Every so often I take reader questions, if I think they are questions everyone has, and someone needs to address. Usually Ariel has already addressed them in a slightly more offbeat way, and I’m taking them on in a ‘reclaiming tradition’ way. So, as always, take your pick. The internet is great for giving us fantastic options. Here goes:
I love your blog – it’s a little haven in the sea of gender stereotype bullsh*t surrounding everything wedding.
I have a question about addressing wedding invitations. “Mr. and Mrs. Joe Blow” makes me sort of nauseous but my parents kind of want things a little more formal than “Joe and Jane Blow.” What do you think about “Mr. and Mrs. Joe and Jane Blow” or “Mr. Joe Blow and Mrs. Jane Blow” or should it be “Mr. Joe and Mrs. Jane Blow” … that kind of sounds weird, right? Any thoughts?
Also, while gathering addresses a few of my cousins’ noted that their names are “Jane Smith Blow” (Smith being their maiden names). Any ideas about how to address those invites? “Joe Blow and Jane Smith Blow”, “Jane Smith and Joe Blow”, “Joe and Jane Smith Blow” and then if we use titles would it be “Mr. and Mrs. Joe and Jane Smith Blow” or “Mr. Joe Blow and Mrs. Jane Smith Blow” or should I use Ms.? Sadly the internet has plenty of advice on how to just leave off the lady’s name on a formal invitation or how to include it if she so daringly kept her given name upon marriage, but I can’t find anything about formal invitations including both names. Please help!!
Your fellow practical bride (and groom),
Cara (and Jeff – he’s a fan, too!!)
So, it’s actually pretty simple. The rules are:
- Woman’s name is always first, when listed separately.
- Same last name? Same line. Different last name? Different line. Nobody cares, or needs to know if the couple is married or just living together.
- Always name everyone who’s invited on the envelope, to avoid confusion. You don’t need to say “No Kids!” on your invite, if you don’t invite them, and then kindly but firmly point this out when questioned. (Yes, yes, yes. The technical rules are that children are listed on the inner envelope. But do you have an inner envelope? That’s what I thought.) Normally children are listed by age, but do what you will.
- And, this rule is half me and half proper, but very important: Always address people as they wish to be addressed. She goes by Dr.? She worked hard for that, please use it. She goes by Ms.? Done. She goes by Mr. Joe Blow in honor of her dead husband? I know you are a feminist, but it’s not your place to judge.
- And one final technicality, which you can choose to use or ignore. If a woman did not take her partners name, she is not technically a Mrs., she is a Ms., thank-you-very-much.
So, long form, it goes like this:
Mr. and Mrs. Blow (for the love of all things holy, let’s kill the Mrs. John Blow stuff, unless it’s to honor your delightful aged grandmother. I’d punch through a wall if I got something addressed that way)
Mr. and Mrs. John and Jane Blow
Ms. Jane Sassy-Blow
Mr. John Blow
Mr. and Mrs. John and Jane Blow
and Mr. Gregory Blow, Miss. Emma Blow, Miss Tiny Baby Blow
Jane and John Blow (Note! This is not formal, so name order is reversed! It’s old school maybe, but I’m on board with ladies first here. Men get to go first quite enough, thanks.)
Mr. and Dr. John and Jane Blow
And out of respect to your old fashioned widowed great aunt:
Mrs. John Blow
And the rules hold absolutely the same for LGBT couples:
Ms. and Ms. Jane and Joan Sassy-Blow
Ms. and Dr. Jane and Joan Sassy-Blow
Ms. Jane Sassy
Ms. Joan Blow
Etc.
Questions? I will hold to my dying day that etiquette is not about repression, it’s about treating people with the respect they deserve, and it can (and should!) be absolutely egalitarian.
Thank you thank you thank you! This will help me out so much a few months down the road.
February 17, 2009 6:09 pm
Report this comment
|
I got my first christmas card this year addressed to "Mr. & Mrs. Johnathan _______". I was a little bit horrified, but moreso after my husband told me that it was probably because his (not at all elderly) aunt probably just did it so she didn't have to find out my name. Ouch.
February 17, 2009 7:23 pm
Report this comment
|
Thank you thank you I love this. Also, I can not stand the “Mrs Man Lastname” either. blaech.
