To think this is an antiquated form of address?

[nomoreheroes]

Long time lurker, first time poster. I received a letter today addressed to "Mr and Mrs D nomoreheroes". D being my husband's initial. While it did concern both of us, it was in response to an application I had made; so why not Mrs nomoreheroes and Mr nomoreheroes (in that order ) or just Mrs? I realise I probably can't call myself a card carrying feminist as I go by Mrs and have taken my husband's surname but I do believe in equality and neither my husband or I are "the boss" in this relationship. He'd have expected the letter to be addressed to me alone or both of us equally.
I'm not that bothered - well maybe a little miffed to be fair - but it just looks weird in 2016. AIBU?

Thanks for the answer on that *Mrsw288.
Anyway, don't worry about doing what you prefer for yourself.

On a slightly different point, I know a married couple, younger than I am, where each has kept their own birth surname but the children have the wife's surname.

I think that can be more common in Germany.

There is a lingering worry i have though about children not matching both parents' surname in their passport in case of some catastrophe where they might get lost or be refugees.

Are you really whining about hostility and being belittled when you call other women extremists for not wanting to be called names that aren't theirs mrsw? You've got some front, I'll give you that.

But anyway, nobody is either belittling you or saying you expect all your correspondence to be addressed in that way mrsw28. Your insistence that either of these things are true is in itself hostile, and an attempt to shut down a discussion that isn't going the way you like. You talked of tradition and impracticality, both of which are inconsistent arguments for the point you wish to make, and are getting upset when this is pointed out to you.

You belittle yourself when you choose to be addressed by someone else's initial/name.

Why mention last names? That's not what this thread is about.

Thank you for those interesting articles HarlotBronte

Margaret Sandra was certainly a very brave pioneer for having no surname at all.
I had not read about her before. It is interesting to see what practical difficulties she faced, and I wonder what she would have donhad she had children.

It seems in Europe some sort of surname has often been used at least for many hundreds of years even if just as identifiers like the job,
'Smith', 'Wainwright' or son of Wilson, or place 'London'. Its odd to think some Roman children did not get first names just numbers!

I'll read the wiki one more carefully later and concentrate properly. I would never have thought looking up the subject before

It is all a difficult question. It is nice not to feel owned, but on the other hand its nice to belong.

lulu I feel that you are consistently missing the point some posters are trying to make. You keep saying it's 'incorrect', but by what standard? Addressing a married couple by the husbands initial is the correct, standard, formal written form. I wouldn't argue that it isn't archaic and sexist, or against change, but you keep saying it's wrong and rude. I'm a feminist, I haven't taken my husband's name, but if one of his distant relatives invited us to a wedding or something and addressed it to Mr & Mrs John Smith I wouldn't think they were being rude if they were unaware of my particular choices; they would just be doing what they thought was the correct thing in formal circumstances. To call me Mrs Jane Smith by that standard would suggest I was divorced. It should and will change now that society is less formal. It is archaic and stems from when wives were mere chattels, but Mrs means wife of, so on that basis it's not 'incorrect'.

You belittle yourself when you choose to be addressed by someone else's initial/name.

Why mention last names? That's not what this thread is about

Lulu
Questioning a wife being called by the husband's last name
follows logically from questioning her being called by his first name.

In fact if this thread is about taking his first name being an outrage, in my opinion it has to also be about last names. The man's last name is even more of an outrage. The last name is used on forms and so on.

In any case, in both cases a woman might feel she is giving up a part of herself.

It could come to seem as though having to have anyone else's name at all makes a person feel too owned.

If you read the Guardian article HarlotBronte just sent, there is an extremely interesting woman writing about how any sort of surname makes a person seem to belong to someone other than herself.

She lived her life without her husband's first name or his a surname, then went a step further and did not keep her maiden name either, but lived without any surname at all. Her reasons for this and her experiences in relation to this choice are what the article is about,

Mrs28 I disagree that you have belittled herself by choosing your husband's names. A name can't do that really, as long as you properly feel you are choosing your life within your marriage.

CharlieSierra I think you explained the predicament of the old established forms clashing with new ideas very well.

Charlie you can't really question a poster saying it's incorrect because 'by what standard' but then go on to say it's correct and offer no evidence whatsoever. You're trying to have it both ways there. The fact that some people still use this form isn't evidence that it's correct, it's just evidence that some people think it is.

