In our AskMartha mailbox, askMartha@marthastewartweddings.com, I fielded this question recently:
We are having a black-tie wedding, and we're setting the tone with our save-the-dates and invitations. I know tradition calls for formally addressing a married couple as Mr. and Mrs. John Smith, but I would like to reflect our more modern times and at least use the woman's first name. What is the best way to format this: "Mrs. Jane and Mr. John Smith" or "Mr. John and Mrs. Jane Smith"?
Unfortunately, the answer to this is "neither." When you are being formal, you use formal forms and formats.
The woman's first name is not included in a formal situation because she is being sheltered (not hidden) by her husband -- it is his role to present the family's official face to the world and act as a protective barrier. Under that idea, some might suggest you put "Mr. John" first (like the post office). Others say to never separate "John" from "Smith" (something about men not being torn from their last names), which means "Mrs. Jane" would precede it (that satisfies the "ladies first" idea we often see).
In fact, there are still people who believe that "Mrs. Jane Smith" is proper only for divorced women; to them, a wife or widow would always be "Mrs. John Smith."
Sure, it's archaic -- but that's formality for you. Nobody's going to arrest you, of course -- you can write anything you like. But if you want to be authentically formal, go with the age-old format.
What are you using on your invitations?
From: Hannah | 8/23/11 at 12:09 pm
I wouldn't necessarily call myself a feminist but I do detest this tradition of only using the man's name. I didn't realize how much it bothered me until I recently received a wedding invite from a close friend. She had gone with "Mr. and Mrs. John Doe"... She is MY friend and my name isn't even on there!! I love my new hubby and was so thrilled to have the same name, but I'm already taking his last name, can't I keep my first?
On my own wedding invites we went with "Mr. John Doe and Mrs. Jane Doe" - full names of both people invited, because we are, after all, inviting both of them!
From: Jessifer | 8/23/11 at 12:41 pm
When I was addressing my wedding invitations, I didn't want the women to feel left out, especially if they were the ones really being invited, with their significant others being the plus one. I addressed the enveloeps as "Mr. & Mrs. Jack & Jill Smith"
From: Rebecca | 8/23/11 at 3:54 pm
The problem with this tradition is that it misses the whole point of etiquette. The whole point is to treat people with respect. Assuming a woman needs her husband's shelter any more than he needs hers is, today, disrespectful. Also, this formality is offensive to many, many women. Why follow a formula meant to show respect when it usually ends up offending people? I used the old way for older couples whom I thought would prefer it. But for the people in my own generation I went with "Mrs. Jane Doe and Mr. John Doe."
From: Karen | 8/23/11 at 9:34 pm
I hate this phrasing, too. I feel that it's disrespectful to the woman to blanket her under her husband's name. Professional titles can also pose a problem. My mother is a physician and my father is not; Emily Post states that it's proper to put the person with a professional title first ("Dr. Jane and Mr. John Doe"). I will have to figure this out when it comes time to write our invitations, since my future in-laws are pretty traditional.
From: Ivan Packer | 8/25/11 at 7:24 am
Great "sheltered (not hidden) by" explanation. I had never thought of it that way.
From: Talley Sue Hohlfeld | 8/25/11 at 11:56 am
I suppose you could argue that it's a bit sexist to think that a woman needed to be sheltered from the world, and it *was* a sexist world that she was being sheltered from. But when you view the custom in its context, women WERE much more vulnerable, precisely because that sexist social code made them so.
From: Talley Sue Hohlfeld | 8/25/11 at 11:59 am
Actually, Emily Post would not approve of that wording, not *precisely*.
It would be: Dr. Jane Doe and Mr. John Doe. You'd need to repeat the last names (and use the "and," bcs it indicates they are married; you'd leave it out and put their names on separate lines if they'd divorced).
And if your in-laws are pretty traditional, get a copy of Crane's Blue Book; that'll squelch any objections they have. (Also, your in-laws don't get a say on how your *parents'* names are represented. They might have an idea about their own, but even then, they don't get that much say here.)
From: Hilary Sarat-St Peter | 9/11/11 at 8:56 pm
The first rule of etiquette is to treat other people well. Your great aunt, who was probably a mother and homemaker by profession, may indeed prefer Mr. and Mrs. John Smith.
However, contemporary women have careers and work in public spaces (not in the home) where they present their own face to the world. It is odd to suggest that these women need a protective social barrier.
If the couple is under 60 years of age, you should address the envelope to Mr. and Mrs. John and Jane Smith to avoid making your female guests uncomfortable. Trust me -- no woman under 60 will complain about having her own name on the envelope.
From: Cristina | 7/2/12 at 5:13 pm
I happen to be an MD and little did I know that decision now allows me to keep my first name. However, I have many professional friends such as JD's who by formality would become Mrs. John Doe and lose their first name. For my wedding, it was controversial but for my generation we are writing Mrs. Jane Doe and Mr. John Doe. But in my mother's defense, I'm not truly following tradition unless I take my husband's full (first and last) name. Little did I know that the Dr. allows me to keep Cristina.
From: marianne | 9/8/12 at 7:32 am
I imagine you're all American. This custom is just about obsolete in the UK now except for very rich people and sometimes in addressing envelopes. I agree very much with the comment that it misses the point of etiquette.
From: Sales & Use Tax | 5/6/13 at 10:35 pm
Thank you for offering this you rescued me a lot of work with this kind of tip!