Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not OP and haven't read the thread.

Personally I think honorifics should be done away with entirely. I don't think doctors should insist on Dr. I don't think professors should be Prof. I think the use of honorifics perpetuates power imbalances that on the whole aren't good. Let everyone go by first name. And yes, I have honorifics I could use but I don't.

An adult insisting another adult use a title is just cringeworthy behavior to me.

I respect your opinion. Would you consider reading the NYT article linked in this thread to see if any of the issues outlined there might, in your opinion, warrant an exception?

I will find it and read it.

Mostly I find the insistence on honorifics to be the vestiges of a racist and misogynistic history in which those honorifics were used as a way of keeping people who deserved it on their merits out of power.

You want respect? Earn it based on your behavior, not by insisting another adult address you with a title.

I am a woman of color, PhD holder, and professor and you could not be more off base here.

Nope. I've been in the trenches myself and I completely disagree with you.

DP, I agree with the professor PP. The NYT article also noted that professors with doctoral degrees who are younger, minority, and/or female are more likely to be referred to by their first names. Anecdotally, I’ve found this to be true among my academic colleagues who’ve mentioned this issue.

The solution is to not use title at all, not to insist other adults use it.

I do make an exception in the military. But beyond that, no.

Why does the military get an exception?

I am the PP who wrote about the military exception. I haven't posted since then, so anything intervening is not me. I make exceptions for the military because in the military, title is not just an honorific but a way of making the organization function, most critically in life-critical roles. In other words, there is a collapsing of the title and job function in a way that makes the system operable, and has impact on life or death situations. Thinking about it, I can think of a few different scenarios where that could be the case: for instance, I could see a rational need to use formal titles in a surgical operating theater, or an emergency room. But certainly not in a college classroom, where it's really just about professorial ego.

I also wonder to an extent if this is geographic in nature. I am in California and I don't run into this insistence on titles often. My doctors, for instance, will often use first names ("Hi, I am John Smith.") I find people who insist on titles from grown adults in non-life-critical situations to be off-putting. Luckily I don't run into it often. And yes, I call people what they want to be called. I just find the insistence on it to be a bit ridiculous and over the top.

How about clergy?

And politicians: Governor, Senator, President? Okay, I wouldn't call the current guy in the oval office Mr President to his face, but in general.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not OP and haven't read the thread.

Personally I think honorifics should be done away with entirely. I don't think doctors should insist on Dr. I don't think professors should be Prof. I think the use of honorifics perpetuates power imbalances that on the whole aren't good. Let everyone go by first name. And yes, I have honorifics I could use but I don't.

An adult insisting another adult use a title is just cringeworthy behavior to me.

I respect your opinion. Would you consider reading the NYT article linked in this thread to see if any of the issues outlined there might, in your opinion, warrant an exception?

I will find it and read it.

Mostly I find the insistence on honorifics to be the vestiges of a racist and misogynistic history in which those honorifics were used as a way of keeping people who deserved it on their merits out of power.

You want respect? Earn it based on your behavior, not by insisting another adult address you with a title.

I am a woman of color, PhD holder, and professor and you could not be more off base here.

Nope. I've been in the trenches myself and I completely disagree with you.

DP, I agree with the professor PP. The NYT article also noted that professors with doctoral degrees who are younger, minority, and/or female are more likely to be referred to by their first names. Anecdotally, I’ve found this to be true among my academic colleagues who’ve mentioned this issue.

The solution is to not use title at all, not to insist other adults use it.

I do make an exception in the military. But beyond that, no.

Why does the military get an exception?

I am the PP who wrote about the military exception. I haven't posted since then, so anything intervening is not me. I make exceptions for the military because in the military, title is not just an honorific but a way of making the organization function, most critically in life-critical roles. In other words, there is a collapsing of the title and job function in a way that makes the system operable, and has impact on life or death situations. Thinking about it, I can think of a few different scenarios where that could be the case: for instance, I could see a rational need to use formal titles in a surgical operating theater, or an emergency room. But certainly not in a college classroom, where it's really just about professorial ego.

I also wonder to an extent if this is geographic in nature. I am in California and I don't run into this insistence on titles often. My doctors, for instance, will often use first names ("Hi, I am John Smith.") I find people who insist on titles from grown adults in non-life-critical situations to be off-putting. Luckily I don't run into it often. And yes, I call people what they want to be called. I just find the insistence on it to be a bit ridiculous and over the top.

How about clergy?

I called all my undergraduate professors "Dr" (that was the culture at my school) and graduate professors "Professor" until they invited me to call them by their first name.

I went to a prestige college and the first time I met the president of the university he said call him by his first name. I was merely a random, sloppy teenager at the time. Ever since, I’ve assumed anyone caught up with formal titles is an insufferable twit.

Anonymous wrote:How are we 13 pages into this?

The OP lacks basic respect and basic common sense

The End

Now we are 24 pages.

It has to be a troll

Honestly, the respect really lies in the acknowledgement that it is the professor's choice whether to make the interaction informal. It's not properly the student's choice to move to a first name basis.

You can have collegial and professional relationships on a first name basis -- obviously so among peers, although even among peers, in some contexts, the culture is to remain formal. In other contexts, there is often a reason for formality.

For instance, with physicians, there is already a breech of standard social contracts. Your doctor may see you naked, or touch you in places only an intimate lover would. Your doctor may ask you things so personal you literally never have spoken about them to anyone else in your life. Sometimes maintaining that nod to formality keeps the emphasis on the structure of the relationship, that it is a professional one, and not personal.

