Wednesday, March 10, 2010

What's in a name? Lots says Bombay High Court

Ok, this is going to be a rant.

I came across this article and yea I am irritated! Apparently divorced women cannot use their ex-husbands' name. If there is no legal compulsion on a woman to change her name after marriage, why should there be any compulsion on her to change her name if her marriage ends? Why can't she have the freedom to choose? Why should there even be an option available only for a woman to change her last name post marriage is something that totally puzzles me. But then I'm reminded of being in a patriarchal society...blah blah and blah!

The whole idea that a woman's identity is totally related to presence of absence of men in her life is so problematic. Currently there is a move to disqualify the citizenship of a Kashmiri woman in case she marries a non-Kashmiri person. To know this and this . I hope that this bill is opposed tooth and nail. It is a big problem if a democratic state treats its women as someone devoid of any independent identity of her own.


A said...

Everything is possible in India


Samyukta said...

I so agree...It annoys me to no end...we live in an extremely MCP society...