Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2010 February 3

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

February 3

Female and Male Population of India

How many women between the age of 18 to 40 in India? How many men between the age of 18 to 40 in India? 174.114.236.41 (talk) 06:00, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Demographics of India provides some information about age and sex distribution, but it only groups 0-14 years, 15-64 years and 65+ years. Astronaut (talk) 13:05, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Does "Hand Vagina" appear in the literature?

I believe that more than half of the male population of the United States, and perhaps the world, will recognize this children's hand game, but I will guess that it has never been mentioned in print. I was wondering how old this is. Does it date to prehistoric times? Is it a 19th century thing? Is it restricted to the English speaking world? To the U.S.? To the east coast? I don't know how to resolve this. Is there anyone who studied the propagation of children's cultural traditions? Barring that, does anyone know if people in other countries do this?

I brought this up once as an example of something that everybody knows about, but which cannot be sourced. I was shocked to find the YouTube video, but that's not a reliable source. I was hoping someone knows another reference. For those that cannot see the video, two participants face each other. Each touches the palms of the left and right hand together, the fingers of each hand making the vulcan peace sign. The two V shapes are then interlocked at 90 degrees. The child with the horizontal palms separates the wrists, and looks through the opening to see a fold of skin between the fingers which is (ever so slightly) reminiscent of a vulva.

I really got curious as to how this sign propagated. I encountered it as a child, and I have heard that it exists in at least one southern state. The reason that I believe this isn't mentioned in the literature is that I was personally embarassed to even mention it, and I think that every adult feels the same way.Likebox (talk) 06:50, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm as straight as an arrow and I never heard of this one! I'm also not seeing it. Must be too right-brained for me. The Vulcan greeting article indicates that that sign, at least, goes back a long ways. It's a Jewish thing, among others. (You didn't know Vulcans were Jewish, I bet.) Have you looked in Google for this hand game, to see if it turns up in anything resembling a reliable source? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:14, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

This has no relation to the Vulcan peace sign--- it seems to be a way for boys to transmit to each other the secret knowledge of what a vulva looks like (vaguely). I think it must be old, because I think I saw it in two different countries (but my memory is hazy--- this is something that is confined to ages 8-12). You should see it if you've never seen it live. Do you mind if I ask you, if you are male, the location where you grew up? It might help to localize this thing.

The midwestern U.S. And I think the most common way this "secret knowledge" was transferred in my old neighborhood was via "playing doctor". None of this hand-sign stuff. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:27, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

The problem with googling for it is that it doesn't have a name. "Hand Vagina" is what the video I linked called it, but that video is the only (relevant) thing that comes up when you google "Hand Vagina".Likebox (talk) 07:26, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

It must be widespread. I'm Polish and I remember this from kindergarten. — Kpalion^(talk) 09:01, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

I did this in my Australian primary school as well. Nick-D (talk) 10:47, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

A better way to create a vagina is to keep your leg straight (no pun intended) and to use two fingers to create a fold in the skin on your knee. This looks exactly like a hairless vagina. I saw this on a BBC tv-show once, believe it or not. 195.35.160.133 (talk) 12:47, 3 February 2010 (UTC) Martin.

I grew up in the Mid-Western U.S. and saw the "hand vagina" throughout my childhood some 25-30 years ago. Dismas|^(talk) 13:33, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Never heard of this; grew up in Hertfordshire in England. Marnanel (talk) 14:28, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

This is not about the "best representation of a vagina", it is to demonstrate that cultural traditions can be maintained within an illiterate subpopulation that is politically powerless and rolls over every four years, the population of elementary school age children. I grew up in Israel and in the northeastern U.S., and I believe I saw it in both places. I didn't consider that observation remarkable until recently, when I thought "how the heck do children in one part of the world transmit this information stably, and get it to spread all over the world without the benefit of a literature source, and without the help of a single adult?" Does anyone from East Asia/Africa/South-America/Pacific islands/ recognize this? If it is just Australia, Poland, and the U.S. might be of European origin in the last 50-100 years.Likebox (talk) 13:57, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

How do you know that it is not about "best representation of a vagina"? In fact it might be about "best representation of a vagina". The interest that prepubescent boys have in vaginas should not be underestimated. Bus stop (talk) 14:21, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

The OP means this question is not about the best representation of a vagina. He is responding to my posting of the 'knee' method. 195.35.160.133 (talk) 14:30, 3 February 2010 (UTC) Martin.

