to address a woman in a formal letter as "Ms"?

[twattock]

Here's the problem; as a solicitor the formal way to address correspondence is "Dear sirs/your faithfully" or "Dear (insert as appropriate)/yours sincerely". But I often have to write to a woman without knowing what title she has given herself-so do I use Ms? I dont want to assume anything obviously, so I can't use Miss or Mrs, so what would people prefer?

I agree with seeker. Language changes they way people think. When I talk to women in my granny's generation (ie., who reached adulthood when 'Ms' as a title wasn't an option), they are much more aware of who's married and who isn't - it is a basic defining characteristic of women they know. Less so for my mum's generation, and less so still for mine.

I'm not saying it's perfect now, or that there isn't a backlash of surrendered wives in my generation, but there has been a change. It would be very difficult to prove that the language changes had no part in that change.

I do commercial work nowadays and always think about what is in my client's interests before choosing a form of address because people can feel so strongly about it. In commercial, you are often addressing foreigners so you have to think about that too.

internationally, "Dear Secret Musicteacher " is the form of address on the rise because you don't have to have deduce gender from the name alone, although it's still embarrassing if you find you have reversed the names, as happens with Spanish and Middle Eastern names

Women are not the only ones who can lose their own names of course. I can't be the only one to feel a bit embarrassed that Chinese business men and women are obliged to have an "English" for international business use.

By the way, going back to UK, it seems to me that addressing a woman as Ms is a sort of code for "dear person that I take seriously" Iyswim

20 years ago it wasn't uncommon for some people to go to the paki shop for a pint of milk. can you imagine thinking that's normal now? the point of this thread was to find the right way to address a woman in a formal letter or email. it might be a small thing but I think it's important to think it through all the same.

Exactly, I note desertgirl hasn't been back to answer the points about racism. But then it's "only" sexism, what does it matter? Apparently we should put up with it and shut up.

Women are not the only ones who can lose their own names. Slaves did too.

I once heard a black rights campaigner on the radio talking about how slaves had their names taken away and they were given new ones including the surname of their owner. He was sort of marvelling at the outrage of it and he said ' who in the white world has the experience of their own name being taken away and replaced to show who they belonged to?' He obviously hadn't thought of the whole of womankind... Obviously now it's deemed a sign of loyalty and commitment but the idea of being given someone's name derives from ownership . That's why names matter. It was done because it was powerful. Still is.

drjohnsonscat - wow, I had never thought of it that way, and it's powerful. I have a deed poll sitting upstairs waiting to sign that gives me my unmarried name back, doubled with my married name (without the poncy hyphen). I feel more determined than ever to get the darned thing signed and claim my name back.

It drives me crazy that my otherwise perfectly equal-rights modern man DH is all hurt and offended that I'm "rejecting" his name (um, no, I'm keeping it, I'm just putting my own name in front of it) but he looked at me as if I'd grown two heads when I asked if he'd take on my name in addition to his.

My DH took on my name as well when we joined them together - not sure why this is an issue for your DH?

desertgirl hasn't been back, Fillyjonk, because she has been at work, it isn't the weekend here.

I don't, personally, believe that stopping calling 'Paki shops' 'paki shops' has made a difference to how people think, and I am not sure how you would prove that it has. Which came first, the decrease in racism (which I would be inclined to attribute to other things, personally, such as more exposure to people of different races, increased education, etc) or the change in terminology? If terminology is all it takes, lets change some more terminology and it will all be gone, no?

I don't, in any case, think that the terms are comparable. Paki shop was never 'correct' - you wouldn't have read it in a (respectable) newspaper. The only similar ones I can think of (though there are probably others) are 'Ms' and some of the changed terminology for disabilities and disabled people. It is quite impressive how the disability terminology manages to change without apparently causing problems during the changeover, but am not sure that the different terms have changed attitudes there either - if you have any evidence that they have, I would be interested to see it (as I would with the racism one)

Ms, on the other hand, still involves making a 'statement' as is sadly apparent from this thread, what must be well over 20 years from its inception. I just struggle with the idea that adding 'Mesdames' which doesn't even sound like an English word is worth all that politicization (where using the old term will be making a statement, using the new term will be making a statement, neither statement will necessarily be one I want to make) for the next 20 years in respect of what is a very niche usage.

