Pet hate - being asked for a title

euronorris

It doesn't really bother me either way, but I can see why others are bothered by it (because of the casual sexism inferred by it).


But.....I think we need to either come up with one new title for ladies, or several others for gents to indicate their marital status.


Even if we do, it's going to be generations before they change on a grand scale. I still have clients who get very, very, very upset if they are not addressed as Sir ...., Lady ...., or even Mrs ....


There are so many possible titles out there, and very few companies offer all of them as options (such as Dr, Professor, Si, Lady, Count etc etc etc).

moneyistooshorttomention

Mojisola wrote: »

I didn't have an engagement ring and I haven't worn my wedding ring since the day of the ceremony.

There's no law that says that women have to be marked as 'taken'.

Must admit my own personal view on that would be that I like gold jewellery and would want my engagement ring AND I would be well aware that some men have started to wear them too and would want Mr Intended to wear one too. Plus the little added sub-text of "It's one way to check out if they are basically of a mean temperament - and I might as well find that fact out to start with....". I'm the "happy medium" and would want to check Mr Intended was too - so that we were compatible on the financial front - as well as in other respects.

Knowing the "unfaithfulness" rate in our Society - I'd have every incentive to mark Mr Intended as "taken" and would think it fair enough to have that "sign" up too myself.:)

Mojisola

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Knowing the "unfaithfulness" rate in our Society - I'd have every incentive to mark Mr Intended as "taken" and would think it fair enough to have that "sign" up too myself.:)

If I thought the only thing keeping my OH from being unfaithful was a ring (that he could take off every time he left the house), I wouldn't still be with him.

moneyistooshorttomention

euronorris wrote: »

It doesn't really bother me either way, but I can see why others are bothered by it (because of the casual sexism inferred by it).


But.....I think we need to either come up with one new title for ladies, or several others for gents to indicate their marital status.


Even if we do, it's going to be generations before they change on a grand scale. I still have clients who get very, very, very upset if they are not addressed as Sir ...., Lady ...., or even Mrs ....


There are so many possible titles out there, and very few companies offer all of them as options (such as Dr, Professor, Si, Lady, Count etc etc etc).

I know what you mean.:cool:

I've been in big trouble before now because some "upstarts" wife absolutely insisted big time that she be called "Lady" because he was called "Sir".

So.....so....so...:rotfl:. So what?!!!!

But then - I just take the viewpoint personally that many of us could have been deemed to be "Somebody" if we had taken a different path in our current life (puts hands up and waves at that point):p. On the other hand - as someone who takes reincarnation for granted personally (no - I dont expect anyone else to agree with me on that one:rotfl: and I have no problem with that...) then I take the view that = many of us were "Somebody" in a previous life. So what?:p

People who insist on titles (of any description) do get my goat personally - and aren't going to get them:rotfl:

At the end of the day we are all "people". Therefore the title of "Mrs" is no big accolade imo - personally speaking I could have been "Mrs" several times over and so what?! That doesnt make me any more (or less) "worthy" as a person.....

Georgiegirl256

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Must admit my own personal view on that would be that I like gold jewellery and would want my engagement ring AND I would be well aware that some men have started to wear them too and would want Mr Intended to wear one too. Plus the little added sub-text of "It's one way to check out if they are basically of a mean temperament - and I might as well find that fact out to start with....". I'm the "happy medium" and would want to check Mr Intended was too - so that we were compatible on the financial front - as well as in other respects.

Knowing the "unfaithfulness" rate in our Society - I'd have every incentive to mark Mr Intended as "taken" and would think it fair enough to have that "sign" up too myself.:)

:rotfl: Oh so naive. A ring is easily removeable.

I don't get this need to "mark" someone. It's like an animal claiming it's territory.

If people are that insecure in their relationship that they make their other half must wear a ring, then I find that very sad.

Thank god my husband doesn't insist on me wearing one, because I wouldn't. I didn't get married for a ring, I got married for so much more than that. A ring to me is fairly insignificant.

Torry_Quine

GlasweJen wrote: »

I've just realised when I'm married we'll become "Dr and Rev Newsurname", call centre operators everywhere are going to assume we're a couple of gay men!

I knew a couple who were Dr and Rev and many assumed that Rev must be the man, it wasn't. Interestingly when the Dr became Prof people now thought Re was the woman. Apparently the 'senior' title must be the man.

tea_lover

Torry_Quine wrote: »

I knew a couple who were Dr and Rev and many assumed that Rev must be the man, it wasn't. Interestingly when the Dr became Prof people now thought Re was the woman. Apparently the 'senior' title must be the man.

I know a couple (hetero) who are both Doctors. The wife is now also Rev. She did once sign her name as Rev Dr Mrs Bloggs, to show how silly it was .

NBLondon

Well being a bloke - I do get it easy...


I do tend to use Ms as a default unless someone tells me they prefer Miss or Mrs - and I have to agree that in the vast majority of cases it makes absolutely no difference whether they are married or not. (Legal and tax matters perhaps?) As far as a commercial transaction is concerned, the sex and/or gender is also mostly irrelevant so perhaps it's time we started calling each other Citizen (or Comrade?).


Did anybody see this - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3522087/SEBASTIAN-SHAKESPEARE-Sir-Elton-title-don-t-asks-hubby.html


He's sort of got a point that there is no male equivalent of "lady" as a courtesy title for a male spouse - "Gentleman John" sounds like a highwayman to me. Which is also why Denis Thatcher got the first baronetcy to be created for yonks to avoid the phrase "Mr and Lady Thatcher". Which actually was quickly superceded by "Sir Denis and Baroness Thatcher" as she wanted to point out that her title was awarded to her in her own right.


If "Mrs John Smith" - literally the Mistress of John Smith - is dated then so is Lady (John) Smith - the Mistress of Sir John. Let them both be Ms Jane Smith if they want to share a family name and Ms Jane Jones if they don't. Of course, Rev or Dr or Dame Jane Smith according to their own achievements.

System

Torry_Quine wrote: »

I knew a couple who were Dr and Rev and many assumed that Rev must be the man, it wasn't. Interestingly when the Dr became Prof people now thought Re was the woman. Apparently the 'senior' title must be the man.

If I have read it correctly, GlasweJen is not a reverend at all and is using that title dishonestly.

missbiggles1

euronorris wrote: »

It doesn't really bother me either way, but I can see why others are bothered by it (because of the casual sexism inferred by it).


But.....I think we need to either come up with one new title for ladies, or several others for gents to indicate their marital status.


Even if we do, it's going to be generations before they change on a grand scale. I still have clients who get very, very, very upset if they are not addressed as Sir ...., Lady ...., or even Mrs ....


There are so many possible titles out there, and very few companies offer all of them as options (such as Dr, Professor, Si, Lady, Count etc etc etc).

Why do we need another new title when we already have Ms.?