It's not cute and it's not funny

[ailbhe]

Why I am not Mrs Robert Collier.

History matters.

Comments

[grumpyolddog.livejournal.com]

History is dead. Anyway, what's the big deal about an 18th century perversion of a far older common-law tradition in which both parties were deemed wholly responsible the acts of the other? Without couverture, Catherine of Aragon could not have legally commanded the army that crushed the Scots while Henry VIIIth was busy wasting time in Calais.

I could produce literally hundreds of other examples where the law was empoering rather than restrictive.

There are fine and respectable reasons for keeping your own name on marriage. This? This is silly.

[ailbhe]

Fuck you.

[rmc28]

It happens that I don't like being considered property of my husband, and the form of address that dates from when that was normal. Mrs Rachel Finch - no problem. Mrs Tony Finch - offensive, please do not use.

[grumpyolddog.livejournal.com]

A fine rebuttal and one I shall think about carefully.

Honestly though, why put in a link to an incomplete article with a stated feminist agenda in a publically unlocked livejournal post unless you expect commentary, opinion and, in fact further knowledge of the subject?

Also, why link to Wikipedia? There are other sources, some of which actually have an understanding of what they're publishing. That thing is a mess of personal power-plays and ill-thought-out political agendas compiled by the terminally bored and the effectively useless at the best of times.

[biascut.livejournal.com]

When my parents married, it was legally impossible for my father to rape my mother. When she said "I do", she effected activated consent to sex which lasted until fifteen years ago when the law changed.

It's not that long ago, wanker. And how DARE you decide which reasons are "silly" and which aren't? Who made you God?

[ailbhe]

Well, yes - though of course I'm not Mrs Ailbhe Collier either, but there's a whole other set of political reasons for that.

[hfnuala.livejournal.com]

What I really dislike is the complete denial of the aggression involved in addressing someone that way when you know they dislike it. It is a classic power play disguised by the surface veil of 'it's not a big deal.'

[pauamma]

Oooh, a troll. Isn't it cute?

[grumpyolddog.livejournal.com]

Nobody made me god; "silly" is subjective. I can say someting is silly without necessarily having to prove it or anything else. "Wanker", on the other hand, isn't subjective. It describes a very specific act so I can only respond with the usual "pics or it didn't happen".

I'm not trolling. This is an opinion peice in a public forum. If dissent is Not Allowed™ please make that plain. Otherwise, should I assume that my "Y" chromosomes mean that my opinion is worth less than yours?

[biascut.livejournal.com]

Yes, yes, very clever.

"An opinion piece" - this is Ailbhe's personal journal, not a newspaper or a political manifesto. Dismissing someone's opinions and calling them "silly" on a personal journal is simply damn rude, in my opinion.

You want debate, go to a debate site. You want to have a serious debate with feminist-identified women about feminist topics, learn to approach with a bit of humility. Your Y chromosome does not make your opinion less valid than mine, but if we choose to engage with your ill-informed opinions we are doing you a favour, so yes, you need to treat us and our opinions with respect or we WILL call you a troll and point and laugh.

[grumpyolddog.livejournal.com]

Please show me exactly where I'm ill-informed on the subject of courverture?

[biascut.livejournal.com]

You think it isn't important. It is clearly important to Ailbhe.

But actually, I meant uninformed on the subject of feminism, and uninformed in believing that anyone here cares what you think about couverture. Can I ask what your purpose in posting here is? What to you see as the goal of this discussion? Do you wish to become more informed, or are you seeking to tell us where we are wrong in caring about such inconsequential matters?

[biascut.livejournal.com]

You are so right.

[winterbay.livejournal.com]

If it is a troll it is possibly the most well articulated one I've seen so far :)

[artela.livejournal.com]

No, not a troll. Just someone with strong but opposing opinions... one's that I happen to not disagree with too much, even if I am a married woman :-)

[kindermord.livejournal.com]

I disagree. But I'm content to let you all go hang on your own way, while I go hang in mine.

[surelars.livejournal.com]

Do people actually ever do that anymore? I remember my mum telling me how mad it made her when people addressed that way back in, umm, the 60's.

I haven't heard that form here since I was a wee lad. Is it still in common use there? It's so darn insulting in so many ways; I can't imagine anyone using it.

[gmh.livejournal.com]

Hmf. I find myself somewhat impelled to act as advocatus diaboli here.

I meant uninformed on the subject of feminism

While grumpyolddog may not agree with Ailbhe's POV here, it does not make him uninformed on the subject of feminism. Furthermore, although they'd probably reject the term, his mother and sister are considerably more 'feminist' than many who'd wave the term around; there's very little room for girly nonsense when you're running a small farm in the West Country.

and uninformed in believing that anyone here cares what you think about couverture

As are we all. Can you or I or anyone else be truly certain that anyone ultimately gives a toss about what the chattering classes say to each other?

