If I should ever marry again, then by default I would expect the woman to take my surname. If she has a profession or business based around another name, I can understand a need to continue use of that name but it need not stop her from taking mine as her legal name.

I would be open, as with most things, to discussion and would try to understand any thoughts and feelings she might have to the contrary but I don't imagine I'd be persuaded. I know of more than one unmarried couple where the woman has taken the man's name and it just seems right to me that a woman who belongs to me by marriage would take my name.

If the woman has a name from a previous marriage, then absolutely and without question, I would have her take my name. A refusal to do so would not be countenanced.

As for this nonsense of "Ms" in a society where the norm is for a married female to be addressed as "Mrs", I just see it as a way for a woman to offer insult to her husband. For sure, if it was normal to have a married version of the male honorific, I would happily adopt it - why not? (Actually it did change historically, in some circles, but the shortened version of both is still "Mr".)

A readers' forum post by Interesdom on Mon, 06/06/2005 - 00:29 | reply to this comment Mrs, Miss and Ms A readers' forum post by Louise C on Mon, 06/06/2005 - 04:37 | reply to this comment Historically, ,'Mistress' was the title used for all women, married or single. 'Miss' was originally a title only used to describe very young girls, or prostitutes. I think it became normal to address young women as 'miss' in about the 18th century.

Since I sometimes use my maiden name and sometimes my married name, I prefer to use 'Ms' when I use my maiden name, because otherwise sometimes people tend to assume that my maiden name is also my husband's name, which he finds very annoying.

リロード   新規 編集 凍結 差分 添付 複製 改名   トップ 一覧 検索 最終更新 バックアップ   ヘルプ   最終更新のRSS
Last-modified: Thu, 10 Feb 2022 17:30:27 JST (300d)