February 17, 2009 7:48 pm
|
I was actually just thinking about this issue the other day. I absolutely agree with how you laid them out, and I also think that etiquette (and the spirit of political correctness) is about respect.
That being said, I’ve run into an address situation I’m not quite sure how to handle (other than getting a REALLY BIG envelope). If you’ve got a blended family with kids on both sides, would you suggest this format?
Ms. Jane Sassy
Mr. Jon Blow
and Miss. Girl Sassy, Miss. Girl Blow, and Mr. Boy Blow
(kids are in age order, oldest to youngest)
My original idea had been to have the two adults on the first line, but the kids were throwing me off, or Ms. and Miss. Sassy on the first line, and Mr., Miss., and Mr. Blow on the second.
Thoughts? I’m sure I can’t be the only one having difficulties with this type of situation. Any help you can give would be great, especially because this is a newly-blended family that we love and we don’t want anyone to feel hurt or slighted.
February 17, 2009 7:57 pm
Report this comment
|
Alenda-
The way you laid it out is just right. People should be sorted by adults and then children*, not by last name. So, you’re spot on. Adults with different last names have different lines (though they could share a line as Mr. John Blow and Ms. Jane Sassy, if you ran out of space). Kids can all share a line, no matter what the last name. They are all family now, after all.
*unless you actually have the relationship with the child and are inviting their parent just to be nice. Then you would flip it to read:
Miss Girl Sassy
Mr. John Blow
Which would imply that Mr. John Blow should not show up without Miss Girl Sassy, though she may show up without him (age permitting).
Meg
February 17, 2009 8:02 pm
Report this comment
|
One technical etiquette rule, which intrigues me–when the woman has a higher title than the man, she gets listed first–so it’s Dr. and Mr. Jane and Joe, not Mr. and Dr.
(That said, we’re ignoring it, since it’s Mr. Brother-of-the-Groom and Dr. Sister-in-Law-of-the-Groom, and my personal rule is that relation trumps title.)
February 17, 2009 8:08 pm
Report this comment
|
I think it is presumptuous and dated to use Mrs. or Miss for any grown woman in place of Ms. unless I had actual knowledge that it’s what the woman in question prefers–the marriage-status-specific honorific is not that different from erasing the woman’s first name altogether. In all but the most regressive circles, Ms. has become the default for both social and business correspondence.
Aleda, I don’t like the different last names on different lines for the exact reason you describe–it implies some sort of division among members of a blended family, or when the parents have different last names from one another and the kid has the last name of only one of them. As someone from a blended family, I was very sensitive to that stuff growing up. I would do adults on one line and kids on another if you don’t have space to put it all on one line. Or if you have the extra papergoods, send separate invites to the kids. Kids love getting mail. (Heck, I still love getting mail!)
February 17, 2009 8:10 pm
Report this comment
|
FF-
You can (of course!) use Ms. for your guests if you think it’s what they’ll prefer. That’s the whole point, in the end. I think in younger circles Ms. is more or less the done thing, in older circles not so much. It’s all part of addressing people the way they want to be addressed. We may think Mrs. is regressive (I’m not using it), but to tell older family members that *do* use it that it’s regressive is unfair to them. I’m not suggesting it be used blindly, presumably we all know everyone on our invite list well enough to not use a default honorific for any of them.
As for two lines, it’s not really a rule for blended families, its a rule for those of us who are choosing to keep our names. For us, it’s a signal of respect. Again, respect trumps everything else. If you feel it’s disrespectful to your guests to use separate lines, use one line.
And Miss is only *ever* used for little girls. And again, you can use something else if you would find it more respectful.
Meg
February 17, 2009 8:34 pm
Report this comment
|
Just wanted to point out that while widely accepted, it is actually improper to address something as Mr. and Mrs. Joe and Jane Blow. This isn’t etiquette…this is just proper English usage. The above example is redundant with its use of “and”. They’re not both Mr. and Mrs. or both Joe and Jane.
So the proper way of using the first names of both parties is Mrs. Jane and Mr. Joe Blow.
As to why the woman goes first, that’s some rule about the man’s first name always being next to the last name…no idea where that rule comes from or if it’s worth following.