I do understand that. And it is a valid point that you are making. But the entire question may not be one concerning transmitting cultural phenomena across the globe, which seems to be a working hypothesis. In fact the phenomena may be more of an expression of inherent interest in a subject, done so using available body parts. Bus stop (talk) 14:35, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Is there anyone who studied the propagation of children's cultural traditions? Yes, many people. Iona and Peter Opie spring to mind. Marnanel (talk) 14:50, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

But even within the same act, for instance the referred to "hand vagina," there can be two components — the inherent need to represent the female body part, and the means to do so. Given the limited means available, it is possible that populations all over the world are arriving at the same solution. I do not know if this is so, but it would seem a possibility. Bus stop (talk) 14:53, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I'll read the Opies' stuff, and see if I can find it.Likebox (talk) 15:46, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

To Bus Stop: I considered the possibility that it is an independent rediscovery, but you have to reject that hypothesis. The ritual is awkward, and elaborate (try it, it doesn't feel natural), it isn't something you can do alone, the representation is vague, and the arbirrary parts of this (why is it always two fingers to the left and two to the right?) are always the same. I think this has to have a single point of origin, and there's still a possibility that it might be ancient.Likebox (talk) 15:55, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Ironically, and speaking of old-fashioned cultural things, your user ID seems to fit this topic perfectly. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:00, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

That's true. I noticed that too, a few months after I chose the name. I originally wanted to be "Linkbox", but someone else was that. Linkbox/Likebox is an obscure term I used in a publication. It has nothing to do with "liking the box".Likebox (talk) 23:33, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

(deindent) If anyone from East-Asia/Pacific/Africa/South America can chip in and say if this occurs there, I think I'll have a clear picture.Likebox (talk) 01:46, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Could I just wash this discussion in a little pedantry and point out that what the kids, and some of you, were/are looking at is a pretend vulva not a vagina. I believe the ignorance of this distinction is more widespread than the 'game'. Richard Avery (talk) 08:07, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Hence the well-known lubricant, Vulvaline... A couple of the sentences in that writeup make amusing double-entendre in this context. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 08:19, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Which nationality did she have?

Yoshiko Kawashima was born in China but adopted to Japan. She was later executed as a traitor by China after having worked for Japan. The question is: which nationality did she in fact have? As she was adopted by a Japanese citizen, would she not have become a Japanese citizen? Did she have a Chinese or a Japanese citizenship? --Aciram (talk) 13:26, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Citizenship is not a discrete attribute. It is possible that she felt she was Japanese and Japan also agreed she was Japanese. At the same time, China disagreed and claimed she was Chinese. This is still a fuzzy issue for a lot of people. I work with a doctor from Syria. He claims to be a dual citizen. The United States does not recognize his Syrian citizenship. Syria does not recognize his U.S. citizenship. -- kainaw™ 15:03, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Does the USA have something against Syrians? My aunt and cousins have both US and British nationality & passports. DuncanHill (talk) 15:36, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

The rules between the USA and other countries are determined by treaty and/or on a case-by-case basis. Presumably we have diplomatic relations with Syria, but they are not exactly in our top ten list of nations friendly to the U.S. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:00, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Exactly; though citizenship also carries responsibilities which some may not want. I choose not to claim the Israeli dual-nat to which I'm entitled because I'd be required to go do military service, and the British government decline to protect me in such circumstances! ╟─TreasuryTag►sheriff─╢ 20:30, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

I think what Kainaw is really saying is that to the US, a US-Syrian dual citizen is no different from any other US citizen, because for most purposes the US government only cares whether you are a US citizen or not. It's not something that would be different for a US-UK dual vs. a US-Syrian dual. Presumably most governments feel that way about their citizens, including Syria. --Anonymous, 19:51 UTC, February 3, 2010.

