny Smith-Matai-Carter-Linden-Brook-Jones”). If hyphens are all we can come up with then we have failed our daughters and their daughters.
2. Beyond branding: Are we beyond branding ourselves with surnames all together? Probably not, but some academics have predicted a decline in the importance of the family name. In a way it’s not so radical. Other cultures cope just fine without them.
3. Creative and meaningful naming: I know a couple who, when their first child was born, both changed their surnames and effectively invented an entirely new surname that was meaningful to them. Kudos to these rare, creative and unconventional folk. Of course, there are some practical issues that make this option a little troublesome. Most notably, we spend a long time building our careers and it can be difficult to change something as identifying as a surname. Of course, this dilemma hasn’t stopped generations of successful women from changing their surnames at marriage.
I like the option of creative and meaningful naming, and if I have children, it’s most likely the path I’ll take.
I don’t expect or even hope everyone will agree with me—I just want a discussion.
Are we—are you—ready for one? Or should we wait a few more generations?
Paula Grace Watkins lives between Sydney and Byron Bay, Australia. She’s an academic (PhD in refugee mental health), yoga teacher, activist, blogger and raw food fanatic. Visit her at her website.
Like elephant enlightened society on Facebook.
Assistant Ed: Josie Huang/Ed: Bryonie Wise
{photo: via Kristen Poehlmann on Pinterest}
Incorrect source, offensive, or found a typo? Or do you want to write for Elephant?
I love this one P, and in the unlikely situation of procreation I have no idea what path i’d follow; potentially hyphen (my grandkids can sort the rest out), a new name (potentially, but what would you possibly choose), or the stock standard penis as a last name? I like having my Dad name because it links me to my Chinese heritage (poor Mum clearly didn’t get a side in this) and creates those cultural and historic bonds.