Brussels + PC brigade = Daily Mail OUTRAGE!

[Deckard]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7952261.stm

In recent days the European Parliament has again caused "outrage" in the British press after publishing a pamphlet asking staff to refrain from using the titles Miss or Mrs. "Ludicrous", one Tory MEP told the Daily Mail. "Political correctness gone mad", he continued. Another, in the Daily Telegraph, branded it a "waste of taxpayers' money".
This is so full of all the requisite ingredients and cliches, I had to first check it wasn't a parody.

I mean I have to ask, what sort of spiteful, backward nation is so stuck in their ways and consumed by selfishness that they aren't willing to make even the tiniest concession in the way they refer to a section of society for the subtle but general/long-term benefit it may have, instead opting to turn an issue of basic courtesy into an issue of political correctness?

Oh that's right - my one. :rolleyes: .....

It is more than 30 years since Ms began to gain ground among a US feminist movement keen to find a title which did not denote a woman's marital status. Decades later - while being a Ms might be seen in Brussels as simple as being, well, a Mr - many elsewhere are less keen to catch on.

Being a Ms is, frankly, unheard-of in some quarters.

"I don't think it's very helpful," said Charles Kidd, editor of Debretts Peerage and Baronetage - the guide to aristocracy. "I was brought up to address a married woman as Mrs John Smith, for example."

Oh you were brought up to do that were you? Well that's the end of that argument then. Sorted. Thanks for resolving it.

Just pathetic.

Look I know "Mrs/Miss" aren't comparable to terms of actual intended abuse, but that's not the point. What re(eeeeeeeee)ally winds me up is this same old complete LACK of generosity of spirit displayed by those on the right who stubbornly refuse to see any positive attempt to challenge the status quo or hold it up to a mirror as "political correctness gone mad".

They could choose to view this as a positive move, even if they believe it to be just a gesture. They could choose to recognise it as an issue of courtesy, of basic human consideration, of acknowledging the inherent backwardsness of only focusing on the marital status of women and not men.

Or... they could choose to ignore all that and just kick and scream about how they're having to change their ways (never mind that often they're not even being told, they're just being asked) and reinforcing how, again, they're the real victims in all this - of the great "PC brigade".

Invariably they choose the selfish, ungenerous, latter.

I too was brought up to write Miss and Mrs. I then reached an age where I appreciated the benefits of using Ms - not just the sense of encouraging an equal footing, but the obvious logistical benefits too.

The change was hardly a big deal.

And these same quarters - the Tories, the Mail, my own family (I'm ashamed to say) - will also use the same arguments to whinge about how unfair it is that they "can't even buy a gollywog in the shops these days" or "why CAN'T we call them Pakis and chinkies? We don't mean anything by it..." and I have to ask, are these people being deliberately wilfully ignorant?

Had I not batted for this side, I know my family would be making the same case about "queers" (in the pre-reclaimed, non-ironic sense of the word).

But with Ms, I'm just curious: is there this same resistance to adopting the term in the States, Canada, NZ, etc as there is over here? Or is it just us?

As I say, the sky's not going to fall in if we use Miss or Mrs, no-one's claiming that. But the point is, it's such a small thing to ask - isn't it?

[Sean]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7952261.stm


This is so full of all the requisite ingredients and cliches, I had to first check it wasn't a parody.

I mean I have to ask, what sort of spiteful, backward nation is so stuck in their ways and consumed by selfishness that they aren't willing to make even the tiniest concession in the way they refer to a section of society for the subtle but general/long-term benefit it may have, instead opting to turn an issue of basic courtesy into an issue of political correctness?

Oh that's right - my one. :rolleyes: .....



Oh you were brought up to do that were you? Well that's the end of that argument then. Sorted. Thanks for resolving it.

Just pathetic.

Look I know "Mrs/Miss" aren't comparable to terms of actual intended abuse, but that's not the point. What re(eeeeeeeee)ally winds me up is this same old complete LACK of generosity of spirit displayed by those on the right who stubbornly refuse to see any positive attempt to challenge the status quo or hold it up to a mirror as "political correctness gone mad".

They could choose to view this as a positive move, even if they believe it to be just a gesture. They could choose to recognise it as an issue of courtesy, of basic human consideration, of acknowledging the inherent backwardsness of only focusing on the marital status of women and not men.

