Breaking customs and tradition F.I. is taking my last name .

CMGragain

southernbelle0915 said:

southernbelle0915 said:

CMGragain said:

All this is your own opinions.  When the etiquette books change, so will I, but I will not take the personal opinions of a few ladies as fact when they are not.
There is nothing wrong with Ms. Jane Doe.  That was a typo, and I apologized for it a while back.
Go back and read my original post on this thread.  I gave several CHOICES.  I have never objected to people prefering something different, and I DID say "traditional".  Sorry about the typo, though.

I do not object to Ms. Jane Doe, or Ms. Jane Doe and Mr. John Doe.  I even listed them as one of the choices.  So what are you arguing about?

I do object to someone telling me that my own personal preference is sexist.  Bull.  If you get a choice about your name, then so do I about mine.

It IS sexist though. You suggested that a woman who keeps her last name still has the social title "Mrs. John HerLastName". 

First of all, that's not even correct. If I'm a woman who keeps my last name (I happen to be), my social title is "Ms. Jane MyLastName". 

Second of all, the notion that a woman's social title changes (even if she keeps her last name) to include her husband's first name, yet a man's title doesn't change at all is inherently sexist. 

Assigning certain roles and rules based on sex is exactly the definition of sexism. I'm sorry if you don't like to think of this view as sexist, but that's exactly what it is. 

Sorry, but the standard etiquette books disagree with you.  I have the option to use Mrs. John Doe, and this is still the default title.  Your choice is just as valid, and you are also correct in using it as your choice.
You do not have the right to judge someone else's preference.  I do not judge yours.

Please cite where in your "standard etiquette books" it says that my social title is Mrs. John MyLastName.

southernbelle0915

CMGragain said:

southernbelle0915 said:

CMGragain said:

This is the most liberal guide I use:  http://www.emilypost.com/communication-and-technology/social-names-and-titles/293-womens-names-and-titles

Again, please cite a standard etiquette source that backs up what you said here about a woman who keeps her last name and a man who changes his. And why her title would be Mrs. John HerLast. Your link provides nothing in that (unless I'm missing it, please point it out).

Also, Emily Post is old school, dead, and her kids/grandkids have basically hijacked her name to make money. You've said as much yourself on various occasions.

This is not the same question you asked me.  You just can't admit that you are wrong, can you?  This information is
straight off the modern internet site.  Shame on your for making up new
rules.
My original post answered the OP's question, and I doubt she is still around after reading all the nonsense on this thread.
I'm done!  I have answered both your last question and the OP's original question!


Is this a joke? You are the one who pulled "Mrs. John HerLast" out of your ass (making up your own rules...shame on you). And then when asked to cite your source, you couldn't do it.

Then you got bent out of shape because people called you out on giving sexist advice, which you claim isn't sexist because...reasons.

So shame on me? Please CMGr....

redoryx

CMGragain said:

southernbelle0915 said:

southernbelle0915 said:

CMGragain said:

All this is your own opinions.  When the etiquette books change, so will I, but I will not take the personal opinions of a few ladies as fact when they are not.
There is nothing wrong with Ms. Jane Doe.  That was a typo, and I apologized for it a while back.
Go back and read my original post on this thread.  I gave several CHOICES.  I have never objected to people prefering something different, and I DID say "traditional".  Sorry about the typo, though.

I do not object to Ms. Jane Doe, or Ms. Jane Doe and Mr. John Doe.  I even listed them as one of the choices.  So what are you arguing about?

I do object to someone telling me that my own personal preference is sexist.  Bull.  If you get a choice about your name, then so do I about mine.

It IS sexist though. You suggested that a woman who keeps her last name still has the social title "Mrs. John HerLastName". 

First of all, that's not even correct. If I'm a woman who keeps my last name (I happen to be), my social title is "Ms. Jane MyLastName". 

Second of all, the notion that a woman's social title changes (even if she keeps her last name) to include her husband's first name, yet a man's title doesn't change at all is inherently sexist. 

Assigning certain roles and rules based on sex is exactly the definition of sexism. I'm sorry if you don't like to think of this view as sexist, but that's exactly what it is. 

