Women – still defined by marriage on an everyday basis.
Identity is important – but it’s even more important if you’re a woman it seems. Equalist co-creator Hannah Marsh explores the daily equalist challenges of ordering a new pair of shoes
My shoes hurt.
Bought for a mere £10 from a well known fashion retailer, my work-ready ballet pumps consist of slender soles through which every uneven edge of pavement can be felt, and through which the slightest bit of moisture on the ground quickly seeps. The paper thin foot covering is hardly worth being there, and there are plentiful pock marks where I’ve stubbed my toe causing myself to inelegantly hop on the spot in agony and instead of actively protecting my tootsies, the material has wimpishly given way and ripped.
So anyway. I decided it was time this cheap shoe wearing stopped. I was going to bin the buggers and buy myself a proper pair of work shoes, sturdy and supportive, nothing too flash, but something reliable that would suit any occasion. The Coldplay of the footwear world if you will.
But I digress. It was in the act of attempting to buy such a pair of shoes that I encountered a situation I’ve come up against countless times in day to day life. Something so innocuous I’m sure many of us just tick the box without thinking. But it’s something that always grates on me, and every time I find myself in the situation, I find a small rush of frustration rushes to my throat.
My chosen reliable high street shop didn’t have the shoes I wanted in my size.
So I trotted along to the service counter to order them for delivery.
“Surname?”
“Marsh”
“First name?”
“Hannah”
“Miss or Mrs?”
“Erm…”
Why, can someone please tell me why the actual FUCK, us women have to define ourselves in countless everyday situations by our marital status?
The equivalent of Miss for men is Master – a juvenile, infantile title reserved for little boys in short trousers, on their way to earning their adult title of Mr.
But once they attain the giddy adult heights of Mr-dom, that’s it. Their identity is safe. No one asks to know whether they are unmarried and therefore suitable only to be described by a child’s title, or married and therefore worthy of being upgraded to a suitably promotional title that applauds their success in landing themselves a spouse.
Clearly the only acceptable alternative is Ms, but I find that problematic too. It smacks of defensiveness, of aggressive refusal to comply and of course it’s relatively useless as it’s really only unmarried women who don’t want to infantalise themselves by calling themselves a Miss that opt to use it – rendering just one more distinction, that of Rebellious Female.
Instead of a Child-Woman, yet to find her true identity manifested through her husband, or a Married Woman (fanfare, applause etc), you still mark yourself out as unmarried and remain thus defined in society’s eyes. Which sticks in my throat.
Ms has balls, it makes a point, you don’t write Ms unless you’re making a very definite statement. It’s not casual, it juts its chin out and stares down shop assistants and census forms, stating with certainty and a touch of defiance.
Which is fine, but it still defines what category of woman you are and I’d love it if I didn’t have to.
Mr doesn’t have to. Mr just means I am an adult male. It gives nothing away about marital status and sets no store by it either.
I don’t see myself as defensive, and although I often admire aggressive refusals to comply with society’s norms, in my everyday life I’d quite like to just be able to answer a basic question without having to staunchly defend my marital status and whether I myself place value on it or not. I’d rather save my rebellious activity for bigger fish than ordering a pair of work shoes in a department store.
Although its tempting to reply ‘Dr’, or maybe even ‘Lady’, or for laughs ‘Sir’, it remains something that creeps under my skin and irritates me every time I stare down at those boxes or have to answer the question.
It’s one of those small, niggling, daily reminders that things are not equal. I am an adult woman. Why should I have to define myself further on casual forms and information documents? Why cling onto these archaic titles that still categorise women by their marital status? Or if we’re going for equality why not keep men as Masters until they get a ring on their finger and finally ascend to the lofty heights of Mr so that we know exactly who’s married and who’s not – hey, it could come in handy for those on the pull.
There is hope though. Last year France ditched the title Mademoiselle, the diminutive equivalent of our Miss. All French women now go by the title Madame, to match the male Monsieur, defined now solely by their gender and nothing else. What a triumph!
But until we decide to embrace equality on this bureaucratic level I guess I’ll be sticking with Ms.
The Equalist 