Etiquette -- Old Hat or Good Sense???

Peeves to pet? Haha! Well, my brain isn't working too well this morning, so I'll just mention a couple of things to get started.

CELL PHONES
Cell phones are the cause of a lot of annoyance, though I've determined (from personal experience) that it can be amusing to be the one walking down the aisles of Costco, chatting away. It is rude but invigorating and fun. It can also be handy to relay information if I'm home & Mr.P or my daughter are shopping. Yes, the vintage WHITE cheese, not the other. No, not that bacon. Get the stuff in the ....

I do detest being at a restaurant and hearing someone talk on the cell phone, especially if they are loud, long or too jovial. Can things really be THAT funny? And, of course, I desperately want to honk (but that would be rude) at someone who is driving a weaving car while intent on their cell.

DOORS
I do wish everyone would learn the correct way to open doors for others AND willingly smile or murmur their thanks. Though I grew up when the feminists were in their heyday, resenting chauvinistic males, it never occurred to me to truly resent someone opening the door for me... nor to open the door myself for someone of either sex who needed a hand.

The idea that feminism ruined good etiquette is faulty, I think, or maybe an excuse. Anyway, despite being a feminist myself and raising good feminist kids, I have taught my son that (all other things being equal) to go ahead and open doors for women (and to expect thanks for it).


UNWANTED CONVERSATION?
Here's another. I think this seems to be regional... in some parts of the country (like this one) it is considered pleasant to have an informal chat with someone while waiting in line. Apparently this is considered rude and forward in other parts of the country. I expect it is an urban method of staying uninvolved, but I think it is psychologically unnerving to be unwilling to talk to a fellow human.

Piffka- I consider myself a feminist. When I was a teenager, (before feminism was a buzzword) I felt very uncomfortable having a boy running around a car to open the door for me. I was perfectly capable of getting out of the car by myself.

I will wait and open a door for ayone behind me, male or female, young or old. I think that it is simply good manners.

Thanks for the opportunity to pet a little peeve of mine. (or pick some nits, as it were)

In this office building, the men go too far (IMO) with etiquette on elevators. This is not true in other buildings where I've worked in this city and others. About 80% of the people in the building work for the same company.

They step back (sometimes holding the elevator door) to let women enter the elevator. When departing the elevator, they step away from the doors to let any woman exit who might wish to. It's like being at a dance and not knowing the steps sometimes!

It seems to me that we can all be equals when entering and departing the elevator. The closest person gets to enter or exit first. Wouldn't that be simpler?

I stopped fighting this quirkiness long ago. I know, I should be grateful that they've noticed my gender or some such...

mac11-The problem is that many people nowadays do not even realize the meanings of these niceties. The implication for men opening doors, taking off a woman's coat, letting her out of the elevator first, etc. has its roots in the notion of male superiority. What men are doing, is making a kind of "noblesse oblige" statement, which I think is of questionable taste in today's world.

The problem with some boy running around a car to open the door is he should be able to do it with more finesse. It is perfectly possible to open a car door for someone without making a big deal out of it. If I am transporting a friend who is a little bit older & not so spry anymore, I can manage quite easily to open the car door without making a huge deal out of it.

My daughter had a friend, a boy, who often annoyed her by making a huge deal about opening the car door for her. She said that once as he was getting out of the car on his side to let her in, he locked the doors so that she wouldn't be able to open the door for herself. What a foolish thing... it certainly didn't make her like him!

Phoenix, I'm not sure that the "ladies first" rule is based on a belief in male superiority. Can you explain that?

Must admit, I'd rather a man let me go first, then made me trail along behind. I've also found that when a man has to hold a door open from behind, there is a somewhat uncomfortably close physical presence which I'd just as soon do without (unless it is my husband). Know what I mean? He opens the door and you have to sort of press past his wide open grasp. Hmmmmmmmm.

I agree with you, Phoenix. I find the behavior condescending, when it's carried too far.

In the case you mention, it is a kindness that people help the aged and infirm. But there still is a power balance. The able bodied person is deferring to the less able. In the case of male/female etiquette, the implication is that the female is ALWAYS incapable, or not as capable, of performing the act herself, so she needs the assistance of the male. It is a way that the male asserts his authority over the female.

I realize that it sounds like I make a big deal out of this. I really don't. But I am acutely aware of the SYMBOLIC implication of these "niceties".

I used to go to a beauty parlor. There was a lovely mural on the wall. It looked like it was out of the Arabian Nights. A woman and man were on a flying carpet. She was sitting. He was standing with his arm outstretched, as if to show the woman whatever it was that he wanted to show her.

The mural bugged the hell out of me, every time that I saw it!!!

I'm not sure I agree that the implication in etiquette is always that women are less capable. When people serve a royal, a king for example, they do similar services. Do you say that in that case there is an implication the king cannot manage?

Piffka- In that case, the king does not HAVE to manage.

I hate the size of the aisles at Wal-Mart

I hate that no one considers trying to shop with multiple children isn't a handicap.

I hate it when your in a restaurant or any public place and someone is obviously talking loudly enough for people to hear them because they feel what they are saying makes them look good.

I hate it when receptionists show cleavage.

I hate when someone doesn't give a straight answer.

I hate the fact that some people make a big fuss over appearances. Especially those married women who stay at home with their children and dress to the nines just to go to walmart!!! Are they trying to impress someone? Are they that unhappy in their marriage?

