Caution: rant ahead
A friend of mine emailed recently to let me know that after five years of living under her husband's name, she's come to realize it's just not her, and she has decided to bushwack through a jungle of paperwork to return to the name she was given at birth.My first thought was, "let's throw the sister a party!"
I wrote to tell her congratulations and mentioned that even though she was married when I met her, she had never struck me as someone who would change her name when she got married. She said she was relieved to hear I hadn't pegged her as a name-taking kind of gal - not that there's anything wrong with it!
I have to disagree. I do think there's something wrong with a woman taking her husband's name when she gets married. I have a lot of good friends (or had, maybe, once they read this,) who are strong, smart women and say it was their personal choice to take change their names on their wedding days. I think that's a cop out. Marriage is no longer the sexist institution it once was, but there's still a lot of institutionalized sexism, and how can we expect to shake it if we don't shatter the nearly subconscious perception changing our names give: ie. that once a woman is married, she leaves her independent self behind and becomes part of her husband's household. My women friends may be liberated themselves, but they're not helping the cause any.
Women are no longer their husband's legal property; they rarely vow to obey in this country, and dowries are pretty much a thing of the past. But women are still expected to change their identity when they get married. It would be different if men were held to the same expectations, but you never hear the groom being asked if he'll take his wife's name. (Actually, I did ask this of my brother-in-law. He thought it was a ridiculous idea. I think he even laughed. Fortunately, he has a lot of other redeeming qualities.) Maybe if couples were asked, "whose name will you be taking?" I wouldn't have such a problem with it. But here and now, like most domestic responsibilities, the burden falls to the wife.
There are always exceptions. I know a couple of men who have hyphenated last names, and I say good for them! I know one guy who decided with his wife to come up with a completely different last name for the both of them. Bold! I am proud to count among my friends at least three who have spent time as stay-at-home dads and a few more who share equally in household chores. This is progress, but it's not equality. We women have more freedom and choices today because of the women who came before us and fought for our rights. We can't give up the struggle just because things have gotten easier for us. Women still earn less than men and face discrimination in the workplace when pregnant. Legislation has secured us many more rights than we once had, but we still have to fight the pervading perception that women are most valuable in the home.
And if you're not part of the solution, Sister, you're part of the problem.
posted by judybat at 1:01 PM
47 Comments:
Hmph. I had a lot to say, but it got deleted and I am too lazy to re-type. Maybe it's better that way.
Agreed. One spouse taking the other's name is so 20th century. ;-)
I know a few couples who have done the "let's invent a new name for our new family" thing. In one case, his last name was Greek, and hers English, so they translated her name into Greek and infixed it smack dab in the center of his. Another couple went a simpler route: their new name is, quite fittingly, Home.
I'm interested in how this fits into the larger question of naming and renaming as an act of empowerment. In graffiti culture, inventing a new name for yourself is a necessary part of creating your identity and getting fame. Meanwhile, on the intarwebs, folks like you and AR invent pseudonyms: power through anonymity. At Burning Man, half the people you meet have names that only exist on the playa. And the baseball stadiums in San Francisco seem to be named after a different corporation every few months.
The funny thing about the patriarchal naming tradition we've inherited, is that it isn't even all that old. Isn't it true that before a certain point (what was it, the Industrial Revolution?) people didn't necessarily get last names from their families at all? You'd just be JudyBat Photographer or JudyBat GreenHouse or what have you.
Seems like there are a lot of questions for new couples to ask themselves: do we want to share a family name, and if so, what purpose should it serve? Is it there to indicate our children's genetic inheritance? To uphold a family tradition? To fit in with our adopted culture? To say something about who we are or hope to be? To be easily searchable? To look good on a movie marquee?
It doesn't matter to me so much that my last name is patriarchal; it's just that I've had it since birth and it's who I am.
My friend who's going back to her maiden name said she changed it in the first place because she and her husband were building a new family and they wanted everyone to have the same last name. Her husband took her last name as a new middle name, and their kids have it as a middle name too. But she said the new name never fit; she felt about as comfortable introducing herself with it as if she were introducing herself as "Marilyn Monroe." Now she has two kids and she realizes it's not so important to her that they share a last name.
I love the idea of couples finding new names for themselves, (JB GreenHouse is lovely,) though you'd lose out on the whole genealogical history aspect of names. (I think it's cool that my last name in comes the town in Spain my ancestors presumably fled from during the inquisition. Also, it looks awesome on the back of a soccer jersey.)
V - come back and tell us what you said!
This is one of those conversations we have every time one of our friends gets married. I agree with Judybat on principal: Everytime a woman changes her name, it sends a message to the world and adds to the pressure on those who opt otherwise.
But at the same time, I think these kinds of decisions are so personal that we can't fault another woman for doing what she thinks is right. Names are tricky things. Cynicali and I grew up with different last names. Based on that experience, I think it's important for siblings to go by the same surname. Thus, TheBoy and Beta will both have Judy's.
At the same time, you'll notice I haven't changed my name to reflect the family dynamic. Nor did she ask me to, by the way.
If you really want to get JB worked up, ask how she feels about wedding veils.
Ok, I have had yoga and my arms are all wobbly, but here goes:
I met a fantastic man, whom I'll call "A." A and I decided we were going to get married, but by then I had not spoken to my father for three years. So at that point I was eager to get rid of my old last name, which felt like an unpleasant burden. I thought it might be odd to take my stepfather's name at the same time I was getting married. I could have used any number of lovely family names, but I felt best sharing a name with my spouse. We recently found out that our families lived in the same Connecticut town in 1630, so we have family history in common. Hell, we may be related, but that's another story (how many of your ancestors were married cousins?)I felt that taking his name was the logical and sentimentally appropriate thing to do. Was I running away from one thing to another? Maybe. I don't give a damn what anyone thinks about my decision. I am honored to share A's name, because it is now my name. Even our dog has our last name. Just ask the Walgreen's pharmacy, where I had to go to get her Elavil the other day. Really.
Around the time we got married, my uncle Allen passed away, and since Allen was my grandmother's maiden name, I took that as my middle name. I have to say that I get tired of defending my more traditional situation. Many so-called feminists would view my choice with contempt(and have expressed that to me in fact), but to me, feminism is about a woman having the freedom to do whatever the hell she wants as long as she doesn't harm anyone in the process.
I do wish more tolerance could be extended my way, because the whole hyphenated name thing seems logical to me, yet the name bearers often have such a point to prove that they leave me tired(I think I am becoming more and more generally misanthropic as I age.). I see it as a personal decision, and even if I don't just luv it, I tolerate it and don't hassle them about it. God forbid anyone should call the hyphenated, made up name silly or contrived, but sign your name Mrs. John Doe, and you get an earful from people whose opinion you did not solicit. It makes me want to go off on my own rant, and I see now that I have, though I am still trying to be polite and rational.
It's really none of my business how peple name themselves. I was raised to be tolerant of people, even if I do not like them or what they do, as long as they don't harm anyone. I had a superfeminist teacher in HS whose name was Rita Catherine, having eschewed the whole patrirchal thing and taken her mother's first name as her last name. We thought that was odd, but it was her chosen name. She didn't ask me for my opinion, so I just accepted it and figured that she had her reasons.
I wonder if I will get an earful for staying home to raise babies and letting Mister provide for us. I sure as hell hope not. Tolerance goes both ways.
My fave moment was walking from the hairdresser's in cut-offs and an old tee shirt with my clogs on, wearing my veil, hopping into the car and driving off. I loved my veil. It made me feel bridey and gorgeous. Can you imagine what will happen if you have a girl and one day she wants to get married and wear a veil and take her spouse's name? Boy-howdy!
You certainly won't get an earful from this corner of the little green house. Staying home to raise babies is much harder than getting paid to work with adults.
Whats in a name? It seems like a brand, like Pepsi or Coke or Nike or in my case CUTSH. I inherited it from generations of scottish and viking badasses who were tougher than the others, who formed and protected and supported their families. Some supervised the irish when they were growing potatoes for the brits, then moved to the USA when that went to shit. They started family farms; one was a glass blower, one supervised a logging and lumbermill operation, and one, with the help of the Montgomery GI bill and a strong working wife put himself through a private college and became a Senior Partner of a sizeable CPA firm. So I guess I agree, your last name should be meaningful, and I am proud my wife took mine and it has passed on to two daughters and a son. And I will support them all in whatever they choose to call themselves. But there's no denying all that territorial, tough, competitive, creative, hard working and thrifty Scots blood in those veins. Call it what you want, but I call it CUTSHALL, and its mine. I'm such a throwback.
