Part of me wants to believe that it is simply a positive identity statement. I recall thinking through the name issue a few years ago after reading an editorial in Christianity Today. It was written by a black man who detailed why he insists people call him by his title and last name. He knew that historically black men were disrespected and simply called by their first names (like children). For him it was a point of pride and proof that times had changed to be referred to in respectful terms. As I read his piece, I thought that for women the opposite is often true. Historically, we had no individual identity and were referred to as “Mrs. John Does.” Our identity was simply an extension of our husbands, our name his name. So for women to use their first name became a symbol of identity – asserting that we are people with our own distinct name. So when I see the “Sarah” or the “Hillary” campaign signs, I want to believe that it might just be a means of asserting identity.

But there is a part of me that also question if the use of the first names is simply a way to make strong women more acceptable. Our culture still fears powerful women – they get labeled as bitchy or scorned as cold if they are too assertive, knowledgeable, or decisive. So the use of the more familiar first name softens this perception – makes them appear more like children or best friends and less like the scary female leader. Instead of a term of respect it becomes an accommodation and a reminder of how far women still have to go to reach equality.

So what do you think? Why do these women simply use their first names? What is your personal preference in how you are addressed? Do you see difference in levels of respect regarding what people are called?