True and I think going after people for their name, whatever their reasons for that name, doesn’t get you far.
But neither do I think it is wrong to speculate why someone chose the name they did. Why didn’t Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis just become Jacqueline Onassis?
I’d bet dollars to dimes Sarah Huckabee Sanders wants to trade on the Huckabee name. Especially when you consider her conservative roots. Maybe there were other reasons.
In the end…call yourself whatever you (general “you”) want and we can make fun of you for whatever we want.
I do not see this as a sexist thing at all since anyone can choose whatever name they want. We can mock them though. For example:
I’m not trying to offend. But you seem to be taking a very uncharitable interpretation of my post.
My point was just what I said. I don’t understand why she uses her maiden name. The talk about her fathrr is only in reference to Sarah Huckabee Sanders, and showing that she clearly didn’t do it for the same reason.
She is a politician, using a form of her name that is not the one I would expect given her cultural background. Thus I believe it likely she did so for a political reason, just like Sanders did.
I will also note that having your middle name replaced with your maiden name is a very patriarchal custom. Again, it isn’t a compound lastname, but a replacement for a given name, which does suggest a patriarchal ownership. Heck, given how anti-feminist she is, I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s the point.
She may yet have a legitimate reason for the name. But she chose to make it a middle name, so I can fairly call her Greene, while I cannot refer to AOC as Cortez, as that is not her name. I will refer to her as I do Sanders, treating her the same as I would a male politician. The only reason I don’t use Ortezio-Cortez is that it’s hard to type, and she nicely came up with an abbreviation for us.
I will not refer to Greene using those letters and have it replaced the “Magic the Gathering” meaning in my mind.
There was no need to sneeringly wonder who her father was.
Over the last 20 years, it’s become increasingly common for women to keep their last name as an informal middle name, especially on social media. I think it’s because they want to take their husband’s name but want people who knew them before they married to be able to find them. It’s dirt common. There’s no need to twist it into any political statement.
I agree with MandaJo here. While it isn’t universal, I have seen many examples over the last few years of employees keeping their maiden name as part of their legal name after marriage. Some of them my hyphenate while others make their maiden name their legal middle name. For example, Sandra Diane Johnson will come back with a Social Security Card that reads Sandra Johnson Smith after she’s married.
Why did Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis choose that name?
No social media at the time.
No maiden name in there (Bouvier).
The point is there can be lots of reasons why someone chooses the name they want the world to see. Some are innocuous, some self serving.
We can speculate on that. Conservative women are not well known for flexing their independence from their husbands. Kinda goes against the grain and when it comes to someone like Sarah Huckabee Sanders. She puts herself out there into the public sphere we are free to comment on her.
If she were some random Jane Doe I’d say leave her be.
They folks @Sherrerd and the folks quoted are talking about are mean people. At bottom mean people are mean because they’re fearful cowards. There’s nothing more to it. The louder and more aggressive they are, the more fearful they are of everything around them.
Cowards to the core. Like small yappy dogs. And equally deserving of respect or attention.
No, she must stay, as we call all point to her whenever the repubs make a crack about AOC or anyone on the Dems side. Just neuter her. In fact i think Pelosi can just never recognize her?
I’m not so sure that the “Trust the Science” part of Greene’s poster—the rest of which says “There are TWO Genders: Male and Female”–indicates that on this topic Greene believes that science supports her position.
Obviously science does NOT support the idea that humans can be divided into two polarized distinct genders, with no overlap or shared traits.
Now, Empty Greene is probably not terribly gifted in the IQ department.
Still, if I had to bet money, I’d bet that she knows that her position isn’t supported by science—and that she included the phrase purely to troll.
I’m not inclined to think that. I’ve met my share of people who seemed perfectly intelligent and functional who believe that humans are divided into men and women, that science supports that (they don’t know anything beyond XX and XY), and all these myriad gender classifications are a liberal social phenomenon. I don’t see any reason to believe Representative Greene is not one of these fairly mainstream people. I think basing her “trust the science” purely on trolling is giving her too much credit. I sincerely think she believes it. A hell of a lot of people do.