I'm not having it both ways at all Harlot, it's 'correct' by the same standards we use when we finish a letter sincerely or faithfully according to whether we used the person's name at the beginning. Some people would think you uneducated if you didn't use the established form.

Thank you Kind

You're absolutely having it both ways charlie, because you're taking someone to task for not offering evidence while not offering any yourself. Because you're not. The fact that it used to be considered correct to address all married women in this way and some people still think it is, doesn't amount to evidence. There are clearly some people who'd think you were uneducated if you didn't use this form, equally clearly there are people who'd think you are uneducated in modern ways, backward and rude if you did. There are evidently multiple standards here, so if you want to tell someone theirs is incorrect you need to do more than point out the existence of another.

Totally the kind of thing an old person would put. The only time I get anything addressed like that it's from elderly relatives so I don't get offended. Mr and Mrs Surname is fine though, as long as that is actually your name.

When I was a kid it was drummed into me that you address envelopes with Mr and Mrs Husband's initial Surname but I never do it now. I might put Mr and Mrs Surname if that is their actual names, but often I just write first name surname or even first name and first name if they are not married or have different surnames. Realistically, unless they live in a shared house you don't really need to put a name on the envelope at all, do you? It's not like they're going to get a letter and refuse to open it because it might be for someone else if it's got their address on it.

Most of my friends have kids now so on Christmas cards it's mostly The Surname Family anyway.

Totally the kind of thing an old person would put

I'm over sixty and I've hated this form since I first laid eyes on it when I must have been about about eight. One of the many things I love about livingin Mexico is that women keep their names

OP here. I'm still watching with interest. I wanted to comment again just to agree with lulu. You don't have to be feminist or non feminist to prefer being called by your own first name. I took my husband's name as I liked the.idea of our family unit all having the same name. The reason I say I don't identify myself particularly as a feminist is because I just think we are (or should be) equal in status and opportunity. I am not my husband's possession, I'm his partner and his equal. I just like that our family all have the same name and I guess followed tradition (sheep-like though it may be) and took his. But I didn't take his first name or initial!

I find this fascinating. And terribly sad. Women just giving themselves to men.

I'm 45 and it has never occurred to me to change my name. It's me.

Ugh, I hate this. I get this from my inlaws! I haven't even taken my husband's name - he's taken mine. They don't know this but they have never asked.

Mixed feelings; but when writing cards I always write the mans name first- similar to "mr" the. "Mrs" - same vein ? Tradition? Conditioning ? Bit like voting labour..... Because your parents did?!

I sent a load of post off yesterday. Didn't use any titles - they've just gone to J Smith, N Brown, L Jones & S Owen, F & P White and so on. (Except that I used their real names and initials - though I have posted things to people using their board names before!)

Sooo annoying.
I get Mrs husbandsfirstname husbands
surname from ILs even though I'm Ms myfrickinsurname.
I refuse to open them as its not addressed to me.
They even gave out to us as our wedding invitations were not addressed to them in that manner

LOL - I always write Mrs John Smith when addressing others or referring to myself. I'm happy with just Jane Smith as a form of address but I cannot bring myself to write Mrs Jane Smith when she so clearly isn't. Archaic it might be but Mrs is simply short for 'Mistress of' so it clearly makes no sense to be Mrs Jane Smith and it irritates me. The only exception is if the woman is a widow. If it bothers you, use Ms or leave out the title all together.

Pontyman the whole point of the fact that it's archaic means that it's old fashioned, no longer usual, deemed to be out of date. Therefore we no longer do it?

I mean dial up is archaic. I assume you've ditched it for broadband.

And the day I use Debretts that purveyor of class stereotypes and stratification is the day you can shoot me

At work today a lady made an enquiry to make an appointment for her and her Dh.

I wrote Mrs X and Mr X

That's they way I operate at work.

Totally the kind of thing an old person would put

Nope, I'm 36 and I always address letters to married couples this way. I was taught to do so for correct rules of grammar and I've never changed it.

"This is how I address my correspondence to married couples having the same last name"

And are you happy knowing you are offending people, apple?

Boils my piss. My ILs do it all the time. I just don't open the mail as its not addressed to me