Getting Shot for Calling Women Ladies in London?

Can't enlighten you, Boss, although some of our members from Jolly Old might help. In the United States and Canada, referring to a woman as a lady is not seen as patronizing necessarily, except by the most militant feminist extremists--it is generally treated as simple courtesy, on a par with calling a man a gentleman.

Thank the nice gentleman for helping you out with your question, Oristar.

I must say I find it irritating to be called 'Ma'am' - makes me feel like a frumpy wart-nosed granny.

Being called 'Woman' or 'Lady' (like THAT ever happens to me!) is fine - even 'that girl' is hunkey dorey or I don't mind being called 'Miss' or "Missus' - it's really only the 'Ma'am' that makes me cringe and want to smack the person upside the head.

Truth hurts, huh?

Heeven- You hate ma'am, 'cause you're from Boston. Since I moved down south, I get "ma'amed" quite a bit, and I really don't mind. It's part of the local scene, like grits and magnolias. I DO mind a clerk calling me by my first name, or sweetie, or something like that!

<<<< SMACK ! >>>> to Setantas FAT-HEAD!

Well I guess it's better than what I generally get called around here ... somethings I couldn't repeat to your gentle ears.

Heeven- Ya talkin' to me? I'm from Brooklyn. I have heard it all, and responded with a few that would curl your hair!

Once when interviewing for jobs at Southern Illinios University, i responded to a question by the interviewer that i had asked the lady in the outer office . . . and was stopped cold while she began a rant about the word lady, and girl (which i had not used) and other terms which she implied i had used or would use, and the evils of a male-chauvanist-pig dominated society. I interviewed for several jobs at that time, and got a better one than that on offer in her department. No details, who, what and when are not the point. I later filed a formal complaint with the Vice President for Academic Affairs, and was informed that the lady in question would not be interviewing any more candidates for employment. I replied with my thanks, and offered the opinion that: "the lady in question may have been having a bad day." I copied her on that letter, i'm sure that sent her through the roof.

Setanta- I think that the "lady" was way out of line.

When I moved to GA, I had to get used to being called ma'am (at 27 years old) by people older than me. It was odd. Never did come to like it, just tolerated it. Lady is ok with me. baby, honey, sweetie, etc. from strangers rubs me the wrong way too.

I was talking about Setantas virginal ears - apparently the word 'Lady' makes them bleed (snigger!)

I find a lot of these reactions hilarious. When i sit down in a diner in the South, and the waitress approaches, i always start with a cheery greeting and an inquiry after the lady's health. I "yes ma'am" and "no ma'am" her consistently, and in no time, she is calling me "honey," "shug" (short for sugar), "sugar pie," etc. I get great service, and have occassionally been propositioned.

I miss living in the South.

Jack-ass!

That's the sweetest greeting I can come up with, I'm afraid. It shows I love ya really.

That may well be . . . saddly, i can't bray in the South at the present time.

But oristarA is refering to London, where, for all I know, the word lady is reserved for members of the hereditary nobility. In the US it is often used in the taxi driver sense of "Now look, lady. . ." Of course they are not getting shot over the usage in London. There are not many guns left there.

OristarA - I will try to answer your question - but I cannot speak so very much for contemporary London...

Here, in Australia, though, there are two threads of thought in objecting to terms like "lady".

The first is the general, broadly left-wing, belief that calling men "gentlemen" and women "ladies" is a silly throwback to a class-ridden view of human worth. Great Britain, and with it, but to a greatly lesser extent, Australia, share a history where people were, indeed, divided along the lines of ladies and gentlemen, (upper class or at least upper middle class - but not necessarily titled) and the common man and woman. Great Britain is still very class conscious, I believe.

The Australian (at least) left has always regarded such distinctions as nonsensical - even when they became forms of polite address more than actual terms that really meant a difference to how you were treated.