Sorry, but the standard etiquette books disagree with you.  I have the option to use Mrs. John Doe, and this is still the default title.  Your choice is just as valid, and you are also correct in using it as your choice.
You do not have the right to judge someone else's preference.  I do not judge yours.

Please cite where in your "standard etiquette books" it says that my social title is Mrs. John MyLastName.

Are you just actually misreading @Southernbelle0915 's question or are you just refusing to admit you can't cite an answer to her question because you are wrong?

She's Ms. Jane Southernbelle. She marries John Northernyankee. But he becomes John Southernbelle. Are you still saying she now goes by Mrs. John Southernbelle? 

redheadbride15

I'm late to the party here, but I just want to say that the "tradition" of saying "Mrs. John LastName" has given me the heebie-jeebies ever since I was a small girl. Was I born a feminist? Or did I just have a normal negative gut reaction to the idea that by simply marrying, we relinquish the use of a major personal identifier (our first names)? That, in formal contexts, we essentially become nothing more than our husband's wife?!?

VulgarGirl

Anyone know what us fucking queers are supposed to do?

Wifey took my last name...is she Mrs. Vulgar Girl? Are we Mrs. and Mrs. Vulgar Girl? Is she even ALLOWED to use Mrs? Because she didn't take a man's last name. I am not a man. Her taking my last name did not make me "the man" of the relationship. 

And what the fuck are two dudes supposed to do? If Mike and Ken get married and Ken take's Mike's last name are they Mr. and Mr. Mike Lane? 

Or what if BOTH people choose a new last name to share? Who has to give up their first name then? 

Yeah see these old rules are bullshit because they only subscribed to one kind of relationship. A heterosexual relationship in which the woman takes her husband's last name. The completely refuse to account for ACTUAL FUCKING COUPLES who exist now that don't fit into the standard issue mold. It's fucking goddamn bullshit.

And of course there are also polyamours/triad/quad/ect couples to take into account as well.

ETA: Also what about women doctors who marry men? Does Dr. Alice Smith become Dr. John Smith? Even though John isn't a doctor? 

VulgarGirl

redheadbride15 said:

I'm late to the party here, but I just want to say that the "tradition" of saying "Mrs. John LastName" has given me the heebie-jeebies ever since I was a small girl. Was I born a feminist? Or did I just have a normal negative gut reaction to the idea that by simply marrying, we relinquish the use of a major personal identifier (our first names)? That, in formal contexts, we essentially become nothing more than our husband's wife?!?

Why in the world would you WANT to be more than your husband's wife? My god, being a man's wife should be all that you strive for and once you actually become someone's wife that is a badge of honor!

photokitty

I'm a big fan of addressing people how they desire to be addressed.

If I am uncertain and too lazy to ask I err on the side of Cranes:

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

If someone is trying to be polite and not an asshat, I'm going to try and not find offense. I will politely correct them so they can remedy it in the future. If someone refuses to acknowledge that I kept my maiden name and there fore am a Ms. then I'm going to get pissy and think you are rude as hell.

AddieCake

I go by Mrs. Adam Levine socially, of course.

redheadbride15

VulgarGirl said:

redheadbride15 said:

I'm late to the party here, but I just want to say that the "tradition" of saying "Mrs. John LastName" has given me the heebie-jeebies ever since I was a small girl. Was I born a feminist? Or did I just have a normal negative gut reaction to the idea that by simply marrying, we relinquish the use of a major personal identifier (our first names)? That, in formal contexts, we essentially become nothing more than our husband's wife?!?

Why in the world would you WANT to be more than your husband's wife? My god, being a man's wife should be all that you strive for and once you actually become someone's wife that is a badge of honor!

Thank you, @VulgarGirl, for expressing EXACTLY how I feel! I do not know how I lived the first 37 years of my life using my own name and feeling like a worthless nothing because I wasn't a wife! So many years of self-realization, travel, great friendships, and three advanced degrees - NONE of this means anything!

MyNameIsNot

CMGragain said:

This is the most liberal guide I use:  http://www.emilypost.com/communication-and-technology/social-names-and-titles/293-womens-names-and-titles

I get why you follow a source, but this source really doesn't consider the question at hand. If I read the guide and follow the same logic without a sexist bias, I would then say that if Jane Smith and John Doe get married and he takes her name, they'd become Mr. and Mrs. Jane Smith. By the same logic, he'd then be Mr. Jane Smith even without her. 

