To the extent that it is humanly possible, Miss Manners tries to stay out of other people's bathrooms.

Not when out visiting, she hastens to add. As a guest, she trusts that her kind hosts do not have their sensibilities shattered by her habit of drying her dainty fingers on -- oh, the audacity of it! -- a guest towel.

Others, she figures, can manage in there for themselves. Guests are usually toilet trained and hosts trained to accommodate them. It is true that some basic skills which used to be covered by child-rearing -- inoffensive eating, for example -- are now thought to be advanced etiquette, but surely some still are.

And considering how absolutely Miss Manners expects to reign in drawing rooms and dining rooms, she would imagine that a room offering escape and privacy would be appreciated.

It appears that she was overly optimistic. There are problems beneath Miss Manners' notice that people nevertheless keep trying to bring to her attention. And even people who seem to have mastered the general idea find bathrooms -- their own and other people's -- overflowing with etiquette problems.

Among them are timid guests who are embarrassed to ask where to go, and fearful of being overheard when they do go, and bold guests who take the opportunity to explore unauthorized territory, including medicine cabinets and adjacent private rooms.

In addition, there are hosts who want to apologize for the fact that their facilities are not functioning fully, and hosts who want to prevent their facilities from being fully used to avoid wasting water.

All of this has caused Miss Manners no little embarrassment. She is unaccustomed to saying, "Oh, grow up, face facts, and say what you have to say."

It strikes her that there is far too much articulation of facts connected with the bathroom and coy avoidance of euphemisms. If people go into bathrooms to do anything other than powder their noses or wash their hands, she doesn't want to know about it.

However, if guests need to perform one of these functions, they must inquire where to do so and excuse themselves, knowing that the nature of the excursion could be guessed by anyone rude and bored enough to care to do so. Polite people are incapable of hearing any resulting noises, other than those associated with flooding.

To prevent that from occurring, hosts, who are supposed to provide equipment that can cope with ordinary usage, must frankly warn their guests of any particular eccentricities or ordinances that apply. Such things are not pleasant to discover for oneself.

Miss Manners realizes that hosts never follow the universal recommendation to sleep in their own guest rooms to test their comfort, but surely they can manage to do an occasional test run, so to speak, in their own bathrooms. The idea, as with other aspects of hospitality, is to provide for their guests' needs and comforts, trusting their guests not to abuse the situation.

For those who do, the euphemisms a host needs to know are:

"No, no, the bathroom is this way."

"The plumbing is a bit delicate, I'm afraid, but there's a closed trash can in the kitchen."

"If you tell me what you were looking for in the medicine cabinet, perhaps I can find it for you."

And with that, Miss Manners would like to put a lid on the subject and firmly close the door.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: People seem to be apologizing for things that are not their fault. For example: I visited an ATM in one of my local supermarkets. I discovered I had left my card at home. Although there was someone staffing the banking center, he apologized because he didn't have cash on hand to allow me to complete my transaction. It wasn't his fault that I forgot my ATM card.

GENTLE READER: You are shopping at the wrong store, Miss Manners is afraid. You should have no trouble finding one in which the correct answer to your problem, and indeed all customer needs, is, "Hey, lady, what do you expect me to do about it?"

Your finding one of these businesses would have the beneficial effect of shortening the line at this one for the rest of us, who would be only too pleased to deal with the employee whose politeness offended you.

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: My husband of 42 years received a phone call from a man 45 years old saying that his mother had passed away four months ago. She left a picture of my husband (we haven't seen that picture) and wrote that he is his real father. He sent a picture of himself, and there is a resemblance.

His mother married before he was born but claims that the one she married knew he wasn't his biological son. The man that raised him has passed on, and that is one reason he decided to pursue this.

My husband admits dating this woman for a while but says that he had no knowledge that he is the father.

I have been so sick ever since we heard this, and my husband thinks I'm ridiculous, as this was before we even knew each other. But I just can't control my emotions. My husband and I have had a very happy married life.

This man wants to be a part of our family because he's big on family. My husband wrote him a letter and said that after all these years, he should be considered a sperm donor, not his father. This did not go over very big.

We have two daughters that he wants to get to know. They do not want to know him. They say they don't need another brother. I was a widow with five young children when my husband and I got married, three boys and two girls. We haven't told them of the situation, as we are afraid it will hurt the relationship he has with them.