I don’t mean to be nitpicky and I certainly won’t be the etiquette or English language police hunting you down…I’ve just spent too much time reading etiquette books my entire life so I have a plethora of random etiquette knowledge. :)
February 17, 2009 10:09 pm
|
We may think Mrs. is regressive (I’m not using it), but to tell older family members that *do* use it that it’s regressive is unfair to them.
Absolutely–to tell anyone what they should call themselves is unfair, and is definitely not what I was suggesting. The issue I was talking about is the assumption that one would be Mrs. or Miss rather than Ms.– that assumption is regressive. I haven’t found it to be the case that Ms./Mrs. preferences break down by age as you suggest, that’s going to differ from social circle to social circle. You and I are mostly saying the same thing but in my circle I am more hesitant about generalizing based on age, and I need some evidence that someone actually wanted to be called Mrs. before I’ll do it–in my world that’s the path least likely to cause offense, so I wanted to throw it out there for consideration.
As for Miss being used only for little girls–that is not accurate. It may be more in line with current usage, but it is not in line with formal address. It is either Mrs./Miss dependent on marital status (it has nothing to do with age), or it is Ms. for everyone. Again, individuals may make whatever choices they like for themselves, but there is this misunderstanding floating around out there that Ms. has replaced Miss as the term used for unmarried women rather than being the marriage-inspecific term that it is, and I hate to see that misunderstanding reinforced here because it ain’t so.
I am confused about the reason for separate lines. In your reply to me, you say it is a question of respect for partners who have not chosen to share a name (fair enough, though I was speaking specifically to Aleda’s situation of blended families). In your response to Aleda, you say the separate lines means the person listed on the lower line should not attend unless accompanying the guest on the first line. If that’s the case, then it seems to me less respectful to list members of a couple on separate lines, rather than more. It sounds like it would imply that whoever is listed first is more welcome than whoever is listed second, yes? Or is there a difference when children are involved? This is a rule I’m not at all familiar with and is really interesting to me. I am genuinely not trying to be a pain.
I ought to bow out after this since Quakers generally eschew honorifics, so our invitations were addressed to everyone by first and last names only. It was fabulously easy and no one refused to come from lack of title ;) I can highly recommend this route for anyone experiencing angst about this.
February 17, 2009 10:49 pm
Report this comment
|
What about ‘and family’? Such as Mr, and Mrs. Mekler and family?
My envelopes are small, and listing all multiple kids (some of who have different last names) would be difficult, crowded, and messy looking.
any thoughts?
February 17, 2009 10:50 pm
Report this comment
|
I have a similar question as Anna . . . I was just going to use "and Family" I was also planning on leaving out Mr and Mrs . . . is it really necessary? I have a "fancy" font, but I want everything to be pretty casual. So why non just "Joe & Jane Blow & family"?
February 17, 2009 11:28 pm
Report this comment
|
We addressed ours:
Jane and John Blow
or
Jane Sassy and John Blow (shock horror, same line!)
or – and here’s where we threw the rules out the window – if the man was the main guest (e.g. one of my brothers) and the woman was more his guest (i.e. a girlfriend):
John Blow and Jane Sassy
…because that felt most appropriate to us. Hmmm, I wonder whether anyone thought anything of it…?
I think our avoiding titles was a very good thing because I might have insisted on using Ms for every female against their personal preference. I know it would have been wrong of me but I seriously think it’s way past time for the Miss/Mrs crap to be ditched. But of course you’re right it’s not my place to tell anyone what they should call themselves… so lucky we went modern/informal!
February 18, 2009 1:27 am
Report this comment
|
P.S. The first envelope we received addressed to Mr and Mrs N Subrosa is proudly displayed on our fridge… yeah, I’m a walking contradiction ;)
February 18, 2009 1:32 am
Report this comment
|
In England at least a woman may use Mrs with her maiden name if she wishes to indicate she is married even if she doesn’t take his name.
If she does take his name then becomes Mrs His-firstname His-Surname. i.e. Rachel Smith marries Thomas Wallace she becomes either Rachel Wallace or Mrs. Thomas Wallace. Collectively you would be formally known as Mr. and Mrs. Thomas Wallace. If she is referred to as Mrs Rachel Wallace that is incorrect.
February 18, 2009 3:02 am
Report this comment
|
I’m sitting here watching my postbox waiting for my envelopes to arrive. This post is both timely and awesome, thank you for that.