And if you really have to change it, couldn't you just change it to 'Dear Allen & Overy LLP' or 'Dear Freshfields' or whatever instead of adding the ridiculousness of Mesdames to the existing ridiculousness of Sirs?

Slave naming is scary - I'm reading a book at the moment where a woman is tracing her family back in time in Barbados. And she explains how it was very difficult for her to realize she really could only tell the story of her white ancestors for the early part of her traced history, because they were the ones who had the name recorded. It only became the name of her black ancestors because they were owned by that family. The book is called 'Sugar in the Blood', btw, and it's really interesting so far).

I would be being polemical if I said that women being called by their husbands' names has the same origins of ownership, but it does.

Anyway ... I came back to this thread because I was reading the one about using other titles, and I was thinking that 'master' has different implications than 'miss' anyway. In medieval England, a priest who was also a graduate of Oxbridge was 'master so-and-so', whereas an ordinary priest was just 'sir'. And that survives on so that the heads of Oxbridge colleges are usually called 'master' (some women's colleges have 'principals'). Whereas the only profession I can think of that uses 'Miss' is teaching. It's interesting, isn't it?

(No, ok, probably only to me! )

desert - are you also against the word 'entrepreneur'?

It doesn't sound like an English word, dammit!

LRD, when did you last hear the word 'Mesdames' used in English? I don't like Sir, or Madam, as terms, and bringing back arcane plurals doesn't seem particularly constructive. Perhaps 'not sounding like English' isn't what I meant - but while it is a normal word in French, as the plural of "Mrs", or as 'Ladies..", it isn't 'normal' in English - does that explain it better?

I'm not sure that's how English works!

It's not 'normal' English, I agree ... but, goodness, what is? Language evolves very fast. You'd not have heard people say 'I skyped my mum yesterday' even five years ago, but now it is quite normal. English is actually a language with a lot of French as well as Germanic and Latin influence, and although 'mesdames' sounds odd to us, it's been in use for a few centuries so it's not that recent, it's just unusual.

Trying to stop languages changes is like trying to order the tide to turn back.

Is it progress, though? If you are changing language on the basis of gender inequality, why do it using terms which themselves imply inequality - if you are treating people as your equal, you don't address them as 'Sir' and 'Madam', do you?

I really don't want the hassle of changing, but if it has to change, I would rather move forwards than backwards to the days when Mesdames was in regular use.

Oh, I see what you mean.

My hunch is that language change doesn't work like that - in that it's not so easy to engineer it precisely. But you're right, ideally we'd all just stop using titles overnight and not recognize gender.

I don't think that using male titles is the way forward, though. To me, that is going backwards (though I do see why you don't agree), because it goes back to when women would be laughed at and told 'but women can't be [insert title here]', or when women were simply not referred to and 'he' was default.

ok so use the firm name.... no titles involved?

But mesdame is simply the plural of madam, as sirs is the plural of sir. I don't see why that causes any confusion or is a step backwards.

Addressing the partners at another firm as "Sirs" is about respect. But it excludes women. So add Mesdame. Simple as can be as far as I'm concerned.

Changing terms on the basis of gender equality has little bearing on any implied lack of equality through calling someone sir or madam. There's no respect in excluding women from the form of address. In fact, it shows a great lack of respect for women. On the other hand, there is respect in addressing them as sir or madam. The two arguments aren't comparable IMO.

Oh, I'd use the firm name, but I'm not a lawyer and thought people were saying that just wasn't an option?

I can see why it'd be nice to have a respectful title that wasn't gendered. But I can't see how it'd happen, and I suspect if it ever does, it will happen long after people start accepting women need respectful titles too.

