this post was submitted on 04 Jan 2024
356 points (86.2% liked)

News

22838 readers
3762 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 61 points 8 months ago (9 children)

Just curious. Why make an exception for marriage? If the intention is so people can identify you if they recently knew you by your previous name, that seems even more pertinent.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

Religious BS, probably. Marriage is religious in origin.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Not religious in origin, but the people who propose using it as exclusions to laws think so.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Nah pair mating happens in other species. Religion just got its claws into it at some point.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Meh. True monogamy is quite rare in mammals.

Used to think monogamy was very common in birds, but IRC thanks to DNA testing, we now know plenty of baby birds have a different daddy. Ie. they raise the baby together, but they have an open relationship and impregnate/get impregnated by other birds.

Apparently that's surprisingly rare in humans.

[–] merc 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Less that they "have an open relationship" and more that the birds sneak around behind each-other's backs. Males go off and try to sneakily impregnate other females, females sneak around and try to get impregnated by other males. You find it in apes too.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Isn't this anthropomorphizing, though? Is there evidence that the mates would experience emotional distress if they learned their partners were "cheating" on them?

Being in a consensually monogamous relationship, I know I would and my husband would, but how much of that is cultural? I'm not really convinced it's something that's ubiquitous in the animal kingdom, though if you have a source about this that discredits my (admittedly amateurish) hypothesis, I'd be open to learning more.

[–] merc 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Sure, but saying "have an open relationship" is also anthropomorphizing. Also, sneaking around describes what happens much better. I don't know what it looks like with birds, but with apes when a non-dominant male mates with a female, they have to sneak around to do it. If the dominant male catches the non-dominant male he'll attack him.

Here's an example from monkeys:

https://www.discovermagazine.com/planet-earth/monkeys-try-to-hide-illicit-hookups

I haven't found articles about chimps and gorillas, but I remember it being similar.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago

Huh today I learned something interesting! Thanks for the link.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Marriage and monogamous pairs are different though. You can have one without the other.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Sure and you can have landownership without paperwork. Pretty confident if you went on a guys farm plot 10k years ago he would make it clear who owned it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago

Birds ain't getting married my dude

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago (2 children)

No it isn't. Religion usurped it and claim they invented it but it's older than that

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

I'd be curious about this claim. There's pair bonding in other species, and other species that are (mostly) monogamous, but an explicit formal declaration of a monogamous pairing is something that doesn't happen until you have some kind of culture and by the time we have any kinds of surviving records (even mostly coherent oral traditions) of anything religion already has it claws in a lot of things.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

How much older? And were the origins devoid of religious influence?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The answer is that there shouldn't be. And a woman changing her name to match her husband's is archaic patriarchal bullshit. I'm glad my wife decided not to do that.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

Mine did, but that's mostly because she didn't change it back after the divorce from her ex was finalized because she figured we were headed in that general direction and it would save her some paperwork.

I made a point of telling her it was up to her, and that things like both of us hyphenating her maiden name and my name were on the table if she wanted, but she wanted to take my name and I'm fine with that.

I figured the odds are that it started as patriarchal bullshit in the most literal sense. Less claiming ownership of the woman like you are thinking and more claiming ownership of the children.

But I suspect that a lot of cultural institutions that are considered patriarchal bullshit had their origins in trying to square the circle of wanting men to be materially responsible for their offspring and also paternity being non-certain with no obvious solution using bronze age technology. So you legally and culturally tie man and woman together, make any of their offspring legally his and bear his name, and leave it to him to make sure no other man is fathering children with her.

Compare to groups like the Mosuo where there are no permanent pair bonds, but also men aren't materially responsible for their offspring or raising them - children belong to their mother's family, only. Women are still supposed to know who fathered their children, but I suspect you'll never get away from that as a norm just to avoid half siblings breeding.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I’m just spit-balling here, but I assume the reason for requiring someone to disclose a recent name change is so that you don’t have someone trying to run under a new name for reasons of deception. “What’s that? Oh no, it’s okay, I know that Donald Trump can’t be on the ballot, but my name is Ronald Krump. Common mistake.”

In most jurisdictions you can legally change your name when you get married without paying a fee or filing any other paperwork (don’t ask me if that applies to men, that’s a whole other archaic bit of bullshit). It’s therefore also the most common reason for someone to change their name, and I guess they just figured nobody would bother getting married just so they could get on a ballot with a different name.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago

Jorge Santos about to run for the House for the first time in 2024.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I assume because marriage requires a lot of documentation and an official process, whereas my name change only required my friends to sign a document I made.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Marriage requires a license and an officiant. Name change often requires a hearing and publication in a newspaper. So, no, you're wrong.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (4 children)

"my name change only..." Did you miss that part?

Here is what I did: https://www.gov.uk/change-name-deed-poll/make-an-adult-deed-poll

So, no, you’re wrong.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I think UK and US system might be different.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago
[–] [email protected] 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)

In most US states you need to have a decree of name change notarized by the county clerk, or issued by a family court if. Not that hard to do, but a lot more formal and government-involved than the UK process.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago

Good to know, cheers.

[–] lingh0e 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Do you think Ohio is in the UK?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yeah you missed the part about this being in Ohio

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

You missed the part were I said "my name change". I have no idea about Ohio, and you didn't seek to give clarification, you just responded like a prick.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago

Lol yeah, I'm the prick here.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago

I would guess it is for establishing that you meet residency requirements to be eligible to run for office and don't have a criminal history that would disqualify you.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Because it has nothing to do with that. If the goal was to inform the public there would not be an easy escape clause

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

It could be clerical. Changing your last name due to marriage is a different process than changing your full name.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

You can find a name change on the marriage license. So perhaps you look up the name of the person on the marriage license and find the previous name.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

They probably wouldn’t make an exception for marriage actually

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago

It's mentioned in the comment section here that they do.