I think if a state really wants to execute you as a traitor, they can be a little flexible over citizenship. Marnanel (talk) 15:30, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Even though it failed, the Wikipedia:Citizenship and nationality proposal makes some good points regarding the interchangeable use of "citizenship" and "nationality". Gabbe (talk) 16:00, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

I once knew someone who had the right to any of 5 nationalities. Peter jackson (talk) 11:06, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I realise it is a complicated question - it depends on which country allows double citizenship. Spontaniously, I have always taken it for granted that it you are adopted, you are given citizenship in your new country, and loose your original citizenship. My question here was more specific; about this person in particular. If she was no longer a Chinese citizen, she could not be executed as a traitor to China; but, as you pointed out above, this is no real proof that she was still a Chinese citizen, as she could have been considered a Chinese citizen without being one, juridically. Does anyone know which juridical Citizenship she had, or should have according to the adoptionlaws of China and Japan of the time? --Aciram (talk) 14:08, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

"If she was no longer a Chinese citizen, she could not be executed as a traitor to China" As someone indicated above, this doesn't follow. William Joyce was executed for treason against Britain, even though everyone agreed he wasn't British. Of course I'm not an expert on Chinese law, so you might be right there. Peter jackson (talk) 18:41, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

To put this in persepective, Kawashima was from nearly a century ago. Nationality laws for Japan and China were murky at best. Chinese Nationality Law did not come about until 1980. It was also during war time when Japan was in the midst of invading China through its domination in Manchukuo. Human rights and modern day legal due process were probably an afterthought. The fact that Kawashima was a Manchu nobility did not favour her in the early Republican China. --Kvasir (talk) 21:20, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Zen Calendar 2/2/2010 explanation please

The Zen page-a-day desktop calendar has this entry for February 2, 2010:

"I look upon it that he who does not mind his belly will hardly mind anything else." Samuel Johnson.

I just don't get it. Please explain. 206.54.145.254 (talk) 16:22, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

I'd help here, but I'm too hungry to think.--Wetman (talk) 16:41, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

The full quote is: At supper this night he talked of good eating with uncommon satisfaction. "Some people", said he, "have a foolish way of not minding or pretending not to mind what they eat. For my part I mind my belly very studiously and very carefully for I look upon it that he who does not mind his belly will hardly mind any thing else.". Does that explain Johnson's meaning any better? Not that I can see what Johnson has to do with Buddhism. Marnanel (talk) 16:41, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

If it is intended as zen, it isn't necessarily meant to make sense. That is, you're not supposed to 'get it', and that feeling of not getting it is part of the point. As to Johnson himself, I think he's just saying that he thinks food and good eating are very important, and a sign of discernment. Not that complicated. 86.179.145.61 (talk)| —Preceding undated comment added 18:40, 3 February 2010 (UTC).

If you don't care what you eat, you won't care much about anything else. A bizarre statement to make. Vimescarrot (talk) 20:42, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

well, I hardly think that a commercial Zen calendar is really a reliable source for the philosophy of Zen. The only thing vaguely zen-like about this is if you interpret it in light of zen's tendencies towards moderation: something like "excesses (of satiation or denial) destroy equilibrium". but mostly I think it's just something some marketing guy grabbed when he realized he had 365 days to fill and only had 200 actual zen quotes. whaddayagonnado. --Ludwigs2 21:36, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

It isn't very bizarre. Phrased yet another way... "If you are willing to cram whatever junk food that is within reach into your mouth all day, do you really care about much?" -- kainaw™ 22:32, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

I think it's saying if you don't care about putting rubbishy food in your body, you won't care about putting rubbish in your mind.The Bible compares food to knowledge which Johnson would have been familiar with.hotclaws 00:18, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Food (or more broadly, health) is one of the essentials in the hierarchy of needs. If you don't mind or "take care of" that one properly, it's liable to diminish you in other areas. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:50, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

"And the more broadly, health" would have been on Brother Sam's mind, probably. I'm also getting a "to thine ownself be true"/"people in glass houses" vibe, i.e., get the center of your own universe figured and and put in order before you start in worrying about the problems of the hoi polloi or anybody else. A thought only. Some jerk on the Internet (talk) 18:35, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

You Are What You Eat?--Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:46, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Speed limits

I'm asking out of curiousity, not for legal reasons.

If I were in a 70 mph speed limit zone and I was travelling at 70.2 mph could I be prosecuted? I would be going faster than 70.00 mph but I would also be travelling at 70 mph if it were rounded down. What about 70.89 mph? That could be rounded up to 71 mph, but at the same time, I've not hit 71 mph. Sam 16:43, 3 February 2010 (UTC) SamUK

You were in a 70mph zone and travelling faster than 70mph. What's the difficulty here? Marnanel (talk) 16:45, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

