Old fashioned way: It used to be that as a woman you automatically got the last name of your husband.
Revolution 1: Then you automatically got to keep your last name, but it was put behind the last name of your husband and a '-' , to show you are married.
Revolution 2: Recently, you automatically keep your last name.
You have always been able to change your last name in a different way. Say during revolution 1, if you wanted to ditch your own last name, you could, but you had to fill out a form and explain why you wanted that and apply for it. Also if your husband wanted to ditch his last name and get yours, it was possible, but only if you explained and applied for it.
The same options are still available since revolution 2 started, but it just means more paperwork for those who prefered revolution 1 or the old fashioned way.
What do you think about the 2nd revolution? Is it better or worse that way?
I'm not sure why they changed the rules. Did they do it because most women just want to keep their last name nowadays and there'd be less paperwork to do and thus make marriage more attractive (passports, drivers licence and other official documents need not to be replaced) or did they do it to make marriage less attractive and indistinguishable from long-term partnerships on paper?
*** I know in some countries, it's commong that the wife always gets to keep her last name and the children have a double last name or a different last name than one of the parents. Does anybody know what their reasons were?
- I'd rather ditch my last name. / For men: I'd rather she ditched her last name.38% (12)55% (6)42% (18)Vote
- I'd rather have two last names. / For men: I'd rather she had two last names.19% (6)18% (2)19% (8)Vote
- I'd rather keep my last name. / For men: I'd rather she kept her last name.43% (14)27% (3)39% (17)Vote