to think the statement should be "Mr and Mrs Tindall" and not "Mr and Mrs Mike Tindall"?

[OrlandoWoolf]

"Using Phillips' married name, a Palace spokesperson said in a statement at the time: "Mr and Mrs Mike Tindall are very pleased to announce that Zara Tindall is expecting a baby in the new year."

Talk about losing your identity.

Her name is not Mike.

Exactly.

Well obviously she changed her social name on marriage, or the Palace wouldn't have used it. Keeping her maiden name professionally is quite posh too perfectly respectable.

I'd forgotten and presumably she's due very soon. I feel a trip to Baby Names is coming up...

So we shouldn't talk about anything that is not to do with us?

I am sure that Zara doesn't care and is happy with lovely little DD. why let it worry you?

Thing is, this is one of those minor things that seems to be completely unimportant and doesn't really matter as such, but the reason it matters is because its one of thousands of small things that are all indicative of a much bigger ingrained problem in terms of how people subconsciously view women.

I hadn't heard she had had it. Bwah.

And it turns out she is listed as Mrs Michael Tindall in the order of succession so I agree with pps who said 'Mrs Mike' is wrong

I think she said she was keeping Phillips. And I suppose they put Mr and Mrs Mike Tindall rather than Mr and Mrs Tindall to differentuate which Mr and Mrs Tindall they are talking about...

Doesn't bother me in the slightest when I receive letters addressed to us like that.

Correct according to etiquette. Doesn't make me any less of a person/individual. How insecure I'd need to be to think so.

It's rubbish and I hate it. I am with Flowery - it is only considered 'correct' because a bunch of men generations ago decided it was correct. It's not correct in the sense of an unchangeable rule.

That said, the royal family is full of ridiculously outdated customs and formalities (indeed, some might say that the family itself is one ), so it is hardly a surprise that they keep this one up. Though surely it is Mr and Mrs Michael Tindall?

I don't use Mrs Husband'sname Surname in rl or like it used about me. I only write it on letters to relatives who I know will be offended by any other form of address.

Well, we do live in the seventeenth century

oh wait

"Doesn't make me any less of a person/individual. How insecure I'd need to be to think so"

I really don't think any who object to this type of outdated form of address are doing so because they actually think it makes them less of a person!

If Mr and Mrs Mike Tindall preferred to be addressed in some other way, they're perfectly capable of saying so themselves.

I suppose if there were 4 brothers and you sealed up the 4 Christmas cards to be addressed to them and their spouses, you'd need to differentiate between the 4 brothers and their wives...

I find it odd people get so worked up about this but are fine to change their surname and go by Mrs. This is all part of it.
It should be Ms Zara Phillips and Mr Mike Tindall. That would be keeping ones identity!

In that event you could write the cards to Mr A and Mrs B Smith to distinguish from Mr C and Mrs D Smith. Or Albert and Betty Smith to distinguish from Colin and Denise Smith.

I really don't think there was much danger of anyone thinking it was Mike's brother and his wife the announcement was referring to...!

It's traditional but also horrible. Language is a living thing. It evolves. A married woman is no longer her husband's property. The mode of address needs to evolve to reflect that.

I agree with you Thants and I am guilty of that. I got married aged 22 in 1998 and it was just assumed by all and sundry that I'd change my name and become Mrs DHssurname. I wasn't mature enough or confident enough to actually consider anything else.

If I were getting married now, I don't think I would change my name, and because I was 22 I didn't have a career yet that I needed to keep a professional name for or anything.

My assistant at work was appalled when I changed my name.

She went puce when I told her I was chucking up when I had children

Although it's part of the same thing, I do think it's slightly different changing surnames. I made a decision to take DHs surname (even though I may not make the same decision now if the situation arose), but at no point did I decide to also take his first name, so I don't like it when people decide to address me using it.

See I married aged 21 and one of the reasons (other, obviously that I loved the bones of him) was to take "his" or rather dds, surname.

When dd1 was born and registered I only allowed her to take Dh's name on the understanding that I would have the same surname by the time she started pre-school.

And I did.

Mr and Mrs Michael Tindall is the official title. If I were her, I would be offended if people continued to refer to me as miss Philips. But then I am quite old fashioned.

I don't think you a're right beck and call. It could be both though.

Salvation, you've really confused me with the triple negative...admittedly that's not difficult to do...

Can't believe that people are worried than an anachronism is using an anachronic form of address.