Professors may have different reasons for maintaining formality. When you are explicitly required to pass judgment on others as part of your job, it can be good to maintain clear and distinct boundaries: no gifts, no getting drunk with your students, no inappropriate late night meetings. For some, the clarity of formality aids that boundary.

And individuals can choose to make exceptions, or be exceptions. Of course. But expecting formality until specified otherwise doesn't necessarily mean you expect servitude or that you suffer from egregious self-importance. It doesn't necessarily mean that at all.

And note that jackasses can be jackasses on a first-name basis, too.

I don't disagree about erring on the side of formality in academia.

But here is another data point. My experience at the US DOJ is that among the attorneys (and just about everyone else), only the AG is addressed formally. Everyone else -- the Associate Attorney General, assistant Attorney Generals, Deputy Assistant Attorney Generals -- goes by first names.

Anonymous wrote:Always address as Dr. X or Professor X. If they want to be informal, they will tell you.

Heh heh heh, I am old enough to remember the original SNL sketch, "Dr X: Family Counselor"

https://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/dr-x-family-counselor/3006659

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not OP and haven't read the thread.

Personally I think honorifics should be done away with entirely. I don't think doctors should insist on Dr. I don't think professors should be Prof. I think the use of honorifics perpetuates power imbalances that on the whole aren't good. Let everyone go by first name. And yes, I have honorifics I could use but I don't.

An adult insisting another adult use a title is just cringeworthy behavior to me.

I respect your opinion. Would you consider reading the NYT article linked in this thread to see if any of the issues outlined there might, in your opinion, warrant an exception?

I will find it and read it.

Mostly I find the insistence on honorifics to be the vestiges of a racist and misogynistic history in which those honorifics were used as a way of keeping people who deserved it on their merits out of power.

You want respect? Earn it based on your behavior, not by insisting another adult address you with a title.

I earned the right to respect - being called professor - through my behavior. Specifically, by writing my dissertation, defending it successfully, getting hired by a university, and earning tenure through teaching, publication, and service to the university. It's not an honorary title.

Sincerely,

A Professor

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I went to a college where many, but not all, professors asked to be called by their first names. Still, I always started with “Professors lastname” until they made clear they wanted to be called by their first name.

This. Of course, this. Basic manners.

Exactly

Anonymous wrote:I went to a college where many, but not all, professors asked to be called by their first names. Still, I always started with “Professors lastname” until they made clear they wanted to be called by their first name.

This. Of course, this. Basic manners.

I work in senior administration in a college. When I first speak to a professor, I call them Dr or professor. It is just the culture of academics. When academics speak about each other, they also use titles, and not first names. They also use titles like Provost, Dean etc.

The use of formal titles is just part of the culture. Once I know someone well, I use their first name if speaking only to them but will still refer to them by title if addressing them in a meeting or to students or others.

Anonymous wrote:If she wants to get ahead, she must be professional. Who Gives A Sh if you don’t like it? Teach your child to observe social mores and it will benefit them. Can’t understand why people want to debate this topic. It’s not a matter of morality. Just do it. Or don’t. But know if you don’t, you may not get the internship, assistantship, job, place on the team, etc.

Let OP and her DD reap what they sow

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not OP and haven't read the thread.

Personally I think honorifics should be done away with entirely. I don't think doctors should insist on Dr. I don't think professors should be Prof. I think the use of honorifics perpetuates power imbalances that on the whole aren't good. Let everyone go by first name. And yes, I have honorifics I could use but I don't.

An adult insisting another adult use a title is just cringeworthy behavior to me.

I respect your opinion. Would you consider reading the NYT article linked in this thread to see if any of the issues outlined there might, in your opinion, warrant an exception?

I will find it and read it.

Mostly I find the insistence on honorifics to be the vestiges of a racist and misogynistic history in which those honorifics were used as a way of keeping people who deserved it on their merits out of power.

You want respect? Earn it based on your behavior, not by insisting another adult address you with a title.

I am a woman of color, PhD holder, and professor and you could not be more off base here.

Nope. I've been in the trenches myself and I completely disagree with you.

DP, I agree with the professor PP. The NYT article also noted that professors with doctoral degrees who are younger, minority, and/or female are more likely to be referred to by their first names. Anecdotally, I’ve found this to be true among my academic colleagues who’ve mentioned this issue.

The solution is to not use title at all, not to insist other adults use it.

I do make an exception in the military. But beyond that, no.

Why does the military get an exception?

I am the PP who wrote about the military exception. I haven't posted since then, so anything intervening is not me. I make exceptions for the military because in the military, title is not just an honorific but a way of making the organization function, most critically in life-critical roles. In other words, there is a collapsing of the title and job function in a way that makes the system operable, and has impact on life or death situations. Thinking about it, I can think of a few different scenarios where that could be the case: for instance, I could see a rational need to use formal titles in a surgical operating theater, or an emergency room. But certainly not in a college classroom, where it's really just about professorial ego.

I also wonder to an extent if this is geographic in nature. I am in California and I don't run into this insistence on titles often. My doctors, for instance, will often use first names ("Hi, I am John Smith.") I find people who insist on titles from grown adults in non-life-critical situations to be off-putting. Luckily I don't run into it often. And yes, I call people what they want to be called. I just find the insistence on it to be a bit ridiculous and over the top.

If she wants to get ahead, she must be professional. Who Gives A Sh if you don’t like it? Teach your child to observe social mores and it will benefit them. Can’t understand why people want to debate this topic. It’s not a matter of morality. Just do it. Or don’t. But know if you don’t, you may not get the internship, assistantship, job, place on the team, etc.