Do you support the use of Mx.?

[kenny]

Years ago the time had come for Ms.
Identifying the marital status of women with Miss. or Mrs. (but not that of men with Mr.), was unfair.

Caiytlin Genner's Vanity Fair cover story may indicate the time for Mx. has arrived.
Not only does Mx. not identify marital status, it does not identify gender or play into the withering idea that there are only two genders that everyone must belong to.

One authority on the English language, The Oxford Dictionary, is considering adding Mx..
SNIP from below link: " A representative of the Oxford University Press, which publishes a range of periodicals, including the OED, was contacted by someone asking whether Mx. might be added to the mix. The answer was yes, it is being considered by one of the publisher’s online lexicons, OxfordDictionaries.com."

What do you think?

Here's an interesting NY Times article on Mx..
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/07/style/me-myself-and-mx.html?_r=0

 

[manderz]

I think it's a great idea. No one needs to know whether I am Mrs or Miss, other than myself and my husband. My marital status has literally nothing at all to do with my job performance. Nor should whether or not I have kids, but I always get short changed at work because I DON'T have any kids.

 

[kenny]

I agree with you Manderez but this isn't about Ms..
It's about Mx..

Mx. is the new title that does not place a person in a gender jar.

 

[VRBeauty]

Why not just go to Ps. - as in person? Or just do away with honorifics altogether?

Seriously, Caitlyn Jenner is an easy one - she would prefer to be identified as Ms.

I do understand that there are some people who do not fit easily into male or female categories, and I have known some. One is still in my life so I suppose I could ask her preferences. I'm not sure we're ready as a society to go to one gender-neutral honorific for all, and truly I'm not sure that we need to. "Mr. " and Ms." add a bit of formality, and sometimes a bit of gravity, and sometimes a bit of fun, that would be lost if everyone had the same honorific. And as in math, where a denominator of "1" is generally not used simply because it's not needed, I suspect an honorific that applies equally to everyone would quickly be done away with altogether.

 

[ecf8503]

I approve. As a sibling of a trans person, I have seen the troubles he has endured and wish him all the love and support I can.

That said, Kenny, how should we pronounce Mx? Mix? Mux? Other?

 

[manderz]

The NYT article indicated that it would be pronounces "Mix". I like the sound of that!

Kenny, I do see where it was intended. I think it's great! I love the idea of not needing to fit neatly into a specific box someone else wants to put everyone in, especially if there's only 2 "appropriate" answers. I also see this as a great way to level the playing field as far as sexism goes, too. I would not be opposed to calling everyone, across the board, Mx.

 

[packrat]

why do we need to bother then? I see it as a big cluster of well I'm not married and I'm a guy and I prefer to be Mr. but this guy over here wants to be Mx. But this married woman wants to be Ms and then this one over here wants to be Mx--and I can guarantee you that the ones that have a glaring preference are going to be irate if someone doesn't get it right. it's just another tip toe around on the eggshells so somebody doesn't get offended. Eventually we'll end up w/a different designation depending on 7 different variables so it gets super confusing. Aliens are going to be too confused to ever land here.

 

[AGBF]

why do we need to bother then?

The author of the article asked this at its conclusion, too. And I agree. If we need to refine titles ad nauseum to pander to the whims of smaller and smaller subsets of the population, maybe we had better throw out titles entirely. In other words, if the children cannot be reasonable, they cannot have any titles to play with!

Let them live like the Quakers, using their first and last names, equal in the sight of God. (And for those who are do not believe in God, equal in the eyes of the law...at least here in the United States.)

Deb

 

[KaeKae]

Hmmm. The only thing I don't like about Mx. is that it's pronounced "mix."
It just sounds extra weird for me, I think, because it's already a word with a different meaning. Or is it? Is it meant to refer to the fact that the courtesy title is used for a mix of people?

 

[OoohShiny]

An interesting discussion

At work I sometimes have to reply to people who have written in with no Mr/Mrs/Ms/Dr or even a first name, just an initial, and sometimes I cannot even identify if the given first name is male or female (because it is not possible to know every name in every different language!). I usually respond with "Dear B. Smith" or "Dear Kim Jones", for example, which seems somehow very odd and unconventional.

