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.

The Common Core of Etiquette, Vol. 13, Issue 40

Last week Etiquetteer was pleased to speak to a group of MIT student ambassadors, and among the many questions afterward came one from a student who had read a manners manual from the late 1890s. "What of that etiquette is still relevant today?" Etiquetteer's reply could be distilled to "Consideration of others." The etiquette of calling cards, for instance, is all but irrelevant now, but it's still necessary to know how to respond to a kindness (with a Lovely Note), an invitation (with a Timely and Definite Response), and to tragedy (with a Sincere Offer of Assistance). Coincidentally, not long after this pleasant interchange, Etiquetteer stumbled upon Emily Post's chapter on "The Fundamentals of Good Behavior" from her 1922 edition of Etiquette. The core values of this document - Financial Honor, Consistency in Behavior, and above all Discretion - should remain guides for all of us. Rereading it, Etiquetteer was by turns relieved, alarmed, and saddened by how far we've come as a civilization since 1922.

For instance, "A gentleman never takes advantage of a woman in a business dealing . . . " does not take into account the exponential rise of women in business, nor their considerable abilities, like many male counterparts, to seize the advantage when offered. In other words, while Chivalry may have retired from the board room, the merger of Gender Equity and Mutual Respect is supposed to have taken its place.

In these days of social media and the sometimes aggressive assembly of "connections," it is worth revisiting Mrs. Post's injunction "The born gentleman avoids the mention of names exactly as he avoids the mention of what things cost; both are an abomination to his soul." That Mr. Dimmick Who Thinks He Knows So Much should probably stop tagging so many people in social media status updates . . .

Mrs. Post writes "A man is a cad who tells anyone, no matter who, what his wife told him in confidence, or describes what she looks like in her bedroom. To impart details of her beauty is scarcely better than to publish her blemishes; to do either is unspeakable." Nowadays, alas! This sentence could be rewritten "A man is a cad who takes advantage of a lady by creating revenge porn with her nude images and ruining her reputation."

Another area where Mrs. Post gets it right and we frequently don't is in the way we treat service personnel. "When you see a woman in silks and sables and diamonds speak to a little errand girl or a footman or a scullery maid as though they were the dirt under her feet, you may be sure of one thing; she hasn’t come a very long way from the ground herself." And as Etiquetteer pointed out earlier in a column on restaurant tipping, Americans are known to treat service personnel poorly. Etiquetteer is still angered and heartbroken by the stories from waiters and waitresses in Sundays Are the Worst, and needs this Bad Behavior to stop.

Thinking about what makes Perfectly Proper Conversation, Mrs. Post admonished "Notwithstanding the advertisements in the most dignified magazines, a discussion of underwear and toilet articles and their merit or their use, is unpleasant in polite conversation." Think of nowadays, when Reference to Bodily Function is bandied about so casually! Etiquetteer does not need to know why you're going to the restroom. The only Perfectly Proper reason would be to wash your hands. (And you'd better, too, whatever else you're doing in there that you shouldn't be talking about.)

On the other hand, it's important to remember that etiquette books get written, and etiquette advisors like Etiquetteer have vocations, because people have always, and will always, behave thoughtlessly and without a care for how their actions affect others. The common core of Mrs. Post's guidelines is awareness of the impact our behavior has on other people. That remains even truer today, when fewer people have been taught consideration for others from the beginning.

Winter Etiquette, Vol. 13, Issue 23

Dear Etiquetteer: Occasionally my nose will suddenly start running, from any one of a number of causes. It could be strong smoke or fumes, scented products, spicy foods, or some unknown reason. I know it's considered rude to even wipe one's nose in public, let alone blow it, especially at the table. But it's also embarrassing at a restaurant or a group dinner to keep hopping up and disappearing into a distant restroom. What's the best way to navigate this difficulty?

Dear Nosey:

Etiquetteer had two Lovely Grandmothers, Granny and Gramma, and they each knew only one joke. Granny's joke was "Brownie's at the door," and it went like this:

A spinster lady agreed to take care of her young nephew while his parents were going to be away, which meant that she had to take him with her to a dinner party. "Now Nephew," she said, "I have post-nasal drip, and if you see a drip on my nose, I want you to tell me 'Brownie's at the door.'" Nephew agreed, and off they went.

