Reference to Bodily Function in the Political Arena, Vol. 14, Issue 29

"Cousin Marie says politicians aren't gentlemen."

- Agatha Christie, Death on the Nile

A line has been crossed, and Etiquetteer is very unhappy about it.

Reference to Bodily Function, outside one's doctor's office, is not Perfectly Proper. Etiquetteer has said this before, and sadly will have to go on saying it. Don't think for a moment that this pleases Etiquetteer.

In the aftermath of last week's debate of Republican presidential candidates hosted by Fox News, popular (populist?) candidate Donald Trump abandoned forever any possible illusion anyone, no matter how deluded, might still cling to that he was still a viable candidate or a gentleman. Readers probably already know how he did this: by explaining that Fox News debate moderator Megyn Kelly was suffering from what used to be known as "female complaint" during the debate. Etiquetteer believes he made this suggestion because Ms. Kelly held him to account about previous, and very public, disparaging comments about women who had criticized him, nor would she accept his attempt to suggest that he only criticized one particular woman.

How might one feel if Mr. Trump had suggested this about Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany? How might one feel if Mr. Trump had suggested this about Dilma Rousseff, President of Brazil? How might one feel if Mr. Trump had suggested this about one's mother?

Mr. Trump's behavior has always been the antithesis of presidential, and this incident confirms it for anyone who might wish to think otherwise. It is the antithesis of Perfect Propriety. It is the antithesis of Chivalry. Any man who could make such a suggestion, petty and vulgar, makes clear that he is not fit for public office, or any role in public life, and should slink in shame to his (in this case, gilded onyx) corner. Etiquetteer calls on those who might continue to support Mr. Trump as a candidate to condemn this behavior publicly.

Man-spreading *shudder*, Vol. 13, Issue 61

A reader has encouraged Etiquetteer to speak out on the issue of men sprawling beyond the limits of their seats on public transporation, which has been given the Vulgar Appellation of "man-spreading." Indeed, this issue has become such a Menace to Public Decency that the MTA has inaugurated a campaign to curb it. A gentleman does not take up someone else's space. And that should be quite sufficient.

Really, Etiquetteer compares this Ostentatious Behavior to blaring one's car radio (or do we have to call it "sound system" now?) outside the limits of one's car, or revving one's motor to call attention.

In short, Etiquetteer considers Excessive Sprawl advertising one's shortcomings.

Marcus Smart vs. Jeff Orr, Vol. 13, Issue 17

Unfortunately more and more people believe that etiquette only matters someplace that's defined as "formal," for instance a funeral, a library ("Sssssshhhhh!"), and especially at weddings. (Etiquetteer believes that weddings probably generate more questions about how to behave than anything else.) But Good Behavior is needed in every part of the day, from the bedroom to the boardroom, from the elevator to the escalator, from the cafeteria line to the telephone line, from the concert hall to the colosseum. Wherever you are, whether you think of it as "formal" or not, Good Behavior matters. So Etiquetteer was dismayed to read about Marcus Smart, the Oklahoma State University basketball player, who shoved a fan, now identified as Jeff Orr, after a bungled play. The OSU Cowboys are on a five-game losing streak, so undoubtedly the pressure was on Mr. Smart, the star player for his team, to deliver something good. Mr. Orr, a well-known fan of the Red Raiders of Texas Tech, is also well known for taunting players of the Raiders' opponents.

It appears that Mr. Orr said something to Mr. Smart - apparently not an expression of concern for his well-being - that enraged Mr. Smart enough to make physical contact. Fox News reported "CBS personality Doug Gottlieb said via Twitter that a Texas Tech friend of his had a text conversation with Orr, who texted that 'Yeah, i kinda let my mouth say something I shouldn't have. I feel bad.'" Mr. Orr did not repeat what he said to Mr. Smart, which of course leads everyone to think that it was a racial slur.

Etiquetteer can only wonder if Mr. Orr feels badly enough to issue a public apology to Mr. Smart. Whether a Filthy Name was used or not, Mr. Orr has discredited the behavior of all Texas Tech fans, which Etiquetteer feels sure he does not want to do. Plenty of Perfectly Proper people are enthusiastic football fans without demonizing the opposing team. Ask yourselves, sports fans, what means more to you: the victory of your team, or the defeat of the opposing team?

While sympathizing with Mr. Smart, Etiquetteer can in no way condone physical violence. Figures in the Public Eye, simply because they are in the Public Eye, must restrain themselves from responding to outrageous provocation. Because when you respond, your opponents win because they have made you lose control. It's a true art, containing one's natural reactions - even Etiquetteer has yet to master it - but as Rose Sayre famously said in The African Queen, "Nature, Mr. Allnut is what we are put on this earth to rise above."

Etiquetteer hopes that both these men will offer public apologies for their behavior, but that we'll also be spared the ostentation of a "beer summit" such as President Obama hosted for Professor Henry Louis Gates, Jr. and Sgt. James Crowley after that Unfortunate Incident.