February 18, 2009 3:02 am
Report this comment
|
P.S When you say “And Miss is only *ever* used for little girls. And again, you can use something else if you would find it more respectful” I think perhaps that is an American thing as people in England are referred to as Miss Surname until they are married. I certainly abhor the word ‘Ms’ as for me it has connotations only of being divorced.
February 18, 2009 3:05 am
|
FF-
the first/second line attendance thing is only if your say, inviting a 10 year old girl, and her father as a chaperon… not for partners. But I agree, no real problem with putting people on the same line if that seems better.
Anon-
We disagree on that. I too have a depth of etiquette knowledge, and that is not the way I do it or would tell people to do it. But if that works for you, go for it.
And on the Miss front, that’s more my new-school egalitarian rule. I would find it very disrespectful to use Miss for a grown woman. That is one of the *many* reasons Ms. has been developed. However, using Ms. for a four year old girl seems… odd.
Look at all this fuss this kicks up! As I said way back in the beginning of the post, for goodness sake, only use this if it is helpful. People were asking the rules, and I supplied the egalitarian ones. We haven’t followed these rigidly either! We use what works in each situation. But sometimes knowing rules that can be feminist help… especially in dealing with mothers, no?
February 18, 2009 5:29 am
Report this comment
|
I didn’t think a lot about adressing my invites… went for Mr and Mrs John Blow for “old” couples (grand parents and so on) but I must say I just put X and Y Blow for younger ones (including most of my parents’ friends). And not always the lady’s name first, oops (just put what we usually call them because, I don’t know, it rings better, or the one first is the one we know better…), but I don’t think they’ll mind ;-).
February 18, 2009 5:50 am
Report this comment
|
And on the Miss front, that’s more my new-school egalitarian rule. I would find it very disrespectful to use Miss for a grown woman.
I can’t tell you how much I hope your “new-school egalitarian rules take on, Meg. Like you say, it’s all about respect.
I must disagree with Rachel’s assertion that British married women who keep their maiden names use ‘Mrs.’ I have never seen/heard that and would think it very strange if I did… like she married her father/brother/cousin!
February 18, 2009 6:16 am
Report this comment
|
This is a tough one. When I addressed our wedding invitations I wrote them in calligraphy (I learned calligraphy in 7th grade English class, no idea why, but I was determined to use it!) so I was worried enough just about the actual writing.
I found that allowing myself to be flexible with how I addressed the guests really took the pressure off–just because I addressed one couple or family one way didn’t mean I had to use the exact same rule for other guests if it didn’t seem right for them. Spending time worrying about how to address my invitations and fiddling around with calligraphy seemed silly at times, but in the end it allowed me to spend time thinking about each guest as I addressed their invitation. It ended up being one of my favorite parts of preparing for our wedding!
February 18, 2009 6:25 am
Report this comment
|
“I must disagree with Rachel’s assertion that British married women who keep their maiden names use ‘Mrs.’ I have never seen/heard that and would think it very strange if I did… like she married her father/brother/cousin!”
Sorry to be pedantic but what I actually said was “a woman may use Mrs with her maiden name if she wishes”. In my experience I have never known anyone do that as everyone I know has chosen to take her husband’s name or created a double-barrelled surname. I was just pointing out that it was legally acceptable to use Mrs with a maiden name if you so choose.
February 18, 2009 6:40 am
Report this comment
|
I hadn’t even thought about addressing my invites yet… now I’m a little terrified.
I teach at a school for girls situated right on top of the Mason Dixon line. I was SHOCKED when I arrived here to find that the schools directory (that lists all students’ parents) is FULL of “Mr. and Mrs. John Blow (Jane).” The scariest part to me is that the parents have a choice in how they would like to be addressed and I would say about 90% of them choose this insanely regressive title.
I think it’s more widespread than you think. Until I moved out of NYC and San Francisco (where I had lived up until this point), I had only ever seen this type of title on letters addressed to my grandparents. Out here in the rest of America, we’re a lot farther back than I ever would have guessed.
February 18, 2009 7:08 am
Report this comment
|
For the record, we didn’t use honorifics on our Save The Dates. We haven’t made a decision on our invites. That said, I did make sure it was: Jane and John Sassy-Blow, not the other way around. But that’s me.
