Saturday, September 29, 2007

so apparently i don't have a name

2 pieces of addressed mail came yesterday. Both of them were at least in part to me. Neither of them had my name on them. I can usually pass it off as "old fashioned" and not worry about it too much...but for whatever reason, yesterday it irritated me.
I have a name people.*

*the only person that can address something to me but that calls me mrs J. T. is my grandma. i suppose the other piece of mail from yesterday was likely addressed by someone who is also my grandmother's age, but it doesn't matter. she is still the only one who is allowed to do that.

8 comments:

--Nathan-- said...

the only thing i'd have to say is everyone should be able to be called what they want (although people continue not to call me by what i ask: Super Sexy Hunk). if people know that you dont like the "traditional" way of being addressed then they should respect that... but if they dont know that you dont like that then i really dont think its sexist to write Mrs J.T. Some females i know really like the fact that they get addressed that way and dont think it takes anything away from them being their own person.

just my thoughts.

kris said...

There are lots of girls who would love to be Mrs. J T. They even have their own t-shirts.

--Nathan-- said...

but thats just because that J.T. is bringing sexy back... Jordan is actually the reason sexy went away.

kristen said...

ba doom doom...CLANG!


i agree that we should be addressed how we wish to be addressed. but to say that calling a married woman by Mrs. Husband's Firstname Husband's Lastname isn't routed in the old patriarchal sexism is being a little naive. even if some associate it with "traditional" now and don't find it sexist, that is fine, but it is routed in sexism.

I am perfectly happy if others are ok being addressed that way (and even though I didn't officially change my name, I don't have a problem with people calling me Mrs. K. T.), but having two pieces of mail on the same day that were addressed to me that way got me in the gut.

(ugh...that wasn't very eloquent. it must be Monday morning...)

Sandra said...

I'm with Kristen on this one. It should not be assumed that a woman has taken her husband's name, or that she would like to be called "Mrs. J.T.", simply because that may have been the norm in the past. It would be perfectly acceptable to ask her and then go with how she likes to be addressed but by only addressing mail to you by how you are connected to another person takes away the sense that you are an individual on your own, not simply someone's spouse. It would be like you, Nathan, receiving all your mail as Brother of Matt Kellett or Cousin of Jordan Tronsgard. But hey, what do I know? I don't have any of these name issues:)

--Nathan-- said...

i dont buy that its routed in sexism, thats like saying i shouldnt hold open doors for females because really thats just saying i dont think they are physically capable of doing it themselves.

BUT... i see your point . (sigh i miss these debates)

fuzzy wuzzy said...

I have no difficulty with addressing someone by their married LAST name, but agree that a person is still Sue Or Sally Or Kristen even if they are married. Who ever made up that stupid rule anyway. The way it went too was that when the spouse died, then you could be addressed by your own name. Go figure! How would a guy like to be called Mr. Kristen T. (or M for that matter)

lu said...

oh you know i understand this one.

ok i don't UNDERSTAND being called mrs j t, but i do get the frustration of the whole system it is rooted in.