This article is so true in the context of gender equality. It’s sad to not have the ability to easily find women ancestors. Ideas prescribed in this article can help change the narrative for women.
Great points and I’m proud to have been mostly researching the women in my family tree. I have a 2x great grandmother whose death certificate lists her name as “Mrs. Frank Petrasek”… when I found that record I was angry. But I channeled the anger into uncovering her story which I ended up titling “More than a Mrs.”
These women are really the foundation of our families and worth knowing better.
Love this. The whole idea of following a family line based only on male descendants just seems so... antediluvian.
My parents divorced when I was still in diapers and my mom remarried. My sister and I grew up with our stepdad's name. By the time I married, changing my surname name seemed so simple. Surnames felt like postal addresses, relevant only to location, not identity. My identity is woven into the changes.
From my thoroughly documented mother's side, happenstance of location had me focusing my family history storytelling on a family tree that followed prominent great grandparents who had three daughters. Three generations later, none of us cousins have ever carried that surname. It's created a layer of simplicity and equality across the men and women in the family.
As I've learned to navigate family history a bit better, I've come to appreciate the respect for women's names within genealogy. Her name is her name. What name she (or they) choose to carry after forming a family is a choice and generally a story.
I hope to have a contribution — my ggm who came to California by covered wagon as a teenager, and wound up in San Jose with a household of her mom and orphaned nieces— all school teachers. Still getting research facts to substantiate family lore.
This article is so true in the context of gender equality. It’s sad to not have the ability to easily find women ancestors. Ideas prescribed in this article can help change the narrative for women.
I love the idea of channeling your anger into telling the fuller story. 👍
Great points and I’m proud to have been mostly researching the women in my family tree. I have a 2x great grandmother whose death certificate lists her name as “Mrs. Frank Petrasek”… when I found that record I was angry. But I channeled the anger into uncovering her story which I ended up titling “More than a Mrs.”
These women are really the foundation of our families and worth knowing better.
Love this. The whole idea of following a family line based only on male descendants just seems so... antediluvian.
My parents divorced when I was still in diapers and my mom remarried. My sister and I grew up with our stepdad's name. By the time I married, changing my surname name seemed so simple. Surnames felt like postal addresses, relevant only to location, not identity. My identity is woven into the changes.
From my thoroughly documented mother's side, happenstance of location had me focusing my family history storytelling on a family tree that followed prominent great grandparents who had three daughters. Three generations later, none of us cousins have ever carried that surname. It's created a layer of simplicity and equality across the men and women in the family.
As I've learned to navigate family history a bit better, I've come to appreciate the respect for women's names within genealogy. Her name is her name. What name she (or they) choose to carry after forming a family is a choice and generally a story.
I hope to have a contribution — my ggm who came to California by covered wagon as a teenager, and wound up in San Jose with a household of her mom and orphaned nieces— all school teachers. Still getting research facts to substantiate family lore.