What happens at the moment when there's a gender-neutral title (such as 'Dr' for a medic or 'Rev' for a vicar), is that people mostly assume the 'Dr' or 'Rev' in question is a man.

Realistically, none of it is an option in terms of being generally accepted for at least another generation.

Anyway, am not 'not back' now either, am going to bed! Bonne nuit, mesdames.

Night night!

And yes ... it won't all change for a while. But it will be interesting to see how things do end up changing.

I've just been getting a legal document drawn up - there were loads of errors in it (wrong addresses, names wrongly spelt over half the time, referring to another document by the generic name but not specifying which one it referred to - at least 3 if not 5 options etc so when sending it back marked up for change I asked why they had stuck the one male name at the top of the list where it didn't fit in any logical order (alphabetically, age etc) and if they were going to have it that way on one document then to reverse the order on the other document so it is at the bottom or use a sensible obvious order for all the names. And it's come back with no explanation and all in the same order. Harumph.

With regard to the legal convention of using dear sirs, next time I discover myself in the position of writing to such a firm then they are one of the few groups in a position to switch to something neutral - dear partners would work perfectly. Although it would be tempting to send it to dear overcharging incompetent fuckwits. (can you tell I've had a bad experience with some solicitors recently!! It's directed at them and not any of the nice solicitors on here of course!)

And to the poster who said her sister had been called pretty girl by opposing counsel - every time Jesus that I've have replied 'oh thank you pretty boy' (even if old and ugly) and if pulled up on it would say that I was merely trying to be polite as it was obviously his preferred form of address but if you wanted me to be truthful the you would be happy to go with ugly old bloke if they thought that was better :o

I'm a rabid ms user myself (not least as I think zipzap dhsurname sounds horrid and just doesn't go) and what has amazed me is how little official systems support the fact that although you are ms you a) might not want to be forced to be miss or mrs instead and that b) natwest I'm looking at you there are still people that insist on sending me cheques addressed to mrs zipzap dhname and I can't register my wedding certificate once on the system as I did in Lloyds but have to take a wedding certificate in every bloody time it happens

I'm not in UK and here law firms address each other as Dear Colleagues. Would that sound funny in British English?

I think it would HazleNutt. I see the parallel with things like 'my Learned Friend', but opposing counsel would definitely not see themselves as colleagues!

I don't think Dear Firmname would work catch on either. You don't write to Dear Marks and Spencer. We used to get the odd letter from small foreign firms addressed to 'Dear Clifford Chance' (not actually my firm BTW, just a big one for the purposes of illustration) and used to wonder if they actually thought that the firm had one partner named Clifford!

I think if law firms are going to change, I think the most likely candidates would be to be Dear Sirs/Madams or Dear Partners. Go on someone, have a go!

Nothing wrong with it in my eyes. I wouldn't think twice about it. It's correct in an old fashioned way, which is fine by me.

Not sure where in Scotland these primary schools are where all female staff are addressed as 'Miss' regardless of marital status?! I went to one and that was definitely not the case and I have never heard of it ever happening since.

Currently a secondary school teacher in Scotland and a 'Ms'. Not the only one though still in the minority.

Have to ask the question about teachers in other areas being addressed as 'Sir' and 'Miss' - this is not something that happens in my area, teachers are always addressed by their full names e.g. 'Ms Beveridge' but I know it happens elsewhere. Any teachers out there who have objected?

Good job it doesn't happen where I teach as I would be drilling the kids that the correct form of address in that case would be 'Ma'am' (in the style of the police training colleges!) as 'Miss' is clearly not a title equivalent in status to 'Sir' by any stretch of the imagination.

We get called Sir and Miss at our school when it's 'yes, sir, yes, miss'. You're right, beveridge, they're clearly not equivalents.

None of my male colleagues have knighthoods and most of my female colleagues are married. I have been called far worse in my time as a teacher than Miss. I don't like it but I don't really like Ma'am either - sounds so old fashioned to me.

I insist on Ms with my surname, though, and it's slowly getting through.