My husband did say that we would visit with him and his family, when and if we ever get back to that part of the country. Possibly this summer. I have agreed to this.

My question is this: Do we have an obligation to accept this and tell the rest of our children? They are all in their 40s now.

GENTLE READER: In the quagmire of moral and possibly legal questions this unfortunate situation presents, Miss Manners has been searching for problems that would be within her purview.

She does not feel that the decision about telling your children from your first marriage is one of them. No one else can perform the difficult task facing your husband and you, presuming that this claim turns out to be true. You must weigh how much information you morally owe your children, how this is likely to affect each of them emotionally (not just in regard to their opinion of your husband) and whether they are likely to hear it anyway from other sources.

However, you do face a major etiquette problem, which is that of getting your emotions under control. Etiquette's toughest requirement is that one must sometimes overcome, or at least disguise, one's feelings out of consideration for others.

This means you must not treat your husband's son as if he were some sort of stalker. You hardly have child-rearing responsibilities, as he is 45 years old, so you needn't clasp him to your bosom, literally or figuratively, but you have an obligation to be courteous and respectful in whatever relationship your husband establishes with him.

Then there is the matter of how you treat your husband. Miss Manners is hardly predisposed to regard careless parenthood lightly, but it does strike her that by your own account, you brought this gentleman five young children he had not fathered, and he seems to have earned their and your trust and love and made you happy.

Therefore, although it may not be ridiculous for you to be upset, it is unseemly. If Miss Manners may stray ever so slightly into the area of morality, she would say that you owe him the acceptance he so generously gave you and yours, and that you should emphasize this to them as a mitigating circumstance if the decision is made to tell them.

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: Due to the vagaries of fate, I now find myself having dinner once a week with the gentleman who was my favorite author when I was in high school. We are cordial, even friendly, to the point of inviting each other to private parties in our homes.

Sometimes he asks me my opinions of his recent work. Frankly, I don't read genre fiction any more, and I haven't read any of his books in decades. How do I dodge his questions without hurting his feelings?

GENTLE READER: With a bit of judicious dialogue:

"Oh, you already know I've always been your greatest fan. But tell me what sort of reaction you are getting from critics and readers. Sometimes I feel that even your admirers don't fully appreciate the depth of your work."

In Miss Manners' experience, that ought to keep any author going until you can safely say, "Oh, my, the time has flown, I didn't realize how late it is."

DEAR MISS MANNERS: My 23-year-old son is engaged to be married next summer. His finance [sic] is planning a large wedding (400-plus). My son recently informed me that, according to her, it is "customary" for the groom's parents to pay for the liquor at the wedding reception and for a honeymoon to Hawaii (as this is where all young couples now go). The estimated cost of the reception's open bar is $12,000, and the Hawaiian honeymoon nearly $5,000.

It was my understanding that the bride's family was primarily responsible for the wedding and that the groom's family paid for the pre-nuptial meal and the groomsmen's gifts. Any other financial assistance from the groom's family was optional. We are not involved in planning this wedding and are certainly not of the financial means to cover such large expenses.

Can you provide some guidance? We want to fulfill our obligations and maintain cordial relations, but we are not of a financial means to spend thousands of dollars to fulfill the bride's every wish.

GENTLE READER: Fully half the letters Miss Manners receives about engagements and weddings put an extra "N" in the words "fiancee" or "fiance," as you did. She used to think it was a typographical accident.

Apparently not. The state of being engaged is now interpreted as granting license to control other people's finances. Parents, wedding attendants and guests are told what they must allocate through contributions, sponsorship and purchase.

And what authority is there for granting this unprecedented ability to dictate expenditure regardless of the owners' thoughts or wishes?

"Etiquette," claim the finances and financees. It is only proper that others fork it over, they declare.

Oh, no they don't. Miss Manners is not going to stand for etiquette's being portrayed as extortion, and she is surprised that anyone else submits to being victimized. Furthermore, the finances and financees always prove to be ignorant of what is "customary."

Customarily, the bride's family pays for all the wedding festivities, and the bridegroom pays for the groomsmen's presents, the entire wedding trip and any other expenses the couple may incur from then on.

In recent years, this has been modified in the interest of fairness so that the bridegroom's family may offer to give a dinner the evening before the wedding or otherwise share in the wedding expenses. However, all of this, including the bride's family's assumption of costs, is voluntary, and saddling people with bills that strain their means is as improper as it is cruel.

: