Personally, I think this is really weird too.
But I know it is still fairly common? Newly married couples are sometimes introduced this way at the wedding… I know I have heard it at least once
@Pizzagirl - you wrote “Either way, your maiden name is a man’s name - your father’s” - why is that? Many girls do not have the same last name as their father - it could well be the mother’s last name.
Soccerguy,
It seems to come up when printing invitations, and when you are married to George Clooney.
FWIW, this is OT, my issue isn’t with the idea that it’s a “man’s” name or not. I just don’t personally see the point of changing your given name- no matter who gave you that name. Everyone is allowed to do whatever they want, clearly, I just think changing your name is a PITA and I already have my name in print… no point in changing it FOR ME because it was the name my parents gave me and I’m darn attached to it 
SG, that’s interesting. I haven’t heard any newly married couples announce themselves like that. (I, admittedly, run in very liberal circles.) I would never address an envelop to Mr. and Mrs. John Doe. I wouldn’t want it done to me so I wouldn’t do it to someone else.
If you are marrying John Doe you are becoming Mrs. John Doe. You are not Mrs. Jane Doe, ever. You can be Ms. Jane Doe or Mrs. Doe or whatever the heck you want to including Susie Smith if you tell everyone but getting offended because the envelope is addressed correctly is perhaps just a little silly.
Actually, marie1234, I expect that people who know me would respect my name choice and address an envelope correctly. I also got married “back in the day” and never changed my name. It’s my name and was my choice. It’s been the same name for decades and decades and decades 
so should be very easy to remember since I’ve used it professionally and socially all those decades and decades and decades.
Yeah, I don’t think you’re understanding my post.
Calling her Mrs. George Clooney is correct. As is calling her Ms. Amal Clooney. Mrs. Amal Clooney is just wrong. I have no idea what she prefers but it does appear she changed her last name since that is how she signs things now. And, sure keeping your maiden name is fine and being Mrs. Amal Alamuddin would be okay too I suppose. But, it would be weird and no-one would do it without prior instruction. And, it would still be weird.
I have a professional name and am married but I would never put a Mrs. in front of it since it is not my husband’s last name.
Can someone point me to a “rule” that says it is somehow incorrect to use Mrs. Jane Husband? Because Wikipedia and Emily Post are telling me otherwise.
Count me as shocked if she has officially take his name for professional use. Unless she need to for the green card. G
Mrs. Amal Clooney is “wrong” only if your etiquette books were printed in 1950!
The business default became Ms. in my world a long time ago but it was well after the 1950’s. However, this is only a story because she is married to George Clooney and the writer refers to her as the new Mrs. George Clooney as lighthearted form of identification. It’s a lifestyle story in USA Today. On a business envelope it would probably be Ms.
I don’t see how Mrs Amal Clooney is right. That’s how one used to refer to a divorced woman before the term Ms was in wide use. In any professional context, she’d be Ms Amal Clooney because that’s the modern way to refer to women. If you were addressing a letter to her (and solely her), that’s what you would write on the envelope.
From googling, I see all kinds of nonsense for addressing envelopes - like Mr and Mrs John and Jane Smith because they want to include the woman’s name. How awkward! If you think Mr and Mrs John Smith is too patriarchal (like they’ll never figure out the envelope was meant for both of them), then write Mr John Smith on one line and Ms Jane Smith on another, which works regardless of whether Jane goes by Smith or her maiden name Doe.
Bldrdad. Even my mother’s last name is still a man’s name - my grandfather’s. If I decide to honor my maternal grandmother and go with her maiden name,it’s still a man’s name - her father’s. And so forth.
“Everyone is allowed to do whatever they want, clearly, I just think changing your name is a PITA and I already have my name in print… no point in changing it FOR ME because it was the name my parents gave me and I’m darn attached to it”
I wasn’t attached to my maiden name, personally. I was born with last name Xxx (a truly bad last name!), mother remarried and it was legally changed to Yyyyy when I was 6, which is how I grew up. I can look at childhood mementoes and half say Xxx and half say Yyyy - I’m still the same me. In any case, Yyyy was long, mispronounced, and signaled a certain ethnicity, so I was happy to change it when I got married. My married last name is simple and nice-sounding.
Of course, everyone can do what they like and that’s fine w me - I just observe that having a different last name from a spouse/children can also be a PITA
My first thought is that this woman is clearly distinguished enough to teach anywhere.
Sadly my second thought is that Columbia only asked her to teach once she was married to George Clooney.
I am not sure she would have been on their list otherwise. So for myself, Columbia drops a point on my scale.
Of course maybe they wanted her all along. Then I would stand corrected.
You only knew of her once she married George Clooney, even though she was distinguished in her field. What’s the difference? If she’s qualified, which I’m sure she is, I don’t see what’s the big deal.
I agree with PG. Her resume is impressive, and just because we hadn’t heard of her before her engagement does not mean that she was not well known and/or well respected in the Human Rights Law community. She advised Kofi Annan, and was named a leading barrister in England. Her visiting professorship this spring parallels George’s schedule, as he will be filming “Money Monster” in NYC the spring. So its a win-win. Columbia is fortunate to have her. Good for them for making this work.
PG, Well, if I was an internationally known lawyer I would find it suspect that I was not asked to teach for a school until I happened to marry a celebrity.
It rankles my feminist bone.
Well rankle away. I suspect she may have reached out to the NY schools (she got her advanced degree/LLM from NYU) because George was going to be there in the spring. Why not? Makes perfect sense. Schools have visiting/guest lecturers all the time. She is a good choice. And how do we know that other schools haven’t invited her before? We don’t.
There are plenty of internationally known lawyers who aren’t asked by Columbia (or other law schools) to teach.
Are you also mad at Harvard, Yale, Stanford law schools? Or just Columbia?
Additionally, she lived / was based in London, not the US. I don’t think it’s the norm to assume that people based halfway around the world are available for your teaching assignments, unless there is reason to believe they will be in your area.
You would have a feminist bone to pick if George Clooney had married an “everyday unexceptional lawyer” and because of her celebrity, now was invited to lecture at Columbia. But there’s no feminist bone to pick when an accomplished female lawyer speaks at a top notch law school.