Did the Rules of Etiquette Provide a Greater Sense of Safety For Women?

[BlueTrain]

Did I say anywhere in my rambling posts that the rules of etiquette proved any additional measure of safety for women? I sometimes talk around a subject without saying much. Overall, I don't think they did. But I don't think they in any way suppressed women, though that may be a more arguable point. But the rules of good manners will still always be there, problematic though they may be.

Good manners are problematic because they are complex and they vary from place to place. Generally speaking, though, you will be well received if you use your own good manners in other places where the rules are a little different. You have a long time learning good manners but you manage okay because you start learning manners almost from birth. The only disclaimers is that you have to be reared by people with good manners and some people weren't, even though they may have learned which fork to use. That fact give etiquette a bad name. It's considered to be phony and pretentious. Some people are phony but most people are real and are not pretending. They way you see them is the way they really are. And if they're like everyone else I've ever known, that's the way they've always been.

 

[sheeplady]

I recently went to a baby shower for a woman who was probably one of my best friends at one point in my life. It was catered.

My wedding wasn't even catered (we had a friend pick up a massive take out order-we had arranged the order months in advance- and bring it). I don't think anyone in my family ever had a party catered at their own home. I've been to many formal events in my life, I make a decent living, am extremely educated, because of this I am likely upper middle class. Despite all of this and the fact this woman was one of my closest friends, I have rarely felt so out of place as at that small party. Signs that you can take the girl off the farm but you can't wash off all the dirt, exhibit A.

I'm not sure about safety and etiquette. I've met a fair number of men who are disrespectful little punks who've held the door open for me. (Little does not refer to their age or height.)

I am not a harsh parent by any means (I am likely too permissive for many standards) but I am been teaching my kids that "no means no." So when one of my kids says "stop touching me" the other better let go fast. And I've tried to teach my kids to say, "no, don't touch me" and demand it be respected. I have a 4 year old and a 1.5 year old, obviously this happen's frequently.

I teach my kids etiquette (we do "formal" Sunday night dinners in our home) because I don't want them to be clueless when it comes to a fancy dinner. As far as the rest of it, I think most of it comes from observation. My father always held the door for my mother and i, but I also saw him treat my mother very poorly. I chose a man which might not open my car door for me everyday, but he's an equal partner and parent.

 

[scotrace]

One often reads of women feeling less safe around men. That they feel men are predatory, crass and exhibit less self control. My thought is that perhaps this may in some small part be related to the relaxation of standards of behavior that, intentionally or not may have served the purpose of keeping males under close observation and control.
Whether or not those rules also benefitted the interests of The Man is another animal.

 

[ChrisB]

I suspect that human nature changes but little, and the same proportion of men behaved just as badly in the past.

 

[LizzieMaine]

And likewise, the fact that these specific "standards of behavior" were generally observed only ever by a relatively small subset of men. The vast majority of men, even at the height of the "etiquette era" were not the punctilious middle-class types who observed such customs. The average turn-of-the-century factory hand, mill worker, coal miner, or roustabout was not concerned about who went up the stairs first, or who walked on which side of the street.

"Hoiman! Stan' up an' put yer shoes on! It's a lady from th' WPA with a camera! Ain't you got no couth?"

 

[BlueTrain]

If what I read is true, and it isn't always, I still believe that a "gentleman" that knows the rules of eitiquette inside and out is just as much a threat to women (any and all women) as the men in the photo above. As the saying goes, some people even get away with murder.