And when did anyone acquire the right to speak for anyone else?

These are my opinions, those are your opinions, those are grumpyolddog's opinions and those are ailbhe's opinions. They may overlap from time to time and place to place; and they may also differ, but they belong to each of us and we all have the right to them.


Can I ask what your purpose in posting here is?

Lessee. He's known Ailbhe in person for over 9 years (as have I). Though I wouldn't agree with everything either of them said, I'd call them both good friends.

As such, it's not an amazing surprise to find him reading Ailbhe's journal; he does it because (oddly enough) he cares enough about her opinions to read them.

It doesn't mean he has to agree; and he's not the sort to shy away from telling someone that he thinks they're wrong.

(It has been remarked that grumpyolddog is to diplomacy what napalm is to garden management.)

The response made a couple of posts ago was a fair enough comment, IMO:

This is an opinion peice in a public forum. If dissent is Not Allowed™ please make that plain

I am somewhat disquieted by the implicitly exclusionary tone of your response to him, and by the conflation of honest dissent with deliberate provocation.

Admittedly, I know both of them in person, and am therefore not simply going on the words written here; and I suspect that it was an honest mistake on your part rather than any deliberate dismissal.

*sigh* - I may personally wish that people might express themselves more carefully on occasions, but God forbid that any of us be pressured into not expressing themselves - whether it is because a woman's opinion is felt not to matter - or because a man's is not.

[naath.livejournal.com]

Ugh, yes. I totally agree.

(My mother insists on being Mrs Dad's-name-in-full; I'm not sure what I should do there. On the one hand I want to respect her wishes, but on the other hand I don't want to be referring to that historical nastyness)

[biascut.livejournal.com]

OK, I'm going to completely ignore the part about grumpyolddog's mother and sister because it's entirely irrelevant. Dude. If being related to strong women were a substitute for a passing acquaintance with or commitment to feminism, we wouldn't NEED feminism, because there are plenty of strong women around and always have been.

I have asked grumpyolddog what he sees as the purpose of this debate, and I mean it as a genuine question. It's pretty evident to me that this is an issue which is both personal and very important to Ailbhe. As far as I can see, this isn't true for grumpyolddog: if there was any suggestion that he did care deeply about it, I'd have more respect for his opinion. But I think he just wants a "debate", where "debate" means pointless point-scoring, rather than any serious discussion of the topic. Nor do I see him asking why this is important to Ailbhe, or why she feels that history is relevant. Again, if he did, if he evinced a genuine desire to learn or to understand her point of view, I'd have more respect for him.

So what I see is a man stating his own opinion forcefully, and engaging in petty point-scoring, after it has been made clear that his contribution is not welcome. That is the reason I responded to him as I would a troll. I don't see any evidence that grumpyolddog cares deeply about this topic, nor that he really cares why it's important to Ailbhe, and I think it IS trollish to treat a post like this, on an emotive personal matter, as material for cheap point-scoring and showing off how clever he is. And it's also a technique used by men to dismiss feminist arguments for generations.

I hope that clears up where I'm coming from.

(And I'm aware that I'm in danger of doing the same thing myself, so, ailbhe, many apologies if I'm overstepping the boundaries of politeness here and I will shut up after this unless you tell me you don't mind.)

[rjw76]

Someone did it to me this morning. After they had been told that I haven't even changed my name.

*still fuming*

[gmh.livejournal.com]

Everyone should be called what they want to be called, not what someone else thinks they should be.

As such, clanwilliam retains her original surname; and I'd never for a moment think of asking her to change it.

OTOH, paul_kruzycki elected to change his surname to that of his wife renarde; and it would be rood to call him by his maiden name.

I'd say your position is pretty simple: call her Mrs Dad if she wants you to. It's her marriage, and she and her husband have presumably made their decision on the matter; if you refuse to recognise their right to do so, then you're actually giving something of an insult to both of them, regardless of any historically-based trouser-wearing.

[rjw76]

I would probably go with addressing envelopes in a non-committal way, eg "Mrs [surname]" (I assume you don't want your actual surname being thrown around LJ?). IE, not giving in, but not doing the opposite either.

[naath.livejournal.com]

I don't mind; I just thought that putting my Dad's first name on LJ might be bad.

I sneakily haven't posted them anything... I do generally just go for Mrs Cousins if I need to; avoiding the issue.

[naath.livejournal.com]

Gosh, you're married now aren't you. Are you Mrs W. then? (not that I'm likely to ever need to address you in such a way)