To hate addressing a letter to a women using husband's initials

[justarandomer]

On an address with the name as say;

Mrs M E Smith
When women is called Patricia Smith
But husband is Martin Edward Smith.

Why not Mrs P Smith

There must be a fancy term for this.

My MIL does it. It sends me up the F wall. I am a person in my own right than you very much.

On a birthday card or something personal she will still write it as
Mrs M E Smith.

I think she does it because she sees son as coming from above me, and so I'm lucky to be part of her dynastey.

It might be correct etiquette and might be how things were always done but are we, as a society, not able to look back at things done in the past and thing they are wrong and horribly sexist and change them going forward?

"That's how I address letters and I'm 30... It is the correct way to address a married woman."

The "correct" way to address anyone is by their actual name. It is not ever correct to address anyone by a name they don't have.

"I assume that if people didn't want to be known as their husband's name then they'd keep their own name on marriage."

I did keep my own name. My own first name. I took his surname and kept my first name, so why assume that I no longer want to be known by my first name just because I took his surname?

I use this form of address. I assume any woman who has given up her surname is aware of what it entails.

I took my husband's name because everyone misspelled mine and I wanted us all to have the same surname. It doesn't have to 'entail' anything much. My name is (e.g.) Lulu Juliette Eolian, NOT John Patrick Eolian. I expect people to address me as such. The (very old and outdated) 'rule book' may say otherwise, but things have changed somewhat since it was written.

Those of you who are saying it's 'correct' - correct according to whose authority?

"correct" according to the formal rules of English etiquette. As I said. Bullshit. But no more bullshit than taking a man's name and automatically giving children a man's name.

There is no such thing as correct. Correct is just a made up thing to enable certain groups of people to make judgements about certain other groups of people. And a term of address cannot possible be correct if it makes the addressee upset or angry!

I can't bear it. I am very relieved to have the same first initial as DH which saves me a lot of inward fuming I think!

My mother who died last year in her late 90s would do this, and couldn't see anything wrong with it. A generational thing, I think, since it would never occur to me to do it, and I would object to anyone addressing me as Mrs Dh.

Since times and attitudes have changed so much, I can't see anyone in any official capacity insisting that it's still 'correct'.
If it's anyone I know, I just put their name, with no Mr or Ms or anything.

Fair enough to regard any tradition as bullshit, Bertrand , but women who take their husband's surname have chosen to do so (whatever their reason might be). I don't think that many in this day and age would think this meant that they had also chosen to be addressed using their husband's first initials, as it is a pretty old-fashioned practice, only adhered to by sticklers for such things. Suggesting that just because a woman has chosen to retain one tradition, she must therefore suck up any others which people decide to foist upon her isn't necessarily very helpful.

I do this to wind my friend up but no I think you are totally reasonable to be pissed about it! It would drive me mad too!

Lets hope none of you get an invite to a party at Buckingham Palace then as all invitations are addressed this way.

Why do you not just ask her to stop and give her your very valid reasons?

"invite" ?

I think you must mean "invitation"........

I think this is horrible. 'Mrs John Smith' makes it sound as if she doesn't have an identity of her own, beyond being the wife of John Smith.

It's telling that a man being called 'Mr Jane Smith' would be laughably absurd, like 'Prince Anne' mentioned upthread, but a woman having her identity subsumed is somehow okay. It's like - and I'm misquoting from somewhere - when a man and woman are married they become one person. And that person is the man.

It was understandable, given the historical and legal context, in the 19th century. 95-year-old relatives aside, I can't see how anyone in the 21st century can think this is acceptable.

Bottom line, it's really,really rude to call someone something they don't like. If someone does not want to addressed as Mrs his name surname why would you do it??
It's rude! Your 'etiquette' matters more than someone else's feelings about their own name outrageous.

I'm not even married and I get Mrs hisinitial his surname. I'm not even married to the bloke! What is that about?

My Dad recently had a massive fallout with the AA as they persisted in addressing letters to my Mum to Mrs Dad Stick. He actually called them to tell them to stop it as it was offensive (and, incidentally, he gave far more of a shit than Mum). They went into full "computer says no" mode and he stropped off to join the RAC!!!! I love him!!

I hate this. I'm a doctor and didn't change my name when I got married yet all letters come to us address me by DH's surname.

The worst is my aunt (my own flesh and blood) who sends us a Xmas card every year to 'Dr & Mrs DHSurname. DH is a doctor too, why does he get to keep his Dr on marriage but I don't???

I love it when people bring up Buckingham Palace and similar in these threads, as though that's in some way determinative. Hint- there might just be a correlation between people who object to one sort of outdated bollocks and people who object to another sort.

Although I do wonder, actually, should Her Maj wish to communicate with me in writing, how would she actually know my husband's surname, let alone his first name? Would she call him Mr Hyacinth Bucket? I hope so. I might not even wipe my arse on the letter then.

Those of you who are defending this archaic, sexist form of address as 'correct etiquette' might like to consider whether it is good manners to persist in doing this, if they know that the recipient doesn't like it.

My DM once sent us a letter to Dr and Mrs Dragon after I'd got my PhD too... only the once!

Suggesting that just because a woman has chosen to retain one tradition, she must therefore suck up any others which people decide to foist upon her isn't necessarily very helpful.

You see, I wouldn't say anyone should suck it up. If you dislike a form of address and ask others not to use it, I fully agree that - at that point - it is rude for people to continue to do so. But I agree with Bertrand it is the formal etiquette which comes with taking your husband's name, so I really don't think you can say it is rude the first time/before you've explicitly asked not to be called that. It's the same thing as being given a title (Mr/Mrs/Ms etc) by someone you haven't met before. If you don't like being called "Mrs Smith", you are perfectly at liberty to say " Please call me Jane". But it's a little unfair to call them rude when they are following protocol and they haven't had a chance to assess or be told your preference.

Jackie0 I am also in my 40s (48 today, in fact ) and I don't use these forms of address, as I prefer to use my manners and address people by the name they choose to use.

I recall a thread a few years ago where the OP had a real problem with her PIL redusing to accept she had not changed her name on marriage, to the extent that when she was anywhere with them and being asked her name, the FIL in particular would shout over her saying her name and loudly insisting she was "Mrs DHsurname". They tried to say that by marrying their son, taking his surname was non-negotiable to them.

I bet people would agree this is rude. So is insisting on addressing an envelope in a name that someone doesn't use. It's all part of the same thing.

Those of you who are defending this archaic, sexist form of address as 'correct etiquette' might like to consider whether it is good manners to persist in doing this, if they know that the recipient doesn't like it.

Of course not. It's polite to refer to someone as they wish.

I'm not defending it. I was explaining it. And bring surprised that people who are happy to change their names and give their children their husband's name are getting so up in arms about it.

Happy birthday Raspberry.
I wouldn't dream that of using it if I thought I was causing offence.
Before this thread I would have never realised people felt this strongly .
I suppose it's the default mode of address until I'm told otherwise in the same way I might call a newly wed Mrs , before being told she is actually Ms.
I see I'm in the minority.
Just out of interest did you learn this in school too?
I'm getting the impression people my age and older weren't taught this .
I'm wondering if it's a geographical difference .

Well, bertrand, there can be pragmatic or emotional reasons to have one name for the family (whether its his, hers, double barelled or a newly minted one) but I damned if I can think of a single reason why referring to a woman using her husband's first name makes any sense whatever. Not one which should apply in the 21st century, anyway.

And they do it anyway. Even if you are NOT MARRIED.

It's not about names it's about power and control. You belong to your man even if you haven't married him.