With all the urgent matters to discuss right now, I'm finding it difficult to believe I'm spending my time writing about this particular issue. But it's one that I've been irritated by so many times on this site, and now I've seen the exact same thing I've complained about numerous times done again - by a front pager. One who is, I believe, a woman no less.
People, there is no Mrs. Greenspan. Really and truly, there is not. There is an Andrea Mitchell, who is the wife of Alan Greenspan. And there are many who believe it critical that we all be reminded on a daily basis that Andrea Mitchell is married to Alan Greenspan, because heavens knows, we're all idiots and might forget that fact if we're not reminded of it each day. And apparently it's much too much work to write out "Andrea Mitchell, wife of Alan Greenspan" in order to so remind us. So much easier to ignore her decision to not become Mrs. Anybody and force someone else's name upon her by using that quick and oh so witty "Mrs. Greenspan".
Are those who are taking this incredibly lazy way out truly not recognizing the insult they are making to women and women's right to choose their own name, even after marriage? That by assuming the right to rename a woman because she has married, they are totally disrespecting women?
This would be the equivilent of the right deciding to refer to Gov. Shwartzenegger as Mr. Kennedy in order to suggest he's not a true rethug when they disagree with his moderate stance on some issue and to prove he's really a Dem in disguise. Yet even they don't lower themselves to take that step. Why? Because it hasn't been traditional for men to take their wives names, so it never occurs to them to disregard his real name and give him one of their own choosing.
Anyone who wants to claim this act of calling women by their husband's surname when they have chosen not to take that name is not sexist, please give me just one example of a time a man was referred to by his wife's surname in order to minimalize his positions or his work - on this site, by the right or anywhere else. I doubt you'll be able to find one.
When I got married 33 years ago, I retained my surname. I got an ton of flak for it. Not one person I knew supported it. I got lots of mail from relatives addressed to me with my husband's surname. I felt insulted by every piece addressed that way. My father refused to address me by my own name and informed me that he would only address letters to me with my husband's surname. I informed him I would not open or respond to any addressed to someone who did not exist. He said he would then never write to me. And he never did. For the seven years he lived after my marriage, we each lived by our decision.
It is not an easy decision for a woman to make to not follow tradition and to instead keep her own identity in all ways, and she encounters, even today, constant flak - usually from the right wingers. The very least this so called progressive site can do is to respect that difficult decision by giving women - all women - the right to be known by their actual name rather than bestowing their husband's surname on them against their will.
The people on this site failing to do that might think they're being all witty by disrespecting their decision. I do not. I believe they are disrespecting me and my decision just as much as they are disrespecting Andrea Mitchell and her decision. Please just take that extra two seconds, drop your attempt at great wit, and write out the whole thing. Or you might even want to start considering that we're really not all so stupid we can't remember from one day to the next that Andrea Mitchell is married to Alan Greenspan. (And just think - for those who don't know that yet - instead of them wondering who the hell Mrs. Greenspan is, they'll actually learn that Andrea Mitchell is married to Alan Greenspan.)