The guide just doesn't address a lot of situations. It doesn't even consider a woman who keeps her name. I just don't think you can use this guide to say conclude that this couple would be Mr. and Mrs. HisFirst HerLast. 

Maybe I'll publish a guide for modern addresses and cover all sorts of less common and less traditional situations. It will be one page long and say "address him/her however he/she prefers."  

VulgarGirl

CMGragain said:

This is the most liberal guide I use:  http://www.emilypost.com/communication-and-technology/social-names-and-titles/293-womens-names-and-titles

And your source completely negates same sex couples. Good job. We don't exist. We don't matter. Per etiquette. Apparently.

KatieinBkln

CMGragain said:

All this is your own opinions.  When the etiquette books change, so will I, but I will not take the personal opinions of a few ladies as fact when they are not.
There is nothing wrong with Ms. Jane Doe.  That was a typo, and I apologized for it a while back.
Go back and read my original post on this thread.  I gave several CHOICES.  I have never objected to people prefering something different, and I DID say "traditional".  Sorry about the typo, though.

I do not object to Ms. Jane Doe, or Ms. Jane Doe and Mr. John Doe.  I even listed them as one of the choices.  So what are you arguing about?

I do object to someone telling me that my own personal preference is sexist.  Bull.  If you get a choice about your name, then so do I about mine.

I don't think anyone cares what you want to call yourself, @CMGragain. You do you, as the kids say.

Where people take umbrage is when you suggested that the same "social title" rules cited in etiquette guides from a time when marriage was overwhelmingly male-female and women overwhelmingly took their husbands' last names continue to apply in the OP's situation. Emily Post doesn't have anything to say about men taking women's names. She doesn't address gay couples. 

So while you can cling to your etiquette books all you want, it is unnerving that you seem to completely opt out of the conversation when people rightly bring up situations that fall outside those books, choosing instead to twist the entire conversation into a "woe is me, the mean Youths are attacking my choices!" sobfest. No. It isn't about you, actually. It's a legitimate conversation that many would like to have with you, since you actually do follow these traditional etiquette guides, so people are wondering what your take is on the nontraditional (but increasingly common) situations that Emily Post simply doesn't address. That is not personal. It's an honest discussion to have. The fact that someone uses the word "sexist" to describe the old ways is not a personal attack on you, and frankly to take it as such is beyond tiresome (much like the term "privilege," it seems no one can say it without someone getting butthurt beyond all reasonable measure.)

southernbelle0915

KatieinBkln said:

I don't think anyone cares what you want to call yourself, @CMGragain. You do you, as the kids say.

Where people take umbrage is when you suggested that the same "social title" rules cited in etiquette guides from a time when marriage was overwhelmingly male-female and women overwhelmingly took their husbands' last names continue to apply in the OP's situation. Emily Post doesn't have anything to say about men taking women's names. She doesn't address gay couples. 

So while you can cling to your etiquette books all you want, it is unnerving that you seem to completely opt out of the conversation when people rightly bring up situations that fall outside those books, choosing instead to twist the entire conversation into a "woe is me, the mean Youths are attacking my choices!" sobfest. No. It isn't about you, actually. It's a legitimate conversation that many would like to have with you, since you actually do follow these traditional etiquette guides, so people are wondering what your take is on the nontraditional (but increasingly common) situations that Emily Post simply doesn't address. That is not personal. It's an honest discussion to have. The fact that someone uses the word "sexist" to describe the old ways is not a personal attack on you, and frankly to take it as such is beyond tiresome (much like the term "privilege," it seems no one can say it without someone getting butthurt beyond all reasonable measure.)

CMGragain

southernbelle0915 said:

CMGragain said:

All this is your own opinions.  When the etiquette books change, so will I, but I will not take the personal opinions of a few ladies as fact when they are not.
There is nothing wrong with Ms. Jane Doe.  That was a typo, and I apologized for it a while back.
Go back and read my original post on this thread.  I gave several CHOICES.  I have never objected to people prefering something different, and I DID say "traditional".  Sorry about the typo, though.

