to not want to be defined by my marital status or surname?

[tealight]

To be not at all surprised that women still strive to achieve equality when some/many/most (???)women in marriage take on men?s surnames and (in marriage or not) agree to their children taking the man?s surname? That is the way it used to be when women and children were literally, in the eyes of the law, men?s property. That is the basis o the tradition for fathers to give their daughters away. And why should my marital status be used to define me every time I fill out my personal details? Miss, Mrs, Ms? Men just have Mr. Yet many of us still subscribe to this. Why why why?????

"pogeons - a very plump variety of pigeons native to Kent"

'pisces - several posters have referred to feminsists or 'the feminists' making it clear they are not.

Well I am a feminist. It doesn't mean that I have to take the (IMO) foolish name of Ms. Maybe I have missed the subtle reason, but it seems to me to have amalgamated MRS and MISS- both of which come from the masculine of Mister-I would have thought that if people didn't want either they could have at least come up with a more imaginative alternative.
I always vote-because of what women went through to get it-and yes I would have been a sufferagette-but for the things that matter-I resent being told that taking my DHs name makes me subservient and it makes me his property-I said earlier that even my great grandmother would have laughed at that idea!
The only reason that I am on this thread is because I deeply resent the idea that I took my DHs name through tradition, without thought. If you had read the whole thread,sausagerolemodel, which you say you haven't-several pages back you would have seen my list of reasons for changing my name.
They are right for me I don't expect them to be right for everyone. I don't even think you can predict what you DD thinks-we are all different.
There isn't a right answer for everyone-there is only a right answer for you.

I don't know why women can't just respect other women's rights to doing things there own way without the need to tell them what they should think!
I have my DHs name-I am MRS -I am a feminist.
(If being a feminist means following every feminist belief blindly, then I am not a feminist-I hate any system where the strongest and most vocal get their own way)

I would agree with you on that one seeker-I am sure it comes from the feeling that an unmarried woman is inferior! If I was unmarried I would be proud to be Miss-I wouldn't feel the need to hide behind Ms. I would say that many of the most successful women have been Miss-and proud of it. I can't see why marital status is of any interest, or something that needs to be kept a secret.

Sorry their-not there.

I think you're probably correct seeker, not that many would admit it. But picesmoon, I don't think I'm "hiding behind Ms"-I've been one since I was 18! It's just because, in my opinion, my marital status is not any business of the kind of people who ask whether I'm a Miss or a Mrs. It's not a case of being ashamed I'm not married, because that is my choice. It's just that men are not asked "master or mr". Why, therefore, are women? I'm afraid that my answer always comes back to sexism.

You can't ring up to ask for a mail order catalogue without being asked "Is that Mrs or Miss?" I always try to say "Neither - just Kate" and sometimes it works. Usually I have to say "OK, Ms then!"

seeker - but why chose 'Ms' rather than say 'Mrs' or 'Miss'? You could choose any title you liked such as 'Dr' or 'Professor' or 'Revd' and no one would be any the wiser. You could even give yourself a peerage and call yourself 'Lady' or 'Baroness' if you wanted as my MIL accidentlly did the other day at John Lewis and she got a package delivered to 'Lady Whatsername'.

Why do you choose 'Ms'? Surely by choosing that title you are 'making a statememt' about yourself at least as to your sex. Would you consider choosing 'Mr' if you want to be strictly neutral about it - as that would break all conventions and traditions?

It does not bother me that you do say Ms but its no better or worse than saying Mrs or Miss or any of the other titles I suggested.

These are just my random Sunday morning thoughts - not having a go at what you said.

I never use Master-I think it very outdated. If I am addressing envelpes to DCs I just put their names-Miss for a 3 yr old seems equally silly. When they get to teens I sometimes put Mr or Miss in front-sometimes I don't, it really depends on the person. If it is an old lady I would put Miss and the initial because I think it better to err on the side of formal for that generation.
If I phone up anywhere and am asked for name I always give my full name, I don't say Mrs first. The mail order one wouldn't bother me-I am Mrs so I just say so-if they put Ms I have a quick irritation but not enough to complain. I agree with ABatDead-if you don't like the question then why stick with Ms-you might as well be Lady-it hardly matters on a catalogue!

