You're not a... if you're...

[Gffbjjgfddbjkkm]

To start:
You're not a feminist if you're a "Mrs"
You're not an environmentalist if you're a meat eater

Add your own...

Where did I say I believed I'm of a lesser status because I don't have a penis???

You’re not a feminist if you tear down other women’s choices.

You're not a mature and nuanced person if you're busy seeing people and life through -isms.

You can't judge other people's choices based on what you think the options would be if something was created now rather than in the past.

Those things do exist. So they are an option. And a true feminist wants women to be allowed to make choices for themselves, from the options available, much like men do. Whether the options are the same for men and women for things that currently exist doesn't really matter. Let women choose, respect their right to choose and the choice they make. Anything new being created should be created with the fact it's 2025 not 1925 in mind, but the things that already exist, some women like so let them have it.

I'm a Mrs. Hasn't disadvantaged me in the slightest. Don't care that it denotes my marital status. I could change my title to Ms Mx or Miss if I wanted to and I'd still be married. I can change my name to anything I fancied by deed poll, people do it. Which means I could could change my first name to Lord, drop the title entirely in every day use and people would refer to me as Lord Daisydoos and wouldn't know my sex or marital status.

None of that would change my marital status or advantage or disadvantage me in anyway.

Describing a woman's choice in a certain way is not limiting it, though. You have the right to call yourself what you like, OP has the right to say what she wants, neither of you are limiting each other in this respect. I think the distinction between someone being critical of your decision and limiting you is an important one.

Strangely enough men are given their fathers name too

Lmao no.

The whole basis of the original argument you made is that because most surnames originate with men (and they certainly haven't all come from exclusively men, btw) this means women don't get their own names, without applying this to men in the same way. Pointing out why this basis is wrong can't possibly be pedantic when you formed your point around it. You only believe it's obvious because you didn't bother to interrogate it.

And you're still doing it now, which is why you say husband's and father's names and don't allow for a woman to have her own.

If this is your approach, you need to pick one and go with it. Either none of us have our own surnames if we weren't the first to use them, in which case the husband and father don't have them either. Or we all do, in which case the woman is giving up her own name for someone else's.

If this is still something you're struggling with, try applying the double standard the other way and say the woman is swapping her own name for that of her FIL, or some random long dead probably but not always male ancestor. The principle is identical.

'Your vegan' what?

Yes, I agree if we were starting from scratch we would probably only have a female child and female adult title. So that's what I'm doing Miss -> Mrs, whatever my marital status.

I think honorifics may be on the way out anyway. They're being used less.

Not all children get their father's surname. Some take their mother's.

Of course, one of the logical reasons to give a child their father's surname is to make a statement about paternity. Maternity's a certainty....

Year’s ago older unmarried women would be referred to as Mrs (Mrs Bridges, possibly Mrs Danvers). We don’t seem to do that today.

I like that all adult French women are Madame and all German women are Frau. I think it’s the English language itself that is lacking in this area.

First 3 posts nail it!

Exactly this.
I posted this link: www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/mistress-miss-mrs-or-ms-untangling-the-shifting-history-of-titles

upthread. It explains that Mrs was a social status, unrelated to marriage. As was Mr.

“Mrs was the exact equivalent of Mr. Either term described a person who governed servants or apprentices, in Johnson's terms – we might say a person with capital. Once we adopt Johnson's understanding of the term (which was how it was used in the 18th century), it becomes clear that ‘Mrs’ was more likely to indicate a businesswoman than a married woman. So the women who took membership of the London Companies in the 18th century, all of whom were single and many of whom were involved in luxury trades, were invariably known as ‘Mrs’, as the men were ‘Mr’. Literally, they were masters and mistresses of their trades.”

Urgh pendant

Your not an environmentalist if you are vegan

Happy?

Thank you. Wanted to say something similar. Gross thread anyway

You're not a shit stirrer if you haven't got a stick

You feel you're inferior to boys and men?

All of which meat eaters eat.
Nothing touches the amount of water consumed in the animal agricultural industry.

@Confabulations It’s a real shame that it changed then. I think it’s probably harder for unmarried women to use the Mrs title because people will assume they are married, (especially if you don’t want people thinking you’re ‘spoken for’, like that nice guy at work lol).

Someone should tell my bank. I can’t for the life of me think why their forms ask for honorifics, totally unnecessary for both sexes. Their online form won’t even let you bypass it.

😂

Which bank is it? I notice the older ones seem to use them more. Whereas I have a savings account with a digital bank and they're always Firstname Surname.

ODFOD

Mrs MyLov, Feminist.

I have never had my father's surname. Ever.
His surname is also not on my birth certificate.
From the moment of birth until I chose to change my name, I had my mother's name.

Babies in hospital are defaulted to "baby mother's surname". In some families that may match the father's surname too, but baby follows the name that mother uses in the hospital.
Families may choose to register baby with a different name combination.