I do not object to Ms. Jane Doe, or Ms. Jane Doe and Mr. John Doe.  I even listed them as one of the choices.  So what are you arguing about?

I do object to someone telling me that my own personal preference is sexist.  Bull.  If you get a choice about your name, then so do I about mine.

It IS sexist though. You suggested that a woman who keeps her last name still has the social title "Mrs. John HerLastName".
No, I said that this would be one of her CHOICES.  Another choice is Ms. Jane Herlastname.

First of all, that's not even correct. If I'm a woman who keeps my last name (I happen to be), my social title is "Ms. Jane MyLastName".  Yes, this is certainly your choice if you wish.

Second of all, the notion that a woman's social title changes (even if she keeps her last name) to include her husband's first name, yet a man's title doesn't change at all is inherently sexist.   In the past, the man would often assume the woman's last name in order to keep the family name from disappearing.  You can change your last name to Bozo, and it won't affect the etiquette, traditional or modern.

Assigning certain roles and rules based on sex is exactly the definition of sexism. I'm sorry if you don't like to think of this view as sexist, but that's exactly what it is. 

Complain to Emily Post, Miss Manners, and Amy Vanderbilt - not me.  I'm for CHOICES.  Is it sexist to use one title (Mr.) for men and another (Mrs. Miss or Ms.) for women, too? What about trans?  I maintain that it is all about CHOICES.  Nobody has argued about this.

justsie

CMGragain said:

southernbelle0915 said:

CMGragain said:

All this is your own opinions.  When the etiquette books change, so will I, but I will not take the personal opinions of a few ladies as fact when they are not.
There is nothing wrong with Ms. Jane Doe.  That was a typo, and I apologized for it a while back.
Go back and read my original post on this thread.  I gave several CHOICES.  I have never objected to people prefering something different, and I DID say "traditional".  Sorry about the typo, though.

I do not object to Ms. Jane Doe, or Ms. Jane Doe and Mr. John Doe.  I even listed them as one of the choices.  So what are you arguing about?

I do object to someone telling me that my own personal preference is sexist.  Bull.  If you get a choice about your name, then so do I about mine.

It IS sexist though. You suggested that a woman who keeps her last name still has the social title "Mrs. John HerLastName".
No, I said that this would be one of her CHOICES.  Another choice is Ms. Jane Herlastname.

First of all, that's not even correct. If I'm a woman who keeps my last name (I happen to be), my social title is "Ms. Jane MyLastName".  Yes, this is certainly your choice if you wish.

Second of all, the notion that a woman's social title changes (even if she keeps her last name) to include her husband's first name, yet a man's title doesn't change at all is inherently sexist.   In the past, the man would often assume the woman's last name in order to keep the family name from disappearing.  You can change your last name to Bozo, and it won't affect the etiquette, traditional or modern.

Assigning certain roles and rules based on sex is exactly the definition of sexism. I'm sorry if you don't like to think of this view as sexist, but that's exactly what it is. 

Complain to Emily Post, Miss Manners, and Amy Vanderbilt - not me.  I'm for CHOICES.  Is it sexist to use one title (Mr.) for men and another (Mrs. Miss or Ms.) for women, too? What about trans?  I maintain that it is all about CHOICES.  Nobody has argued about this.

I wasn't going to comment, because honestly I agree with most PPs, but I had to comment on this.

It would not be sexist to call someone who is a man (like trans men are) Mr. if that is their preferred pronouns. Trans men are not women. It is VERY RUDE to call either a trans man or a trans woman by something other than their preferred pronouns. 

VulgarGirl

CMGragain said:

southernbelle0915 said:

CMGragain said:

All this is your own opinions.  When the etiquette books change, so will I, but I will not take the personal opinions of a few ladies as fact when they are not.
There is nothing wrong with Ms. Jane Doe.  That was a typo, and I apologized for it a while back.
Go back and read my original post on this thread.  I gave several CHOICES.  I have never objected to people prefering something different, and I DID say "traditional".  Sorry about the typo, though.

