Proper and Formal Addressing for Invites.

MrsMarende

I have a few questions about addressing the invites. 

1. Do you ALWAYS address the woman first?  example on my brothers invite do I list him first of his girlfriend? 

2. When listing non married couples I have it as Mr. Jeffrey Smith & Miss Breanna Smith. Is that right? 

3. When addressing Married Couples different last name I have it the same as above but with Mrs instead of Miss

4. Addressing Married Couples same last name do you address Mr & Mrs. John & Jane Doe or Mrs. Jane & Mr John Doe? 

Thanks for everyone's help!

Maggie0829

@CMGragain this one is for you

southernbelle0915

MrsMarende said:

I have a few questions about addressing the invites. 

1. Do you ALWAYS address the woman first?  example on my brothers invite do I list him first of his girlfriend? Do they live together? If so:

Mr. BrotherFirst BrotherLast

Ms. GirlfriendFirst GirlfriendLast

2. When listing non married couples I have it as Mr. Jeffrey Smith & Miss Breanna Smith. Is that right? Use Ms. (not Miss) for an adult woman.

3. When addressing Married Couples different last name I have it the same as above but with Mrs instead of Miss Use Ms. for a woman who did not change her last name.

4. Addressing Married Couples same last name do you address Mr & Mrs. John & Jane Doe or Mrs. Jane & Mr John Doe? Traditional wording = Mr. and Mrs. John Doe; including the woman's first name would be Mrs. Jane and Mr. John Doe.

Thanks for everyone's help!

Here's a good link to a guide:

http://blog.crane.com/2012/02/03/wedding-etiquette-how-to-address-your-envelopes/

CMGragain

Yes, the Crane's link says it all.  Either Miss or Ms. is correct for an unmarried woman, but many do prefer Ms. these days.  Don't use it for an older woman unless you know she prefers it.

MrsMarende

Thank you, so you do not always have to list the woman first right? like in my brothers case. 

southernbelle0915

MrsMarende said:

Thank you, so you do not always have to list the woman first right? like in my brothers case. 

No, not always. It depends on the situation. Check out that link and it'll tell you what's what. Good luck!

I should add that if you aren't using inner envelopes, use the inner envelope label when addressing. @CMGragain - that's right for not using inner envelopes, correct?

ashleyep

If a couple lived together and had different last names (married or not), I did the woman's name first. If the couple didn't live together, I put the one I was closest too (usually only one of them was my friend) with their SO next and sent it to the one I was closest to.

huskypuppy14

For unmarried couples, I would list whoever you are closer to first. So for your brother, list him first, because he is the primary guest, then his GF. There is no "and" between unmarried couples, and you never use an ampersand (&).

Mr. John Doe

Ms. Kelly Clark

MrsMarende

I noticed on the link that on married couples it only gives the option of Mr. & Mrs. John Doe. Is it then never appropriate to put the females name on the envelope? 

ashleyep

MrsMarende said:

I noticed on the link that on married couples it only gives the option of Mr. & Mrs. John Doe. Is it then never appropriate to put the females name on the envelope? 

According to old school, traditional etiquette. No, not if you're doing Mr. and Mrs. You could say John and Jane Doe, but formally it would be Mr. and Mrs. John Doe. But you should always address people how they prefer to be addressed, if you know they don't like that format, don't do it.

huskypuppy14

MrsMarende said:

I noticed on the link that on married couples it only gives the option of Mr. & Mrs. John Doe. Is it then never appropriate to put the females name on the envelope? 

If the wife has her husbands last name, traditionally it should be Mr. and Mrs. John Doe. If the wife has kept her own name, you separate their names with "and": Ms. Jane Kelley and Mr. John Doe.

This is the difference between married couples with different last names, and unmarried couples.

 Use "and" for married.

Now if the couple prefers Mr. and Mrs. John and Jane Doe, that's fine, but it's not traditional. You shouldn't just do it because you prefer it.

biggrouch

Now if the couple prefers Mr. and Mrs. John and Jane Doe, that's fine, but it's not traditional. You shouldn't just do it because you prefer it.

I agree that you should address people how they want to be addressed, including if they prefer the "Mr. & Mrs. John Doe" form of address, but I think by "traditional" you mean "sexist." It's a little disingenuous to hide behind "tradition" when counseling someone that married women, by default, should be addressed in such a way that almost entirely subsumes their identities to their husbands', and they have to actively express a preference in order to be addressed as equals on your invitations. This is not just tradition and tradition doesn't magically get excused from the questions of equality and justice just because you're printing in gold ink.

The post linked on crane gets even worse: for example, it says that if the couple are both doctors, you can address the envelope to "Dr. and Mrs. Smith." Um, really? Reading that made me livid, and I'm not even a doctor. It's just the thought of someone casually dismissing your degree because you happen to be a woman, but respectfully using your husband's proper title. Bull. Shit.

