DEAR MISS MANNERS: I have fallen in love with my (married-with-children) dentist and don't know how to get out of this -- maybe transference? At my age, 53, I should know better. I am so upset with myself that I got blind-sided by this. I wish I were smarter or even a more virtuous person, but I'm not. I have lost 20 pounds, can't eat, can't sleep, and do not have an acceptable outlet for these feelings. I can barely keep my eyes off this man, much less consider anyone else. I need a competent dentist, but I cannot afford, financially or emotionally, to go back to this man. Have you any insight into this that would be helpful to me?

GENTLE READER: It is quite common to love your dentist if you have had toothache and the dentist made it go away. And people often have trouble eating after they have been to the dentist, although usually only for a few minutes until the numbness wears off.

That is about as much emotional insight as you are going to get from Miss Manners. Her concern is that people behave themselves even when renegade feelings prompt them to do otherwise. Smartness and virtue offer no protection against falling in love, but they are useful in preventing this state from inspiring behavior that is foolish.

So far, you seem to have managed to restrain yourself from leaping at your dentist while he has a drill in his hand, which is a very good idea all around. So is removing yourself from future temptation.

Therefore, Miss Manners' answer to your suggestion of "transference" is yes. Get your dental association to help you transfer your dental care, if not your affections, to another competent dentist.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: I recently got married, which is wonderful, but now we are struggling with the name situation, which is not.

For a variety of reasons, my husband is taking my last name. Our friends and relatives want to know how we should be addressed: Mr. and Mrs. Maidenname? Mrs. and Mr. Maidenname? On formal invitations, should we be listed as Mr. and Mrs. Husband Maidenname?

It is all very confusing. I am tempted to go to medical school so that I can just use "Dr." and be done with it.

GENTLE READER: Medical school sounds like a good idea. Are we done now?

Miss Manners supposes not. There are those four years of studying to get through, and I didn't catch you in time to suggest postponing your marriage. So you have to choose between the old and new forms currently approved (by Miss Manners).

There is not much tradition on this issue, but there is some. In aristocratic families without sons, the son-in-law would sometimes take his wife's name so that their children would continue its usage. From then on, it would be treated no differently than if the wife had taken his name, so you would be Mr. and Mrs. Husband Maidenname.

Those who do not use the Mr. and Mrs. construction for one reason or another may use both their full names with honorifics, in which case you would be formally Ms. Brianna Maidenname and Mr. Zachery Maidenname -- until you finish medical school, when we will all feel better.

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: At a brunch with a bunch of ladies, I ordered buttered toast, and was served two pieces of toast with the butter on the side. I proceeded to butter both pieces while they were still warm, and return them to the plate. I then broke off small pieces, applied jam, and ate them.

One of the women, who has appointed herself resident guru of manners, told me that what I did was incorrect. We won't go into the rudeness of her correcting people publicly, but what is the accepted procedure? Before people became fat conscious, the toast would have been served buttered, so the question would never have come up. Was I wrong?

GENTLE READER: Miss Manners cannot skip over the information that this Guru of Manners had her nose in your butter plate. No doubt that enabled the lady to get her nose buttered all at once, but that is wrong.

Amateurs fail to understand that knowing the rules is not sufficient. As in the legal profession, a judge must also know how to weigh the circumstances and consequences of applying the rules.

A polite person may sometimes be forced to choose between conflicting etiquette rules, in which case the correct one is the one that least inconveniences others. It is true that bread should be buttered in bite-sized pieces, but if you wanted your bread buttered while it was warm, you were right to do it yourself rather than to call over the waiter as you finished each bite and send the next bit of bread back to the kitchen to be reheated.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: I have quite a 21st-century etiquette question. Like most e-mail users, I periodically receive SPAM -- those annoying, widely distributed pieces of junk email that usually include some sort of plea to "forward the e-mail to everyone you know."

I find these impersonal and rude and usually I simply delete them. Lately, though, I've been wondering if I should do something more. I have learned about various web sites that point out that these e-mails are hoaxes. I have wondered recently if it would be appropriate to point the senders of these e-mail to these sites.