Another thing to think about: social titles have always been different than professional titles, which is something we can *own* in an egalitarian way. For example: My mother-in-law goes by Ms. Jane Sassy professionally, but as Mrs. Jane Blow socially. Her credit cards are under both names, since her legal name is Jane Sassy Blow (no hyphen).
The fact that social titles are different is why the technical rule has always read that Mrs. is the default social honorific for a woman that changed her name, but Ms. is the default business honorific. That said, use what seems right, that’s just the root of the rule.
February 18, 2009 7:29 am
Report this comment
|
A point of clarification: Do you think that it’s better to write:
Mr. and Mrs. John and Jane Blow
rather than:
Mr. John and Mrs. Jane Blow?
They both seem cumbersome!
I would leave off the titles altogether but like the original questioner, my parents want more formality….
Thanks!
February 18, 2009 7:45 am
Report this comment
|
I so very much appreciate this post! I plan to send most of my invitations out via the Internet since I’m planning a ‘Social Media Wedding’ — all planned via email/facebook/blogs/IM/twitter, etc. I feel like I’m grasping at straws figuring out how to write the actual copy, and addressing them? Ugh.
February 18, 2009 8:43 am
Report this comment
|
We went reeeaallly simple for ours:
For married couples: The Blows
For families: The Blow Family
For unmarried couples: Joe Blow and Jane Schmo
February 18, 2009 9:10 am
Report this comment
|
I have had more conversations about this than practically anything else wedding related. I think it’s regressive to use “Mr. and Mrs. John Blow” but that’s how my future mother in law sent her WHOLE list to me– I had to ask for the ladies’ names because I just refuse to send out invites like that. I don’t think it’s only a generational thing, both of my sisters (who are only 10 years older than me) think I’m crazy for not just using “Mr. and Mrs. John Blow” and can’t imagine anyone being offended by it.
That said, I will be using it on one invite, for future mother in law and father in law, since I know she prefers being addressed that way. But for her widowed friend who I don’t know very well? Um, no.
By the way, I decided to throw etiquette a little out the window and do “Mrs. Jane and Mr. John Blow”. I just liked it, even if it’s not 100% correct, it’s less cumbersome than “Mr. and Mrs. John and Jane Blow” and I figured no one would be offended.
February 18, 2009 9:12 am
Report this comment
|
Thank you Meg, for posting this. As with Ms. Grrrl, I am a little terrified, but appreciate the info. :) It is bookmarked and will be quite useful in April and May.
http://ameliacarolyn.wordpress.com/
February 18, 2009 9:14 am
Report this comment
|
*cheers!* I love sensible etiquette.
For my invitations (which were sent four days ago and no one’s RSVPed yet aaaaa!!!) I chose to not use honorifics, because of the idea that the invitations set the tone of the event. I used full names and a fancy font, though, because what I wanted to get across was that this is a special occasion, but not a formal one. I do not want people showing up to my park wedding in tuxedos, you know? So I think it’s possible that for quite a few practical weddings, leaving off the honorific or at least not going with the MOST formal option might be the right choice.
February 18, 2009 9:31 am
Report this comment
|
Marina-
Agreed!
Everyone else:
I would use Mr. and Mrs. John and Jane Blow. I actually don’t find it cumbersome at all, my parents have used it my whole life. My mother is a first wave feminist, so she was *NEVER* fine with Mr. and Mrs. John Blow. I find it far less cumbersome then Mr. John and Mrs. Jane Blow, and think it is more correct. BUT, if you have a strong preference, for goodness sakes, go with your gut, not mine.
And all, no need to be terrified. Unless you write something rude on your invitation (say: “Bring us a present or don’t bother to come” for example), no one is going to be offended. Etiquette is only there to provide some uniform rules, and make it *easier* for you, not harder.
February 18, 2009 9:55 am
Report this comment
|
And an aside: in principal, I don’t like “and Family” because I think everyone that is invited should be listed on the invite. It’s respectful (especially to kids, who don’t tend to get a ton of respect). Plus, precision with save you headaches later on “No, no, ‘and Family’ didn’t mean that you could bring 10 people who are all ‘like family’ to you.” Plus, it gives you a clear way to invite kids or not invite kids, without saying “No kids!”
