Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
User Settings
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Report this Comment
Use this form to report the selected comment to the moderators. Reporting should generally be used only if the comment breaks forum rules.

47. Re: Morning Mobilization Jul 3, 2013, 20:27 NewMaxx
I think it was Shakespeare who said, "a rose by any other name would smell as sweet."

A name isn't all that important. In the old days, a name generally told you only basic information about a person. Namely, from whom they derived (hence, -son), what they did (e.g., Smith), or if nobility it would denote the dynasty.

A woman took the man's name primarily for the same reason she would today: legality. The marriage between two families was at its heart a legal contract, as it implied inheritance. Nowadays, at least in most developed nations, women and men are functionally equivalent when it comes to the legality of inheritance.

Now that's not to say it isn't nice to keep with tradition. It's also okay for someone to want that equality in a relationship. The problem is when you get progressive people who feel like their occupation overshadows their spouse enough to flaunt it for no reason other than PR. In other words, a lot of women in the business field do it to look tougher against their male competitors, which to me is a bit hypocritical.
Login Email   Password Remember Me
If you don't already have a Blue's News user account, you can sign up here.
Forgotten your password? Click here.


Blue's News logo