And how about those Israelis? Talk about tough bastards. Damn, makes me misty. I wonder if they intend to charge you when you park on what used to be Lebanon.
I'm pretty ok with everything except the hyphenated name thing. Where does that lovely tradition end? Perhaps when your hyphenated initials 3 generations down the line spell a totally new name?
Isn't this really just another point as to why marriage is an anachronistic and unnecessary arrangement? Let's for a moment strip away the thought of marriage, assume that life partnerships are legal arrangements granted for the purposes of safety, accounting, and emergency phone numbers - that people enter in to when they desire to share their life with another, and hell let's throw in a ridiculously lavish party.. now isn't everyone happier? No name changing, no gender bias, no trading of three cows and forty oxen, instead the simplicity of two people and a life time of arguments and make-up sex.
I have no problem with the commiting, just the fact that it's not only commiting to the one I love, but the government - and its apparent need to qualify my lifestyle.
I think the most important thing you said, V, was that you don't give a damn about what anyone thinks of your decision. Good for you. In my experience, though, a woman changing her name is the expected, acceptable and most well-trodden course, which is why I feel the need to rant and rave about what I see as the societal impact of that personal decision.
I hope I live to see the day when a name change is nothing more than a personal decision. And I hope it is before my kids grow up and get married, because, while I won't be thrilled if a daughter of mine wants to wear a veil at her wedding and take her husband's name, I'll be torn if my son wants to marry a woman who wants to take his, which is also mine, which I love and would love to see passed on, except you know how I feel about a woman taking her husband's name.
It's a rough thing to have come to certain positive conclusions about negative things -- particularly the ones related to marriage which is oh-so-personal.
My thing, lately (not that I'm getting married) is about why so many otherwise decent people continue to mark the occasion of marriage by purchasing an overpriced stone that was almost certainly obtained through brutal work conditions of people (sometimes kids) who have little control over their economic opportunity.
Fortunately, I have grown fairly comfortable with focusing on a lifestyle of "fix my own shit first" before trying to teach other people how to fix theirs. But it's still painful when I see folks doing things that are obviously (to me) socially or environmentally detrimental. When I see someone buying a diamond, my impulse is to tell them: "Hey, why don't you cut out the middleman and just punch some poor person in the gut, eh? Oh, and don't forget to throw some crap into the local water supply after you've taken your latest ATM withdrawal and run it through the paper shredder."
Yep. "Fix my own shit first". I like that.
I think Judybat comes off as intolerant and judgemental, in ways she would criticize others for. Sure, I agree with her basic views on the long-term benefits of women not taking their husband's names, but the way she expresses her view does disservice to the cause. It's prickly, almost. I mean, come on -- "Part of the problem?" Intolerance, preachiness and judgementalism from The Left may not be as bad as same from The Right when it comes to these things, but Judybat, it still ain't pretty. You know that people reading this have made different choices than you would, and yet you still wrote in that tone? Reminds me what I once read at our college about Carter and Reagan. People who disagreed with Reagan would come away from talking to him generally liking him. On the other hand, people like us who agreed with Carter would come away disliking the guy. I know it's your blog, and your personality quirks are what make it interesting, but please, recognize when ye are being judgmental and just say "I'm sorry." It'll do you good in the long run.
Wow, suddenly I feel the need to defend my ladyfriend, even though I don't entirely agree with her. Yeah, sure, her tone is a little harsh. But she'd tell you the same thing in exactly the same way in person.
It's funny, my first thought after hearing your anecdote about your friend wasn't "let's throw sistah a party" but "oh, yikes, what a gigantic pain in the ass to change your name twice!" As you know, M and I took each others' names as a double last name, no hyphen, though neither of us have done so legally (not for any political reason, just for pure laziness-- we haven't picked up our stamped marriage certificate either.) The only one(s) with our official legal last name are the kiddos. A big part of what facilitated our decision was that the two names sounded good together, and in total added up to 3 syllables. I figure when Simone gets hitched up she and her partner can just decide what they want to do and go from there. So we have yet another confusing option sure to screw up our spawn-- a lifetime of explaining that their last name is "two words, no hyphen, alphabetize under P". While the guv'mint still sees M and me as our birth names. Unless we motivate and get down to city hall before we leave the state. But then that gets back to my first observation-- what a pain in the ass.