At the dinner table, the nephew was seated on one side of his aunt, but on the other side the spinster found a handsome young bachelor! She spoke to him with fascination for some time, until she felt a tug on her sleeve. "Auntie, Brownie's at the door!" said her nephew. "Not now dear, I'm talking," was her reply. This dialogue was repeated two or three times. Finally, conversation at the table turned, and the spinster lady asked her nephew "Now, what was it you wanted to tell me?" "Well," replied the nephew, "Brownie was at the door, but he's in the soup now."

Humans have had runny noses longer than there have been dinner tables, and as you point out, it's not sustainable to leave the room every time one needs to to blow. To Etiquetteer, the real criterion is discretion. How silently can this operation be conducted? How can this be accomplished without attracting attention? At the table, if only a drip needs to be mopped up, "dab don't rub" is a safe rule. If it's possible for you to blow your nose silently and briefly, do so at table. If you're one of those people like Etiquetteer, who is unable to blow his nose without sounding like Gabriel's Legion or a New York City traffic jam, it's best to leave the table.

Easy availability of the handkerchief is the second important factor in unobtrusive nose blowing. The old saying of "A handkerchief should be in your hand three seconds before you need it" is always true. A gentleman, of course, may keep it in his inside jacket pocket or a pants pocket. Perhaps at the table ladies could keep theirs in their laps under their napkins? Attention is always attracted when the need for a handkerchief is making itself felt and the search for the hankie becomes more frantic as the need becomes more urgent. On NO account should one's handkerchief be allowed to touch the surface of the table! Take it out, use it, and put it back.

There is healthy, yet to Etiquetteer tedious, debate about handkerchiefs vs. paper tissues. Etiquetteer's principal objections to the latter are that they form a gigantic wad in one's pockets after use, and that too many people will try to reuse them after one blow, which is simply Disgusting. While Etiquetteer cannot object to people carrying those little plastic packets of paper tissues - apparently ladies need them in the ladies room, and it's not Etiquetteer's place to ask why - nothing beats a sturdy linen or cotton handkerchief.

Dear Etiquetteer:

This may sound foolish but when one lives in the Deep South how does one get rid of snow boots gracefully?

Dear Booted:

Your query makes Etiquetteer long for the days when anterooms were still an important part of domestic architecture. Those were also the days when servants were still an important part of domestic equipment. Both those features make divesting winter footwear less inconvenient than it is today, since they provided a specific place with sufficient space to do it, and a method (the servant) that didn't involve any bending for prolonged periods. Nowadays, one can't even be assured of a chair on which to sit to carry out this operation.

As much snow should be removed from one's shoes as possible before actually going inside. Etiquetteer tries to do so by stamping on the doormat or gently kicking the doorframe or a step to dislodge it. If hosts have provided an area for shoe removal (often a chair near the coatrack, sometimes with a towel spread on the floor nearby), take advantage. If you've brought inside shoes, make the transition as quickly as possible. If not, be sure before you've left your home that your socks have no holes or bare patches, and try to act nonchalant about socializing in stocking feet. Perfectly Proper Hosts inform their guests in advance if they expect shoes to be removed.

Acknowledging Acknowledgment of a Sneeze, Vol. 12, Issue 19

Dear Etiquetteer: If I sneeze while wearing earphones, should I remove at least one bud to accept and show gratitude for a "bless you" or is it OK to keep listening to my NPR podcast?

Likewise, if I am on the opposite side of that scenario is it rude NOT to say "bless you" to the sneezer should they not shed a bud, assuming that they will not hear it anyway or should I throw it out there regardless?

Dear Budded:

If a sneeze is sneezed in the forest with no one to hear it, is it blessed?

It is one of etiquette's eccentricities that sneezing is the only Bodily Function acknowledged in public. One does not comment on, or even acknowledge, coughing, nose-blowing, yawning, belching, snoring, and especially flatulence - no matter how obvious any of those Bodily Functions might be. Etiquetteer has always understood that this began in Days of Yore ("when knighthood was in flower") because the soul was thought to leave the body with the sneeze; a blessing would protect or restore it.

To answer your second question first, a Perfectly Proper "God bless you!" can't go wrong, even if the sneezer is wearing earbuds or earphones. (Etiquetteer does prefer "God bless you" to "Bless you." The Fiercely Secular may always use "Gesundheit," which is the German for "health." Etiquetteer must caution you to avoid translating this into French. Answering a sneeze with "A votre santé!" will only lead people to wonder where the champagne is*.)

