[quote="Walter Hinteler"][quote="Bohne"]Unlike in Germany, where officially the Frl. has been completely removed from the language.[/quote]
Really? What institution does such?
[/quote]
I suppose you'd still find it in a dictionary, but is is not valid as an official title any more.
oh Tai Chi
Now I'm dying to know what your maiden name is.
My maiden name, in the changed pronunciation my grandparents gave it when they moved to the US, sounds almost perfectly identical to the name of an African country.
My first husband had an Irish last name, even though he was Italian. Actually, the name was British (his mother divorced and remarried while she was pregnant) and lacked a letter of the Irish version, and had a different vowel thrown in there.
Now, my surname is the name of a common bird. I'll even say to people when they need to get the spelling of my name, "That's Chai Vulture, like the bird".
I have come to realize that there are apparantly at least 5 different ways to spell vulture.
Chai wrote:oh Tai Chi
Now I'm dying to know what your maiden name is.
I had the same thought. Maybe we can get her to PM us. Tai, I'll tell you mine if you'll tell me yours.
Bohne wrote:I suppose you'd still find it in a dictionary, but is is not valid as an official title any more.
That's your opinion.
It's still in "official" use in German speaking Switzerland and Belgium ... and I know more than a couple of elderly ladies who insist being called "Fräulein".
[quote="Walter Hinteler"][quote="Bohne"]I suppose you'd still find it in a dictionary, but is is not valid as an official title any more.[/quote]
That's your opinion.
It's still in "official" use in German speaking Switzerland and Belgium ... and I know more than a couple of elderly ladies who insist being called "Fräulein".[/quote]
I don't know about Belgium and Switzerland that's why I wrote IN GERMANY!
When Eve Kay entered her title as Ms on a government form she found herself embroiled in a row about the word's definition. For heaven's sake, she says, surely it's time to ditch Miss and Mrs for good ...
In today's The Guardian:
Call me Ms
"..Miss and Mrs are marks of the old world, reminders of women's second-class status as wives-to-be (Miss) or simply wives (Mrs). If you are a woman who doesn't use Ms - particularly a woman under 30 who has never even thought of it - then ponder this: how do you want to present yourself to the world? Are you an appendage or an appendage-in-waiting? Don't be branded and marked by old-world convention. Let's kick against those fools at companies such as Atlantic Data. Let's put two fingers up to employers and bureaucrats who want to define us by our marital status. Choose Miss and you are condemned to childish immaturity. Choose Mrs and be condemned as some guy's chattel. Choose Ms and you become an adult woman in charge of your whole life. ..."
Yes, yes, yes!
Thanks for the article, Brother Walter!
It amazes me that this sort of discussion is still being held. I thought we had moved beyond this years ago. <sigh> I guess for "women under 30," though....
I use Ms. most of the time and always for business. Frankly, it is nobody's business whether I am married or not, and I see no need to advertise my marital status. Men don't. It is personal information. "Ms." is appropriately impersonal and generic.
Interestingly enough, the one exception is teaching. I teach part-time at the school my son attends. They address me as "Mrs." because our whole family is known there. I have no problem with that.
To me, this issue points up the absurdity of much of what was insisted upon by militant feminists in the late 60s and early 70s. I personally use Miss for all women, unless and until they express a desire to be addressed as "Missus"--i ignore anyone who attempts to correct my pronunciation by hissing "Mizzzzzzzzz" at me.
But it quickly degenerated into silliness. If a man speaks for an organization, he is referred to as a "spokesman." As soon as you hear "spokesperson," you know they are talking about a woman.
I always liked "Ms". Why should I be addressed in different ways depending on whether I'm married or not? It's a good, useful, all purpose title. I think "miss" is almost as antiquated a title as "master" these days.
I just read this entire thread through. It just hit me. Some people are offended that Mrs. and Miss define women as to their marital status. If one looks deeper, Mr. and Ms. define people by their sex. Why is THAT necessary. As for something like chairman or chairwoman vs. chairperson, why would not "chair" suffice?
Years ago, a sign saying "men working" used to bug me. Now I often see signs saying "workers", which to me makes much more sense.
Anyone else ever thought of that, and what do you think about it?
People who don't know my marital status all call me "Miss" or "Ma'am" Think of it, one denotes married, the other single but that is what people use here in progressive San Francisco. I like getting called Miss at 59.
Phoenix32890 wrote:I just read this entire thread through. It just hit me. Some people are offended that Mrs. and Miss define women as to their marital status. If one looks deeper, Mr. and Ms. define people by their sex. Why is THAT necessary. As for something like chairman or chairwoman vs. chairperson, why would not "chair" suffice?
Years ago, a sign saying "men working" used to bug me. Now I often see signs saying "workers", which to me makes much more sense.
Anyone else ever thought of that, and what do you think about it?
I like the idea, Phoenix.
Setanta wrote:To me, this issue points up the absurdity of much of what was insisted upon by militant feminists in the late 60s and early 70s. I personally use Miss for all women, unless and until they express a desire to be addressed as "Missus"--i ignore anyone who attempts to correct my pronunciation by hissing "Mizzzzzzzzz" at me.
But it quickly degenerated into silliness. If a man speaks for an organization, he is referred to as a "spokesman." As soon as you hear "spokesperson," you know they are talking about a woman.
I hear people refer to men as "spokespersons" often. Men aren't classified by their marital status, why should women be? What is absurd is that men still resist efforts for women to gain equality.
I think the sexual reference is useful, Phoenix. A lot of people have names that could be male or female. It clears up confusion.
That's interesting, Roxxxanne. Here in middle America, calling a middle-aged woman "Miss" is playing into the old stereotype of calling women "girls." As though we'd be complimented by being mistaken for younger than we are.
Because I'd be really embarrassed inviting "Mr." Morgan Brown to a tearoom for lunch.
Given that i address all women as Miss, without regard to age or marital status, the objections voiced here are meaningless to me.
I suppose, if someone addresses me (or anyone else) without 'Herr' or 'Frua' - that would be generally considered inpolite.
Teachers did it at school, 40 years ago: we discussed that and they either changed to prename and 'Sie' [honoric form of 'you'] or 'Frau'/'Herr' plus family name.
From the "Ms-article' in wikipedia:
Quote:In other European languages, non-sexist usage in this regard usually amounts to using words more or less equivalent to Mrs. (madame, Fr.; señora, Es.; senhora, Pt.; signora, It.; Frau, De.; bean-uasal, Ga. and Gd.) for both married and unmarried women, and whether they take their husband's name or not. This makes sense as these titles are usually the direct feminine equivalents of the male titles (monsieur, Fr.; señor, Es.; senhor, Pt.; signore, It.; Herr, De.; máistir, Ga.; maighstir, Gd.), whereas the equivalent of Miss is a diminutive of the female equivalent (mademoiselle, Fr.; señorita, Es.; senhorita, Pt.; signorina, It.; Fräulein, De.; ógbhean-uasal, Ga.; maighdeann-uasal, Gd.).
