I was browsing a bookstore the other day and came across a Miss Manners book, from the 90s, about the culture wars. So of course I had to get it and mine it for insights to help us during our current time of strife.
There are a some things that were hot-button issues in the 90s that just feel totally resolved today.
- smoking. this seemed really big, like there was a time when everyone was either upset about people smoking or upset about people not wanting them to smoke. I guess the anti-smoking side just won that one
- first names. lots of drama about when it was appropriate to call people by their first names, is it sexist/racist to call a woman/black person by their first name (because would you do that to a white man??) feel like the first names have won this.
- swearing. again, I think this has just been resolved in favor of swearing.
And then there are some issues that are obviously still hot-button issues today:
The way race is talked about is interesting. It was clearly an issue on people’s minds back then too. But the way people were thinking and talking about it was really different: it feels like somehow people were actually talking about it in a way they don’t today? Like today there are two sides that don’t talk to each other, and one of them isn’t even talking about race, it’s talking about how you can’t talk about race. But back then there were people on both sides writing to Miss Manners not about how they were angry or exhausted but just trying to figure stuff out: black people asking how to respond to racist remarks, or white people asking how to respond to the black men who are always catcalling them (Miss Manners gently points out that race is irrelevant to this question before going on to answer it).
Workplace sexual harassment was big too. Miss Manners’ take is roughly
- some guys are just dicks, and that’s bad
- other problems result from misunderstanding and miscommunication around changing workplace norms, and see, this is why we never should have gone down the road of workplace informality and casual Fridays in the first place
And yeah I guess people are finally starting to come around and agree with her on that one huh.
She also takes the opportunity to lay out a clear definition of etiquette and explanation of her role:
- “manners” = the principles underlying systems of etiquette. these are universal (eg “show respect in a house of worship,” “guests should respect a host’s home”)
- “etiquette” = culture-specific systems of rules to express these principles (eg “take your hat off in a church”/”put a hat on in a synagogue”, “take your shoes off in a Japanese house”/”leave your shoes on in an American house”)
- etiquette does and should change over time to keep up with other technological and social changes, but gradually (due to its culturally foundational nature)
- Miss Manners’ role is to chronicle and explain etiquette, as well as arbitrating when changes are necessary
- etiquette can be divided into three categories: regulative, symbolic, and ritual
- regulative = how to resolve conflicts or adjudicate differing preferences: similar role to the law, but for situations below the level of legal involvement (who pays the check at dinner, what do you do when someone cuts you in the grocery store checkout line)
- symbolic = rules that seem arbitrary: their purpose is to allow signaling respect/conformity or defiance by following or breaking them (what do you wear to a formal dinner or a business meeting; do you greet people with handshakes, cheek kisses, bowing, etc)
- ritual = purpose is to “provide an aesthetically pleasing and emotionally reassuring sense of social belonging” (protocol for weddings, funerals, etc)
Examples of etiquette rules changing:
- non-smoking becoming the default for gatherings unless all guests are comfortable with it
- precedence for eg giving up a seat on the bus going from gender-based to purely based on age and disability
She pushes back against people who criticize her as being anti-freedom by arguing that etiquette is actually conducive to freedom. She thinks the declining respect for etiquette is in part responsible for regulatory creep and the increasing impulse to make everything bad illegal; she instead argues for keeping more minor infractions in the realm of etiquette, and enforcing etiquette by:
- practicing it oneself
- teaching it to one’s children
- making admission to voluntary associations dependent on following a system of etiquette (everything from marriage and friendship to parties one hosts to clubs or professional organizations)
- for the worst infractions, public disapproval and shaming
On political correctness:
- PC = condemning things for being racist, sexist, or otherwise bigoted
- this can be done appropriately or inappropriately: Good PC or Bad PC
- her principles of good PC:
- responses must be proportionate and consider intent, so people are not severely condemned for minor mistakes
- a rule must first be argued for and widely accepted before you can start the public condemnation phase
- rudeness does not justify rudeness
- prefacing a statement with “I know this isn’t politically correct, but” does not justify rudeness
- appropriate responses to bigotry can range from “surely I must have misunderstood” to “I beg your pardon!” to “how dare you!” to “you will be hearing from my lawyer,” depending on the severity of the situation.
Ok I also just want to quote Miss Manners in response to someone who criticized her for idealizing the past:
“Have you been paying such close attention to Miss Manners’ hairdo that you missed what she was saying? Wild horses could not drag her back to live in the past. For one thing, she has too clear a memory of what perfectly agreeable tame horses, who kindly provided public transportation in a previous era, left in the streets. There are too many things she could not live without, such as air conditioning and feminism.”