I do not object to Ms. Jane Doe, or Ms. Jane Doe and Mr. John Doe.  I even listed them as one of the choices.  So what are you arguing about?

I do object to someone telling me that my own personal preference is sexist.  Bull.  If you get a choice about your name, then so do I about mine.

It IS sexist though. You suggested that a woman who keeps her last name still has the social title "Mrs. John HerLastName".
No, I said that this would be one of her CHOICES.  Another choice is Ms. Jane Herlastname.

First of all, that's not even correct. If I'm a woman who keeps my last name (I happen to be), my social title is "Ms. Jane MyLastName".  Yes, this is certainly your choice if you wish.

Second of all, the notion that a woman's social title changes (even if she keeps her last name) to include her husband's first name, yet a man's title doesn't change at all is inherently sexist.   In the past, the man would often assume the woman's last name in order to keep the family name from disappearing.  You can change your last name to Bozo, and it won't affect the etiquette, traditional or modern.

Assigning certain roles and rules based on sex is exactly the definition of sexism. I'm sorry if you don't like to think of this view as sexist, but that's exactly what it is. 

Complain to Emily Post, Miss Manners, and Amy Vanderbilt - not me.  I'm for CHOICES.  Is it sexist to use one title (Mr.) for men and another (Mrs. Miss or Ms.) for women, too? What about trans?  I maintain that it is all about CHOICES.  Nobody has argued about this.

I've gone over this before. Trans is not a gender identity. People who are trans are male/female/ect. They fall somewhere on the gender spectrum. Referring to them as "trans" as in men, women, and trans is super offensive. It's saying they are something OTHER.

Of course you've completely refused to answer any questions regarding same sex couples (again), so of course you don't get why this is transphobic. You don't get why refusing acknowledge same sex couples is homophobic. Or why pointing out that you've done musical theater therefor know gay people is homophobic. So I'm not shocked to add transphobia to the growing list.

I know, I know, you once saw/taught/sold something to a trans person. Therefore you are not transphobic. 

KatieinBkln

CMGragain said:

southernbelle0915 said:

CMGragain said:

All this is your own opinions.  When the etiquette books change, so will I, but I will not take the personal opinions of a few ladies as fact when they are not.
There is nothing wrong with Ms. Jane Doe.  That was a typo, and I apologized for it a while back.
Go back and read my original post on this thread.  I gave several CHOICES.  I have never objected to people prefering something different, and I DID say "traditional".  Sorry about the typo, though.

I do not object to Ms. Jane Doe, or Ms. Jane Doe and Mr. John Doe.  I even listed them as one of the choices.  So what are you arguing about?

I do object to someone telling me that my own personal preference is sexist.  Bull.  If you get a choice about your name, then so do I about mine.

It IS sexist though. You suggested that a woman who keeps her last name still has the social title "Mrs. John HerLastName".
No, I said that this would be one of her CHOICES.  Another choice is Ms. Jane Herlastname.

First of all, that's not even correct. If I'm a woman who keeps my last name (I happen to be), my social title is "Ms. Jane MyLastName".  Yes, this is certainly your choice if you wish.

Second of all, the notion that a woman's social title changes (even if she keeps her last name) to include her husband's first name, yet a man's title doesn't change at all is inherently sexist.   In the past, the man would often assume the woman's last name in order to keep the family name from disappearing.  You can change your last name to Bozo, and it won't affect the etiquette, traditional or modern.

Assigning certain roles and rules based on sex is exactly the definition of sexism. I'm sorry if you don't like to think of this view as sexist, but that's exactly what it is. 

Complain to Emily Post, Miss Manners, and Amy Vanderbilt - not me.  I'm for CHOICES.  Is it sexist to use one title (Mr.) for men and another (Mrs. Miss or Ms.) for women, too? What about trans?  I maintain that it is all about CHOICES.  Nobody has argued about this.

Yup, it sure is!

That doesn't mean people can't choose to call themselves Mrs./Miss/Ms. It doesn't mean I'm going to go around yelling at everyday women. But the premise that a woman's pronoun should be based on their marital status alone (or god forbid, the status of their hymen--"maiden," anyone?) IS sexist. Because the fabric of our society is sexist. Acknowledging this, and realizing that perhaps this fact might mean we (as a society) may need to rethink some formerly accepted etiquette norms, shouldn't be any skin off your ass. I'm not sure why you take the Emily Posts of this world quite so personally.