If you sneeze without sufficient power to dislodge your earbuds, Etiquetteer does not think it necessary for you to remove either or both of them to acknowledge a "God bless you." This does not, however, excuse you from acknowledging it. Make eye contact with your blesser and nod - kindly or briskly, depending on your degree of acquaintance - and then go about your business. If you're one of those people who are going along with the Medical Establishment and sneezing into your elbow instead of your hand, Etiquetteer hopes this won't involve removing, um, Nasal Effluvia from your sleeve. While hesitating to question the wisdom of the Medical Establishment, Etiquetteer continues to advocate the use of a Perfectly Proper handkerchief.

*Or whether or not you are Doris Day in Romance on the High Seas.

Layoffs and Colleagues, Vol. 11, Issue 10

Dear Etiquetteer: I was recently catching up with an acquaintance and asked “How’s work?” and got the reply “Well, I was laid off.” I’m not sure what to say beyond “I’m so sorry to hear this.” How does one respond supportively, but not obtrusively? It’s a little easier with a closer friend as you can be a bit more intimate.  If it’s someone you don’t know so well, it can be tricky.

Dear Properly Concerned:

How Very Delicate of you to consider how best to respond without Unnecessary Prying. More often than not those in Unwilling Professional Transition are pestered with coded queries such as:

Question: "What happened?" (Meaning: "Were you fired?")

Question: "Were you downsized?" (Meaning: "Were you fired?")

Question: "Did they let a lot of other people go, too?"  (Meaning: "Were you fired?")

Question: "What are you doing?" (Meaning: "Were you fired?")

Question: "Are you OK?" (Meaning: "Were you fired?")

Question: "I suppose you'll take some time to yourself now." (Meaning: "Did you get a good severance package when they fired you?")

People react differently to being unemployed. Some go into complete tailspins. Others express anger, take a philosophical attitude, proactively begin networking by making the job search their Topic Number One, or decline to talk about it altogether. Gauge your response by that of your acquaintance. For the reluctant, drop the topic. For the angry and the depressed, listen and make Noncommittal Sounds of Sympathy. For the philosophical, speculate with them on ideal or fantasy careers.

The sentence "I'm so sorry this happened to you" is often the best response. Etiquetteer advises care with "If there's anything I can do to help, please let me know." Only say this if you truly intend to help out when asked! Few things are as embarrassing for those in Unwilling Professional Transition than asking for help from those who have said  "If there's anything I can do to help, please let me know" -- whether it's for a professional introduction, review of a resume or correspondence, or even grocery money -- and then not getting it.

Dear Etiquetteer:

I need your help. My male colleague in the next cubicle wears the most annoying cologne. I think this is a fairly new habit because I have never noticed it until today. I have been sitting next to him for the last five months but we have never really talked so I can't just tell him "whatever you're wearing must stop". But I guess I have to. Is there a kind way to do this?

Dear Asphyxiated:

Someone once decreed that one's perfume should not be noticed in a room where one is not, in fact, present. Which is the problem with cubicles -- they're all in the same room!

Questions of Hygiene in the Workplace must be approached sensitively. And questions of cologne are especially sensitive, since scent is used to enhance one's Personal Appeal. (Please note: Etiquetteer did not say Sex Appeal since the setting for this query is the workplace. Those looking to enhance their Sex Appeal in the workplace . . . well, all Etiquetteer can say is, they'd better watch out, or they could find themselves laid off [see above].) It must be a jolt to find out that something one thought of as a positive has turned out to be such a negative that it's created a problem for a colleague.

Your concerns must be approached with sensitivity, too. Many people have olfactory health issues that are exacerbated by heavy or pungent scent, leading them to lobby for Fragrance Free Zones in their workplaces. Whether or not your own reaction to this is medical or just annoyed, Etiquetteer imagines it impacts your productivity. No one can type well while holding a handkerchief to one's nose.

Etiquetteer believes most people who apply their scent heavily don't realize the impact it has. You can bring up the topic casually ("Did you just get some new cologne?") and then segue into the heart of the matter ("Actually, it's quite overpowering.") If the idea of raising this issue creates too much anxiety, talk to your supervisor about it. That's what supervisors are for, after all! Your supervisor can address this issue anonymously on your behalf with your Highly Scented Colleague, or can arrange for a Fragrance Free Zone for you by moving your cubicle.