With no identifier it feels more difficult to appreciate where they might be coming from, if that makes sense, but then perhaps I should not be attempting to infer possible backgrounds behind the viewpoints being expressed and just respond plainly, rather than trying to anticipate what answers they are actually seeking behind their often cryptic communications? lol

Mx would help, I guess, but it does seem a touch impersonal, and I can see people quickly grouping into traditional users and Mx users, with the latter being seen as "different", which is exactly what they are trying to avoid!

 

[iLander]

I'm sorry, but this sort of irritates me. I know it's not politically correct, but I think it's not asking too much for someone to pick a gender. If Bruce is a girl now, he needs to use a girl prefix like Ms. If he's a boy, go with Mr. If your gender is not the one you were born with, fine, change it. But making up a third one is a slippery slope. Where is that heading? !2, 14, 25 different "genders" based on what you were born with, how you changed it, if you're curious about changing it back, etc? Please. Surprisingly, no one cares, deep down, what gender Bruce or anyone else is. They care about their own lives, their children, their careers, etc. In the light of the real world, no one cares.

Flame away.

 

[momhappy]

I tend to agree with some of what iLander & packrat have posted.

 

[kenny]

I can see people quickly grouping into traditional users and Mx users, with the latter being seen as "different", which is exactly what they are trying to avoid!

Careful.
If Mx. catches on some of us may use Mx., and not because we feel we don't fit in one of the two jars society shoves down everyone's throats.
We'd use it to show solidarity with the idea that there are not just two jars.
Not that internal and external anatomy/hormones/chromosomes is gender but keep in mind nature has always given us intersex babies
Nature does not have only two jars; why should we?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex ... "The population of intersex depends on which definition is used. According to the ISNA definition above, 1 percent of live births exhibit some degree of sexual ambiguity.[120] Between 0.1% and 0.2% of live births are ambiguous enough to become the subject of specialist medical attention, including surgery to assign them to a given sex category (i.e., male or female).[121] According to Fausto-Sterling's definition of intersex, on the other hand, 1.7 percent of human births are intersex.[121]"

Lots of straight people attend gay pride events to show support.
I know of a couple strait folks who put rainbow bumper stickers on their cars for the same reason.
They have no fear of being mistaken for gay, because they get that that would not be a negative thing.

As to, "being seen as "different", which is exactly what they are trying to avoid!"", I'd not make that assumption.
I'd say we different people don't mind being seen as different. We simply are different.
We are, rather I am, just trying to challenge and end others seeing different as bad.
This is a huge challenge.

The term, "normal", has always annoyed me because of the ubiquitous perception that normal=good, and not-normal=bad, when normal is actually just a number over 50% or the largest percentage.
It could be argued that being red-headed or left-handed is not 'normal', yet nobody would place them in the dreaded 'abnormal' jar, well hopefully not.

I have a theory that we humans are basically insecure.
We do stuff so we feel better about ourselves, like staying in the largest groups.
You even see this on Rocky Talk where noobs often just want to know, "What do most people buy?"

 

[kenny]

Eventually we'll end up w/a different designation depending on 7 different variables so it gets super confusing.

Anything to cut down the suicide and depression rates of these rejected people.
Many people were very annoyed when Ms. was introduced too.

I image some women do not want to go by Ms. but are address that way.

While annoying attempting to show respect for people's wishes is central to Mx. and Ms.

 

[iLander]

How many jars do you want, Kenny?

 

[kenny]

How many jars do you want, Kenny?

As many as necessary.
A minor inconvenience is better than a suicide somewhere, or depressed/suppressed/rejected people.

This is not about me or you.
It's about others.

 

[lyra]

People can be identified however they wish. But is it necessary to give everyone a title? What if I don't like my particular set (Miss, Ms., Mrs.) and just want to be indentified by my name? Sometimes as a woman I feel vulnerable having to identify myself as such. I have a unisex name. I kind of prefer being very anonymous in life.

To each his own. YMMV. People vary. I will do my utmost not to offend other people. It's getting harder to do though. I'm flexible, but at some point I'll be too old to remember how things are supposed to be "now".

 

[iLander]

How many jars do you want, Kenny?

As many as necessary.
A minor inconvenience is better than a suicide somewhere, or depressed/suppressed/rejected people.

This is not about me or you.
It's about others.

No one wants suicides, duh. But I think that it is non sequitur to your questions about nomenclature.