'I'm afraid that my answer always comes back to sexism. '

Exactly-there is no escaping it. You have your father's surname (in the majority of cases).

Perhaps it should just come down to choice. I wouldn't have wanted my mother's surname-it is one of the top 10 English surnames but my father's surname is very uncommon and I am proud of my ancestors on that side. I know my DSs wouldn't want my father's surname-they think it funny for exactly the reason that I got teased at school (I didn't care about being teased-I liked it)-and given a choice they would choose their father's name-which is so nice their friends call them by their surname.
I can't follow the argument that says you can't have DHs name because you are not his property, but you can have your father's name,signifying his propery, because you have had it since you were too young to have a say and it is yours.

It is only a name-it doesn't define you-neither does your marital status.
Do whatever you like-but don't make judgements about women who make a different choice.

ABatDad - because I don't see why my marital status is remotely relevant to my desire for a Lakeland catalogue! I could call myself anything I liked - Rev, Lady, Grafin - but I don't want to. I just want to either be called by my name, or failing that, an honorific that denotes nothing but gender, as a man can. I don't see why that is remotely a problem!

But Ms actually means an adult female - if I said I was a Dr or Mr or Rev etc, I'd be lying about myself. I don't want to lie, I just don't want to give out unnecessary info about my marital status to people for whom it should be no concern. So, Ms till I die then I guess!

It went 9 hours without further comment-I thought everyone was finally bored to death with it!!
One last thought-we have had threads where elderly people want to be treated with respect in hospital or nursing homes e.g they don't want to be 'love' or 'Peggy'. To my mind this means Mrs Smith or Miss Smith-I very much doubt whether they mean Ms Smith. Are we to force them to have Ms Smith because definining their marital status is demeaning or do we politely let them have Miss or Mrs? (When I am elderly I am quite happy to have 'love' or my name but Ms will get me to screaming point!)

What I can't understand is that Ms seems loved on here but is ridiculed and hated in RL. I supply teach and so I go into lots of schools and because it is the primary age group they are mainly female and all known formally. Out of all the teachers, TAs, dinner ladies etc I know only one Ms. I have 3 DCs who have been through secondary school and in that time and in all their combined time I have know only one Ms. I know quite a few that have a different surname to their DH so I don't think that it is a question of being 'liberated'. Many letters to parents go to e.g.Mr Smith and Miss Jones -I very rarely see Ms on the envelope.
A couple of years ago I was booking secretary for a woman's event(involving hundreds from all over the UK)-I didn't book in a single Ms.
If Ms had taken off, the majority of the female population would be using it and there would only be the elderly and a few diehards left. That is not the case-Ms in the definite minority-at least among my friends, work colleagues and aquaintances.

Piscesmoon knows only one Ms! Where does she live? Do you think people have heard her say how awful she thinks Ms is and are a bit scared to admit to it.

And what was the women's event she was booking at which nobody called themselves Ms - Surrendered Wives' Bake-0ff?

Hilarious as always, ermintrude. No need to actually make a point or, god forbid, an argument when you can instead just belittle someone else.

Piscesmoon's personal experience is as relevant as yours.

My own gut feeling is that Ms is not used by a large majority of women (mainly because it still seems to take a certain amount of flak in RL as a lot of posters on here have commented on) but tbh I wouldn't have a clue how many Miss/Mrs/Msess I know .... No one ever has to submit a form or questionnaire to me and there are very few occasions where I have cause to use titles. (Not that I think this matters in the slightest to the issue anyhow.)