The Signs of 2009: An Etiquetteer Photo Essay, Vol. 9, Issue 1

To ring in the New Year, Etiquetteer returns to the Old, Anno Domini MMIX, and some signs of varying Perfect Propriety. First we have a couple signs from a flea market in Newfane, Vermont:

This should be everyone's guiding maxim every day, but for behavior, not spelling.

Etiquetteer doesn't know how many places you have been to where a "Post No Weapons" sign has been in evidence. For Etiquetteer the last time might have been 1981, at a Detroit cinema for a screening of The Rocky Horror Picture Show.

Then this gem turned up at a cemetery in Vermont:

Etiquetteer could not agree more. Nothing brings down the tone of one's grief more than faded, cracked, and flaking plastic flowers.

Anno Domini MMIX also saw the rise of swine flu, also known as the Bad Piggies, H1N1, or Heinie Flu. This led to all sorts of extravagant signage, such as this:

Seen at the Interlochen Center for the Arts, Interlochen, Michigan.

Issues of public hygiene then lead Etiquetteer to these two notices from a Boston church bathroom:

These notices were certainly a surprise to Etiquetteer! But it turns out that the church in question ministers a great deal to the homeless and indigent, for whom such instruction is sometimes necessary.

Then we come to the issue of tipping:

Seen at a restaurant in Lake Charles, Louisiana, one in which you have to order your food at a counter and then have it brought to you. A healthy debate ensued over whether or not the waiters and waitresses had to work as hard as those who take orders tableside as well.

Finally, two signs from businesses in Greater Boston who seek more Perfect Propriety from their customers:

Rosie's Bakery, Inman Square

Leavitt & Peirce, Harvard Square

Etiquetteer could certainly not agree more with this brisk sentiment!

And with that, Etiquetteer bids you a hearty Happy New Year! Your future etiquette queries are eagerly welcomed at queries_at_etiquetteer_dot_com.

Unwanted In-Laws and Current Events, Vol. 8, Issue 8

Dear Etiquetteer: We live near my husband's brother, who is constantly inviting or letting my mother- and father-in-law invite themselves.  We (my husband, two kids, and I) are always faced with the "threat" of their every other month visits.  These visits usually last at least five days.  The events involved are excruciating to me.

What should I or my husband tell my brother-in-law and his parents to make them understand this is totally inappropriate?

We have invited them one time in seven years.  All the other visits, which have been every other month for the last seven years, have been them inviting themselves and no one saying anything.  Or my brother and sister-in-law inviting them for some reason.

Bear in mind that I have a special needs son who is 11 and my daughter is very active; she is six.  I home school my son as of about two weeks ago.  We live in the country and my husband could be losing his job.   Things are not perfect right now but it doesn't help to have people in your face that you would rather not see at all - ever!

Dear Daughter-in-Law:

You are correct to note that someone has to say something about this situation to solve it. Nearly everyone thinks that etiquette has a way to make problems disappear without them having to say or do anything. Unfortunately, since humans are involved, that's not possible. And Etiquetteer knows, to his sorrow, that the longer one seethes silently, the worse a problem becomes.

First of all, and this is true in any marriage, if it's his family, he does the talking, not you, and vice versa. On the other hand, you may find out that your husband isn't as opposed to these frequent visits as you are. Etiquetteer can't assume that he shares your revulsion for his family, although he may. Etiquetteer predicts a frank conversation between the two of you. Whatever the result, it's his family, and he has to deal with them. 

Etiquetteer hopes that your brother-in-law is not actually inviting people for multi-day visits into your own home! Only you and your husband have that privilege. 

All you have the power to change is your own participation and, in consultation with your husband, the participation of your children in these visits. If members of your husband's family want to get together outside your house, that's not your business. But Etiquetteer sees no reason for you to join them more than once over the course of five days. 

Now, how are you going to change the expectations of your in-laws, who are used to seeing you and your children a great deal after seven years? Etiquetteer recommends that you start not being available. Oscar Wilde created "Bunburying" in The Importance of Being Earnest, the subterfuge of leaving town to visit a fictional sick friend (in this case named Bunbury.) Etiquetteer doesn't think you need to go to those lengths, but you can create special activities with one or both of your children, or your own friends, that keeps you from joining your in-laws. Send your husband alone with the excuse that you'd already made other plans, or he can bring the kids and say you "need some time alone being worn out taking care of the children." If he doesn't want to go either, he can tell his brother that all of you have other plans, every night of the week, if necessary. 