Another thing, I would have no problem if the woman I was marrying did not take my name.. but if she did take my name and three years later wanted to switch it back; I would be hurt, insulted, and frankly, I can't imagine I wouldn't question the bond we shared. For whatever reason, I think that would make me rethink many of my decisions too.
oops. I said three years.. it was five. and unlike wine, this is not something that appreciates with age.
I wonder how many times feminists have been told, "Well, I agree with you for the most part, but do you have to be so militant about it?"
The answer is YES! I have to be militant about it, because people don't listen to you if your not in their faces, and if they're not listening to you, then how can you get them to think about the world outside the box they've nested in? Do you think this post would have gotten so many responses if I'd been polite about it? People liked Reagan because he never asked them to sacrifice anything. Meanwhile, his presidency nurtured greed, arrogance, neglect and hypcrisy in this country.
I decided a long time ago not to apologize for making people feel uncomfortable when I speak out on things I feel strongly about. (See also: SUVs, fast food and Republicans.) Nothing's going to change if everyone is comfortable. Am I judgemental? Sure. But not intolerant. I encourage anyone and everyone who thinks I'm full of crap to say so - but you've got to tell me why. Make a good argument and you might change my mind. (V came close, but I still say the good of the many outweighs the good of the few or the one.)
Phil - you tell those people about the diamond mines! Maybe they don't know that the tradition of giving diamond engagement rings was created by marketers, just like Mothers Day, (not that there's anything wrong with Mothers Day.)
ooh, fun, ranting! I want to play too... So, here is why I changed my name legally when I got married. I wanted our family (with or without kids) to have the same name. It was a nice symbol, to me, of the fact that we were becoming a team for life. Would I feel that team spirit any less with a different name? No, but I thought it was a nice symbol. So, why his name (D) and not mine (C)? I had to go with the underdog, basically. There are plenty of Cs in the world -- my ancestors got around. There are very, very few Ds in the world, partly because of an Ellis-Island style name change and partly because those who didn't make it to Ellis Island probably all were killed in the Holocaust. So it seemed more significant for me to take his name. And yes, part of the calculus probably was that it would be easiest for me to take his name if I wanted our family to have the same name. But I don't think that was the main part of my decision.
Professionally, I used C for several years. Just in the past few months, I've dropped it and gone just with D. I can't say why, exactly -- it just felt right. And I that's enough for me, really, and as v said I don't care what others may think of it.
Sorry, JudyBat, but I think this whole issue is a red herring, similar to the whole ridiculous "war" between "stay at home" and "work outside the home" moms. It's bullshit -- we need to stop bickering about this petty crap and work on the real issues, like maternity leave and health care and decent affordable child care for all. I think debating bourgeois crap like this is a waste of time when we should all be uniting and focussing energy on real social justice issues, like how Ann Coulter is evil and must be destroyed or like the single mom who's stuck working in a crap job because of welfare-to-work rules and she can't afford decent childcare. I really don't think she cares what any of our last names are, she's still waiting for feminism to care about the working classes. And yes, I have been looking for an excuse to use the word bourgeois. And yes, I guess we can still take time out of our busy social justice pursuing schedules to blog.
That said, I don't begrudge JudyBat her opinions or the tone/strength with which she expresses them. I myself am pretty judgmental about certain things and I think the word has gotten a bad rap -- having the capacity and thoughtfulness to make judgments on important things is a good quality in my book.
I'm glad that Lisa decided to keep her name (in fact, I encouraged it), but I'm sad to think that she would have been "part of the problem" if she'd decided otherwise. I say let's keep the blanket critiques of other people's decision to a minimum.
From YOUR READER
As a mother of your religious persuasion might say: “THIS you call militant?”
Give. Me. A. Break. You really want to be militant? Go be militant where it counts, with conservative people who disagree with you who aren't your friends. But with people who you like, you really don’t need to be insensitive, especially when every other one of your posts decries each and every insensitivity you perceive throughout the course of your days. Militant? Senator, I knew Gloria Steinem. I worked with Gloria Steinem. Judybat? You’re no Gloria Steinem.
The Coulters, Robertsons and Falwells of the world can – and do -- say the same thing, that they’re militant to catch people’s attention and that justifies whatever they say. The end justifies the means, they say. But really, all that does is get some similarly militant people who agree with them to give money. Is anyone giving you money for talking/writing like this, Judy? Tell us the truth, because we all deserve a percentage. If you want to make the point, you’re smart enough and a good enough writer to make it without making people YOU LIKE feel like you disapprove of very personal choices. (Side note: You don't know the couple dynamics that cause people to make these choices.) Anyway, remember what your parents told you about honey and vinegar. I’m at least as liberal as I know you to be, and you’re alienating me. So there.