...or, stillstanding, no need to make a point which I and others have made over and over, when I can make a lighthearted and quite funny comment on what I find a truly remarkable position, viz. only knowing one 'Ms'. Whether or not that's true, I'm not sure why anyone's experience is relevant. Ms is clearly not as popular as many of us think it should be, so it's hardly a numbers game.

But since you seem to be keen, I'll make the one, inarguable point again:

Men change neither their names nor their titles on marriage. Women traditionally do. This is inequality.

Inequality - not equal, one being treated differently from another for no reason other than gender - geddit?

To be treated equally the broad choices are:

Men and women remain Mr or Ms Theirownnames forever (yes yes, that means her father's name in the first generation but let's not split hairs here). Many of us do this already but the question of what to name children is a potential problem here.

Men and women have a change of title and name on marriage (so we have to bring back Master for those proud bachelors, as well as give them a new or double-barrelled surname)

Ms and Mr become Ms and Mr Jointname - which may be new, or double-barrelled (and if the latter, the female and male lines can use the appropriate part of the double barrel on marriage, so both easily traceable for genealogists.

It will happen one day. Meanwhile there's nothing wrong with being in the avant-garde.

Gosh. Putting aside my usual irritation with your manner, Ermintrude13,I actually agree with most of that,

It does demand a very strict view of "equal" though, i.e. that men and women have to be treated exactly the same otherwise they are not equal. Obviously that is technically true but I am not sure that name-changing is an issue that demands equality in the strict sense in the way that, say, compensation for work does. To me this is an area where you can focus on equality in the broader sense, i.e. do the DH and the DW have the same rights/value/respect as opposed to do they make the exact same choices. There will always be differences between different people (let alone between men and women) and just because they make different choices doesn't mean they are any less equal (again in the broader sense) iyswim.

I labour this point because there is another option which a couple could follow, namely that Ms and Mr become Ms and Mr Jointname - where the joint name is either the DH's name or the DW's name. Some people might prefer this option because they don't fancy a new or double-barrelled name (too [contrived][long][poncey][insert personal reason here]) and therefore prefer to name-change to their partner's name.

Obviously if they did this they are not being treated equally (in the strict sense) because one partner has name-changed and the other hasn't but I don't think this is particularly signficant in the grand scheme of things. Saying both partners had to change to a new name in order to be equal would (imo) be more of a gesture than a contribution to substantive issues of equality.

Perhaps I can illustrate my point better by looking at the example that you gave in your third scenario (ie Ms and Mr Jointname) where you mentioned that the female and the male lines could take the appropriate part of the double-barrel. I think you mean by that that DDs get DW's name and DSs get DH's name? That would presumably meet your definition of inequality too, ie "one being treated differently from another for no reason other than gender" but I don't think that perpetuates inequality in the broad sense anymore than I think that a DW or DH name-changing to their partner's name perpetuates inequality.

Stillstanding, it's big of you to put aside your irritation at my manner . Perhaps, as with emails, levity doesn't translate too well in this medium.

True, pretending that the genders are not at all different verges on a 1984 (the book, not some retro hell) scenario none of us would want. But to me a naming system is one of the areas in which there is no excuse or reason for difference to remain.

The main problem I can see in your scenario is whose name to choose. In some cases that might be a calm and easy decision, but if it were to move away from just being the DH's name by default, it's inevitable that family pressures, imagined insults and the comparative dominance/egotism/family loyalty and identity of each spouse would go into the mix. Oddly, having no choice (as women used to have no choice), or a limited choice, would be fairer.

My suggestion about male/female lines being followed is a way of avoiding quadruple-barrels in the future, and of ensuring that for genealogists nobody is 'lost', as women who marry and name-change have been in the past and still can be unless the researcher knows their married name. Male and female children would share the same double-barrel as their parents before marriage, and could keep their father's (for girls) and mothers (for boys)original surname in their names on marriage, just not as the part that makes their new married name. In this case I feel it's a question of equal-but-different rather than unequal.

