Sexism and ageism in charity shop?

[BillieWiper]

Just wondering if others feel a bit off about this exchange in a charity shop.

An elderly woman using a wheeled walker donates an item in a charity shop. They want to do gift aid and she's already signed up for it. She uses this shop regularly.

The staff member was presumably commencing this process when she asked the woman's name.

Being slightly deaf, she didn't instantly answer the question. The staff member immediately followed up the question by saying 'Oh, your husband's name..'?

To me that is an assumption that an elderly woman wouldn't understand her own tax affairs or have control over her own finances, or would have all her business in her 'husband's name.

I believe this to be sexist, ageist and potentially homophobic. In the assumption that the person is definitely heterosexual.

It makes no difference really but the elderly woman is widowed and has managed perfectly well without a husband for 35 years. But she could just as easily be a lesbian.

But mainly that they would never ask anything about a husband if it was a younger woman. That's what bothers me.

The staff member was around 30, looked like the sort of person to be well aware of the importance of anti sexism, ageism, sexuality discrimination etc.

I'm sure it's not worthy of a complaint. I don't think? I do feel annoyed about it though hence posting here. And almost feel like that person needs to know not to do it again.

Just really seeing if others think this is a bit off or maybe I'm being a little oversensitive?

Thanks in advance wise women of MN.

You are over-reacting.

She was just trying to establish who in the household pays tax so she could organise the gift aid.

Was it more like "your name ... oh no wait, it'll be your husband's name I need instead"? Or "your name ... or your husband's name"? The first one would probably be a sexist assumption, the second one a fairly normal question badly phrased. Either way, though, you're correct that it was (mildly) homophobic in that it should have been "your spouse's name (if applicable)".

Not sure why anyone's yukking it up over the specific suggestion that it's homophobic; while it may seem like a heavy-handed term, that's the word that's used, and assuming all romantic pair bond relationships are man-woman and normalising that assumption IS at least mildly homophobic. I'd probably have just politely corrected her, though, if there was no other indication that it was malicious.

Thank you. Yeah I get what you mean about the subtle difference. And without being certain it was one or the other I should probably assume the best.

I'm glad you understand why I raised the notion it could be mildly homophobic.

But to me to assume that's a man is sexist and ageist. There was no man and she shouldn't assume there is one.

That was taught to me when I stated work in the mid 90s. That you don't automatically assume the man is the breadwinner or that he even exists.

I didn't make any assumptions about my mum no. I asked on here what you thought.

I made an assumption that a young woman working in a charity shop wouldn't say that. As I certainly wouldn't and I'm much older.

Once again, the terminally offended.

Being slightly deaf …

I think this statement might do most of the explaining!