What’s In A (Last) Name?

In the fervour and excitement of getting married, one tends to skip over a tiny detail - what must become of a woman’s name after marriage? While we spend hours fussing over the menu or the flowers, and months over which outfits to choose, this mammoth decision seldom gets any thought at all. Like most things born out of patriarchy, it assumes a silent but smug space in the corner - it’s shadow posing as the ‘comfort of the known’, yet actually debilitating us.

Having always been opinionated, I did feel seeds of resentment springing up when within a month of getting married, I was asked to sign on forms and applications to change my name. It started with my passport and tax documents. I indignantly retained my maiden name on social media, even refusing to hyphenate it. To a budding feminist, it felt like my identity was being erased and I could not help but fight to keep it. Yet, not once through it all did it occur to me that I could actually say ‘no’. That I could keep my maiden name despite the constant pressure to be a Mrs. something. These were just angry thoughts that surfaced from time to time and were pushed back under the blanket rule of ‘aisa hi hota hai’ (this is how it’s always been done).

It took me days to get over the unfairness of our system when while applying for a visa to the UK (for a month long summer school), I was asked for a ‘No Objection Certificate’ from my husband. I had to all but stop myself from giving my travel agent a piece of my mind. We discussed this over the dinner table and everyone (my husband and in-laws) had a laugh about it. What infuriated me seemed childish to them. 

Incidents like these occur multiple times over a woman’s life. There is a voice inside that nags us from time to time, but we squish it because generations before us have done the same. Choosing our battles becomes the norm, because there’s just too much to fight for. For some, this becomes a way of life. A few make it a point to never stand it. And for a few, like me, something happens to shake us out of our stupor. It wasn’t until I decided to get divorced that I realized the little agency I’d had over my life. 

Despite generations of activism and feminism, the norm, especially in the case of heterosexual couples remains - women take on a man’s last name. 

Historically, a person’s last name was only conferred due to growing population and the need to distinguish people. And so, surnames began to be based on functional grounds such as occupation, locale and subsequently lineage. Even so, women taking on their husband’s surnames only began as a construct of a patriarchal society - reducing and delineating women as ‘property and possessions of men’. 

The fundamental lie that a patriarchal society stands on is ‘convenience’. Things have been done a certain way for centuries till they seem so natural that any other way seems difficult and troublesome. Yet, some communities have found solutions without sticking to patriarchal norms. 

Sikhism, for instance, is rooted in egalitarian and gender-neutral philosophies. The ideology behind men assuming the last name Singh and women, Kaur, was to do away with anything that categorized people. A little known fact is that even the kaur was initially kunwar, meaning a prince, furthering the gender-neutral approach. 

What this clearly establishes is that it is very much possible to maintain law and order even in a more egalitarian society. While continuing to do what has always been done may be the most convenient route for the society at large, it is more than a trite uncomfortable to women like me. 

While separating from my husband and trying to move on with my life, I was made to feel trepidation over taking any step that he did not approve of. The reason being - that I still was bound by his surname. I was cajoled into not leaving the city because my husband could create trouble at my place of work or with prospective landlords - just because I bore his last name. I was constantly questioned about using my maiden name while my documents still bore his surname.

While filing for a divorce, my first question to the lawyer was - ‘how can I change my name again?’. His answer - ‘The easiest way to do it is after the divorce.’ In other words, when you’re no longer a possession of your husband. 

In 2010, the Bombay High Court ruled that divorced women could not use their former husbands’ names. The judge stated that “By using the ex-husband's name, or surname, there is always a possibility of people being misled that she is still the wife, when in fact she is not.”

In another case in 2015, the same court ruled that there was no law stating that a woman could not use her ex-husband’s name. However, this petition was filed by a woman because she had applied for a passport using her ex-husband’s surname but declared herself a divorcee. The communication she received from the passport office was - “Since you are a divorcee and are using your ex-husband’s surname, you are requested to submit an NOC from him to use it.” 

These instances clearly show the state of affairs in our country - whatever the laws may state, public opinion and treatment may not mimic them. The little agency women often have over something as basic as identity is shocking. The same rationale extends to physical appearance as well, as women are expected to look married - wear sindoor, jewellery or a mangalsutra. This is to clearly establish that a man has staked his claim and the woman is now off the field for other men. 

Having finally received the divorce decree, my first act was to file for a name change. It will be easier now, for I am no longer someone’s possession. I am free to assume my maiden name once again - a name belonging to my father, another man.