That said, we’ve used it. We used it in cases where, for example, there was a divorce going on, and we were unclear who exactly should/should not be invited. In that case, it seemed more sensible and less fraught.
February 18, 2009 10:00 am
Report this comment
|
“Men get to go first quite enough, thanks.”
i die.
February 18, 2009 10:24 am
Report this comment
|
I love this. I could have used it when addressing my sis's invitations. We just ended up doing the Mr. & Mrs. thing for older guests that get offended when referred to by their own names and we used much less formal addresses for people we knew wouldn't care.
Um, I got an invitation in the mail the other day where my SO and I were referred to as Mr. and Mrs. So and so. And I'm not married. And the invitation is from his family (maybe they are hinting at something?).
February 18, 2009 11:16 am
|
I totally agree with you about etiquette.
Out of curiosity, how do you word a wedding invitation when you have two people with divorced parents? There are a total of eight people who are parents who probably are supposed to go on the invitation, when there is an invitation. Effing hell! Mr. and Mrs. Blow and Mr. and Mrs. Sassy request the honor blah blah for their daughter Jane to Jonathan, son of blah blah blah blah…
Sooner or later it sounds too biblical for me.
February 18, 2009 11:32 am
Report this comment
|
I don’t know…I love being addressed Mrs. Jonathan “insert last name here.”
There’s something so old-fashioned and southern about it.
My point being — I think it’s nice to ask around and see how people prefer to be addressed. It’s a tedious task, but often family members know, or you can easily ask as you double check addresses.
But, then, I’m old-fashioned, like a great aunt, so you can just ignore me. On to my knitting! :)
February 18, 2009 11:45 am
Report this comment
|
If, by chance, you are lucky enough to invite any married female couples who share a last name, the honorific is “Mmes.”- the pluralized version of Mrs. :)
February 18, 2009 12:42 pm
Report this comment
|
“Mmes.” sounds lovely! When we asked the one married female couple that we are inviting how they wanted to be addressed (actually, what they were doing about their last names), they told us “according to Martha” they should be addressed as “The Misses Jane and June Sassy-Blow”. I think Mmes. sounds much nicer, but we of course went with what they requested :)
August 15, 2012 8:35 am
Report this comment
|
I would like to add to Marina’s comment that choosing to forgo honorifics not only sets the tone for an informal/relaxed wedding, but in my opinion also appropriate for a small wedding at which all invitees are very close friends and immediate family. We decided to use no honorifics on the invites (our wedding was both small-ish and on the informal side), and that made sense for our guest list, which did not include old aunties or parents’ friends.
February 18, 2009 1:22 pm
Report this comment
|
Not sure if this helps, but I was told (here in Australia) when getting my passport that “Miss is for girls under the age of twelve. After that you’re Ms or Mrs!”
Might assist when figuring out how to address the teenagers :)
For families, we addressed the envelope to “The Blow Family”, and then on the inside we had “Dear John, Jane, Sarah and Michael, you are invited blah blah”
February 18, 2009 4:22 pm
Report this comment
|
My mom asked not to be Mrs. Joe Blow. She likes being Mrs. Jane Blow, but she is quite offended by being relegated to being the nameless wife of my father. And that is the attitude I was raised with – so you can guess how quick I was to address invitations, Christmas, cards, etc, so that people are named properly.
But some women (like Great Aunt Betty and Mrs Jonathon Anonymous) like being known as their husband’s wife. And Mrs Jonathon Anonymous (a couple posts above) is right – if someone prefers to be known by her husband, then I would honour her wishes.
Meg – I think you did a good thing in this post. You did say this was advice – that we can take it or leave it. There are a couple things I do differently (I put a married couple with different last names on the same line if it fits).
But really, in the grand scheme of things – I don’t think anyone would refuse to come to my wedding if they were on the same or different lines!
This is a great post as a starting point to get people thinking.
February 18, 2009 6:42 pm
Report this comment
|
Great post! I struggled with this issue so much when I was sending out my invitations. I absolutely detest being known as Mrs. Joe Blow. In fact, I don’t like the title Mrs. at all and go by Ms. (although I did take his last name). However, I know that many (not all) older women like the more formal title, so for friends of my parents and my in-laws, I used the “proper” address, Mr. and Mrs. Joe Blow. For my friends, I said Jane and John Blow or Jane Sassy and John Blow (separate lines). I didn’t know that it was proper to list the woman’s name first if honorifics are not used. I just listed her name first because I was really inviting her, and her husband could tag along if he wanted. :) For my husband’s friends, we did the opposite.