One I can think of is that police radar devices do not have that level of accuracy. Googlemeister (talk) 16:48, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Indeed. Here in Germany they used to give you 10%, with improved technology they now they usually give you 5%. But if the adjusted speed is over the limit, you're (potentially) on. In other words, how they determine if you are above 70 might give you some technical wiggle room, but no legal wiggle room. Compare "I only stole US$ 10 million from Bill Gates - that's so little he cannot possibly notice" ;-) --Stephan Schulz (talk) 16:58, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

There is also the concept of the public interest, which needs to be considered in each & every UK prosecution. Is it in the public interest to prosecute borderline cases? Probably not. Of course there is the question of where the border lies; but it is probably not so close to 70 as your examples. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:03, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

I suppose this borders on legal advice, but if you got a ticket for going 0.2 mph above the speed limit, you could challenge it in court, at least in Canada and probably the US. You could challenge any ticket in court, really, but you are more likely to be successful if the ticket is for something ridiculous (the police officer might not even bother to show up, to avoid the embarrassment). Adam Bishop (talk) 17:15, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

In the early days of speed limits in the UK, before radar was quite so accurate, the rule followed by the police was "allow 10% + 3 mph" which means that you would not have been prosecuted under 80 mph. Modern radar is more accurate, so I believe the Crown Prosecution Service is no longer so generous. Don't risk it! Dbfirs 18:13, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

sad to say, but this mostly depends on the officer, and the officer's impression of your attitude. most cases you won't get pulled over so long as you're within 10mph of the speed limit (which is a grace given to the limits of the driver's perceptions, not the technology - drivers are supposed to be watching the road, not the speedometer). but if the officer has 'suspicions' about you, or thinks that something in your driving speaks to a reckless (or conversely) sneaky attitude, he may pull you over and cite you for any minor infraction he can dredge up, just to have the chance to run your wants and warrants through the computer. --Ludwigs2 18:24, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

The "quota" could also be a factor, especially as you near the end of a month. I think where they're most likely to get you is if you're by yourself going well over (not .2, as it assumes both the radar and your own speedometer are that finely tuned), or if you're flying around other traffic that's going at or near the limit. Getting a radar detector is also a consideration, although if you get caught with it, that could work against you. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:59, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Given their username, I assume they are from the UK. Therefore this advice does not apply, since speeding tickets are generally issued semi-automatically based on speedcameras which are signposted and included on most GPS and mapping software. As such, it is not a question of quotas or being nice to the officer, as neither are involved in the process. And there really is no excuse for not knowing a camera was there. Dbfirs is the one to listen to here. 86.179.145.61 (talk) 22:15, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

They still have mph in the UK? Googlemeister (talk) 22:25, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Very much so. Kittybrewster ☎ 22:50, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, all speed limit signs are still in miles per hour here ( ... and long may they remain! ). Do other countries use standard Metric units of metres per second? Dbfirs 22:53, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Har, har. Kilometres per hour, sometimes posted as km/h, but not usually stated anymore here in Ontario, Canada. -- Flyguy649 ^talk 23:05, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Something that hasn't really been mentioned but is important to remember. They have to allow for a margin of driver-error. The speed limit is 70mph but it is extremely easy to drift up a few mph without realising, especially on different gradients of road. That said the tolerance levels for Speedometer accuracy are set such that it promotes speedometers that over-state the speed, rather than understate it (http://www.speed-trap.co.uk/Accused_Home/Rules_useage/The_Law.htm). ny156uk (talk) 23:29, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

No, they don't have to allow for either driver error or speedometer error. It's the responsibility of the driver to make sure that his car is proper working order (that includes the speedometer) and that he follows the traffic laws. If someone tends to "drift up a few mph", they should aim at 65 to allow for this frequent error. Bicycles have no requirement for a speedometer at all, but I'm still responsible to stick to 25 km/h if that's the posted limit. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 00:01, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Really? A few years ago the local government in Brisbane were considering speed limits for shared bike/walking paths, but were advised by state police that speed limits for vehicles not required to have speedometers were legally unenforcable. FiggyBee (talk) 22:36, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

As I understand it, speed limits in the UK generally apply only to motor vehicles. One exception is in [[Royal Parks of London|Royal Parks]}, where they apply to all vehicles. AndrewWTaylor (talk)

Judges have overburdened dockets. The judge would almost certainly throw out a 1-mile-an-hour violation as de minimis and a waste of judicial resources. Public policy favors economical use of judicial resources, a factor that heavily influences common law precedents. The judge might even sanction the cop, or at least warn him/her against this sort of wasteful behavior. Finally, given that a "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard is used, the criminal accusation would fail prima facie. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.17.54.195 (talk) 23:36, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