You have probably already figured out that your in-laws are with you for life, until death or divorce severs your relationship with them. Rather than rely on those two courses (the first immoral and illegal if you arrange it, the second painful for your children), Etiquetteer very much hopes that you can stake out your own territory in your family life.

Etiquetteer has seen a lot in the news over the last week worthy of notice and comment:

Etiquetteer has seen a lot in the news over the last week worthy of notice and comment:

Etiquetteer applauds the Bill Duncan Opportunity School of Lakeland, Florida, for suspending Jonathan Locked, Jr. for deliberately disruptive flatulence. Unfortunately Young Master Locked's father is appealing the suspension, apparently believing that the punishment went too far. Etiquetteer cannot agree, and regrets that Mr. Locked isn't using this suspension to teach his son to respect the authority of teachers and school principals, respect for education and his classmates, and of course Perfect Propriety. Etiquetteer can only hope that the Locked family eats fewer beans after this unfortunate, um, outburst.

In Sheboygan Falls, Wisconsin, a pastor and a congregant got in trouble with the law for shooting an arrow in church during a service. Reading the article Etiquetteer certainly got the impression that the pastor is more devoted to using props to illustrate the Word than the Word itself. This sort of sensationalism, plus the way the pastor evicted an objecting congregant, violates every sense of Perfect Propriety to Etiquetteer.

Also in church news, Etiquetteer was very interested to read about the innovations of Rev. Anne Gardner's iSermon Sundays at Phillips Academy. Certainly technology and References to Popular Culture will follow us everywhere, and Etiquetteer really has no objection. What raised Etiquetteer's hackles was the fact that Academy students were eating breakfast in the pews during church! Forgive Etiquetteer for sounding just a bit old-fashioned, but eating in church is NOT approaching worship of the Deity of One's Choice with Perfectly Proper undivided attention. Stop it at once!

Etiquetteer could not but agree with the Daily Telegraph's list of ten first date faux pas. 

Finally, Etiquetteer was both touched and amused to read the obituary of Stella Trafford last week. "The Grande Dame of Boston Parks," who was unafraid to wield a hoe or take on City Hall, received from her stepdaughter what Etiquetteer thinks is the ideal epitaph for a Working Lady to the Manner Born: "She died with her pearls on."

Etiquetteer has a new address for all your etiquette questions, queries_at_etiquetteer_dot_com.

Belching, Vol. 8, Issue 7

Dear Etiquetteer: My sister, who is a beautiful, intelligent, and accomplished young woman, burps. She burps loudly, often, and without covering her mouth. She doesn't say, "excuse me," after the fact. She doesn't excuse herself to the restroom (or another private place) beforehand. In response, my family and I have said things starting at, "Your doctor could probably get something to help with your digestion," to, "That is rude. Please don't burp at the table."

Her response to the former is that she doesn't have any health problem that causes the burps, and to the latter, "I do what I want!"

Again, she is a young woman who has enough background to appreciate just how rude her actions are. She is highly educated and reasonably cultured. We don't understand where her dismissive attitude regarding eructation. Privately, it is uncomfortable. Around company and in public, it is mortifying. How can we address the seriousness of our concern and inappropriateness of her dismissive response?

Dear Digesting in Silence:

Your sister seems to have taken as her role model Princess Fiona in Shrek, which is most unfortunate. Etiquetteer has said often that "No one cares what you want or how you feel," and this certainly applies to your sister! Her willful eructation will surely obscure the beauty, intelligence, and accomplishments you mention, while also making her the darling of eleven-year-old boys everywhere. (But Etiquetteer must question how Reasonably Cultured a woman can be if she behaves this way. Certainly no woman willfully belching like that could be called a lady.)

Etiquetteer fears nothing will curb her evil behavior until she loses a job or a lover over it. Etiquetteer can just imagine her ripping out a large BRAAAAAAAAAAAAAPP while interviewing for a job she wants, and then being shown the door. 