CMGragain

I cannot answer questions about same sex couple etiquette because that has not been published yet.  Etiquette will need to adjust, but when it does, I have a feeling that YOU won't like it, because you don't like anything I post.
Judge away.  You don't know me.

Jen4948

CMGragain said:

I cannot answer questions about same sex couple etiquette because that has not been published yet.  Etiquette will need to adjust, but when it does, I have a feeling that YOU won't like it, because you don't like anything I post.
Judge away.  You don't know me.

Well, you opened the door....and you're judging us although you don't know us either.

VulgarGirl

CMGragain said:

I cannot answer questions about same sex couple etiquette because that has not been published yet.  Etiquette will need to adjust, but when it does, I have a feeling that YOU won't like it, because you don't like anything I post.
Judge away.  You don't know me.

And you can't make an educated guess? So until someone gets around to it...you'll just continue to refuse to address the fact LGBTQ people exist and get married?

And you're right, I don't like homophobes. 

KatieinBkln

CMGragain said:

I cannot answer questions about same sex couple etiquette because that has not been published yet.  Etiquette will need to adjust, but when it does, I have a feeling that YOU won't like it, because you don't like anything I post.
Judge away.  You don't know me.

I'm genuinely not trying to be an asshole here. But what do you do (on a day-to-day basis) when you have to interact with people who have relationships or identities that the etiquette books haven't caught up to yet?

Presumably, you do the best you can to treat them with kindness and dignity, even without the guidance of a book. All people want to talk about is what name/title etiquette MIGHT look like in the modern age, given the absence of these books. Surely you don't think the only answer is to religiously stick to books that even you recognize as outdated at the expense of people with unorthodox relationships?

Hell, even a little humility would go a long way, even if you don't care to speculate: "The books say this, but I realize it's imperfect in the advent of newer situations like men taking women's names and the increasing prevalence of same-sex marriage."

VulgarGirl

I know it's not a dead white lady but:

http://www.gayweddinginstitute.com/_blog/Gay_Weddings_are_Good_for_Business/post/How_to_Address_Gay_Wedding_Invitations/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/the-rules-for-addressing-holiday-cards-to-same-sex-couples/2014/11/24/db3057fc-7102-11e4-8808-afaa1e3a33ef_story.html

But no, just ignore same sex couples until dead heterosexual white ladies tell you what to do. 

lovegood90

KatieinBkln said:

CMGragain said:

I cannot answer questions about same sex couple etiquette because that has not been published yet.  Etiquette will need to adjust, but when it does, I have a feeling that YOU won't like it, because you don't like anything I post.
Judge away.  You don't know me.

I'm genuinely not trying to be an asshole here. But what do you do (on a day-to-day basis) when you have to interact with people who have relationships or identities that the etiquette books haven't caught up to yet?

Presumably, you do the best you can to treat them with kindness and dignity, even without the guidance of a book. All people want to talk about is what name/title etiquette MIGHT look like in the modern age, given the absence of these books. Surely you don't think the only answer is to religiously stick to books that even you recognize as outdated at the expense of people with unorthodox relationships?

Hell, even a little humility would go a long way, even if you don't care to speculate: "The books say this, but I realize it's imperfect in the advent of newer situations like men taking women's names and the increasing prevalence of same-sex marriage."

This. And, you know, the fact that a lot of traditional "etiquette" advice for naming people is sexist.

CMGragain

KatieinBkln said:

CMGragain said:

I cannot answer questions about same sex couple etiquette because that has not been published yet.  Etiquette will need to adjust, but when it does, I have a feeling that YOU won't like it, because you don't like anything I post.
Judge away.  You don't know me.

I'm genuinely not trying to be an asshole here. But what do you do (on a day-to-day basis) when you have to interact with people who have relationships or identities that the etiquette books haven't caught up to yet?