Current Events, Vol. 6, Issue 17

Celebrities only seem to get into the news when they are behaving badly. Two recent mini-dramas have captured Etiquetteer’s attention. You will be surprised – very surprised, Etiquetteer suspects – to find Etiquetteer defending Karl Rove about anything. But after the White House Correspondents Dinner last week, Etiquetteer must Wag an Admonitory Digit at Sheryl Crow and her dinner companion Laurie David for initiating a nasty little contretemps about global warming. Crow and David, whose self-serving account of the incident appears on Arianna Huffington’s blog, certainly make themselves out to be the Calm Crusaders. From ingenuous comments like "How excited were we to have our first opportunity ever to talk directly to the Bush Administration about global warming" to glossy acccounts of their own part in the barney ("We felt compelled to remind him that the research is done and the results are in"), they present themselves as Earnest Little Girls nicely asking the Big Man about a Bad Decision. Etiquetteer finds abhorrent their idea that Sheryl Crow’s beauty alone should compel Rove to speak with them ("How hardened and removed from reality must a person be to refuse to be touched by Sheryl Crow?"). Feminists everywhere should be offended with this 19th century notion. If they really wanted to have a meaningful dialogue about climate change with Rove, they would have used this opportunity to schedule an appointment. Indeed, courtiers of Louis XIV were always advised not to surrender petitions to him during particular audiences because the Sun King was likely to lose them while changing clothes. Instead, it just looks like they wanted to get in the paper themselves. Not that Rove comes out smelling like a rose. Eyewitnesses indicate that he gave as good as he got, whereas a change of topic or a cold "This is not the time or place to discuss it" would have been Perfectly Proper. The truth, as is so frequently the case, is someplace in the middle. Moving right along, we find that actress Kim Basinger has released to the press an abusive voicemail message from her ex-husband, Alec Baldwin, to their daughter Ireland. While hardly excusing Baldwin’s vicious telephone tantrum – did he miss that day in anger management class? – Etiquetteer is outraged that La Basinger and her attorneys leaked the voicemail to the press. Can you think of anything that would be more embarrassing to eleven-year-old Ireland? All this dirty laundry could have been kept right where it belonged – in the family – without the vengefulness of a celebrity divorcée selfishly shaming the father of her child, and her child as well. Etiquetteer cordially invites you to join the notify list if you would like to know as soon as new columns are posted. Join by sending e-mail to notify <at> etiquetteer.com.

Reader Response, Vol. 4, Issue 38

After Etiquetteer’s column on personal solicitation two weeks ago, some readers responded with thoughtful solutions: Dear Etiquetteer: I have a budget for charitable donations and part of it is to support my friends in their choices. Some friends agree that they do not want more stuff (two days of being hosts of a yard sale convinced them) and so I make donations in their honor to charities I know they support. I give money to a local university to help students perform public service, and to the charity that any friend or acquaintance supports through marathons, bikeathons, etc. I find that being able to thank my coworkers, friends and acquaintances for the opportunity is a much better solution than having to decline gracefully. Etiquetteer responds: Your generosity and prudence are to be commended. Etiquetteer has noticed for years that knowing one’s friend’s likes and dislikes goes far in selecting gifts. You are to be commended for observing that some of your friends actually prefer what might be called a non-gift and acting accordingly. Dear Etiquetteer: I have some standard responses memorized for those seeking money for causes: UNKNOWN TELEPHONE CALLLERS: As this is no doubt a telemarketing firm, offer nothing more than a curt interruption of "I do not respond to telephone solicitations. Please add this number to your Do Not Call List. Goodbye." PEOPLE WHO HAVE FOUND YOU AN EASY TOUCH: "My financial advisor has put me on a strict budget since the market has gone down. At the first of the year, he allows a certain amount that I must not go over; and right now, that amount is spent. I hope you'll call me when times are better." FRIENDS AND FAMILY WHO HINT FOR MONEY: Go overboard in agreeing with them about how difficult "things" have become. For example, one person might hear your thoughts on the utility bills: "Isn't it awful? How do they expect those of us in reduced circumstances to pay all that? I, myself, have been thinking of calling the Relief Agency and asking for help." You might end with ... "I hope you haven't had to cut your pledge to the Church, but of course that's between you and God." If you remember that nobody likes to be grouped with the indigents, it's easy to respond. As for the dolt who puts linen napkins in dirty plates, there's no need to be polite. Unless this idiot is blind and cannot see what other guests are doing with their napkins, simply watch Cousin Zebulon and when he starts his act, speak in a loud voice, "Cousin Zebulon! Please don't do that! I have to wash that napkin." There is absolutely no need to spare the feelings of people like Zebulon if he has had the opportunity to learn better.Etiquetteer responds: Etiquetteer could not agree more with the way you nip solicitations in the bud, but must remind you of the age-old dictum that a guest can do no wrong. Publicly humiliating one's errant cousin at the dinner table -- tempting though it seems! -- would embarrass everyone there, not just Zebulon himself. Etiquetteer continues to believe that finding a quiet way to keep him from soiling the linens unnecessarily remains the best way. EXAMPLES FROM THE DAILY LIFE OF ETIQUETTEERFrom the Department of Shut Up and Eat, Etiquetteer lashes out at two old men who darn near ruined a beautiful dinner dance the other night. Guests ordered tickets and indicated their meal choices six weeks in advance for this private club event. Many, Etiquetteer included, selected "Filet Mignon with Bearnaise Sauce." You wouldn’t think this would be a problem, would you? As Etiquetteer’s table was being served (ladies first, in Perfect Propriety) some faces began to fall. Murmurs of concern were exchanged between couples. "It isn’t rare," Etiquetteer heard one lady tell her husband. This did not prepare Etiquetteer for the vehemence of this man’s response when the waitress came to serve him. Before his plate even touched the table he boomed at her "I want RARE!" Didn’t his poor sainted mother ever teach him to say "please"?The poor waitress fled like a startled rabbit in the face of that, but worse was to come. Another poisonous octogenarian loudly declared "I want rare without the sauce!" as soon as a waitress came within earshot. When a sauceless filet was produced he cut into it and then vigorously protested that it was not rare. Later still, when the waitress returned with the last steak available and the information that the kitchen never cooked meat rare, the diatribe REALLY began, cowing the rest of the table to silence. "This is the worst damn food," etc. etc. Etiquetteer was mighty tempted to tell him that a lot of hurricane victims would be mighty glad to have a filet on their plate, even if they did think it overdone.So, long story short, a lovely evening reduced to a shambles by two dietary divos. Enough! If you’re going to be that fussy about your food you might as well stay home. Etiquetteer cordially invites you to join the notify list if you would like to know as soon as new columns are posted. Join by sending e-mail to notify@etiquetteer.com.

