I ordered something online yesterday

[QueenOfFeckingEverything]

And the only options for 'title' on the webform were 'Mr' or 'Ms'.

It made me

Excellent!

What was it?

It was a new wrap sling

I will look at what options ToolStation offer later when I order the guttering...

Why does it make you happy that some women were denied their choice of title on that webform, Queen? Is my choice of Mrs as my title somehow less valid or worthy of respect?

Fwiw, I think that whatever title someone chooses should be respected - I don't like Ms or want to be called Ms, but there are a sizeable number of women who do, so it should be an option on forms etc.

sdtg - possibly because Queen doesn't wish any woman to be identified by her sexual relationship or lack of with a man?

I don't see why we need title at all TBH.

I don't need to be defined by my marital status.

But does someone sending me a package need to know my gender?

Why would she be happy that her choice is respected and other people's aren't, though, alice?

Trillian - I am not defined by my marital status, but it is a part of who I am, and I have chosen the title Mrs to reflect this, and to reflect my connection with dh and the family. To be clear, I am NOT saying that a woman has to use the title Mrs, otherwise she's not reflecting her connection to her dp and her family - all I am saying is that, for me, it does reflect the connection, and I value that choice.

agree with trillian. titles aren't necessary. who needs to know what sex anyone is when sending something?

Posted too soon - I agree absolutely that someone posting you a package doesn't need to know your gender or marital status. I don't need a title - but I like it.

Why would I be happy that my choice not to have my dd told boys are better at maths is respected when the opposite isn't? Because my choice is better. Cultural relativism does women no favours.

There should be an option to not give a title.

If you are complaining that the options didn't include Mrs I will join you in complaining that my choice of title was not there (Dr).

Why is your choice better, alice?

I agree, Trillian - your choice of Dr should be there too.

What about Lord/Lady?

Reverend?

The Right Honorable?

Duke?

Sir?

Where do we draw the line?

Those could be covered by 'other' and an option to input a title that wasn't listed.

They want to know your gender for their marketing database.

So what is the minimum allowable range of specific choices before "other"?

I prefer to be known by my Christian name - not Miss or Mrs or Ms.

So when I give my name I just say Ooopsadaisy Smith.

Then they automatically assume (because I'm an old bag in her 40s) that I'm Mrs Smith and write that down.

I say "actually I'm not married".

Even worse when it's something to do with the children and they try to make me Mrs DCsname. No I'm bloody not.

Why the assumption?

Trillian - the minimum allowable range should include the most-used titles - Mr/Ms/Mrs/Ms/no title, maybe Dr and Rev. But to leave out Mrs and Ms denies the valid choice of many, many women. I don't think that is a good thing, any more than leaving out Ms as an option is a good thing.

If they have a box to fill and you haven't given them any information then Mrs will be correct most of the time for a woman in her 40s. Similarly most of the time Mrs DCsname will be right. If they have to make a guess that's the one that will pay off most often.

I just don't understand how one can campaign for equality for women by telling some women that they are less deserving of equal treatment because of their choice of title.

Trillian - yes, you may be right, but I think it's rude to assume it.

Of course, I don't just stand there and and let them get it wrong and then get all sarky when I have to correct them. I try to politely intervene first to avoid the correction.

I am just amazed that it is seen as good service to just make an assumption.

Because Ms only indicates that someone is a woman, it makes no statement on her marital status, therefore indicating that her marital status is irrelevant to the transaction (which it is).

You can be called Ms as it is an accurate title that describes you (a woman), as it does all women. Other women cannot be necessarily called Mrs/Miss as these titles indicate marital status. It's not about "equal treatment", you are not being treated badly because your chosen title of Mrs isn't included. My chosen title of Empress of the Universe isn't there either but I don't think that's undermining my equality.

I don't see the need for titles in life generally, but especially for buying things.

I think it is better to go with no title at all or, failing that, if people insist on wanting a way to discriminate against people for the sake of it, I prefer the bare minimum of Mr / Ms.

Equality between men and women in this issue is signified by giving equal options to men and women. The options need to be equal in terms of status and number.

Mr / Mrs - is unequal because of status.

Mr / Mrs / Ms - is unequal because of status and number of options.

No title - is equal because of status.
Mr / Ms - is equal because of status and number of options.
Mr / Mss* / Ms /Mrs - is equal because of status and number of options.

*Until a new option (I suggest it could be "Mss") is introduced for a man who wants to publicly declare his pride in being married to his wife, use of Mrs for women is unequal. How many men would take up such an option? Probably none. That, in itself, would highlight the inequality of Mrs.

I like it, Vesuvia.

But I would suggest Mrd for men who want to publicly declare his connection to his wife. Pronounced "Married".

So for instance the radio could report that "Married Cameron commented on NHS reform", if he chose to take that title.

I like this idea of introducing another title for men, but something tells me that men themselves wouldn't be interested.

My dh finds it incredible that there is so much fuss over this issue in the English speaking world, as in his language there is one title for men and one for women, neither denote marital status.