Doing without titles: who likes the idea?

[StuffingGoldBrass]

Inspired by another thread about being called Ms/Miss/Mrs - how many times is it really necessary to use titles like Mr/Ms to indicate whether we are male or female?
After all, how many interactions/jobs are there where it really does matter what gender a person is?

I never use titles unless I have to, I don't bother putting them on letters etc either.

Don't really know why, I never have.

Mind you, when pushed I refer to myself as Ms. But only when I really can't avoid it.

What do you fill in forms with if you don't use a title?

Quakers don't use titles, do they?

FB: How about just your name?

But you know when you fill in forms over the phone and they say they have to fill in certain sections? Would you just say 'I have no title'?

Do you use no title?

ps. DH just said he thought it would be a cool idea for us to amalgamate our surnames/make up a new one and change our whole family's names by deed poll! DD1 doesn't want to because she knows how to spell our current surname!

I use Ms rather than get into a prolonged discussion with some callcentre drone whose first language is not English, of course. But it's just one of those things that annoys me: being asked (when filling out online forms) to state whether I'm male or female/Mr-Ms-Miss-Mrs when it really isn't relevant.

So what are you called in formal settings then?

sgb, i've posted something similar to this ages ago. i don't see how my gender or marital status are needed by utility companies. ffs tell the gp i'm female - it might affect whether he/she thinks i'm pg or have a hernia, but it matters not to the vast majority of service-providers.

i think the response then was something like 'well, even if you don't your husband's name you use your father's name.

ho hum.

i think it was in response to a trans thread though - i have trans friends and the whole 'what to put on forms' thing causes ridiculous angst. but it's probably not wise to kick off a whole other trans discussion

i kind of think the original aim (a more formal/ polite way of addressing someone) is fine, but to base it solely on gender and (marital) status is a bit odd.

that said - when they got rid of the (w) annotation on female service personnel's numbers it caused (and still causes) huge administrative trauma to a system where it is imperative to know what gender you are dealing with... (tee hee)

i want a gender neutral sir/ madam, if i'm honest. can't come up with something suitable...

GML: Maybe I'm a bit of an oik, but I don't go to many formal events where I need to have a formal title.

I do remember reading years ago an article by someone who suggested using the designation Pr pronounced Per (short for Person) instead of Mr/Ms which I thought was an interesting idea.

i am omar whenever i can get away with it, which is most of the time, and failing that Ms (but i hate the lesbian assumptions).

i like it when cold callers phone for my partner. when i say he is out, they ask "is that Mrs Omar'spartnersname?". i say: what, his MUM? no, she doesn't live here. they get terribly confused.

I am Dr. Hahaha. No-one knows my marital status, it's none of their business.

I have a unisex first name too so no-one knows my gender if they only know me from a piece of paper.

FlamingoBingo was correct--Quakers often prefer not to use titles, because they feel as if it puts people into groups where some are superior to others. There was a woman from a Quaker background who joined the staff at the university I went to, and she sent around a message asking people who didn't know her well to call her "Firstname Lastname" and after people got to know her, to drop the last name. It seemed a bit strange, but I can see how it makes sense.

I quite like the US? Christian? tradition of calling someone Brother or Sister then their name.

But tbh I don't think titles are generally needed, unless for professional purposes e.g. you know who is a professor because that's in their name.

I would far far far rather just be called by my full name, titles are a relic AFAIC.

I never use my title at work, just firstname lastname as do all my colleages, except (of course) for the doctors for whom the title is very important. Generally I just use my first name because it is very distinctive and so the surname part is not required. I tend only to use the title/surname combo when I can't be bothered to spell my first name out really. I'm not really bothered about forms, it just seems somewhat irrelevant really.

I quite like the formality of being Ms.Risotto when at the doctors or on the phone to companies. They like to call me my first name though and I don't like that.

I use my first name generally, if I like you then you may abbreviate it down. My mother uses 2 of her first names, one for family and close friends the other for everyone else, but I suppose that could be a bit odd when you make the transition ('I know you've been calling me Mary, but from now on you can use Jane'). But perhaps not if everyone did it?

As I live in Greece and use Greek all the time, the issue of titles doesn't come up, because in any case, even if I do not give a title, gender is immediately obvious. Every adjective, every article, every pronoun, every participle, all grammatical references used in relation to me will reflect my gender. When I can't even say "I'm tired" without it being gendered, then titles are somehow insignificant!

However, when I'm over in the UK, I prefer Ms, but I'm interested in the idea of having no title at all. A more formal approach could be to use the surname, less formal the first name. When neither is known, I like SGB's Per for person. The only other option I can come up with is Cit for Citizen, but it makes me think of either the French Revolution or Communism!

Alternatively, we could all just shout "You!" and point at the relevant person!

oooh, yes after reading the other thread, I thought it wouldn be good if we all just rejected titles.
I'm in

what about formal situations?
I'm "san" in Japan- Sakura-San. DH is "san" as well.
Shall we all just go with Ms

I'm jealous of Trills. I want to be Dr Hahaha.

I agree, titles of any sort are rarely necessary. I like the Quaker approach to this.

I work in academia where most people have lots of spare titles, but first names are the usual mode of address.

It's an interesting proposition. Like Trills, I am also a Dr (but much much older than Trills). I have found it difficult, when I'm dealing with someone whose gender is unknown to me, as I feel it's rude to get it wrong (have done so with a woman called Kevin with whom I only corresponded by email ).

So, I guess what I'm saying is that, while I agree that gender is not relevant in most situations, how do we get round not being rude to someone? Or should we up our game and get rid of gender-specific pronouns also, to avoid feeling like we're being rude?

i've used ms for 20 yrs (god that's a long time) during that time I've gone from single to married.
I'm fine to be known as female, other than that it's my business

Ms is the obvious answer where titles are necessary.

Can't quite believe it still hasn't become utterly standard.