Edgefield advertiser. [volume] (Edgefield, S.C.) 1836-current, 1901-04-17
WHICH NAME IS BEST
ONE OF THE D:LEMMAs THAT CON
FRONT A MARRl:D WOMAN.

Must She Lose Her ldenti.y2-Shoud She
Retain Her Maiden cognomen on Mar
rying, or Compound it With That OF Her
Husband, or Drop it Altogether
What shall be a married womans
name? This is the question one OF the
-women,s papers has been trying TO
nssszerafnr its read Shall "a mar;
ried woman take her husbands name
and drop her own, being known as Mrs.
John Smythe Rogers? Or shall she
keep her maiden name in full, and add
to it that Of her husband, writing her
self as Mrs. Mary Jones Rogers? UT
shall the wife and husband unite their
names, and call themselves Jones'
Rogers? Or shall the woman keep
strictly to her own name, dlscardlng
entirely that Of Ser husband, and call
herself Mary jones' or Mrs. Mary
Jones? These are the possibilities
offered in the way of woman's name,
and they ought to satisfy the ambition
of even the most individualistic college
graduate of this opening year Of new
!. century.
That not many women care to re-
tain their own name without taxing
that of their husband simply shows
how powerful is social custom. IL
might be SAID that it indicates that Wo-
men are wanting in individuality; Dut
such an assertion can have little
weight in view of the fact that social
tradition reaching back for thousands
of years practically settles what shall
be the form of woman's name. Few
women have the time or the energy or
the courage to battle with an estao-
lished rule of this kind; and the num-
ber of men cannot be much larger. II
it.were, they would wage Tie battle fof
the women, which they now SHOW no
inclination for doing.
However, there are not wanting IN
dications that women are gaining IN
individuality, a fact that is shown by
the increasing number who do not
wish to lose their maiden names when
they are married. Yet there also
seems to be an increase in the number
Of women who respect the conventions
of society, and merge their names IN
those of their husbands. If John Smith
is a prominent man in business or
politics or literature, 1t is natural that
his wife should wish to have the social
advantage of his popularity. II she
calls herself Mrs. John Smith, it serves
not only to identify her in the minds
of all who know her husband, but 1t
adds to her social standing and posi-
ton. That most business men and
politicians would take advantage OF
such an opportunity ought to excuse
the women for so doing.
AS women come to do things for
themselves, however, it is of advantage
to them to keep their own names, just
AS it would be to men. No man of a
positive individuality wishes to appear
under the form of &C.," in the firm to
which he belongs. He may submit to
it because he has not money or expert
ence enough to take any other posi-
tion; but he is pleased to have his own
name appear when that is possible.
Why should woman wish to aban-
don her own name, that has become
identified with her personality, and
that is in real sense part OF her in
dividual self? The fact seems to be
that as soon as women make a place
for themselves in the world they do not
desire to abandon their maiden names.
Professional singers, actors, artists
and others refuse to give up what has
become identified with their successes.
This increased sense OF personality,
that identifies Itself with a name
known to the public, and that has its
professional and business value, has,
no doubt, its influence in causing wo-
men to refuse to marry. The popular
idea Of marriage, that merges the wife
in the husband and in his children,
must have its influence on women who
have sought to work out career for
themselves. Now, whether we think
women, ought to be contented with
husband and children or not, the fact
is that an increasing number of wo-
men, and those the most intelligent