[Deckard]

Originally Posted by Sean

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 I simply find Miss to be an outdated term, certainly in my professional life.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.

Originally Posted by Sean

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...

Originally Posted by Deckard

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.

Originally Posted by Sean

"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.