"there is even the possibility of addressing a woman which identifies her marital status."
- yes, this is the problem.
this is one of these societal things where choice is not good enough.
Suppose there was a convention that all women's names had their weights automatically published next to them. It was the norm to think more of slim women, so the statistics were published for people to know what they would be getting and not make the mistake of, say, interviewing an overweight woman for a PA role.
Then the convention was weakened, by some women taking a stand and refusing to disclose this information or have it published.
However, the conventional majority, and those who are proud of being slim, continue to publish these statistics whenever their names appear.
What this means is that those who would before have just despised the women for being overweight can now despise them for not publishing their weight. There will be some slim women who don't publish their weight, but all that means is that they get despised anyway and lumped in with the dodgy ones - "they'll all dodgy, aren't they, that lot, either because they're fat or because they're rejecting our right to judge them for being fat."
those who waffle about tradition, about how they love their husband etc are actually also enjoying being on the right side of convention and unless they give up that privilege, then the disadvantage will still pertain to those who cannot access it.
I hate to say this, some of my best friends are called Mrs Theirdh, and I would never mention it to them. but actually, systemically, it is pretty shitty to keep it going. Not all that shitty in the grand scheme of things. but it matters, and it is bad. sorry.