Feminist Pub 17: The Bluestocking frolics in the fells and fens of feminism

[AKnickerfulOfMenace]

This is the 17th incarnation of the Feminist Pub!

Here be goats, cannons and chat on feminism and related themes. Also snacks. And booze, copious booze.

Welcome!

Lock on the door, Buffy?

Or ginormous rucksack in the way of it opening?

Flashing neon sign on the door saying "Go Away"?

It would need to be very big and flashy because Men Don't See Things, obviously.

But more practically, yes, just wedge the door shut.

Oh God I have to read something that I have read a million times but each time with subtle changes... Can I just pretend I've read it?

Ear defender style headphones?

This Morning's Rant

Mumsnet's choice of thread to promote on Facebook this morning is one about women's titles. Yes, that old chestnut. I don't dare click the link through to the actual thread because it will make me very angry, as those threads always do. But of course the comments under the Facebook post are, I'm sure, a mini representation of the full thread, with the usual...

"I'm a Mrs because I'm so proud to be married"
"I'm a Miss and can't wait to be a Mrs when I get married"
"Why on earth are feminists so worried about titles anyway? Haven't they got something more important to worry about?"

So in Camp A, we have women who see no problem with the idea that the day on which a man agrees to join with them is the single event which defines them as a person in the public sphere. Not any actual personal achievement of their own, but their association with a man. In fact, they seem to absolutely relish the idea that being married means that they have "arrived" as an adult human being and now get to have a grownup title. How proud they are that a man has validated them and given them status.

In Camp B we have women who have never given any brainspace to what the whole Miss/Mrs/Ms thing actually means in terms of equality for women, because they would never be so dismissive of the importance of the issue if they had. But it's okay to slag off women who have thought about it as "having too much free time" and "neglecting important women's issues".

Sometimes I just want to shake a large chunk of womanhood by the shoulders, look them in the eyes and plead with them to please, please, for the love of all things vaginal, open their eyes and engage their brains!

I didn't dare to click on that ...

I'm on it. Tis Ok!

for the love of all things vaginal

I'm quite proudly a Ms btw.

Just came on to link to this www.mumsnet.com/Talk/mumsnet_live_events/2326774-Webchat-with-Mara-Clarke-of-the-Abortion-Support-Network-TUESDAY-MARCH-10-12-30pm

On your reassurance, Knickerful, I braved the thread. It was okay to start with but has dissolved into the usual stupid arguments, including "I hate Ms cos it sounds funny".

Sigh.

I was reading that thread on Friday, so I went to catch up on what's been posted since. I see the old "But a woman's name is just her father's name so what's the difference?" line has been trotted out. And now I'm cross, because some randomer on the internet is denying my ownership of my own name. It's been mine for nearly thirty years, it's not on loan!

Funny how a woman's name, be it married or unmarried, is just a loan from a man, but a man's name is always his own.

So both a women's title and her name (ie, her identity) are things bestowed upon her by men, and as such are fluid things, which can be withdrawn as easily as they are bestowed. Better behave, women, or we'll remove the status we have allowed you through association with a man.

Annie www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Kaur I'm an atheist but I was raised a sikh and I've been looking back on the religion with a more academic frame of mind.

The Sikh attitude towards surnames actually seems quite enlightened, especially in light of the era.

I like the Quaker practice around titles, too, avoiding honorifics.

This is the thread, right?

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/2324502-Ms-Mrs-or-Miss?msgid=53034025#53034025

Yes.

I didn't know that ebear. For many years I assumed that most religions were incompatible with feminism (patriarchal, father figure god, dubious practices etc) but some have quite feminist aspects.

I lived in a different continent in a very impoverished country at one point and was chatting with two workers on our project about surnames. Worker A (female, younger, able to declare that women had rights, along with children) said that she was not changing her surname on marriage. This is actually also the traditional position - everyone takes their father's first name as their last name on birth and keeps it till death. It is actually known as "father's name" on official forms etc. A bit confusing for foreigners though as I continue to use the last name my father uses it is reasonably straight forward for me to complete that box on the form. If your father does not acknowledge you as his child then your mother either unilaterally gives you his name, or gives you HER father's name.

Worker B (also younger, male, probably had not given any thought to anyone having any kind of rights) said "come on A, get with the times, these days women take their husband's name" - a trend along with e.g. white wedding dresses (and brides being in the same room as their groom when making their vows etc.) that has come from the West.

No, I was able to inform them, these days in other countries women keep the name they've had all their lives very often. It's a newer fashion.

Ha! says worker A. I'm more up to date than you!

Enlightened, indeed, Enormous. But sadly, as the article points out, not entirely practical as the population grows!

I liked that story, drspouse.

It is true, Ebearhug that once we've got the whole Ms/Mrs/Miss thing ironed out, the next step will be to make all that work redundant since it's just as pointless and sexist to have to reveal your sex via your title as it is your marital status!

Sadly yes, annie only really practicable as Sikhism is a relatively young religion. Most Sikhs I know are firstname kaur/singh placeofbirthaslastname. As I'm hanging onto Ms and won't be changing my surname if I ever get married my name and title will be the same throughout my life.

I think that Swedish names are now non patronymic and in Iceland people can opt to use a matronymic surname (I.e. helgusson - Helga's son)

I'm keeping my own name when I get married. It's quite nice being able to discuss something feministy with my classes at school, they've all noticed the engagement ring (dp is wearing one too, his is just plainer than mine) and they all want to know what my name will be next school year. When I say "Ms Dragon, same as I've always been" it causes quite a bit of discussions about why some women change their name but more and more women are choosing to keep the names they were born with because we want to keep the identity we've always had and not change ourselves due to "catching a man" or something. Some of them look thoughtful and I think I've got through to them, others ask their follow-up question of "but which name will the baby have?" I'm not pg, and already have 2 children who have both names.

According to my mum I decided that I was going to have the title 'Dr' while I was still at primary school because then no one would know whether I was married or not. I think I had feminist tendencies from a very young age . Although my thinking didn't go as far as 'Dr' being a usefully gender-neutral title back then.

I kept my surname (I was surprised when my DSis changed hers - I keep forgetting to use her married surname). However, the DC both have DH's surname, and at the time it never occurred to me to question this. DS (9) does sometimes ask if he can change his surname to match mine though.

The pattern of DD's name reminds me of horses. She's Hername [by] Dadsurname [out of] Mumsurname.