Or... they could choose to ignore all that and just kick and scream about how they're having to change their ways (never mind that often they're not even being told, they're just being asked) and reinforcing how, again, they're the real victims in all this - of the great "PC brigade".

Invariably they choose the selfish, ungenerous, latter.

I too was brought up to write Miss and Mrs. I then reached an age where I appreciated the benefits of using Ms - not just the sense of encouraging an equal footing, but the obvious logistical benefits too.

The change was hardly a big deal.

And these same quarters - the Tories, the Mail, my own family (I'm ashamed to say) - will also use the same arguments to whinge about how unfair it is that they "can't even buy a gollywog in the shops these days" or "why CAN'T we call them Pakis and chinkies? We don't mean anything by it..." and I have to ask, are these people being deliberately wilfully ignorant?

Had I not batted for this side, I know my family would be making the same case about "queers" (in the pre-reclaimed, non-ironic sense of the word).

But with Ms, I'm just curious: is there this same resistance to adopting the term in the States, Canada, NZ, etc as there is over here? Or is it just us?

As I say, the sky's not going to fall in if we use Miss or Mrs, no-one's claiming that. But the point is, it's such a small thing to ask - isn't it?First time I've ever heard the argument to be honest. Personally, my first reaction is that I'm always amazed at what people find to be offended by. True, there is no comparable qualifier of marital status for men, and if a woman told me she would prefer to be refered to with "Ms" rather than "Miss" or "Mrs", then fine, that's no skin off my back - but I guess my big question would be, what exactly is inherently offensive about a title that identifies a woman's marital status? I mean, you're comparing it to using words like "Pakis", "chinkies" and "queers", but frankly I don't see how they're comparable. Those three examples are all inherently demeaning, disrespectful, derogatory names. "Miss" and "Mrs" just identifies marital status - nothing more. Honestly, so does a wedding ring, yet surely you don't view a wedding ring as being a derogatory piece of jewelry, do you?

So I guess the short answer is that I'm happy to refer to people however they prefer to be refered to, but I honestly don't understand where the offense is coming from.

[Rog]

I have to laugh about the use of the word 'outrage' in the daily mail........
who is outraged??:confused:.....
and another thing, when i see in the daily mail some figures regarding the costs of policing things i reckon that each copper gets about £200,000 for policing a football match.....and why does it cost some apallingly huge figure (i can't remember the exact amount) to 'launch the police helicopter':confused: helicopter fuel must retail around 10 grand a gallon:D
and as for mrs or miss or ms........i don't really mind, -whatever the lady prefers:o

[Deckard]

First time I've ever heard the argument to be honest. Personally, my first reaction is that I'm always amazed at what people find to be offended by.
I'm not sure that it's necessarily about offence Sean, certainly not in any major way.

Fear of causing offence doesn't lie behind my reasons for using Ms rather than Miss. I simply find Miss to be an outdated term, certainly in my professional life. I know plenty of women who agree, even though they don't find the term "offensive" as such. It's just a relic of a time when women were judged on their marital status in a way that men weren't, hence the unbalance. Ultimately I see the trend towards adopting the term Ms as a positive one and I'd be happy to see it used as interchangeably as Mr.

Whether that trend is occasionally enforced or voluntary is a separate issue, but remember there's nothing unreasonable about a public or private organisation providing guidelines for how they'd like their workforce to address people. That already happens in all sorts of ways.

The fact that this particular use is being requested doesn't necessarily indicate that it's considered a terrible word or that there are legions of offended women.

Just like the company boss who decides to make a Christmas card more relevant to his entire multi-ethnic workforce (who will celebrate Eid among other things at about the same time of year) by replacing Merry Christmas with "Happy Holiday". It doesn't then follow that he's doing it because they'd be otherwise offended.

