A Case For "Ms"

I am going to give the world the benefit of the doubt, and go on the assumption that, like the woman I was speaking to a few days ago, the majority of people don't really know what Ms means. The alternative is to put everyone down as misogynistic bastards with values in line with that of a prehistoric dinosaur. No offence to dinosaurs.

The way I see it, Master and Miss are for boys and girls under the age of 18, respectively; Mr and Ms are for men and women over the age of 18, respectively. I don't see why we need to start defining women by their marital status, as if, somehow, being a Mrs makes you more or less important. I imagine that back in the day it was a way of branding women, of saying to other men, "She's mine, assholes. Back off." Much like the engagement ring, it's like whipping out your piece and taking a piss on someone, just so everyone knows "Bob woz ere" - and if a dude is gonna piss on you ladies, then you need to piss back. When he gives you an engagement ring, give him one back. When you change your title to Mrs, he should be changing his to Msr (or something more phonetically feasible; I dunno, I haven't really given the technicalities a huge amount of thought yet).

A few weeks ago, I was filling in a CRB application and, as I always do, I checked the box Ms. When I got to the end of the application and tried submitting it, it wouldn't let me - not until I had filled in the box Previous surname. Of course, I couldn't do this, because I have only ever had the one surname. Reluctantly, I had to check the box Miss instead.

Even when, bureaucratically, a system allows you to choose between Miss and Ms or Mrs and Ms, very often the reality is that you can only be a Ms if you are married, divorced or widowed - in which case, we are still defining women by their marital status. In what world is that OK? In what world are men men, and women simply accessories to men?

In this world, apparently.