Just an interesting tidbit, my mother-in-law is a Ph.D. and her husband is not, but she would rather die than go by Mr. and Dr. or Dr. and Mr. or whatever. :)
February 19, 2009 6:29 am
Report this comment
|
In an effort to avoid all of this, I went totally casual and addressed our invites to first names only (women first). No titles, no last names. Just first names.
I seriously doubt anyone was offended. And if they were, I honestly don’t care much.
February 21, 2009 8:08 pm
Report this comment
|
I grew up in the South and once had a job addressing envelopes for the group who threw the most hoity toity of the hoity toity debutante balls in Dallas. We had a GIANT dusty binder in which you could look up the proper form endless, endless scenarios.
We dodged it all through the saving grace of two envelopes (we had really cheap paper from someplace, can’t remember the deets as it was 10 years ago. That makes it much easier since you can say “The Lastname Family” on the outer envelope and “Kiesha, Clarence, Jared, and Emily” or whatever on the inside.
February 21, 2009 11:29 pm
Report this comment
|
yikes! so many opinions, too much stress! just do what feels right. you know these people well enough to want them present at your wedding, call them what they like and be done with it :O)
February 22, 2009 11:48 am
Report this comment
|
Well, I just received my umpteenth wedding invitation addressed to “Mr. and Mrs. Joe Blow” when my name is “Dr. Jane Sassy-Blow”. Geesh! I’ve been married to this guy for almost 24 years now and no one in his family has still bothered to learn my name! Whoever said the woman with the Dr. title should get to use it was right on! Or at the very least, let me use my legal – hyphenated – last name! Thanks for letting me vent!
April 29, 2009 10:50 am
Report this comment
|
Just another comment on the “Miss” thing-
I’m over 30 with a Masters degree and I love being called Miss Sassy. Ms. Sassy just sounds too much like Miz to me, I don’t like it. So I have people call me Miss.
I tried to get them to call me Master Sassy because of my degree, but nobody’s going for it.
I’m working on the Ph.D. right now, and I’ll probably switch from Miss to Dr. when that is finished, but only for official things. Otherwise, as long as I’m unmarried, I’ll be Miss and love it.
As to kids and whatnot, that’s what the inner envelope is for isn’t it? On the outer envelope you put the honorific names, on the inner envelope you put the social names and kids’ names.
I’m actually expecting a wedding invite from a family member that will have my name on the outer envelope, but on the inner one it will have my name and my SO’s name.
April 29, 2009 11:40 pm
Report this comment
|
Well yes. But 99% of us won’t have inner envelopes.
April 30, 2009 4:36 am
Report this comment
|
LOVE LOVE LOVE your site – Ok here are my questions. I have 2Dr.'s I am inviting, Husband and wife but she did not take his last name. how should I word that? AND when you spell out the year is it – two thousand AND ten or just two thousand ten? help!
September 9, 2009 7:30 pm
Report this comment
|
It’s very simple to address an invitation or other formal correspondence to two medical doctors who are married and who share the same surname:
“The Doctors Johnson”
If two medical doctors are married and use different surnames, or if they are not married:
“Dr. Jane Jones and Dr. James Johnson”
The situation is a bit less clear for persons who have earned a Ph.D. or other doctoral-level degree. It’s probably best to ask them how they prefer to be addressed.
March 13, 2012 3:47 pm
Report this comment
|
Thank you! Thank you! Thank you for this!
I have been traipsing around the internet for a couple days now trying to find an opinion on addressing invitations that was neither entirely formal, nor rigidly traditional. What a relief to find such a thoughtful post.
For me, it was all about “do unto others”. The problem with this situation is that the true “do unto others” is actually to treat them the way *they* want to be treated. Sometimes that can be massively confusing.
Thank you so much for your helpful and thoughtful post.
April 29, 2010 6:19 pm
Report this comment
|
[...] Addressing Wedding Invitations (and staying a feminist) « A … [...]
May 8, 2010 5:00 pm
Report this comment
|