ZOMBIE THREAD ALERT: This thread hasn't been posted on for a while.
Is this the kind of crap that subtly undermines women?(80 Posts)
Friend and his wife are both acknowledged authorities in their (similar) fields. Both have been separately invited to speak at something. Both have same honorary title. She always uses her own surname, has never used his.
Hotel booking when they arrived was for (for example) "Dr FirstName LastName & Mrs HisFirstName HisLastName".
How annoying!! I can't stand this kind of crap. When me and FH got married, we BOTH changed our names by deed poll so that we both have each others surname (I still use my maiden name, but it's nice to share)
His parents just couldn't get the hang of it, and still send me post addressed to Mrs His initial His Surname. I have not become him!!
Oddly enough, my dad was explaining to my 9 year old nephew how in Italy( my family is Italian) Women don't change their names as they are equal. He came to me confused and said "but then their not family without the same name" I responded with "but why should a women take her husbands name? Is that fair?" He replied (lovely boy) "then they should both change their names, so long as they have the same name"
So there is hope for the male future!
tis a proper wind-up - I remember my brother telling me I had 'no right' to call my self <Mrs. Myname> after I was married and didn't take my husband's name!
NO RIGHT TO USE MY OWN NAME!!!! (breeeethe)
Argh this sort of thing winds me up more than it should! A few months ago I booked a hotel for my (male) DP and me using my name and title (Dr). When I arrived they had listed him as the primary guest and wouldn't let me sign for the key, despite the fact he wasn't arriving for a other two hours, until I kicked up an almighty fuss. I then paid for the room using my credit card with my title and my surname. And still they persisted in calling me Mrs His-surname throughout my stay and in subsequent communications.
Amanda - the annoying thing is I pay it all anyway as I sort out our lives re banking and admin etc. We're in NZ and I wonder if it's a country thing? School phoned yesterday to tell me Ds1 sick and I said I'd send nanny to get him and they were shocked on the phone- didn't know I worked!
lollystix if he has no contract with them, tell him not to pay - and chase them for your invoice.
you'llscreamaboutit I don't think it's unusual for a feminist.
Dh has only once attended Ds2's nursery yet every bill is directed to him. I signed all the forms and am the primary person in that respect yet they did ask for father's name. On that basis they make the assumption that he pays. Pisses me off as I earn more than DH!
Mrs DH's name surname makes me
I took his surname because we married as students and it seemed easier to start adult life with minimum concussion.
We both come from traditional families and my maiden name is a pita to spell.
However, I am still me and I'm still female I'm not "mrs John Smith"
I mean I'm sure there are Johns with tits and a vagina, but I haven't met them yet.
I am Mrs HisName. Unusually I guess for a feminist, I changed my name. I wanted us and any future children to share a name. We did think about double barrelling or using my name, but neither was aesthetically pleasing and I just couldn't be bothered to go further and find a whole new name - especially since I knew our families would feel that was a rejection of them.
It didn't occur to be to be Ms HisName at the time, and I might do it more in future.
I am not Mrs HisInitial Hissurname, nor am I Mrs Hisfirstname Hissurname.
And just because I made a particular choice does not mean others have. I would be furious if I had experienced what the OPs friend had. And if I had a doctorate I'd bloody use it - all the time, even amongst friends <far too lazy to ever have one>
I don't think it's at all deliberate, and actually I think that's worse, because if it's unthinking it looks a lot more like the cultural norm, which is what our children and young people are learning. It being unthinking rather than appearing crass and deliberate actually perpetuates it.
A gay male friend and a mutual female friend shared a twin room at a Premier Inn for a wedding and the hotel insisted on referring to her as Mrs HisSurname all weekend, despite them disclosing several times information about their respective personal lives that were none of the hotel's business.
When we bought our house, I put my name first on every form (I know, I know, presumptuous!) - mortgage, insurance, everything. Every single letter that came back swapped our names round so that DH was first.
It actually used to make our mortgage advisor twitch. You could tell he felt a bit sorry for my poor hen-pecked DH. To add insult to injury, English isn't his first language, which is why I always negotiate complex forms etc. But still, rather a man with not great English than a fluent speaking woman, eh.
Tbf, his native country is even worse. I have some shockers.
I forgot my point. Yes, it is institutional sexism I think, but that doesn't excuse in any way. I make a point of ticking Ms (or adding it if it's not there) these days, and cheerfully correcting anyone who assumes anything regarding my marital status.
DP and I recently rented a house. I say we, but actually the rental people had only ever met, or spoken to me (DP trusts my opinion, so didn't even visit the place before we signed up).
When the paperwork arrived, it was all in his name first. I corrected it, put myself as primary contact etc.
EVERY email/letter/bill signup/important 'you must reply within 72 hours for council tax things' letter, EVERYTHING came addressed to him. Which could have been a problem since he went abroad for a month the day after we moved in (the rental agent knew this too). Luckily we freely open each other's mail so I could sort it all out - but they got more than one rather forceful email (and my relatives got a fair few rants) on the stupidity of the situation.
We got a letter from our council recently regarding a house we own, it was addressed to Mr Bairn. Both of our names are on everything official. It made me rageful, flaming furious * clutches pinny tightly *. I'd owned the house for years before there was a Mr Bairn.
Message withdrawn at poster's request.
I'm not trying to disagree that it's institutional sexism.
My objection is to someone constructing straw men arguments by saying 'oh, but it isn't deliberate', as if that were relevant. None of us thinks it is, do we?
To juxtapose that with an insistence that, in fact, the OP is inaccurate and some other made-up event involving no sexism at all must instead have happened, does get me wondering about the intentions behind the post.
I didn't see it as similar to you say it's institutional sexism, because you didn't follow up your comment with a claim that it also probably didn't happen.
<cough> I think it was me who first introduced that it was institutional rather than deliberate sexism ...which seemed relevant to me at the time.
As far as I can see everyone agrees that, and that its a worse issue... a patriarchy problem. I can't see any derailing here TBH.
Eh? No, I don't think we should stop talking and I'm sorry you find my comments ineffective. No one is forcing you to read them.
I didn't say the 'exact same thing' as you - you're misreading my posts. I am objecting to you saying 'it's not deliberate sexism' as if that's relevant, because I don't believe it is. If you disagree, fair enough, but please don't pretend I said the 'same thing' upthread when I didn't.
You're not just 'offering alternatives' - you're insisting the OP (silly woman, doesn't know what she's talking about) must be wrong. And you, who know nothing about the situation, must be right. And why? Because in your version, no-one is ever sexist and silly feminists should just shut up.
Do you not see why I might find that a tiny bit irritating and rude?
You haven't even got a penis, frankly you're lucky they let you sleep in a bed.
Message withdrawn at poster's request.
You think we should just stop talking LRD as it seems for the moment we are not being particularly effective at it. For example I now do not understand why you think my "insistence" that the hotel clark did not set out to be sexist, when you said the exact same thing up thread. So it would appear that again we are both saying that sexism does happen, and that the issue lies elsewhere other than with one clark in one hotel.
If I am disputing what went on, it is because we have a third hand account of a conversation. I offered alternatives, becouse it's just to damn lazy to always assume that the only solution to everything is sexism, are scientists and people in general not supposed to analyse information? K see Im now arguing with you and that is not what I wanted as its gonna postpone me getting on with my day.
Be Well everyone, especialy you LRD
I don't understand why you're so keen to insist the OP's situation must be different from what she says or why you think it's important to insist it mustn't be 'deliberate sexism'.
Join the discussion
Please login first.