 

[scotrace]

How men behaved may also be regional in nature. Away from the confines of Maine harbor men, my midwestern grandfather worked in a steel mill from 1915-1965. He, and the men I knew who worked with him, and with my father in a Timken plant, weren't fussbudgets by any means. But they displayed at least a nodding observance of the basics. Grandpa was also a careful dresser and old school gentleman. It was from him that I learned how to behave around women. He got together with union pals regularly when I was a kid, and they were all much the same way. I never heard my grandfather or his pals swear in my presence as a child, or later, as an adult, for that matter, and they were pretty well-behaved overall.
Actual "etiquette" I learned from my mother in law, wife of a salesman of clay pipe, and from an old 40s copy of Emily Post-- later from Letitia Baldrige. My daughters aren't fussy, either, but they'd know what to do if they took a meal among people who cared. It made me smile when my college-age daughter went on a first date with a boy and that was that. "Dad, he ate with his elbows on the table and held his fork like a chimp."
In a previous life in active politics, I shared space (meals, drinks, meetings) with government officials from town councilmen to US Senators, and I was very grateful to know how to behave without calling unfavorable attention to myself. And the men and women in those positions began as teachers, dentists, pipe fitters, and farmers as well as lawyers. I am not a joiner or blender, distrust all authority and think of myself as a rebel. But being able to walk into any situation without feeling "Oh, crap, what am I supposed to do?" has always been invaluable. It served me well as a disc jockey, as a farm worker for a florist, as a governmental hack, and especially now as a journalist. It's about being able to put others at ease, and to be at ease yourself.

 

[BlueTrain]

What you say is probably true. I've read that cowboys in the West were positively bashful around women, at least if they were ladies. Part of that may be the fact that they likely rarely saw ladies or even women.

Another thing probably worth mentioning is that some men can have serveral personality traits that you might not think would go together, like a butcher who is especially kind to animals, or a gas station attendent who has an interest in fine arts. Or better yet, a rough and not particularly well educated man who is polite and gentle around women. I'd say that it all has to do with how a person was "raised." After all, the good manners and polite and considerate social behavior came first. Then they wrote books about it. But if people, men and women, really learn their good manners at home, then that's where bad manners were learned by those who have them.

I recall something on television a few decades ago about Arthur Fiedler who was doing a tour somewhere in the South with the Boston Pops orchestra. I believe he was at a dinner in someone's home and the host happened to say that he liked to eat his whole meal with the salad fork. So don't worry more than you have to about which fork to use. I also recall a line in some adolescent adventure book that I had as a teenager that was something about learning to eat ice cream with a fork. I think the implication was about following the rules.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I spent a lot of time around politicans myself in my own journalistic career -- some pretty high ranking ones included, and I have to say that "manners" never entered into it. They knew what they were there for, I knew what I was there for, and we had our interaction as simply and as efficiently as possible. There were no formal introductions, no handshakes, I didn't feel any need to curtsey, and they didn't call me "ma'am" or pull out my chair for me. We did our interview and that was that, with the exception of George Mitchell, with whom I'd talk baseball, enthusiastically and at length, whenever we met.

I find that simply behaving naturally, without giving any consideration whatsoever to whether I'm "doing it right" tends to put people far more at ease than insisting on acting out a "social role." At the theatre, I once made Senator Angus King stand outside in the snow to buy a ticket when he tried to use his privilege of office to jump the line, and his wife got a big kick out of it.

 

[BlueTrain]

If they didn't call you "ma'am," then what did they call you? Mister? Hey, you? Or were you on a first name basis?

 

[LizzieMaine]

First-name with Mitchell and a few others, no name at all with the rest. After about the fiftieth politician you encounter, names don't much matter, because they're all the same.

The only politician I ever interviewed who insisted on being called "Mister" was Ross Perot, who spent the entire interview complaining because the high school band didn't play his theme song "Crazy For You" as he walked to the podium.

 

[ChiTownScion]

A lot of it can be dismissed as bourgeoisie anachronism, and there are always those who get over occupied with the minutia of detail, but etiquette at the end of the day really is about treating others with the same respect that you'd expect others to show you.

Call it a personal weakness if you will, but I kind of enjoy going above and beyond and showing a little extra deference to those down to earth, unpretentious type of women who least expect it. (Such as my wife, an old hippie by her own definition, although she's actually a highly skilled medical professional. She still prefers blue jeans to an evening dress.) No one likes to feel as if they're taken for granted, and despite protests of "Please don't make a fuss on my account," etc., I find that giving a bit more than what is expected is usually appreciated.