In past years (maybe still?) in some U.S. states you received a time-stamped card when you entered a tollroad. The story was that if you reached your exit sooner than would have been possible legally given the distance and starting time, you automatically got a speeding ticket. Some states have stripes painted across the highway and an airplane notes your speed by the time to travel between two accurately known points. If a plane tracked you for a minute and the watcher had reasonable consistent reaction time starting and stopping the stopwatch, your speed should be pretty accurately determined, but the 0.2 mph violation at 70 mph would mean that you drove a mile in 51.43 seconds instead of 51.28 seconds. I doubt the observer could claim an accuracy of .17 seconds unless a high speed digital camera was detecting your bumper passing over the stripe. See [1] for a discussion of how to contest the accuracy of laser, radar, "bear in the air" and other bases for speeding tickets. Edison (talk) 00:05, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

A helicopter, more likely; yes, a "bear in the air", as with "Convoy". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:47, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

I would have to disagree with 63.17 above. A speeding ticket does not add to a judge's docket. Only when a driver decides to challenge a speeding ticket in court does it become a potential burden. Since the vast majority of speeding tickets are not challenged, I would guess that a judge would blame the driver rather than the police officer for wasting his time. On the other hand, many years ago my grandmother got a ticket for "changing lanes improperly." Against everyone's advice, she challenged the ticket, and the judge quickly threw it out.

No police officer will admit to giving any leeway when it comes to speeding, but I doubt any of them ever ticket anyone for going a mile or two over the limit. The problem is that almost everyone drives over the speed limit, so how do you decide whom to pull over? Imaging you ticketed a black guy for driving 66 MPH in a 65 zone. You'd immediately be accused of racial profiling -- see Driving while black. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:19, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Mwalcoff, I refer you again to the concept of de minimus charges -- it's a real legal concept and a practicable reply (if not defense) to any "trifling" criminal charge. And that's whether or not the docket is loaded ... which it always is in traffic court as in any other western court, regardless of how many speeding tiockets are contested. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.17.86.75 (talk) 02:19, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Handling of wannabe tough guys (Psychology)

Three seriously tough bodybuilders enter a pub. One little, tiny weakly jerk comes up to them and full of aggression tells to one of the bodybuilders that he (the little one) will "fuck him up". It was not a joke, but was a real threat. The bodybuilders have calmed him down and walked away. I would have probably done the same had I been one of the bodybuilders, because had the bodybuilder actually punched the little one then the little one would be dead. When the bodybuilders walked away I asked the little one if he is some sort of a martial arts expert. He said that he is not a martial arts expert at all but that someone needed to face up to the big guys and show them that they are not as tough as they think they are! He saw them for the first time, but when he saw how confident they walk around he immediately felt provoked! What is actually the best way to handle those little wanna be tough guys who feel provoked by real tough guys?

Exile? TastyCakes (talk) 17:25, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

What do you mean by "What is actually the best way to handle those little wanna be tough guys who feel provoked by real tough guys?" Is there a problem here that has to be addressed? Are you specifically asking what words you might use to discourage (or encourage) the behavior that you describe that you have seen in the individual of diminutive stature that you describe as a "little wanna be tough guy?" Are you specifically asking what words you might use to discourage (or encourage) the behavior that you describe that you have seen in the individual? Bus stop (talk) 17:31, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

NOTE: this question aready appears on the Miscellaneous desk with many answers. Perhaps all discussion (and that is all it appears to be) should be localized there. Bielle (talk) 17:34, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. I now see that it is already being addressed here. Bus stop (talk) 17:44, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Post Office Investigation Branch

I'm trying to find out about this organisation, which is referenced in the Royal Mail article. However, Google only throws up a few Wikipedia mirrors, one or two recent news articles, and an ancient book-review on JSTOR – does anyone know anything, or can find any resources (online or off) about the POIB? Thanks!! ╟─TreasuryTag►constablewick─╢ 18:11, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't know about your google but mine throws up thousands of good results for Post office investigation branch and Post office investigation branch royal mail. There are hundreds of Hansard entries talking about it from the 1920's up until today. Entries include staffing figures and powers. There are even a few hits from both Post Office Security Investigation Services and POSIS as well which are relevant. Nanonic (talk) 18:48, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Changing last names