We're a long way from any of this being put into place, but the debate on how to progress interests me greatly.

i love this thread

i would like to add my two-penn'orth after seeing the new arguments abound....

i became Ms when i was 18 because i just fancied it.
i think i was probably being obstinate (and a teenager, y'know)
after a little while, the title became a legitimate part of my name.
I couldn't change back to Miss and I don't want to be Mrs. (when the time comes )

I went through a time when I was annoyed that I would have to assert that it was Ms, not Miss and I still constantly get annoyed that people think that I'm married to someone and have their name.

My dad (as i've mentioned) is a bit of a chauvanist and a traditionalist too, and usually likes to argue the toss with me on anything, so when my parents came to visit me this weekend and he walked in my shop and said "Hello Ms Don", i felt kind of proud. Of him in accepting something of my decision for a change, and of myself (dunno why, i just felt really grown up! )
in the same way, my dad announced that he was proud of me (because of the wonderful shop, of course).

so now i am a terribly grown-up woman and proud to be a Ms and to have earned the respect that the title deserves.

It's a debate that interests me greatly too, Ermintrude.

I think ultimately people's opinions on this will always differ as our names are such personal things and we see them differently. One person will see it as essential to their identity to keep their birthname but another will see it as key to share a name with their partner and children. Neither is right or wrong though and this is why I get exercised when I see some rather heavy-handed judgements on those that choose a different path.

Anyway, in the spirit of us all seeing this slightly differently ... you say that there is "no excuse or reason for difference to remain" in the naming system and I can understand why. For myself, I can see reasons why a woman (or a man) would want to name-change to their partner's name and I can't see an excuse or reason for the difference to change. I mean, obviously it would be a nice-to-have and I do think that there will be a shift away from the difference in future generations but, given where we come from traditionally and given name-changing's actual significance to equality (imo not much), I don't see a massive imperative to force people to abandon the tradition wholesale or (more RL scenario) to judge them as being anti-feminist or anti-equality for following the tradition.

Which is not to say that I don't see the problem with my scenario. Not because of all the different pressures etc that you refer to - those are going to be present in any decision a couple make - but more because the past tradition has created an expectation that women will change their name and for this reason DH comes to the table with much stronger cards. There was a bit of argy bargy about this a few pages back (akaa the whole "practical and pragmatic" debate) - I do think that there is a real risk that past tradition will factor far more heavily than it deserves in weighing up the pros and cons, i.e. it will be seen as "practical and pragmatic" to choose DH's name merely because that is the convention. Which is clearly not fair or equal.

Hopefully that will change and discussions like these will raise consciousness so that a couple who want a joint name will make the decision based on fair criteria.

I would challenge you, Ermintrude,to go into any primary school and get a list of the female staff, including finance oficers, dinner ladies etc,and find one where more than 20% are called Ms. I think it possible, but I also think you would have to search hard!
I am not saying which women's organisation but they were all intelligent women, all ages and not a Ms on my data base (they were given the choice of Ms).
If someone could come up with a better title I would use it, but Ms is dire IMO.

I've noticed a change in my (secondary) school staff list - used to be pretty much all Ms or Mr, now a lot of younger staff are putting "Miss".

I think it is because younger women feel they have a choice-they haven't been brought up to think they are someone's property, and therefore it isn't an issue.

Yes the battles are all won, aren't they? I do think we will live to regret this I'm afraid, 'tis a backward step IMO.

piscesmoon - no need to challenge, I'm sure you're right that Ms would be in the minority across a school's entire staff - that fact is part of the OP's irritation. It is still predominately used by women who have gone through further education and most, although not all, of my friends who use Ms began to do so at uni.

I can't see why it's 'dire' though - no worse a monosyllable than Miss, surely. It often sounds unpleasant because disapproving people say it as though they are sucking lemons, which would make divine poetry sound grotty

BrandnewIggi It's a worrying trend, perhaps due largely to the complacency of some young women who have grown up in a world where so many battles have already been fought for them.