By the 16th century “mistress” referred to any woman, with neither “mistress” nor “mister” referencing one’s marital status.  It wasn’t until around the late 17th century that the marital status distinction began coming into play.

Once “mistress” popularly took on the alternate definition of a married man’s lover on the side, people almost universally stopped pronouncing “Mrs.” as “mistress” due to the negative implication.  This change began as early as the late 17th century and by the early to mid-19th century, the “mistress” pronunciation nearly completely disappeared in favour of the more socially acceptable “missus”, which was itself just a contracted version of the now taboo “mistress”.

Interestingly, at least from a language evolution standpoint, while “mistress” started out being completely respectable and eventually was sullied, the alternative pronunciation “missus”, that we still use today, actually was somewhat frowned upon until around the 18th century.  Before this, “missus” itself was considered a vulgar form of “mistress”.

Around the same time “Mrs.” showed up in the late 16th century, the abbreviations “Ms.” and “Miss” popped up, both also being short for “mistress”. Unlike the other two, “Ms.” quickly fell out of favour and “Miss” and “Mrs.” were much more commonly used until the late 20th century when “Ms.” once again became popular.

In the early 20th century, “Mrs.” was firmly entrenched as an abbreviation for a married woman and “Miss” was used for non-married women, but there was no widely accepted abbreviation for a woman whose marital status was unknown.  As such, “Ms.” was suggested as a way to refer to such a woman in writing, as noted in the 1901 Republican of Springfield, Massachusetts issue:

There is a void in the English language which, with some diffidence, we undertake to fill. Everyone has been put in an embarrassing position by ignorance of the status of some woman. To call a maiden Mrs. is only a shade worse than to insult a matron with the inferior title Miss. Yet it is not always easy to know the facts… Now, clearly, what is needed is a more comprehensive term which does homage to the sex without expressing any views as to their domestic situation, and what could be simpler or more logical than the retention of what the two doubtful terms have in common. The abbreviation “Ms.” is simple, it is easy to write, and the person concerned can translate it properly according to circumstances. For oral use it might be rendered as “Mizz,” which would be a close parallel to the practice long universal in many bucolic regions, where a Mis’ does duty for Miss. and Mrs. alike.

Despite this very public suggestion and several similar ones through the next half century, this usage didn’t widely catch on at first.  This all changed in the 1970s when Ms. Magazine was first published.  At this time, a friend of the co-founder of the magazine, Gloria Steinem, heard someone suggest “Ms.” as a title for all women, whether married or not, and Steinem decided to use it as the name of the magazine.  After this, “Ms.” finally started to see the light of day, being the female equivalent of “Mr.”, which “Mrs.” had actually originally been.

While “Mr.” started out being an abbreviation for “master”, by the 18th century it was almost exclusively pronounced as “mister”, which derived from “master”, and “master” became firmly entrenched as a separate word from “Mr./mister”.

The proper abbreviation for the plural of “Mr.” is “Messrs.”

Want to get hitched but don’t have a man? Head to Japan where a company sells ‘solo weddings’

Do you dream of having a white wedding, but despair at the lack of a man in your life to share the big day with? You’re not alone – a new trend is cropping up in the Far East for solo weddings. As women become financially independent, they are putting off settling down with partners until later on in life. But they still want the all-about-me no-expense-spared party that comes with getting hitched, without actually having to tie the knot.

Travel company Cera Travel in Kyoto, a city in southern Japan, has started a new service called ‘Solo Wedding.’ It lets single women enjoy all the fun and glamour of the day, including spending the honeymoon night in a fancy hotel. The two-day trip sees the clients get dress fittings, choose their own bouquets, get their hair and make-up done and even choose a man to accompany them for a photo shoot.

The service started in June and is aimed at single, working women who have decided to pursue careers instead of follow the traditional Japanese route of getting married. It is also being marketed at women who have been divorced but want to feel special again. So far ten women have taken up the offer, which costs around £1,700 ($2,750).

A spokesman for the company said: ‘It is a truly unique experience and one that we are very proud of. All the details are taken care of by wedding professionals and for those who don’t want a traditional white wedding dress we offer our Geisha service, which sees the brides going on an historical photo shoot dressed up as Geishas.’

Businesswoman Nagi Daisen, 43, said: ‘I’ve been in a relationship for years but we’ve never got round to actually getting married. So I decided to do this for myself and it was amazing fun. I always wanted to wear a wedding dress and to be pampered like this and now I have been. It was great.’

The honeymoon night does not include the model used for the photo shoot, although the company said the women mostly invited their boyfriends to join them in the honeymoon suite after the ‘wedding’ was over.

source: Daily Mail

True or false?

1. The new service is aimed at women whose boyfriend has refused to get married.

2. The brides get to pick the dress, the flowers and have their hair and make-up done.

3. The brides can choose between a white dress and a traditional Geisha outfit.

4. Japanese women traditionally pursue careers.

5. The trip includes a night at an elegant hotel with whoever the brides want to take along.

answers: 1-F 2-T 3-T 4-F 5-T

Normal
0

false
false
false

EN-GB
X-NONE
X-NONE

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:””;
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0cm;
mso-para-margin-right:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0cm;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:”Calibri”,”sans-serif”;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}

Normal
0

false
false
false

EN-GB
X-NONE
X-NONE

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:””;
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0cm;
mso-para-margin-right:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0cm;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:”Calibri”,”sans-serif”;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}