Why I Refuse to be Addressed as “MRS”

Has anyone ever noticed that for their entire life, men get to be referred to as Mr., while women have to choose between Ms., Miss, Mrs. etc? This is because women are defined by their relationships to men. It’s not always acceptable for women to be independent and have autonomy. This just goes to show how much value women are given alone. Women are defined in relation to men. So, if you are married, you are “Mrs.” because you are now part of your man (but of course no indication he is part of you).

Mrs. has traditionally been used to denote property. You are now taken, hands off, and now you have value because you belong to a man. Religiously, it may be seen as an indication that you are now part of your husband. Christianity teaches us that woman came from man. Emphasis relies not so much on the fact that Adam and Eve were made of one flesh, of one God, but that Eve CAME FROM Adam. The belief is that Eve was only created because, and for. Adam. Some imply Eve is worthless without Adam. Therefore “Mrs.” can be view accordingly.

If you are a Miss, you have never been married, if you are a “Miz/Ms.”, traditionally, you are widowed (hence WAS married to a man). These titles were once used more often in a more sexist society years ago. However, why do we insist on still using these titles? Why do people need to know if I am married, was married, widowed, etc? But yet, we do not need to know these things about men? What is the relevance exactly? Does my title change who I am as a person?

Underpinnings of ownership by men can also be evidenced in weddings when the father gives his daughter away. Years ago, women were the property of their fathers until they got married. At this point, ownership was then transferred to their husbands (another man) during the wedding ceremony. The same is true for taking your husband’s last name. Most women do it. Of course these examples have the nostalgia of tradition, and feelings of wanting to identify as a couple; two of one.

While I personally do plan on taking my husband to be’s last name, I also plan to keep my OWN last name. Why should I lose a part of myself? Lose my identity? Why is it assumed that a woman should have to, but never a man? Is his last name better than ours? Of course not. But the idea is that he is of more importance, hence his name. HIS lineage and children to be named after HIM. Men are of no more or less value than women, so why do we treat it otherwise? If fact, with an increasingly large number of single mothers, it would almost make more sense for children to take their mother’s last name.

I do see a trend where women are keeping their last name completely, or integrating it into their married name. Marriage is about much more than having the same last name. Changing names is more a matter of symbolism than anything. I do hope that men will slowly become more comfortable with women keeping their last names, or better yet, also integrating their wife’s last name into theirs as well. What a way to show their life partner respect and value.

We must be patient: men, just as women, are often controlled by expectations our general society has of “men” and “women”, with few people having the courage to be who they are without feeling they need to fit into this little box of definitions. It may be fair to assume that at this point, men feel less like men if they change their last name, after all, that is what a woman is “supposed” to do, that’s not masculine! If it’s not masculine, it must be feminine (polarization), and feminine is undervalued.

Ladies, make your own judgment call, but I know that when I marry shortly, my plans are to keep my identity and be recognized for my worth as a person, not as a woman married to a man. Any man who respects a woman would never force her to be referred to as Mrs. or take his last name.

I say all women hold one title just as men do, and go by Ms. ! (and it would make life a little less complicated).