🚀 go-pugleaf

 


TarlaStar wrote: 

: mwdamick@unity.ncsu.edu (Matthew William Damick) wrote:

[snip]

: >I've yet to see you demonstrate -how- the reasons are no longer 
: >relevant.  You make assertions.  Now support them.
: 
: I have. The only reason for taking the name of your spouse is to show
: that you have joined his/her tribe. Since that is no longer a relevant
: reason, there is no cause for women to give up their names at
: marriage.

Provided that taking the man's name was only to ID the wife w/ her 
husband, you might be right.  However, your over-simplified and limited 
definition just doesn't align with rality and how many others in this 
country view the wife adopting the man's name.

: >: We do not marry to create alliances between
: >: differing groups anymore (at least for the most part in American
: >: society). 
: 
: >See my last, somewhat longer follow-up to you.  I'm not talking 
: >socio-politico-economic-alliances that are called marriages for legal 
: >conveniences.
: 
: Either it's not showing up on my server, or it's not addressing the
: point, because I'm not seeing whatever it is that you're seeing.

Oopth!  I'm not seeing it either...something slipped through a crack in 
the ether. :)

You asserted that the wife takes the man's name only to ID herself with 
that guy and for reasons of alliance.

I refuted that by pointing out the vast majority of American society 
(relevant b/c that's the one we're both in, being in the USA and all) 
doesn't operate under Dark Ages fuedal-clannish mindset you'd like us all 
to.  You presume a mindset on the part of men that don't view the world 
through your men-are-neanderthals glasses and then rail against your 
personal creation (perception of reality).  You act shocked when others' 
view and commentary don't quite match up with your (perhaps intentionally) 
uniformed perception of reality.
  
: >: The need to show that a female is giving up membership in
: >: her own tribe and taking up membership in another is no longer
: >: necessary.
: 
: >Non-sequitur.  The marriage and taking the surname of the husband in no 
: >way excommunicates the lady from her own family.  Taking the name of the 
: >husband does not imply that the wife forsakes her family.  You're 
: >building strawmen here:
: 
: I never said that it implies that the female forsakes her family. I'm
: trying to point out that since we no longer function as tribes with
: alliances etc. that we no longer need the identification process that
: taking a man's name at marriage used to provide.

Tribal memebership just simply isn't 'on par' with a golf membership.  
One is a life-long matter of participation and support, the other is 
merely participation as long as it entertains you.  If you really see 
marriage as being that casual and feelings-based, then God help us. 
Giving up tribal membership (to join another) was essentially forsaking 
your former tribe.  The problem here is that mainstream American society 
just isn't working with the tribal mindset.  My contention is that I'm 
not wokring from a tribal mindset either, despite your persumption that I am.


: >I said:  taking the surname of the husband identifies you with him for 
: >         the reasons previously mentioned.
: 
: But you never explained WHY it is only the female that is asked to
: give up her name. Why the female is the only one that is asked to be
: deferential, respectful etc.

For me, it's not that I'm asking my fiancee to give up her name so much 
as she's doing it voluntarily for reasons of perference and deference for 
me.  Her love for me is such that she wants to be identified and 
connected with me.  Equal in importance here is that my role as a husband 
requires that I love my wife (and children, when they eventually happen) 
sacrificially as Christ loved/loves the Chruch.  This isn't about mere 
feelings.  I'm making a conscious choice to do my utmost (including 
sacrificing myself) to see to the physical and spiritual well-being of my 
family.  I will commit-promise-vow before God and man to do this until I 
die.  I'm not taking on a talking possession.  I'll be taking on the task 
of putting my wife and future children before me b/c of my love of God 
and for her.

-- 
=== Matt "The ThighMaster" Damick ===========1610==  NC State  
=== mwdamick@unity.ncsu.edu =======================  Chemical
=== Theoretical Perfect World Engineering, Ltd. ===  Engineering