Surname or secondnames are handed down by the paternal line in Western societies. Now in our current politicaly correct and equality charged society this simple system is in disarray. Women are holding onto their maiden names, families are hyphenating names, I even suggested mixing Milewski with Alexander to get Milander as quite an acceptable name for my family.
Now if this is based on women to men equality then I think the men should have the choice of what happens. This is because the traditional method of surname following the paternal line is a women devised scheme. Let me explain.
From the purely biological basis of procreation, males are there with near infinite capabilities, being able and wanting to procreate from age 13 to 90 everyday of their life. So if an opportunity came up where they could, then they probably would. Women on the other hand are biologicaly ready for procreation for only a few hours each month. Sure they may or may not want to procreate all they want but there is only a limited window for the biology of porcreation to take place.
Post procreation is another stroy. The human has a long gestation period and then a long period prior to being able to fend for themselves. This is where partnership and community comes in. It is much easier to be pregnant and raise a child if you are surounded by people who help you. Females wanting to procreate at any time of their cycle is attractive to males who also want to/can procreate all the time. This compatability helps with forming manogomous relationships that underpin our Western culture.
I believe that females went one step further and to cement that relationship they agreed for males to have a sense of pride, importance and be the figurehead of the family unit that they represent. Further then that I think it may have been their idea and encouraged by them. For a little less recognition, the recognition going to the male and his surname, they get a whole lot of protection, partnership and community. Now that is a small price to pay. I am not saying that all relationships are harmonious and loving but there is a sense of belonging, togtherness that is crucial to the rasing of ofspring.
As it is, there is little to link monogomous relationships together. There is nothing physical, it is not like partners are tied together, or chang to the same colur. The contract between man and woman is accepted on trust with a few social/cultural ceremonies. It is the cultural/social structure that provides names that give people a sense of belonging. Just like people speaking a particular language have a stronger sense of belonging to each other, so to people that come from the same family and share surnames have a sense of togetherness.
Our social structure identifies people by names and groups families by surnames. If we did not have surnames at all there would be less recognition for the family unit. As we do recognise family units with surname it is only logical that 2 adults with the same surname are from the same or related families. If thoes adults are in a relationship then they are the head of a family. If the 2 adults in a relation ship do not share the same surname then they are likey not to be family and they are adding a sense of insecurity for raising their offspring.
So to reiterate, the common surname and pride for the male seems to me to be of more benefit to the female in her biological role as a mother. For equality between males and females, it should be the males that make the decision how the surnames are passed on down the line.
The choice of my wife and I for her to hold onto her maiden name came down to the fact that my surname would have made things complicated for her. Milewski would change to Milewska for her. As she does not speak Polish I think it is a bit much to take on. Inside I think that this is only an excuse for the fact that she would not change her name. Then again I do not mind being an Alexander at times, especialy when ordering pizza as there is no need to spell it with my take away order.