For example, the other day I was one of about 40 recipients who received from my priest a poem purportedly originating from a New York doctor. Supposedly three cents would be donated to the American Cancer Society for each time it was forwarded. Within a minute, I was able to find a message on the American Cancer Society's web site saying the e-mail was a hoax and that no money would be sent if the e-mail was forwarded, as well as a message on the site where the doctor works, saying he authored no such e-mail.

Miss Manners, should I inform my well-meaning priest that the e-mail was a hoax? Should I tell other people who forward similar e-mails? Or would I come across as rude and insensitive?

I somehow want to spare them the time and embarrassment of forwarding what so many people seem to know now are hoaxes, but I also don't want to come across as ungrateful for what I assume is their attempt to spread thoughtful messages.

GENTLE READER: Oh, Miss Manners remembers this problem existing way back in the 20th century. But let us not dwell on the past.

Loath as she is to add to the e-mail junk load, she suggests that you take one more minute to compose a polite message to the well-meaning priest and his mailing list, to spare them further embarrassment. What would make it polite is a tone of appreciation and commiseration: "I am sorry to say that someone is taking advantage of your kind intentions..."

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: How soon after a gentleman finishes drinking champagne from a lady's shoe should the lady slip her dainty foot back into her wet shoe?

Reluctantly, Miss Manners admits that no one has actually asked her that. But it is the season for questions about the etiquette of going barefoot and one can hardly blame her for wanting to throw in a glamorous one to make up for the rest.

The usual questions on this subject are querulous and unattractive. People who have been refusing all year to wear every other conventional item of clothing now demand to take off their shoes. Fine. Considering how they've been carrying on about how jackets make them uncomfortable, ties make them uncomfortable, skirts make them uncomfortable, underwear makes them uncomfortable and so on, they should be home in bed anyway.

Carping is equally strenuous on the other side of this issue. If the people who want those complainers to put their shoes back on confined themselves to making the point that barefootedness tramples on most levels of formality, Miss Manners would simply agree. But no, they insist on adding insulting, not to mention unappetizing, speculations about what may be growing on or emanating from exposed feet. Yuck.

Besides, she suspects them of being the very same people who demand that their guests remove their shoes before crossing their thresholds. Having perfected their floors and rugs into an unwalkable state, they feel obliged to contrast this peculiar form of housekeeping with disgusting descriptions of what lies beyond their doors that their guests are bringing along. Some hope to pass themselves off as Japanese, rather than inhospitable westerners, overlooking the fact that it is not a Japanese custom to insult and bully one's guests.

Miss Manners is not taking a stand on either side of this debate, or rather, she has a foot in both camps. (And she is going to stop this kind of talk before she suggests voting with your feet.)

There are indeed places where barefootedness is not only acceptable but practically mandatory. Beach, bed and bath, for example. Contrary to its reputation, etiquette does not always favor formality, and it would be as wrong for Miss Manners to go into your pool wearing high heels (unless she shouted "Whoops" as she entered it involuntarily) as it would be for you to show up barefoot in her drawing room.

Indoor social events require shoes, which is as good a reason as any for declining invitations to parties for which chairs are not provided. Kicking off one's shoes as the evening progresses is a sign of intimacy that should be confined to family and close friends.

Removing one's shoes in public is only permitted it if is undetectable. Those who count on the presence of long tablecloths at dinner and the absence of auditorium lights at performances should remember that they will also require protection when putting those shoes back on. Disappearing under the dinner table or another row in the theater to find them is, Miss Manners regrets to say, noticeable.

As for that question about champagne, Miss Manners supposes that having posed it, she is obliged to answer it. Except that it doesn't really require an answer. By the time the lady is ready to go home the next day, her shoes are dry.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: We have been sending our teenage niece gifts since she was born. We have never received a thank-you note or a phone call. Instead, her mother writes "thank you" on the back of the checks. Is this acceptable?

GENTLE READER: Apparently it is acceptable to you, as you keep sending more checks.

If Miss Manners were you, she would worry whether it is the presents that are unacceptable. Offerings for which minimal or no thanks are offered are obviously a burden on the recipient. Your niece must dislike receiving checks, because she is unable to muster any expression of enthusiasm for them. Politeness would suggest that you respect her feelings and relieve her of her embarrassment.

: