Gender Issues

, Volume 34, Issue 4, pp 316–332 | Cite as

Hillary Rodham Versus Hillary Clinton: Consequences of Surname Choice in Marriage

Original Article

Abstract

In this paper I expand on the current literature regarding how women are perceived by surname choice with a vignette experiment conducted in a diverse sample (N = 1243) of the U.S. and ordered logistic regression to evaluate (1) how committed respondents think a woman is as a wife by her last name choice and (2) whether a woman’s last name choice causes individuals to hold her to different standards (a backlash effect). I describe the woman’s behavior in marriage in order to see if surname choice matters beyond information on how the woman is “performing.” In addition, I examine whether name change varies depending on the educational attainment and gender of the evaluator. While overall, last name choice appears to have little impact on how women are viewed among women and highly educated men, I find that men of low education view women who retain their surnames in marriage as less committed wives. These men also think women who retain their surnames should be held to higher standards than women with their husbands’ last names. My results follow scholarship that finds that men of lower education are more protective of overt instances of the gender hierarchy, of which surname practices are an important example.

Keywords

Surnames Married names Gender Last name choice 

References

  1. 1.
    Clinton, H. R. (2004). Living History. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gooding, G. E., & Kreider, R. M. (2010). Women’s marital naming choices in a nationally representative sample. Journal of Family Issues, 31(5), 681–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hamilton, L., Geist, C., & Powell, B. (2011). Marital name change as a window into gender attitudes. Gender & Society, 25(2), 145–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Etaugh, C. E., Bridges, J. S., Cummings-Hill, M., & Cohen, J. (1999). Names can never hurt me? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 23(4), 819–823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rudman, L. A. (1998). Self-promotion as a risk factor for women: the costs and benefits of counterstereotypical impression management. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(3), 629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pyke, K. D. (1996). Class-based masculinities the interdependence of gender, class, and interpersonal power. Gender & Society, 10(5), 527–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Foss, K. A., & Edson, B. A. (1989). What’s in a name? Accounts of married women’s name choices. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 53(4), 356–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    England, P. (2010). The gender revolution uneven and stalled. Gender & Society, 24(2), 149–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ridgeway, C. L., & Correll, S. J. (2004). Unpacking the gender system a theoretical perspective on gender beliefs and social relations. Gender & Society, 18(4), 510–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Correll, S. J., Thebaud, S., & Benard, S. (2007). An introduction to the social psychology of gender. Advances in Group Processes, 24, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Eagly, A. H., Wood, W., & Diekman, A. B. (2000). Social role theory of sex differences and similarities: A current appraisal. In T. Eckes & H. M. Trautner (Eds.), The developmental social psychology of gender (pp. 123–174). Mahwah, New Jersey: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Benard, S., & Correll, S. J. (2010). Normative discrimination and the motherhood penalty. Gender & Society, 24(5), 616–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Heilman, M. E. (2001). Description and prescription: How gender stereotypes prevent women’s ascent up the organizational ladder. Journal of social issues, 57(4), 657–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Heilman, M. E. (2012). Gender stereotypes and workplace bias. Research in organizational Behavior, 32, 113–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rudman, L. A., & Glick, P. (1999). Feminized management and backlash toward agentic women: The hidden costs to women of a kinder, gentler image of middle managers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(5), 1004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rudman, L. A., & Glick, P. (2001). Prescriptive gender stereotypes and backlash toward agentic women. Journal of social issues, 57(4), 743–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ferree, M. M., Lorber, J., & Hess, B. B. (1999). Revisioning gender. Lanham, MD: Rowman Altamira.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jackman, M. R. (1994). The velvet glove: Paternalism and conflict in gender, class, and race relations. California: Univ of California Press.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Correll, S. J. (2001). Gender and the career choice process: The role of biased self-assessments1. American Journal of Sociology, 106(6), 1691–1730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Foschi, M. (2000). Double standards for competence: Theory and research. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 21–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ridgeway, C. L. (1997). Interaction and the conservation of gender inequality: Considering employment. American Sociological Review, 62, 218–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hamilton, L. (2010). Family names count: Marital name change and definitions of family. In B. Powell, C. Bolzendahl, C. Geist, & L. C. Steelman (Eds.), Counted out: Same-sex relations and Americans’ definitions of family. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Brines, J. (1994). Economic dependency, gender, and the division of labor at home. American Journal of Sociology, 100, 652–688.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bittman, M., England, P., Sayer, L., Folbre, N., & Matheson, G. (2003). When does gender trump money? Bargaining and time in household work. American Journal of Sociology, 109(1), 186–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    England, P. (2011). Missing the big picture and making much ado about almost nothing: Recent scholarship on gender and household work. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 3(1), 23–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gupta, S. (2007). Autonomy, dependence, or display? The relationship between married women’s earnings and housework. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69(2), 399–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Munsch, C. L. (2015). Her support, his support: Money, masculinity, and marital infidelity. American Sociological Review, 80(3), 469–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Forbes, G. B., Adams-Curtis, L. E., White, K. B., & Hamm, N. R. (2002). Perceptions of married women and married men with hyphenated surnames. Sex Roles, 46(5–6), 167–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Murray, T. E. (2013). Attitudes toward married women’s surnames: Evidence from the American Midwest. Names, 45(3), 163–183.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Davis, S. N., & Greenstein, T. N. (2009). Gender ideology: Components, predictors, and consequences. Annual Review of Sociology, 35, 87–105.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Pyke, K. D. (1994). Women’s employment as a gift or burden? Marital power across marriage, divorce, and remarriage. Gender & Society, 8(1), 73–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Jacobs, J. A., & Gerson, K. (2001). Overworked individuals or overworked families? Explaining trends in work, leisure, and family time. Work and occupations, 28(1), 40–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sniderman, P. M., & Grob, D. B. (1996). Innovations in experimental design in attitude surveys. Annual review of Sociology, 22, 377–399.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Liao, F. (2004). Comparing social groups. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 45(1–2), 3–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Angrist, J. D., & Pischke, J.-S. (2008). Mostly harmless econometrics: An empiricist’s companion. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kao, G., & Thompson, J. S. (2003). Racial and ethnic stratification in educational achievement and attainment. Annual review of sociology, 29, 417–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Winship, C., & Radbill, L. (1994). Sampling weights and regression analysis. Sociological Methods & Research, 23(2), 230–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Locksley, A., Borgida, E., Brekke, N., & Hepburn, C. (1980). Sex stereotypes and social judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(5), 821–831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(5), 751–783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kane, E. W. (2000). Racial and ethnic variations in gender-related attitudes. Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), 419–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Scheuble, L., & Johnson, D. R. (1993). Marital name change: Plans and attitudes of college students. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 55, 747–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Scheuble, L. K., Johnson, D. R., & Johnson, K. M. (2012). Marital name changing attitudes and plans of college students: Comparing change over time and across regions. Sex Roles, 66(3–4), 282–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Goldin, C., & Shim, M. (2004). Making a name: Women’s surnames at marriage and beyond. Journal of Economic Perspective, 18(2), 143–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Brightman, J. (1994). Why Hillary chooses Rodham Clinton. American Demographics, 16(3), 9–10.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SociologyPortland State UniversityPortlandUSA

Personalised recommendations