Etiquetteer has also heard much of the rivalry of sisters, both in life and in film. Possibly you are not the best person to give your sister direction. That said, there isn't any reason for you to accept her deliberately rude behavior. If you're in public with others and she belches in your presence, just leave the area as unostentatiously as you can. If she continues to burp at your own table, stop inviting her. Yes, even for functions at which all the family is present. Or, and here you will see Etiquetteer's Dark Side, set a place for her in the kitchen while everyone else dines in the dining room. Undoubtedly she'll take exception to this, and you can gently explain that the dining room is only for those who know how to behave like grown-ups at the table. 

Etiquetteer has a new address for all your questions about manners, queries_at_etiquetteer_dot_com. 

Holiday Fallout, Vol. 8, Issue 1

Dear Etiquetteer: About a month before the holidays I moved into a roommate situation with a social friend. We have known each other for years and it is a great living situation. I have enjoyed getting to know him better. I was raised Catholic, but now view myself as a more spiritual person, and my roommate is Jewish and about as devout as I am to his roots.

I was unsure how I might have approached him on the subject of a small Christmas tree somewhere in the apartment. Unfortunately my room is too small to put up a tree there.

How do you suggest that I approach my roommate on the mixing of our respective religious backgrounds when the holidays come again next winter?

Dear Respectful Roommate:

Etiquetteer must commend your sensitivity in considering the effect your choices might have upon your roommate. Battles royal have been waged over the most minuscule things, even how the toilet paper is placed on the roll. (Etiquetteer never ceases to be amazed at the fierceness of those defending either having the paper fall in the front or the back. The most Perfectly Proper solution to this dilemma is to have two rolls of toilet paper in the bathroom. Why no one else has thought of this mystifies Etiquetteer.)

While roommates share many things, they don't always share holidays. But the simplest solutions are best. Ask your roommate how he would feel about having a Christmas tree, even a small one, to broach the idea. If he likes it, obviously go ahead with a tree. If you detect resistance, confine yourself to decorating your own room. It's amazing what one can do with garlands, lights, and ribbon without even having a tree!

Etiquetteer wishes you and your roommate well as your shared living arrangements evolve in cordiality, courtesy, and Perfect Propriety.

Dear Etiquetteer:

As a frequent reader of your column I am well aware that you generally deal with matters appropriate for company. That said, I hope you can asisst me with an issue of a more delicate nature, "nature" being the operative word.

My loving husband -- especially after consuming foods such as raw onions, Indian food, and Brussels sprouts but, it seems, just about any food -- has a tendency to, let us say, "toot." Sometimes these gaseous emissions are accompanies by an audible announcement, sometimes by just a tell-tale odor.

I've asked him to please give a simple "pardon me" to apologize to whatever companions may be nearby and forced to participate in a not Perfectly Proper environment. As we cozy on the couch after dinner, for example, I do appreciate a polite acknowledgement when it's not the creaking of our old house that's disturbing the romantic moment.

There are times, however, when he chooses to ignore the whole situation, telling me this is the more polite thing to do For example, at his weekly poker game, following a silent attack his fellow players are well aware of an offense while my husband sheepishly seeks to avoid a tell of his cards as well as the ownership of this atmospheric intrusion. These gentlemen have been polite enough not to fall prey to childish behavior. They do not interrogate one another followed by claims of "He who denied it supplied it" and like nonsense. It does seem ill-advised to call more attention to the situation but to say nothing seems like a case of ignoring a foul elephant in the room. If one were to cause some other offense, from arriving late to tipping a chair to a coughing gag, I'd expect a simple apology for disturbing the peace. Is this any different?

Can you please advise?

Dear Aware:

Etiquetteer has written on this olfactory subject before, and must commend your husband for knowing that Acknowledgement of Flatulence is never Perfectly Proper. It remains one of etiquette's pecularities not to acknowledge this Bodily Function while offering an "excuse me" for coughs, sneezes, and even yawns. (It differs completely from your other examples, late arrival and chair-tipping, which are not Bodily Functions.) But flatulence, never!

Indeed, Etiquetteer wishes everyone would stop asking those "What's that?!" type of question when they encounter palpable flatulence. Etiquetteer still shudders with embarrassment over an occasion several years ago. Having been the cause of a sulfurous aroma, Etiquetteer's shame was compounded when the insistent bewilderment of an idiot acquaintance could only be stopped by having to say "I farted. Would you please shut up now?!"