CMGragain

biggrouch said:

Now if the couple prefers Mr. and Mrs. John and Jane Doe, that's fine, but it's not traditional. You shouldn't just do it because you prefer it.

I agree that you should address people how they want to be addressed, including if they prefer the "Mr. & Mrs. John Doe" form of address, but I think by "traditional" you mean "sexist." It's a little disingenuous to hide behind "tradition" when counseling someone that married women, by default, should be addressed in such a way that almost entirely subsumes their identities to their husbands', and they have to actively express a preference in order to be addressed as equals on your invitations. This is not just tradition and tradition doesn't magically get excused from the questions of equality and justice just because you're printing in gold ink.

The post linked on crane gets even worse: for example, it says that if the couple are both doctors, you can address the envelope to "Dr. and Mrs. Smith." Um, really? Reading that made me livid, and I'm not even a doctor. It's just the thought of someone casually dismissing your degree because you happen to be a woman, but respectfully using your husband's proper title. Bull. Shit.

Not everyone shares your views.
When you address mail, you address it to a person's formal title.  Everyone has one, even children.  For example, you would address Kate Windsor as "Her Royal Highness, the Duchess of Cambridge", not Kate Windsor, though that is now her name.

Socially, you address a married couple as a unit.  The usual form is "Mr. and Mrs. John Doe".  If you are addressing a mail to a person individually, "Mrs. John Doe" is the correct title.  This is not her NAME.  It is her formal title.  Her name is "Mary Doe", but you do not address mail this way.

Since times have changed, many women work professionally.  Business mail is addressed to Ms. Mary Doe, which is her business title.  You would not address business mail to Mrs. John Doe.

Since there have been many etiquette changes since the 1960s (I was there!), many ladies prefer to be addressed socially as a couple as "Ms. Mary Doe and Mr. John Doe".  (Emily Post)  They are still being addressed as a unit, but the woman's first name is included.  This does NOT mean that traditional wording is wrong or incorrect.

What is absolutely incorrect is for you to enforce your views on other people, addressing them in a manner which they do not use. This is rude and presumptuous on your part. The women's movement was founded to give women CHOICES, not to enforce a new set of rules.

My sister-in-law is a doctor.  Socially, she prefers Mrs. John Doe.  Professionally, she is Doctor Mary Doe.  She is not offended by either title, but she isn't hung up about her medical degree unless she is at work.

PS.  Either Miss Jane Doe or Ms. Jane Doe is proper for a never married woman, regardless of age.
Widows generally keep their traditional title of Mrs. John Doe, but not always.  Divorcees usually use Ms. Jane Doe.

MrsMarende

I decided to include the ladies name it felt more comfortable that way. I thought the personality of the women would prefer that. Thank you everyone for the link and help

lavenderfields13

biggrouch said:

Now if the couple prefers Mr. and Mrs. John and Jane Doe, that's fine, but it's not traditional. You shouldn't just do it because you prefer it.

I agree that you should address people how they want to be addressed, including if they prefer the "Mr. & Mrs. John Doe" form of address, but I think by "traditional" you mean "sexist." It's a little disingenuous to hide behind "tradition" when counseling someone that married women, by default, should be addressed in such a way that almost entirely subsumes their identities to their husbands', and they have to actively express a preference in order to be addressed as equals on your invitations. This is not just tradition and tradition doesn't magically get excused from the questions of equality and justice just because you're printing in gold ink.

The post linked on crane gets even worse: for example, it says that if the couple are both doctors, you can address the envelope to "Dr. and Mrs. Smith." Um, really? Reading that made me livid, and I'm not even a doctor. It's just the thought of someone casually dismissing your degree because you happen to be a woman, but respectfully using your husband's proper title. Bull. Shit.

SITB

This would really piss me off too if I were a doctor. Why should my husband be addressed as Dr. and not me??

Honestly though, I don't even understand why there's a need to put a professional title such as Dr. on a wedding inviation. I'm not particularly etiquette savvy but I just don't get it. I'm inviting you to my wedding, a social occasion, who cares if you're a doctor?

biggrouch

@CMGragain, I literally opened my post with "I agree that you should address people how they want to be addressed, including if they prefer the Mr. & Mrs. John Doe form of address." Calling me rude and presumptuous, if you were in fact speaking to me, which I assume you were since you were quoting me, for "addressing them in a manner which they do not use" is a completely irrelevant, and weirdly belligerent, attack.