I mean, you're comparing it to using words like "Pakis", "chinkies" and "queers", but frankly I don't see how they're comparable. Those three examples are all inherently demeaning, disrespectful, derogatory names.
Well no that's precisely what I'm not doing...
Look I know "Mrs/Miss" aren't comparable to terms of actual intended abuse .... As I say, the sky's not going to fall in if we use Miss or Mrs, no-one's claiming that.
I completely understand that they're not comparable in terms of scale of offence to the average person. However the parallel I'm drawing is that the argument people use to justify continuing to use the above words is similarly self-absorbed and lacking in generosity of spirit. Believe it or not, I know plenty of people who will do their best to argue that those words above are not inherently demeaning or derogatory. They'll insist that Paki is "just short for Pakistani" like Brit is short for British, without bothering to consider (or by wilfully ignoring) the historical baggage of the term used in its usual context ("You f***ing Paki"). They'll insist "chinky" is just a good-natured nickname based on a physical attribute and no harm is meant. They'll insist queer is acceptable "because that's what they call themselves these days, innit?". They'll say the same about "nigger", and how "it's just a variation of Negro, and if they can use it about themselves, why can't we?". And they'll follow it all with a grumble about how you can't say anything these days without some people getting offended, it's political correctness gone mad. The common thread here, the parallel, being that instead of opting to consider the positive, to offer something outward, they'll just note the negative, the minuscule infringement on their own freedom to use those words, and rest easy in the assumption that it's obviously just being done to placate some over-sensitive minorities (and women are a minority in the sense in which I mean that). That's what I think is a bit pathetic. It completely takes it in the wrong spirit and misses the point.

"Miss" and "Mrs" just identifies marital status - nothing more. Honestly, so does a wedding ring, yet surely you don't view a wedding ring as being a derogatory piece of jewelry, do you?
I didn't say anything about derogatory. Of course people can identify and promote their own marital status however they like, whether it's with a ring or a "Mrs". That's a separate issue.

[Deckard]

I have to laugh about the use of the word 'outrage' in the daily mail........
who is outraged??:confused:.....
Funnily enough, it's usually the Daily Mail readers rather than the minorities concerned.

Apart from me and my usual wall of words, that is. ;)

[BeautifulBurnout]

So weird.

I am in a profession where women are generally called "Miss" irrespective of marital status. I wouldn't want to be a Mzzzzz though. Dunno. It just doesn't really mean anything to me.

[Rog]

Funnily enough, it's usually the Daily Mail readers rather than the minorities concerned.

Apart from me and my usual wall of words, that is. ;)

yeah but no but....i know a few dm readers (my bad).......but as far as i can remember....they aint been outraged......i think it must be the nazi editor who's outraged....(oops! i used the N word....sorry all....haahhhahaha:D

[Strangelet]

I guess the cause of offense is that men are not so defined by their marriage status. They are Mr. by birth. Women are the ones who have to change their social identity when married. I think its the inconsistency between sexes that is at issue, which makes me side with Deckard.

And I agree with Sean, its unfair to say this is as much of an injustice as calling someone "chink" or "nigger". But I do find it real problem. That's because I think it stems from the idea that men feel entitled to enjoy fulfilling their own promiscuous desires, but women are generally inventoried, processed, and labeled. Just because men are too insecure to accept the idea they have their own sexual identity.

I see calling a woman Mrs. Bob Nobberton when they get married a gentle variation on the theme of having women wear burkhas after marrying, nothing but black when they are widowed, and/or thrown on the funeral pyre.

[//\/\/]

but what about madame? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97aB71F-430&feature=related);)

[Deckard]

I am in a profession where women are generally called "Miss" irrespective of marital status. I wouldn't want to be a Mzzzzz though. Dunno. It just doesn't really mean anything to me.
Calling someone "Miss" in that way - akin to "Sir" - seems fine to me. As you say, marital status is irrelevant in that context. And the only time I hear "Mrs" used as a vocal term of address without surname, it tends to be preceded by the word "Ooer" ;)

Just to be clear though, I'm not personally kicking up a fuss about the use of Miss or Mrs.

Rather, I'm kicking up a fuss about the sort of people prone to kicking up a fuss about Ms.

And using it to revel in their status as poor victims of the Great Conspiracy of the PC Brigade®.

I guess I'm just tired of that inherent inwardness, that ungenerous, inconsiderate, "Why should I?" attitude that prevails amongst the it's-PC-gone-mad crowd, of which Tory MPs and the Daily Mail so perfectly encapsulate.

Standing up for freedom of speech and recoiling at the ease with which people can get offended is one thing (well, ok, two things) and that's fair enough, and I'd happily defend those positions. But the kneejerk hostility to any attempt to consider the hidden (and less hidden) implications behind language... the instant dismissal that it's just words, that it's people "telling us what to do" - to me that just reeks of meanness and opportunism and, as I say, taking it in completely the wrong spirit.

[Deckard]

but what about madame? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97aB71F-430&feature=related);)
No, I don't think the fairer sex would like that. ;)