I passed through Singapore twice last month and that's why I read a few issues of The Straits Times. Readers are invited to write in to Singapore's English-language newspaper. The rules for doing so are set out in small type. Evidently, women must "indicate Miss, Ms, Mrs or Madam."
What the? Never mind that "Ms" was invented in order that the archaic "Miss" and "Mrs" may be consigned to the history books but, hey, the ladies in Singapore have another option just in case, you know, they happen to be in charge of a house of prostitution - or something.
But seriously, how can we expect men to take our titles seriously if we can't decide what's appropriate and what's not? Even if you remove "madam" from that robust smorgasbord of options from which people of the fairer gender may choose, it's kind of pathetic to have to decide between three different titles. Isn't it, ladies? Must we really cling onto relics from another era?
So you want to be called "Miss" before you are married and "Mrs" after? It's the twenty-first century and you're still happy to be defined by your relationship to a man? That's nice. You've probably got your reasons. No one said they have to be good ones.
Then hey, you know, it's just the man-hating, feminist, can't-get-a-fella-types of woman who embrace the title "Ms", anyway. Those poor old politically correct thingies. Bless. Remember when they thought it was going to actually catch on? Oh dear.
I last wrote about this issue in the June 2000 piece entitled How Ms can master the modern world. Twelve long years later and I reckon if anything there are fewer women embracing the marital-status-neutral option these days. When did "Ms" suddenly become so unappealing? Please tell me it wasn't my fault.