 

[Matata]

Using Mx imho is just another way of shoving people into a box and doesn't resolve any of the latent issues -- all of the stereotypes and prejudices will simply follow it.

 

[AGBF]

How many jars do you want, Kenny?

As many as necessary.

An honest question, kenny: if we do not use titles is it not like not using jars?

In my opinion, people do not need to be put in jars. If omitting titles entirely keeps them from being put in jars, I would call it a good thing. Wouldn't you?

Deb

 

[packrat]

I don't see it as an inconvenience, I see it as a little overboard. It looks to me like we're trying to "bring everyone together" by separating us further from each other. Why don't we work on acceptance of people themselves?

I don't see it as suicides every five seconds because there is no "formal designation" for every single subset of people on the planet. I see it as suicides because we insist on segregating ourselves STILL. I was born a female, I identify as a male, but I've not had surgery so technically I am not a male but I want to be referred to as a male. Except when you address me formally, then you call me a gender neutral term. Either you are or you aren't. If you want to be a female, be a female and accept what it IS TO BE A FEMALE. Or what it is to be a man. If we're trying to point out those who identify w/neither sex, I can sort of see that...*but* does that mean now we need to have a "neutral" on all forms for those who don't feel either way? Do we now need to quit saying He or She? Maybe revert to a number system so everyone is included in every way shape and form? That way it stays as completely neutral and non personal as possible?

So anyway, 1.9.4.3.12.22 is coming over for supper tonight..you remember 1.9.4.3.12.22 don't you? 1.8.5.14.22's youngest offspring?

 

[kenny]

An honest question, kenny: if we do not use titles is it not like not using jars?

Yes.
Good point.
IMO, best to just drop the use of jar-like titles of Mr. Mrs. Miss. Ms. AND Mx.

BTW, I didn't invent Mx..
I just brought it here to discuss.

 

[packrat]

Why were Mr. Mrs. Miss, Ms. etc introduced anyway? People were maybe more formal or something back in the day?

I can see still using them in schools, for students to address their instructors-heck I still refer to my teachers as Mr./Mrs. when I see them in town, even when people tease me about it. "you're 40, I think you can be on a first name basis w/your 3rd grade teacher" wellll maybe..but still, to me, their names start w/Mr. or Mrs. still. Ha, my 9th grade history teacher is a principal here in one of the buildings and I'm the only staff member who calls him Mr.

I was thinking, what about terms like Aunt/Uncle/Gramma/Grampa etc?

 

[arkieb1]

I saw it and thought it was short for Minx - I say go Minx's everywhere male or female....

Caiytlin Genner is both wonderful - that transgender people are becoming known and accepted by mainstream society
and slightly irksome - another Kardashian money grab (Caiytlin has already signed a deal to do many months or more in the life of.... she obviously learned a thing or to from Kim and the others....)

 

[Maria D]

Why were Mr. Mrs. Miss, Ms. etc introduced anyway? People were maybe more formal or something back in the day?

I can see still using them in schools, for students to address their instructors-heck I still refer to my teachers as Mr./Mrs. when I see them in town, even when people tease me about it. "you're 40, I think you can be on a first name basis w/your 3rd grade teacher" wellll maybe..but still, to me, their names start w/Mr. or Mrs. still. Ha, my 9th grade history teacher is a principal here in one of the buildings and I'm the only staff member who calls him Mr.

I was thinking, what about terms like Aunt/Uncle/Gramma/Grampa etc?

This Mrs/Miss marital status identification issue doesn't exist in some other languages. In Italian, for example, young girls are called Signorina but after a certain age, married or not, a woman is Signora.

I think Mx is ridiculous to say aloud. Mix McGillicuddy and Mix Ricardo invite you celebrate the wedding of...how awful! And what if your last name is Maxwell?

Why not get rid of the honorific altogether and just go by last name. "Watson, come here, I need you" sounds fine. If last name only seems too naked in written form, how about just M. It will look like an initial, but whatever.

signed,
M. D

 

[TooPatient]

why do we need to bother then?

The author of the article asked this at its conclusion, too. And I agree. If we need to refine titles ad nauseum to pander to the whims of smaller and smaller subsets of the population, maybe we had better throw out titles entirely. In other words, if the children cannot be reasonable, they cannot have any titles to play with!