Personal Solicitation and Table Manners, Vol. 4, Issue 36

Dear Etiquetteer: Half-a-dozen times each year some friend or relative, out of the blue, writes or e-mails me with a thinly disguised request for money. Sometimes it’s for a business venture that allegedly will make me rich. Sometimes it’s to help with a medical problem (which they'll then refuse to document, even though they know I'm a health professional). Sometimes it’s to support their favorite charity (even though they're aware that I support a number of my own favorite charities). How can I - preferably early in the dialogue - let them know that I don't intend to fulfill their request, without - as is often the case - eliciting an angry response? The range of angry responses is impressive: shock ("How could you think that I was asking for money?"), a guilt trip ("Your parents would roll over in their graves if they knew what a skinflint you are!"), and sometimes it's just an above-it-all "I thought I knew you better" followed by a prolonged cold wind.) Dear Solicited: Etiquetteer has a lot of experience on both sides of this question, as an enthusiastic fund-raiser for underdog arts organizations and as one who has been "touched" for particular "opportunities." Etiquetteer can tell you recognize these conversations when they start. You have the power to make your position known early on by casually mentioning that your own investment strategy is more conservative now or that you’re focusing your charitable giving on your own favorite charities. This pre-emptive strike should alert your solicitors that you’re not interested. With illness it’s a little more challenging. Etiquetteer presumes that you may actually care about the people hitting you up. Confine the conversation as much as possible to the symptoms and treatment of the illness and not its financial repercussions.As the prospect, you have a few ways to react to your solicitors when they become less than polite. (And really, Etiquetteer is appalled by the reactions you detailed.) Etiquetteer frequently finds it beneficial to ignore the "elephant in the room" until an actual request for a specific amount of money is made. This gets you out of the shocked response you mention; then you can answer "Because you just asked me for money." Otherwise Etiquetteer finds you completely justified in observing "I’m so disappointed that only my money means anything to you. I thought we meant more to each other than that." Then you can blow the chill wind. Dear Etiquetteer: My partner and I recently hosted a sit-down dinner at our home for my extended family. The spouse of a cousin has the habit (yes, this has happened on more than one occasion) of placing, not to say grinding, his linen napkin into the remnants of his meal on the plate when he has finished his meal. Needless to say, this is rather unappetizing, not to say unhelpful when it comes to laundering the linens. We obviously do not want to offend the spouse, but would like to have this behavior stop. Whatever shall we do? Dear Harried Hosts: The solution is obvious. Instruct your housemaid to keep a close eye on Cousin Zebulon. At the first sign of his completing his meal, she should whisk away his plate before he even has time to fold his napkin. No housemaid? No kidding! You must forgive Etiquetteer’s longing for domestic service. Of course it’s so hard to find good help nowadays that no one even bothers. It’s a grievous thing to have to correct a guest in one’s home, and it should only be done in grave situations (like bringing up politics at the dinner table or criticizing another guest to his or her face). Etiquetteer feels sure you have been tempted to give Cousin Zebulon a paper napkin instead, but singling him out from all the others would have an insulting effect you do not want. Can you be sure that your backwoods relative sits next to you at dinner? This way when you see him start to remove his napkin from his lap, you can relieve him of it yourself, clearing his place at the same time. Purists will note that this violates the rule of clearing everyone’s places only after everyone has finished, but Etiquetteer thinks this the best way to preserve both the napkin and the feelings of the guest. Etiquetteer's readers respond to this columnhere. Etiquetteer cordially invites you to join the notify list if you would like to know as soon as new columns are posted. Join by sending e-mail to notify@etiquetteer.com.