Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site dciem.UUCP
Path: utzoo!dciem!ntt
From: ntt@dciem.UUCP (Mark Brader)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: Mister/Master Miss/Mrs./Ms.
Message-ID: <408@dciem.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 26-Sep-83 19:14:49 EDT
Article-I.D.: dciem.408
Posted: Mon Sep 26 19:14:49 1983
Date-Received: Tue, 27-Sep-83 06:47:26 EDT
References: <388@ihuxs.UUCP>
Organization: NTT Systems Inc., Toronto, Canada
Lines: 20

When I was single, I wanted to abolish ALL these "titles*", and I tried
never to use "Mr." for myself.  However, when married people share the
same surname, it is sometimes convenient to refer to "Mr. & Mrs. X".
So my ideal goes like this:  "Mr." is restricted to married men.  "Mr." and
"Mrs." are both used only in social-type contexts where marital status or
pairing is important.  In every other context, use first names; or when
being formal, last name only.  Many newspapers have style guides that
specify referring to a man the first time by full name without "title",
and subsequently by last name only; some even do do it for women, I think.
So it's not as odd an idea as it sounds.

When "Ms." first came out it sounded really offensive to me, as if the person
was ashamed of their marital status and couldn't bring themself--er, herself--
to use her first name.  I've mellowed, though.

*This term may do in America, but in Britain a you only have a "title" if you
 are a "Sir" or a "Lord" or ... ; the best alternative I've seen is "handle",
 used by Phil Eastman of the Univ. of Waterloo, which encompassed "Dr." also.

Mark Brader, NTT Systems Inc.