The surname change debate is a hot topic, with more women choosing to keep their maiden surnames or settle for double-barrel surnames when they get married.
Recently, Stutterheim- based writer and journalist, Sarah Wild, was told at the Stutterheim Home Affairs Office that she either had to take her husband’s surname or take a double-barrel surname when she went to fetch a new identity document.
The Times reported that Wild only discovered that she had been registered as Sarah de Wet, her husband’s surname, during the local government elections.
Efforts to establish how this came to be proved fruitless when she was reportedly told by a Home Affairs official that if she did not take her husband’s surname she “won’t be married”.
Wild’s struggle is not isolated, with many other women feeling pressurised to take their husbands’ surnames.
Buyiswa Majiki, a high court judge and one of King Buyelekhaya Dalindyebo’s wives, said her decision to keep her maiden surname after she had married was motivated by the fact she had already attained her academic qualifications.
“Not that it would have been impossible to change my surname, but I just did not want to be involved in the havoc,” said Majiki.
Judge Majiki said it would be incorrect to take away the right of women to keep their surnames.
“It would continue to perpetuate the oppression of women. Women should reserve the right to change their surnames or to remain using their maiden surnames,” said Majiki.
Jody Fredericks, an attorney at the Women Legal Centre, said women had a choice of which surname to use and it would never affect the validity of their marriages.
However, she said it was their responsibility to inform Home Affairs of their choice.
“The law assumes that when a female gets married that she will change her surname to her husband’s surname, but there is no law that says you are forced to take your husband’s surname,” said Fredericks.
Cultural expert Dr Nokuzola Mndende said Wild’s experience proved that South Africa still remained a patriarchal society even though civilisation continues to “sell a dream of absolute feminism that automatically comes with civilisation”.
She said had women stuck to the African culture, they would not have been entangled in this “new social war to keep their maiden names”.
“Clan names were important to black people, they were the core of our identities but civilisation came and undermined that and introduced surnames
“Your identity is not in a surname – in the cultural context you find more identity in a clan name than a surname,” said Mndende. — simthandilef@dispatch.co.za
SA women’s identities still in their surnames
Recently, Stutterheim- based writer and journalist, Sarah Wild, was told at the Stutterheim Home Affairs Office that she either had to take her husband’s surname or take a double-barrel surname when she went to fetch a new identity document.
The Times reported that Wild only discovered that she had been registered as Sarah de Wet, her husband’s surname, during the local government elections.
Efforts to establish how this came to be proved fruitless when she was reportedly told by a Home Affairs official that if she did not take her husband’s surname she “won’t be married”.
Wild’s struggle is not isolated, with many other women feeling pressurised to take their husbands’ surnames.
Buyiswa Majiki, a high court judge and one of King Buyelekhaya Dalindyebo’s wives, said her decision to keep her maiden surname after she had married was motivated by the fact she had already attained her academic qualifications.
“Not that it would have been impossible to change my surname, but I just did not want to be involved in the havoc,” said Majiki.
Judge Majiki said it would be incorrect to take away the right of women to keep their surnames.
“It would continue to perpetuate the oppression of women. Women should reserve the right to change their surnames or to remain using their maiden surnames,” said Majiki.
Jody Fredericks, an attorney at the Women Legal Centre, said women had a choice of which surname to use and it would never affect the validity of their marriages.
However, she said it was their responsibility to inform Home Affairs of their choice.
“The law assumes that when a female gets married that she will change her surname to her husband’s surname, but there is no law that says you are forced to take your husband’s surname,” said Fredericks.
Cultural expert Dr Nokuzola Mndende said Wild’s experience proved that South Africa still remained a patriarchal society even though civilisation continues to “sell a dream of absolute feminism that automatically comes with civilisation”.
She said had women stuck to the African culture, they would not have been entangled in this “new social war to keep their maiden names”.
“Clan names were important to black people, they were the core of our identities but civilisation came and undermined that and introduced surnames
“Your identity is not in a surname – in the cultural context you find more identity in a clan name than a surname,” said Mndende. — simthandilef@dispatch.co.za
Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Trending Now
Latest Videos