And for the life of me, Judybat, I don’t know why people loved Reagan. Yet as I’m sure you’re smart enough to realize, the Reagan reference wasn’t the point of my last post; the Carter reference was. I agree with you yet I find your tone distasteful. And to put a twist on what black folk have reminded white folk for years, Judybat, your saying that you’re not intolerant doesn’t mean you're not intolerant.
And what if everyone else in the world felt like they didn’t have to apologize for the way they speak about things they feel strongly about? Didn't they teach you about categorical imperatives at your Ivy League school? Your thoughts are no more sacred to you than mine are to me, or AR’s are to AR, anyone you pass on the street's.... I know a lot of smart people who care about important things like you do, and your thoughts are no more special than theirs. Yet they don’t make well-meaning people feel bad. It’s all about tone, sister.
And no, I don’t need to “tell you why” any more than I did. You should know how to make a point like that without going the extra mile to let people know that beyond a shadow of a doubt, The Great Judybat disapproves of their very personal decision. I log in to your blog because I was told it was how I could keep in touch with how some good old friends were doing when they moved far away. Frankly, if your tone keeps up like this I’ll simply log in less often. (Maybe you don't care; that's your right.) And it’s not because I disagree with you; I can handle disagreements from friends; it’s because you’re making me think you may not be particularly nice.
Amen, Amen and Amen!
Rebecca, I loved your attack on Ann Coulter. Wasn't she recently and again voted Olbermann's "Worst Person in the World?" The Coultergeist?
My dear friend looked at Ann Coulter and said, "she looks like a dingleberried cocker spaniel." And yes, I was looking for an opportunity to use that word.
first, the San Francisco zoo has named a baby eagle after Stephen Colbert, and a horse in the petting zoo Coulter. Ha.
So Judy, where do you stand on Kelli O'Donnell taking Rosie's name? Similar issue-- partner with less power taking name of partner with more-- but in this case, it's a two vagina family. What say you?
Now I AM going to start defending my ladyfriend.
Bash and disagree with her if you'd like, but at least have the balls to put your name to it. Otherwise I may have to get all 'Mommy at the pool' on you. OK? OK.
I had to babysit a three-year-old who screamed for 45 minutes straight tonight, and I'm not in the mood to hear adults scream at each other.
And dezz, shouldn't that have been a horse's ass named after Ann Coulter?
and rebecca, your logic in changing your name was exactly my logic in giving both kids Judybat's. there are thousands of people with my surname out in the world, but very few with ms. jb's. i totally get wanting the entire family to have the same name -- hell, i grew up in a household of three last names. it could get very confusing. and yet, i like my name, and for some reason i can't articulate, it doesn't bother me that my kids won't share that. weird.
and can you tell i'm a child of divorce by my efforts to change the subject? move along. nothing to see here.
wow. i sure am glad my comments weren't seen as reply worthy. I was passing by the computer and the heat from this page lit my sleeve on fire.
Taking on the husband's name may or may not be a cop out depending on the reasons why. And if you assume and stereotype then perhaps you will be OK with people making assumptions about who you are and what you are all about.
Sure she could have chosen the husband's name as a cowardly or perhaps mindless act *or* as a "I understand the ramifications and I'm doing it anyway!" Maybe in this person's mind, she doesn't feel the need to prove that she's not property or subordinate in any way because she already knows that to be true.
In other words, she's beyond it.
Perhaps the couple talked through the possibilities in a meaningful way and chose what felt right to them.
And finally, after a five year run of it, she's returning to her roots. The reasons are complex and perhaps not appropriate for the blog venue but they're good reasons and she gets my solid support in that decision. It's who she is.
Ah, where to start. My head's spinning so fast I don't even know, except to say Rebecca, I love reading your posts even when you're harshing on me. I don't see it so much as red herring as a sidebar, though. The whole naming thing is very subtle, yet pervasive, as language informs our perception of things. I agree that it's similar to the whole working-mom/stay-at-home-mom issue, but I don't think that's bullshit either, because most women don't have the luxury of making a choice in these matters.