Let them live like the Quakers, using their first and last names, equal in the sight of God. (And for those who are do not believe in God, equal in the eyes of the law...at least here in the United States.)

Deb

Yep.

Only don't throw them out. Just quit pandering.

A person is a person. Period.
If you want to be a man fine. Woman, sure. Don't want to chose? Who cares. You are still a person.

Just don't go taking away from the rest of us.

What is next? Restrooms with a row of urinals next to the tampon dispenser?

 

[TooPatient]

I don't see it as an inconvenience, I see it as a little overboard. It looks to me like we're trying to "bring everyone together" by separating us further from each other. Why don't we work on acceptance of people themselves?

I don't see it as suicides every five seconds because there is no "formal designation" for every single subset of people on the planet. I see it as suicides because we insist on segregating ourselves STILL. I was born a female, I identify as a male, but I've not had surgery so technically I am not a male but I want to be referred to as a male. Except when you address me formally, then you call me a gender neutral term. Either you are or you aren't. If you want to be a female, be a female and accept what it IS TO BE A FEMALE. Or what it is to be a man. If we're trying to point out those who identify w/neither sex, I can sort of see that...*but* does that mean now we need to have a "neutral" on all forms for those who don't feel either way? Do we now need to quit saying He or She? Maybe revert to a number system so everyone is included in every way shape and form? That way it stays as completely neutral and non personal as possible?

So anyway, 1.9.4.3.12.22 is coming over for supper tonight..you remember 1.9.4.3.12.22 don't you? 1.8.5.14.22's youngest offspring?

This. perfect!
Exactly.

 

[distracts]

Or just do away with honorifics altogether?

Because there are a lot of forms that demand one, and if you do away with them, you'd have to change all the forms!

I personally don't really see the point of them. But then - I have a name that flows easily, and have always been used to people calling me Firstname Lastname altogether, even people who know me well, and because I am addressed by that so often, I usually address others by their full names as well. The only times I use Mr/Ms/Mx/etc are for, like, teachers I had in grade school. As well, between my career and hobby groups and the friends I have, a know a large number of transgendered or agendered individuals, and as people are having realizations about their identities and transitioning, the title is often in flux. I have a friend who went from Mrs, to Ms, to Mx, to Mr professionally and Mx socially. I think doing away with the title and putting less emphasis on gender is a better move overall, anyway.

People can be identified however they wish. But is it necessary to give everyone a title? What if I don't like my particular set (Miss, Ms., Mrs.) and just want to be indentified by my name? Sometimes as a woman I feel vulnerable having to identify myself as such. I have a unisex name. I kind of prefer being very anonymous in life.

Very interesting - most of my online handles are pretty unisex, and while on PS and a few other places, people are assumed female until proven otherwise, on reddit, for instance, I'm always assumed to be male. It leads to some interesting interactions both with women and men who think I am other than what I am, and it's really intriguing to think about the ways in which gender assumptions play out even in online conversations with strangers.

 

[missy]

I don't see it as an inconvenience, I see it as a little overboard. It looks to me like we're trying to "bring everyone together" by separating us further from each other. Why don't we work on acceptance of people themselves?

I don't see it as suicides every five seconds because there is no "formal designation" for every single subset of people on the planet. I see it as suicides because we insist on segregating ourselves STILL. I was born a female, I identify as a male, but I've not had surgery so technically I am not a male but I want to be referred to as a male. Except when you address me formally, then you call me a gender neutral term. Either you are or you aren't. If you want to be a female, be a female and accept what it IS TO BE A FEMALE. Or what it is to be a man. If we're trying to point out those who identify w/neither sex, I can sort of see that...*but* does that mean now we need to have a "neutral" on all forms for those who don't feel either way? Do we now need to quit saying He or She? Maybe revert to a number system so everyone is included in every way shape and form? That way it stays as completely neutral and non personal as possible?

So anyway, 1.9.4.3.12.22 is coming over for supper tonight..you remember 1.9.4.3.12.22 don't you? 1.8.5.14.22's youngest offspring?

This. perfect!
Exactly.

Agree completely. Also agree with TP and her "A person is a person". Period.

 

[Lady_Disdain]

Back in 1989, Dan Simmons already proposed something similar. In his Hyperion books, the future society just uses M.: M. Smith might be Mary Smith or Joe Smith.