Leaving aside the notion that my saying it's sexist to address someone as Mrs. John Doe if you don't know for sure that she prefers it, is somehow itself oppressive to women (um, what? I'm saying you should probably give her the respect of using her full name unless she CHOOSES differently in which case you should respect that... sooo, pretty much the same amount of choice), and leaving aside the notion that feminism is about women doing whatever they want without criticism (yes, it's about freedom for women, but in terms of society giving them responsibility and equality and respect, not about shutting down discussion of how the patriarchy may be affecting various aspects of our lives), you cannot simply declare your own beliefs apolitical by calling them "tradition" and "formal" and "title." Traditional or no, these titles are sexist. A man who's a doctor gets called Doctor no matter what, but you can choose whether or not to address a woman who's a doctor as "Doctor," according to that guide. That shows such immense disrespect for women's educational and professional advancement that it is patently absurd for anyone to try to argue that this supposedly "official" tradition is not sexist.

You stated previously that someone should use the traditional form unless they know the woman prefers it the other way, whereas I am saying that starting with sexist assumptions (like "Oh, she probably doesn't care if I use her actual name, she's fine being addressed by someone else's first name") is, well, sexist; and that you should start with egalitarian assumptions (everyone's whole name gets used) while switching to the other form only if you know the woman prefers it that way (again, I STILL believe that you should address anyone as Mrs. John Doe who prefers to be addressed as such; it seems to need frequent repeating, so I'm repeating it here). My argument for abandoning this tradition qua tradition but keeping it when someone prefers it is not "imposing my views on other people" any more nor less than anyone who advocates for following "tradition" by default. Like many traditions, this one reeks of sexism whether its proponents admit it or not.

CMGragain

This is simply your own personal opinion.

mollybarker11

biggrouch said:

Now if the couple prefers Mr. and Mrs. John and Jane Doe, that's fine, but it's not traditional. You shouldn't just do it because you prefer it.

I agree that you should address people how they want to be addressed, including if they prefer the "Mr. & Mrs. John Doe" form of address, but I think by "traditional" you mean "sexist." It's a little disingenuous to hide behind "tradition" when counseling someone that married women, by default, should be addressed in such a way that almost entirely subsumes their identities to their husbands', and they have to actively express a preference in order to be addressed as equals on your invitations. This is not just tradition and tradition doesn't magically get excused from the questions of equality and justice just because you're printing in gold ink.

The OP specifically asked how to address her invitations the proper/formal (ie traditional) way.....

The 'Mrs John Smith' thing is archaic but so are a lot of (most?) elements of weddings. Things like veils have icky symbolic pasts but if someone starts a thread asking about birdcage vs cathedral length I'm not gonna tell her off for it.

I'm feminist and don't think sexism should ever be excused because "that's how it's always been" or whatever but I also don't think envelopes tend to bring up questions of equality and justice for most people.

biggrouch

And your opinion is what, a scientific fact? Good to know. I admit, I've let my subscription to the Journal of Cutting-Edge Research in 1950s Sexism lapse recently, so sometimes I do miss the latest developments.

CMGragain

It isn't my opinion.  It is the opinion of Crane's, Amy Vanderbilt, and Emily Post corp.
I have debated you in the past.  You are not open to anyone else's opinion except your own.  I'm not wasting any more time.
OP, I'm glad you found your answer.

biggrouch

@mollybarker -- that's a good point, the post's title said "formal" so maybe I should have assumed she wanted the straight-up Jane Austen rules. People throwing around a lot of "shoulds" and "shouldn'ts" just made me a little ragey (and I'll note that the OP didn't end up wanting to follow the traditional rules either). But @MrsMarende, I'm sorry if my rageyness interfered with you getting good answers.

ashleyep

biggrouch said:

@mollybarker -- that's a good point, the post's title said "formal" so maybe I should have assumed she wanted the straight-up Jane Austen rules. People throwing around a lot of "shoulds" and "shouldn'ts" just made me a little ragey (and I'll note that the OP didn't end up wanting to follow the traditional rules either). But @MrsMarende, I'm sorry if my rageyness interfered with you getting good answers.

When we say *should* we mean according to traditional etiquette. Usually that's followed up by a suggestion that might not be technically correct (like all of the suggestions for how to incorporate the woman's name) but that you or your guests might prefer. This is, after all, the etiquette forum.

I'm a feminist too. Personally, for me, it doesn't bother me to be addressed as Mrs. HisName LastNAme on formal, social correspondence. In these days that pretty much only means wedding invitations. I don't think you're passing judgement on my worth as a woman or wife by doing so. I know you're just following some old-school guidelines.

MrsMarende

I did think that I wanted the traditional, however as I typed in each friends name it just felt wrong, most of the people invited are women who happened to be married and I didn't like not having the invite address their name specifically. I realize it breached traditional etiquette, but I got a good array of opinions and felt after everything that neither was a bad option, although one may be a little more proper.