Quebec’s Civil Code denies women’s basic freedom of choice
- Thread starter Madi
- Start date
I can understand your surprise, because your argument falls apart at the second sentence.
You seem to misunderstand the law. Let me point you to the office that will change your name for you: Change of name > Directeur de l'état civil. A woman is allowed to take her husband's name. She just has to apply for a legal name change, it is not automatic with marriage.
There is no need to discuss the remaining points of your argument since everything else is based on this faulty premise. I will point out that you are using terms from feminist theory in a way which most people would consider incorrect. I must ask, have you studied feminist theory at all, or your understanding picked up from osmosis?
You can change your name if you want to, you just have to apply to do it.
Why you think it is a human rights violation, I don't know. Save your energy for something that matters, the delusion that you need to change your name because you got married is silly.
And just a clarification. Though I am mostly "of European stock", that is not a requirement to being open to allowing a woman the freedom to choose or not to change her maiden name. Quebec grants that freedom, so what's the problem.
I've always said that Women should keep their maiden names after marriage, throughout Canada....
Not only that, but children should take their mother's last name....
After all there are plenty of witnesses at the hospital as to who the mother is....but only one to prove who the father is......but even then, that witness has been proven inconclusive on Gerry Springer:lol:
Not only that, but children should take their mother's last name....
After all there are plenty of witnesses at the hospital as to who the mother is....but only one to prove who the father is......but even then, that witness has been proven inconclusive on Gerry Springer:lol:
Well, naming a boy after the father makes some genetic sense. Naming children after their mother always makes genetic sense. In the case of a paternal lineage (assuming no fraud like you name) then you can unambiguously track the Y-chromosome back in time. With maternal lineage you can of course always track mitochondrial DNA, boy or girl.
This is what those women who are so against taking/using their husband's surname should do.
But this should not be compulsory, but a personal choice issue.
Kee-ripes! I can remember my mother refusing to accept mail because it was addressed to Mrs. her-husband's-name. The surname wasn't a problem it was losing her given that set off the fireworks.
Nothing is compulsory. Indeed, you actually have to exercise a choice in order to change your name. Which makes a lot of sense. People should really think about something like that.
I think you start to show your true colors though. "... women who are so against taking their husband's surname..." When I married my wife, in BC, there was no question of husband or wife. We signed on lines that both said spouse. I could have taken her name (in BC). Moreover, there was no question if she would take my surname or not. It is not in her culture, so she didn't even think about it, and I don't see any point in it so I never brought it up.
But you seem to assume that she (as a woman) must be against it. Not at all. It was never on her mind, and I'm glad she wasn't prompted with someone implying that she should have.
If you want to take your husband's name, you can apply for a legal name change like anybody else that wants to change their name. There is nothing stopping you from making that choice.
The "European stock" was not meant to be offensive. It is just in some cultures, things are very different.
Ideally, a matter of freedom should be embraced by people belonging to all cultures.
But that is ideally speaking.
"True colours"?
Are you that PC that the words "husband and wife" irritate you?
I am glad that nobody forced your wife to change her name.
Nobody should force her otherwise either.
Why do women preserve their fathers' names?
Why don't they take their mothers'?
In NB, after marriage, both spouses can take the man's surname, or the woman's, or hyphenate, or keep their own.
I remember when I got married, my wife asked me how I felt about her keeping her name, and I responded, 'that's what I know you as, why would I want you to change your name? what's the point?'
I remember when I got married, my wife asked me how I felt about her keeping her name, and I responded, 'that's what I know you as, why would I want you to change your name? what's the point?'
Taking the man's name is a mark of ownership by the man. That is why it was instituted in the first place, Why, in this day and age would a woman want to be owned by her husband?
Hm...this "ownership" issue...
We are "owned" by someone anyhow (father in the case of women who preserve their maiden name)...
I think that this is an obsolete angle, used by insecure women.
Alain Roy, a family law professor at the University of Montreal says something I totally agree with:
“There is a new generation of women raised in an equal society who don’t feel threatened by men,” said Roy. “For them, taking their husband’s name doesn’t mean living under their husband’s shadow.”