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.

breatheslowly
I have one account in the names of Miss Talk and Mr Peace
and another in the name of Mrs Peace
I won't let DH get one in my name cos I'm a meanie

Anne chose to have her children NOT have royal titles after seeing the stress and damage caused to the Lindley children
She is the one royal I have respect for.

Andrew is the king of the freeloaders as are his (ex) wife and daughters

Compos. No princess Anne is lovely. She is a remarkable woman. I know her through the disabled riding schools. She is a leader. A man would be admired for her methods and skill.

Not when I met her she wasn't. A for some god unknown reason starstruck colleague became tongue tied in her presence and she was incredibly rude and dismissive to him.

If she'd been a man, the behaviour would have been described as what it was, rude and arrogant.

YouSirName - if you think it's so irrelevant, why are you bothering with this thread?

JapaneseMargaret - That's a good point.

The Royals are the poster kids for outdated traditions so hardly surprising she is referred to in this way.

All the people trilling 'it's correct' are baffling me somewhat, just because it's traditional and it's written down in Debrett's doesn't mean it's 'correct'. It's outdated nonsense that some people like, some people are indifferent to and some people loathe.

And it's only a social 'rule', it's not even a legal 'rule'. Plenty of outdated legalities have been deemed obsolete (women's lack of suffrage, women's chattels becoming men's on marriage, etc, etc), and amended.

If we can change the actual law to bring it up to date, I'm pretty certain that social rules can be hauled into the 21st century, too.

Maybe it should have read Mrs and Mr Zara Tindell are pleased to announce.

But that would be making the wife more important than the husband so we can't have that because that might upset the men.

Or Mrs and Mr Zara Phillips.

Keep her surname. Put her first name on the announcement. And put Mrs. first.

That would be radical.

It must be hard if you have "modern" views in the Royal Family. Such as not wanting to get married, to want to work and be a mum, to keep your surname, to be called Ms etc.

I would have preferred Mr Mike Tindall and Mrs Zara Tindall.

Well presumably seeing as she is a grown woman with a mind of her own she has chosen to be addressed in that way and doesn't see an issue with it?
I took my DH's name on marriage, we're not even particularly traditional but I chose to do that, I was buggered if I was going double barrelled, our surnames are way too long! I'm not my husbands property, I'm just me with a different surname.
I would imagine she gives even less of a fuck than I do about what other people think of it...

I'm intrigued to know what would happen if an heir to the throne were gay...

Yes, this is an outdated social rule, and it's hardly surprising people grind their teeth, hearing it. This "inclusion" of the woman into the man's name - basically wiping out her identity - is in complete contradiction to all the progress women have made in the last century, legally and socially. It harks back to a time when women actually had no legal identity after marriage - not only did their property automatically become her husband's but he had sole rights and custody over their children.

This outmoded form of address is a symbol of that time, and has no place in the modern world.

Same thing that's always happened, produce a partner and an heir and then get on with your life as discreetly a possible..
(Unlike Edward II)

But your name isn't yours either is it? It shows you as a product of your father? Owned by him? No bloody different.

Honestly this thread just gets dafter....

Compos, bet he still loves telling the story of the day he met her. ;) just met her at diff times I guess. I bet she don't take fools well though. That kinda woman. Dying breed those ones. I like old ladies like that. Young ones don't have same oomph . Dunno why. A lady like that taught me to ride. I love her. She's dead now, but wow, she was marvellous. All want to be dancing in videos now....

BettcallSaul but the option is there for a woman to keep her own (or as Minnie pointed out her fathers) name, how do you propose to ensure all women keep their own name on marriage? Force them? Make it illegal? Genuinely, I don't see how it can be stopped immediately, it'll have to be a gradual change, which is what's already happening.

I knew someone would come out with that crap!

Why is a woman's name deemed to be her father's, but a man's name is his own?

GRRRRRRRRR

Sorry, Bettercallsaul1 am typing on a touchpad, very badly

Japanese, it was the question of inc girls to be able to inherit and being gay that caused prince Charles to spend an awful long time with others going over what would happen.

I know it should have happened. Anyway but I do like him for investigating and changing. He could have ignored again. He didn't. Remember an article on it at the time.

I've had this surname since the day I was born, I own it thank you very much, just as my brothers own theirs.

Our tradition is that children - boys and girls - have taken their father's name and this is now considered unfair and unequal by many. Some couples are now taking matters into their own hands and trying to find a solution to that.

However, although a woman undeniably has her father's surname when she marries, that has been her name since birth -the one she has used to identity herself. The fact that she loses both her Christian name as well as her surname ie becomes Mrs Mike Tindall instead of Mrs Zara Tindall means that her name has completely disappeared! This practice is a remnant of a time when the woman - as a separate legal entity - did actually disappear. (ie losing all her own property to her husband and having no rights over their children. Until recently, she also lost control over her body, as marital rape was not a crime until late last century)

This way of naming a couple may seem unimportant or trivial to some, but it is actually an anachronistic symbol of a time none of us would want to go back to and that's why it should be questioned and removed from the "etiquette" books.

Surely the "risk" of the heir to the throne being gay exists irrespective of women being able to inherit the throne.

Bettercallsaul1 - well said.

Exactly BettercallSaul

She has lost her Christian name as well. I honestly do not understand why it can possibly seen as "fair and equal" for a married woman to lose both her surname and her first name when being talked about.

And no petition is needed. It's raising awareness and provoking debate rather than just accepting the status quo. If people did not raise awareness of how women are seen and treated, would we have seen societal changes?

When the Monarch comes out as gay and enters into a long term co-habiting relationship (but not married) with his / her partner and no one gives a shit - that will be a time when the Monarchy has entered the 21st century.

I am not a big fan, but my partner was told off by her parents for addressing their cards etc. 'Jack and Jill Hill' instead of 'Mr and Mrs Jack Hill'. Banged on about how proud they were to be married etc.