For instance, when Gough Whitlam, then our first left wing Prime Minister in 23 years, first addressed the nation in his election campaign in 1972, and subsequently, he always introduced his remarks with "Men and women of Australia" - never "Ladies and gentlemen", which was the traditional way of addressing a group.

The second thread of objection came from feminists of my generation and older.

Partly, as I understand it, this objection was in line with that of the left. More particularly it stemmed from two things.

1. Hard as it may be for younger women to believe it, for women slightly older than I, and a little bit for me, being a "lady" was something you were strongly pressured to be (at least in the middle classes!) and strongly criticised for not being.

Being a lady, in this sense, meant many things which I view as quite positive - like having good manners, treating people courteously etc.

It also meant a lot of things that I, and many feminists, do not regard so positively (though I think a lot of the pressure has gone, at least here, and so the objection to the term is far less great) like being quiet, not boisterous, being "genteel", being a sweet, gentle presence - not speaking out, being very circumspect in your behaviour, always worrying about being proper, about how you appeared to others, not standing out - not being aggressive, not making a fuss, being sexually repressed (as we would see it now).

Personally, as a little kid, I was always in trouble for not being ladylike - because I was pretty much how I am now - and always getting dirty and messy to boot.

The attributes of being a "lady" as it was seen then, were not ones that I admired, nor did lots of other women. The expectations of behaviour were not ones we wished to emulate - and had been far more narrow and confining for previous generations. Part of rebelling against the confines of feminine roles was rebelling against being expected to be a lady - hence the objection to the term - while probably over the top, (ie exaggerated, Oristar) was very understandable. I mean, if one spoke out at places and times, where previously men had expected to be the only speakers (like union meetings, political meetings etc) you might well be told (usually in an anonymous mutter from the group) to get back in the kitchen, or go and make the tea, ladies!

As I said, I think the objection no longer makes real sense to younger people, (and perhaps Americans? I think you guys have always had a much less aggressively sexist culture than Australia?) because the strait-jacket of expectation it once symbolized is no longer there. Or I dn't think it is.

2. Again, in Australia, the term was also negatively loaded for many of us, because it symbolized a relegation to a small, secondary role.

Lots of organizations were not really open to women (sometimes absolutely, sometimes by tradition and expectation). I mean, silly things like Lions Clubs were not open to women.

They had "Ladies' Auxiliaries" often, though - who made tea and cakes. They had "Ladies' Nights" - where the women were allowed on the premises, and got a patronizing toast about how sweet and lovely and funny they were - I had to sit through lots of this, cos my father was a prominent business person, and belonged to such organisations - sometimes kids were included with the ladies...).This sort of thing made lady seem a diminished sort of term! An addendum....

Women were not allowed in the front bars of hotels. They went to the Ladies' Lounge.

The mother of a friend of mine helped change this - she and a group of friends chained themselves to the front bar of a famous pub in Queensland!

I hope this helps.

Oh, and I have a personal, and quite irrational - but very visceral - negative response to the term!

It is for a funny reason. When I was a weelowan (ie very young) in the seventies, it was common for a particular brand of hippy male to call his girlfriend his "lady" - or to address any young woman they liked as 'lady". Despite my feminism, I thought this sort of sweet, if really stupid, at first. However, after having a number of years of experience of having such fellas in my living room or kitchen (friends of my partner's, or of other student share household members) for hour after hour, day after day - I began to find this particular sub-species very boring, and eventually annoying! They were the endless cups of tea, joints, "that was really cool", "man, I'm ripped", no other real conversation, eat your food, fall asleep on your sofa, etc etc sort.

But, I admit, this particular response to the word lady is a conditoning thing!!!!! And, perhaps, unfair....LOL!

Well in all my years of living & working in London's film & TV industry, I've never heard any female objecting to being called WOMAN or LADY.
They might get the 'ump if you call then sweetheart, darling, love or dear.
I do tend to address check out girls for example as "love" & refer to barmaids as "the chick behind the jump".
But in a business situation, everyone regardless of gender or status is always addressed by the christian name.