If women were perceived as being as valuable outside the home as in it, would we still have to fight for maternity leave, flex time, decent child care and health care for all? If we had those things, women could actually choose to return to work. But too many women are forced out because they earn less than the cost of day care, or forced back because they can't afford life outside the HMO.
Ultimately, whatever you chose in life is a personal choice, and regardless of whatever reasoning you appy to your decisions, some of those choices are going to have an impact beyond the personal.
And now here comes AR to change the subject.
I'm dragging JB off to take a picture of my large-and-getting-larger stomach. That should be enough to either frighten you all off or force you to focus on happy things, like puppies and flowers and Snickers bars.
I cannot take any more of this conflict.
I'm going to change my name to Chrysler.
(I've been itching to say that all night.)
Thanks, all, for good posts and for hanging in there even when people weren't happy with what others say.
Last word: I was "amen-ing" Rebecca, but the way the posts aligned themselves, I seemed to be amen-ing YOURREADER. I want the record to reflect this. As another child of divorce, I, too would like to see the subject changed. It has been very difficult for me to even post what I did, because I stink at confrontations and standoffs. Let's talk about how expensive Whole Foods is. You should not spend 170 dollars there and still be able to carry your purchases in your hands. Right? Anyone? Shouldn't the less-than-wealthy be able to have access to wholesome foods too? I'll start that rant on my own blog.
But Whole Foods has to be expensive to pay for their power. According to this morning's Times, they're one of very few big companies that gets all its power from wind sources. Isn't that great? It makes me want to go spend $5 on some herb-crusted tofu.
WOW. What a discussion.
My blog is a bleak wasteland of 0 comments compared to this. Guess I should stop posting comments about my cats and my crush on the cute Greek security guard at my evil office, eh?
By the way, I spent nearly my entire paycheck from the N&O at Whole Foods. I don't regret it. Everyone here in Greece thinks tofu is a type of dragon. I feel so alone.
Hello, my friends. If any of you plans to attend a wedding in, oh, say, early September, may I suggest that you give the bride a little time to enjoy her day before bringing up the topics of women-as-chattel and wage-slavery-in-the-diamond-mines.
Maybe you could wait until after the cake-cutting (and we all know what that represents).
As my married women friends can attest, dear Brian, (and yes, I do have some left,) I may bring up this topic before the wedding, but once the deed is done I keep my big mouth shut.
Done and done.
(Can't wait for your big day, by the way!)
I certainly know what cake cutting represents. Fatty goodness.
I do have to follow up on a portion of the RR vs. Jimmy Carter thread. A couple of years ago, I saw JC in the lobby of my workplace, on his way to visit our CEO (who's big on the philanthropic ventures). And I've gotta tell you, JC was elderly, white-haired, and positively glowing. Seriously, dude looked like he was lit from within. (I think it's from the lifetime of good works.) I got a little teary-eyed just from seeing him. I didn't try to talk to JC, but the janitor did later, when they were both in the men's room, and he said JC was really nice. So, there!
Also: Mmmm, caaake...
But what kind of cake? I'll go out on a limb here with my own marriage-related rant ...
Carrot cake is NOT appropriate for a wedding, unless you're marrying a bunny. I'm sorry if that offends anyone.
Where I come from, the bride gets a cake (THE fancy cake) and the groom gets his own (usually chocolate or something)cake. What about that? I say, "MORE CAKE FOR ME!"
My blog is also a barren wasteland of comments. But all I post about is knitting and my dog, so who wants to read that besides my mother?
Oh man, now I have to rewrite my wedding toast :-)
The cake is going to be interesting. In fact, I would go so far as to say it is a meta-cake. Put that in your Derrida and Foucault it.
You'll be relieved to know that it is totally carrot-free, right down to its sugary little subtext.
I hadn't even thought yet about having a groom's cake. Hey, I could arrange for a groom's cake!
Damn straight!
I'll go out on another limb: More cake is better.
Heres my take away on this thread: Jimmy Carter lit from within (the thought of lit from within is causing a 60's flashback) and Uncle Ronny Reagan dead and rotting (end of flashback). Do-de-doot-de-doo... I'm lovin it! Justice, almost served, now all we need to do is change the airport name to ANYTHING else.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
I think someone wrote a play about this: "Much Ado about Nothing". However, Squirt, you miss a point: Marraige offers the opprotunity to choose the better name. Mouse went from "Klotz" to "Siviglia", as in "Il Barbiere de .... Pig
Post a Comment
<< Home