I enjoy the challenge of trying to dazzle my wife a little. She doesn't expect it (Women who expect you to go top shelf every time are tedious gold diggers for which I have little tolerance.) and that's part of the fun of it. The woman who is always sent flowers comes to expect that as part of the territory... but I've found that those who don't expect it see it as a gesture of genuine appreciation. And yes: when they're delivered at her job where her colleagues can witness the event, it's even more appreciated. I don't see making someone feel cherished as an extravagance. At all.

 

[sheeplady]

If a business colleague pulled out a chair for me, or called me ma'am or miss, I'm not precisely sure how I'd feel, but likely at least unsettled. Male colleagues regularly open the door for me. A colleague pulling out a chair though seems... un-business like.

Students call me ma'am all the time, and that's ok by me. I'll admit, them calling me "miss sheeplady" does mildly irritate me, but that only happens once in a while. I haven't been a unmarried "miss" in well over a decade, and well, it's odd to call someone that in the university environment- normally it's professor or "ms." or doctor. It's almost been five years since I've no longer used "Mrs." even as my chosen address.

I let all this pass if it happens (I don't correct students or make a fuss) but because in the past I taught almost exclusively international students, we talked about what you call women in the U.S. workplace off the bat.

 

[BlueTrain]

I think a lady should be addressed as "ma'am" and a gentleman as "sir," in both cases if you aren't on a first name basis. Same for men and women. I do not see why that should be a problem for anyone. As for opening the door for a lady, I mentioned already that I open the door for everyone, men, women, ladies, gentlemen, friends and total strangers, no matter where they might be from. Apparently some people are troubled by that. However, the intent of such actions is not necessarily to insure anyone's safety, except in cases of sinking ships and runaway locomotives.

 

[LizzieMaine]

"Ma'am" is a delicate situation for a lot of women. In many cases calling a woman in her early thirties "ma'am" is to go sailing for a whaling. It may be normal in the South, but in much of the North it's seen as a word applying only to middle-aged or elderly women, and using it here can be as chancy as going to Birmingham and calling all the women you see "Toots."

 

[BlueTrain]

Are you suggesting that, in the North, it is acceptable to call some women "toots?" That's another term I've never heard anyone use. I've also heard that "Miss" and "Mrs." are abbreviations or shortened forms of the same word: "mistress." Yet no woman, especially a lady, would want to be referred to as mistress. Or would they?

 

[LizzieMaine]

Women will call each other all kinds of jocular names when men aren't around -- toots, babe, chick, etc. Most of the women I know, however, don't really care much about honorifics unless it's something they've actually earned, like Doctor, Judge, Senator...

 

[BlueTrain]

Whatever you say, madam.

 

[ChiTownScion]

"Ma'am" is a delicate situation for a lot of women. In many cases calling a woman in her early thirties "ma'am" is to go sailing for a whaling. It may be normal in the South, but in much of the North it's seen as a word applying only to middle-aged or elderly women, and using it here can be as chancy as going to Birmingham and calling all the women you see "Toots."

It's used in the military when addressing a female officer by enlisted personnel, as in " Aye aye, ma'am" in the Navy or Marines. Just as you'd say, "Aye aye, sir," to a male officer.

I do remember the film, "The King's Speech," where Queen Elizabeth (the one that later became the Queen Mum) instructed the speech teacher's wife, "..And that's 'ma'am' as in jam.. not 'mum' as in 'bum.'"

 

[belfastboy]

Without commenting on the rest, I wanted to point out I was always taught that a chivalrous gentleman always keeps himself on the down side of a staircase from a woman, leading her down, following her up. This is to act as a break in case she loses her footing on the staircase.


Sent directly from my mind to yours.

Yes, that is what I was taught. As well, when walking along the sidewalk/roadway the man always takes the outside position closest to traffic.