Is this possible I can change to my future spouses last name if I find one who is white and have an american last name. Is this legal for men to change to women's last name. With Asian man and white women couples could the white women keep the last name the same. It seems strange for a white spouse to have the last name of asian spouses.--209.129.85.4 (talk) 22:01, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

You will have to specify what jurisdiction you will be under, but in most places, like the United States, it is legal and acceptable for the man to change his last name to that of his spouse. —Akrabbim^talk 22:07, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

At last! I knew it was coming to this! Congratulations, 209, on your future nuptials with a white spouse with an American last name. Yes, see our name change article. As it states, in the US, you can legally change your name to almost anything, for any reason. It is still unusual in the US for the male to change his wedded name to the female's last name, but it does occur sometimes. Comet Tuttle (talk) 22:11, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Move this question to proper place. I always post on wrong desks. Anyways I still have looong ways to go before I could even marry. I have to finish college, then find a descent job before I can even think about marrying a white women. Yes I want to become biracial.--209.129.85.4 (talk) 22:17, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Note that race is usually considered to be genetic, and marriage would not change you genetically. Your children would be biracial, not you. Googlemeister (talk) 22:24, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

I think you might have busted his balloon there. Meanwhile, I'd like to know what he thinks is an "American" name. Kristi Yamaguchi sounds Japanese, and that's her ancestry, but she's as American as apple pie. You can find Americans with almost any surname you could imagine. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:41, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

I think it's pretty safe to assume he means an anglosaxon surname. TomorrowTime (talk) 12:19, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

So it would be "Smith", yes, and "Schmidt", nein? I'm still laughing at marrying a different-raced woman and becoming biracial. Although it's possible he's referring to the marriage being biracial. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:38, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

It is uncommon, but not entirely so, for men to take their wives last name. Jack White did so, and I have two different friends who have done so. Of course, the trick with marriage is finding a woman, regardless of her racial background, who will marry you. Rather than worrying about racial marriage statistics, which mean nothing with regards to falling in love with someone (and indeed, to having them fall into love with you). Instead, focus on finding women with similar interests and whose personality meshes well with yours. For some people, race is a major factor in finding a mate and wife, but for many others it is not. Every situation is unique, and it is far better to get out there and date than to sit back researching statistics in some attempt to engineer the perfect match. --Jayron32 23:14, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

It's not unheard-of for a white American woman to adopt the surname of her Asian husband. If she's self-conscious about it, she can use a hyphenated name like Smith-Wong. Or she can just keep her maiden name. It's quite common nowadays for a husband and wife not to share a last name. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:21, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Likewise, I had a friend whose father was of Chinese decent, while his mother was of Irish decent. She took his last name with no problems. Little bit of OR there, I know, but I wouldn't find it uncommon for a non-Asian wife to take the last name of her husband. It would actually seem to me to be less common for her NOT to. --Jayron32 00:46, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

You can change your name without getting married. Here in the UK it is known as a deed poll; I don't know if it has a specific name in the US, but you might find Name change#United States useful. On the other hand, there are laws which prohibit discrimination; so I would hope that no one would think any less of 209 if he was proud of his heritage and kept his non-american name. Astronaut (talk) 23:55, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

There's no legal requirement for a deed poll. You can simply change your name. Peter jackson (talk) 11:21, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

That very much depends on the jurisdiction, Peter. Please don't give legal advice here; it's against our own rules. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 20:50, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

I was responding to the immediately preceding comment, which was about here in the UK & the deed poll. Do you have those anywhere else? Peter jackson (talk) 10:30, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

In Australia, the term "deed poll" is well known and commonly used, but afaik it's not used formally. In my state of Victoria, to change one's legal name, one needs to submit an Application to Register a Change of Name, to the Victorian Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages. The Registrar can refuse a name that is obscene or offensive, is too long, consists of or includes symbols without phonetic significance, resembles an official title or rank recognised in Australia, is contrary to the public interest, or where the change of name is being sought for a fraudulent or other improper purpose. The other states would have similar arrangements. One can, of course, informally adopt a different name (eg. my legal given name is John, but I use Jack in most circumstances; I never asked anyone's permission, I just started using Jack). But to change my legally registered first name to Jack, or to make any other changes to my legally registered name, I'd need to submit the form and all the supporting documentation, and pay a fee ($87.20 last time I checked). -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 21:54, 6 February 2010 (UTC)