Etiquetteer does have to Wag an Admonitory Digit at your husband for not altering his diet. Since he knows that raw onions, Brussels sprouts, and Indian food affect him adversely, he should stop eating them! And really, if all food puts him in a State of Perpetual Indigestion, he ought to see his doctor.

The Year 2005 In Review, Vol. 4 Issue 1

		Anno Domini MMV brought more than a few etiquette issues to headlines large and small, to Etiquetteer’s combined amusement and chagrin. Etiquetteer will now share just a few with you. The scandal of choice for most champions of Perfect Propriety would have to be the Flip Flop Flap, which ignited when the Northwestern University’s championship women’s lacrosse team showed up at the White House in July for a photo op with President Bush wearing (gasp!) flip flops and (probably) no pantyhose! One lacrosse player, Kate Darmody, was quoted in USA Today saying "I tried to think of something that would go well with my outfit and at the same time not be that uncomfortable. But at the same time not disrespect the White House." Alas, Miss Darmody failed at that task, just as much as that AIDS activist who showed up in a T-shirt for a meeting with President Clinton all those years ago. What gets Etiquetteer even more is that one young lacrosse player admitted to wearing flip flops decorated with rhinestones . . . how Redneck Riviera can one get? No matter how liberal your politics, it’s Most Proper to dress conservatively for a visit to the White House.Once upon a time Etiquetteer could have advised you to wear "church clothes," but seeing what some people are wearing to church these days, "business attire" may be safer. On the other hand, seeing what some people are wearing to work these days, Etiquetteer is forced to spell out "crisply tailored two-piece suit with blouse, hose, appropriate heels, white kid gloves, and Navy Red or Cherries in the Snow lipstick." It shouldn’t be necessary to be that specific . . . In other 2005 etiquette news, Etiquetteer and many irritated theatregoers applauded the BBC report that actor Richard Griffiths lashed out at a cellphone user during a November performance of the play "Heroes" in London’s West End. "Could the person whose mobile phone it is please leave? The 750 people here would be fully justified in suing you for ruining their afternoon," he reportedly said from the stage during the last act. Had Etiquetteer been there he would have led a standing ovation.Weddings bring out the worst in people, not least celebrities. In this case, we have newlyweds Robert Downey, Jr. and his bride Susan Levin against "Buckaroo Banzai" co-star Ellen Barkin and her husband, Revlon executive Ron Perelman. Time reported that Barkin and Perelman rescinded their invitation to Downey and Levin to hold their late-summer wedding at the Barkin/Perelman estate because the bride and groom wanted to include press photographers. After the relocated wedding took place, Le Downey suggested that the Perelmans had given them "somewhat less" than their best wishes. Etiquetteer thinks they all behaved badly, but especially the Downeys, who should have shown more respect for their erstwhile hosts, even if it was their wedding. They should all go sit in opposite corners until they repent and make up. Privately, Etiquetteer was told of a Mother of the Groom who attended her son’s wedding in a "champagne-colored" evening gown that was really just as white as the bride’s dress. It’s mighty bad form to upstage the bride, especially if you’re the mother of the groom! Remember, that lovely girl you may think is Not Good Enough For Your Precious Son will be in daily contact with your grandchildren. Treat her well now before she cuts you out of their lives altogether . . . On the higher education front, Columbia University saw the start of a clandestine "Night of Nakedness" party, reported by the New York Sun, which led Etiquetteer to hope that the coat check was administered carefully. Everyone knows of Etiquetteer’s revulsion for Reference to Bodily Function, so Etiquetteer knows you’ll understand the horror when kind friends pointed out to Etiquetteer the latest antics of train wreck former singer Bobby Brown. Apparently on one episode of his reality TV show "Being Bobby Brown," he described – oh, how can Etiquetteer put this – having to assist his wife, singer Whitney Houston, with a Bodily Function Best Not Described or Even Referenced on National Televison. AUGH! Very very bad! Last but my no means least, Etiquetteer really does have to give kudos to Michael Brown and the political cronies of FEMA for demonstrating once and for all just how bad being "fashionably late" really is. And they didn’t bring enough party favors, either! Let this be a lesson to you all to be prompter in 2006 . . . And with that Etiquetteer wishes all of you a New Year of Health, Happiness, Prosperity, and of course Perfect Propriety.