I hate people who are too wrapped up in material things. I like to say....
EXCESS does not qualify you for SUCCESS

And....I hate money!!!!! Its stressfull, and is always coming and going!!!
Causes confusion and delay...and brings out the WORST in people.

My then boyfriend and I took a trip to NYC five years ago and were eating breakfast in a cozy cafe, with seats against a counter that faced the windows. It was crowded and we took the only two seats together. Unfortunately, the woman next to us was discussing her gynocological problems, first with her doctor's office and then with someone she phoned. I assumed this woman must have come from her apt and was on her way to work where she hopefully had a cubicle. It was awful to hear what she had to say.

People in stores generally call home to ask whether they need milk or toilet paper and whether the person at home wants chicken or pork chops for dinner. Conversations like that are alright: nothing of import is said.

I hold doors for men, esp., when we go through a double door situtation and he holds the door first. In general, people around here are pretty good about door holding in buildings. I do think the old custom of opening a car door for a woman is out of date. ANyone watch the brilliant Britcom, Keeping up Appearances?

When I lived in Nashua, NH, people considered it rude to strike up conversations in supermarkets and at Marshall's. I made some nice acquaintances that way and don't regret the time spent talking at all. But New Hampshirites are a cold and stubborn lot.

I referred to my former boyfriend above: he refused to hold a full time job and worked six months of the year, selling sunglasses at Red Sox games. Would not take any sort of job -- retail, substitute teaching -- for the winter. He lived on $18,000/year. The real problem was he wrote down every penny he spent. When I first met him, I was relished his thrift, because my husband borrowed money constantly, usually to start businesses. However, this other man's self-selected poverty and penny pinching contributed greatly to the demise of the relationship. I felt money spent on me was done grudgingly. The NY trip was a gift to me but he expected me to be satisfied eating at McDonald's. The trip co-incided with an event in his family, so his mother paid our bus fare and hotel expenses. He budgeted $150 for museums, transportation and food for the two of us for four days. The upsetting thing is he came with traveller's checks, some that were 20 years old and saved from a life time of trips, but he refused to spend them. This sort of tight-fistedness is not a virtue but a breach of etiquette. If I hadn't brought along $200, we would not have eaten the last day.

Without having the time to read the other posts, i'd like to respond. I try to observe all of the "old fashioned" courtesies i was taught as a child. I enjoy doing it. I understand the practicality of holding a door for someone who is burdened, and don't think there is an obligation placed on either gender. However, as i said, i follow the "old" rules i was taught in childhood. But i was taught those rules thoroughly, which means that i will hold the door for a man, if we reach the doors at almost the same time, but i'm there just before him.

My sweetiepie and i went to a store once, and when we went back to the jeep, i unlocked the door, held it for her, and after she had gotten in, the dog jumped up in her lap, and i closed the door before walking around to the driver's door. A man passing by commented that one does not see that sort of behavior these days. Sad, if true.

Interesting perspective but it has that tinge of feminist revisionism in it.

Were the servants of the nobility of Europe also demonstrating their authority over their Kings and Queens by dressing them, opening doors, etc??

Why is it that in every other situation it is the person being deferred to that is in the position of authority/power yet when it comes to opening a door for a woman it's somehow patronizing or a way to deny the woman authority?

I love old fashioned etiquette and am only too happy to have a door held open for me.....I dislike cell phone use in public places like shops, coffee houses, restaurants, airport waiting rooms.....can't
we get any peace anyplace?

Methinks they should bring back old fashioned phone booths and let cell phone users step into those and close the door while they chat.

fishin'- Interesting- the thought comes to me that the King, or the magnate, is PAYING servants to do chores for them. They are not doing these tasks out of the goodness of their hearts......

Feminist revisionism? Moi? I have a feminist spirit, but I don't align myself with any feminist groups.

I use a walker in public places--a snappy little three wheeler that I can trundle along at a "normal" speed.

While I can manage doors, I'm exceedingly grateful for anyone who will hold a door open for me--particularly the heavy glass doors.

Women of all ages seem to help without thinking as do men over 40 or 50. I've met several very helpful toddlers.

Even with the walker, once I get a door open, I can hold it open for someone else--and I usually do. Men are often slightly embarassed by this. Women usually are not.

Yes, they are getting paid but the juxtaposition is still there isn't it? The servant attends to the needs (wishes, wants, desires, etc..) of the one in power. Why would men act the part of a servant in relation to women in an effort to assert their power? Wouldn't it be the other way around?



I know ya don't but that doesn't mean that the idea didn't get into your thinking from those that do! (I'm not, by any means, saying all feminist groups are revisionist. But there are some groups/individuals that are so anti-male that they DO revise history to fit their agendas.)

Think about an old fashioned, traditional marriage, and the role that the woman took. She was the one who cooked, cleaned, and did the laundry etc. The man was out in the world doing "important" things, while the woman was "just a housewife".

Years ago, the role that servants took in a royal or wealthy household was assumed by the woman (in the middle and working classes) in the traditional marriage. What the man provided to the woman was protection, and sustenance. The reason that she was protected, was that it was assumed, by most men, that women were incapable of dealing with the sturm and drang of the world.

As a chivalrous gesture, certain customs of etiquette emerged that, at first blush, were in deference to the woman. But in reality, the male was asserting his superiority over her.

There is something going through my mind about medieval times, and the roles and relationships of the lords and their serfs. Problem is, I am not that conversant with history. Maybe we can grab a hold of Setanta!