Presumably, you do the best you can to treat them with kindness and dignity, even without the guidance of a book. All people want to talk about is what name/title etiquette MIGHT look like in the modern age, given the absence of these books. Surely you don't think the only answer is to religiously stick to books that even you recognize as outdated at the expense of people with unorthodox relationships?

Hell, even a little humility would go a long way, even if you don't care to speculate: "The books say this, but I realize it's imperfect in the advent of newer situations like men taking women's names and the increasing prevalence of same-sex marriage."

I try and treat everyone with courtesy and respect.  If an individual tells me that they don't like a certain way I address them, I would apologize and use their preference. (This has never happened.)  However, I don't post my personal opinions very often.  I think that would be presumptuous of me.
When I post etiquette advice, it is straight from a standard etiquette book or website.

VulgarGirl

CMGragain said:

KatieinBkln said:

CMGragain said:

I cannot answer questions about same sex couple etiquette because that has not been published yet.  Etiquette will need to adjust, but when it does, I have a feeling that YOU won't like it, because you don't like anything I post.
Judge away.  You don't know me.

I'm genuinely not trying to be an asshole here. But what do you do (on a day-to-day basis) when you have to interact with people who have relationships or identities that the etiquette books haven't caught up to yet?

Presumably, you do the best you can to treat them with kindness and dignity, even without the guidance of a book. All people want to talk about is what name/title etiquette MIGHT look like in the modern age, given the absence of these books. Surely you don't think the only answer is to religiously stick to books that even you recognize as outdated at the expense of people with unorthodox relationships?

Hell, even a little humility would go a long way, even if you don't care to speculate: "The books say this, but I realize it's imperfect in the advent of newer situations like men taking women's names and the increasing prevalence of same-sex marriage."

I try and treat everyone with courtesy and respect.  If an individual tells me that they don't like a certain way I address them, I would apologize and use their preference. (This has never happened.)  However, I don't post my personal opinions very often.  I think that would be presumptuous of me.
When I post etiquette advice, it is straight from a standard etiquette book or website.

But the world is changing more quickly then the standard etiquette is updating. Ignoring entire groups of people on the basis of "I'm waiting for other people to tell me to change" is bullshit. What if they never update? A lot of people are fucking pissed off gay people now have the right to marry in every state. Those same people might be in charge of one of your etiquette places. So they might want to refuse to ever recognize legally married gay couples. So you're just gonna go along with that?

CMGragain

Nope.
You seem to enjoy rejecting traditional etiquette.  What do YOU think the rules should be?

VulgarGirl

CMGragain said:

Nope.
You seem to enjoy rejecting traditional etiquette.  What do YOU think the rules should be?

Do I? Why exactly do you think that?

KatieinBkln

CMGragain said:

Nope.
You seem to enjoy rejecting traditional etiquette.  What do YOU think the rules should be?

Ok. So. Does it not strike you as a little off to describe a person who has been rendered ACTUALLY INVISIBLE by "traditional etiquette" as "enjoying rejecting" it? 

Traditional etiquette, in many ways, has rejected VulgarGirl. It has rejected the trans community. It has rejected even the OP, whose husband's "radical" choice to take her name finds no answers in tradition. To turn that around and suggest that those who have been marginalized are just being contrary is mind-bogglingly obtuse.

Jen4948

CMGragain said:

Nope.
You seem to enjoy rejecting traditional etiquette.  What do YOU think the rules should be?

When it comes to people's names, the rules are (and traditional etiquette actually supports this) that each person gets to decide what their name and title is.  If they don't change their last name or go by Mrs., Ms., Master, or whatever, that's their decision and it needs to be respected.  So it's not up to you to decide that a female same-sex married couple isn't Mrs. or Ms. if that's how they decide they want to be addressed.

CMGragain

Jen4948 said:

CMGragain said:

Nope.
You seem to enjoy rejecting traditional etiquette.  What do YOU think the rules should be?

When it comes to people's names, the rules are (and traditional etiquette actually supports this) that each person gets to decide what their name and title is.  If they don't change their last name or go by Mrs., Ms., Master, or whatever, that's their decision and it needs to be respected.  So it's not up to you to decide that a female same-sex married couple isn't Mrs. or Ms. if that's how they decide they want to be addressed.

This is what I have been saying all along.  CHOICES.