🚀 go-pugleaf

Leah Closson <puck@flash.net> wrote:

>TarlaStar wrote:
>> 
>> mwdamick@unity.ncsu.edu (Matthew William Damick) wrote:
>> 
>> >[snip]
>> 
>{big old hairy snip, having to do with women keeping "birth name" or
>taking husband's name at marriage}
>> 
>Just two quick points:

>One, TarlaStar, although in some ways I agree with you, and you do make
>some good points, there is one small thing you have forgotten.  Your
>birth name was (in all likelihood) given to you by the man your mother
>was married to (I am not saying "your father" simply to point out that
>only the mother is always KNOWN, not that your mother's husband was not
>your father), having given up her own "birth name", (you see the trend
>here, I am sure).  Therefore, perhaps you should take on your mother's
>"birth name", oops, there's that little problem again.  It's a long
>chain you're bucking, but your heart is definitely in the right place. 
>Maybe we should all go with made up names, or change to a matriarchal
>structure, since there is, again, no doubt, ever, as to the mother. 
>(and please, nobody get technical on adopted/abandoned babies)

It would make more sense for us to take our mother's names, but since
I already HAD a name when this subject came up, I thought I'd just
stick with was was there. I understand that it's a patronym but you
have to start somewhere.