Social problem No. 1: Children are growing up too fast. Elementary school children are routinely exposed to sex and drugs, and not just in the television shows they see and the video games they play. Ten-year-olds are dressing like world-weary tramps and thugs. The young are extremely touchy about being treated with respect. At tender ages, they start rebelling against authority.

Social problem No. 2: Adults are refusing to grow up. Middle-aged people are watching animated shows, playing games at work, collecting stuffed animals and paying high prices at restaurants for comfort food. Businessmen protest against wearing business clothes to work, and partygoers protest against wearing party clothes to parties, all with the claim that they only feel comfortable in their simple and sturdy play-clothes. They are insulted at being treated with respect. At advanced ages, they are still rebelling against taking responsibility.

It has thus become possible, Miss Manners notes, to go through one's entire life dissatisfied with one's own age and pretending to be another.

It strikes her that there might be possibilities here of arranging a swap. Children would be in charge of running things, keeping their sins private and their tastes privileged, while adults would forfeit respect but gain respite from responsibility.

Or has that already taken place?

In the manners realm, it would certainly seem so. It is a favorite complaint of adults that children don't know how to behave toward them, but it seems to Miss Manners that the little ones are learning the manners that the big ones are teaching them.

These stem from the great modern prudery, which is not about sex (as you may have noticed), but about age. Adults have taught children that it is rude to notice that they are much older than the children themselves:

"Don't call me 'sir' -- that makes me feel old."

"I'm not Mrs. Wiggleston; that's my mother-in-law. Everyone calls me Muffin."

"Why are you getting up? Do I look as if I'm too old to stand?"

"How dare you offer me a senior citizen rate?"

Adults who are busy assuring one another that they look implausibly young, taking drastic measures to sustain the illusion, and condemning aging and death as the result of improper health care and attitudes, are not going to take this sort of thing from the young. What they are teaching is that any violation of the elaborate hoax that nobody ever ages is an insult.

Having defined the teen years and 20s as the only desirable ages to be, they can hardly be surprised that children share their pretensions. As each age group ridicules or deplores the other's falsifications, an idea of how their own look might arise.

Each has its excuses, Miss Manners understands. Children can't remain in the artificial comfort of childhood when they are so blatantly exposed to the harshness of the real world. And adults who are beleaguered by the harshness of the real world naturally want to retreat to the comforting artificial one.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: My daughter is having Thanksgiving dinner at her home this year. She is planning on no TV football games during dinner and, when the football game is on, the volume will be on mute. Is this correct? She also plans on having games. Help!

GENTLE READER: Your daughter wants to have live conversation at the family holiday table, and afterward she expects people to play games with one another rather than slump around separately watching strangers play games?

Has she no sense of tradition?

As your daughter is the hostess, you must go along with her outrageous wishes. You may actually find yourself feeling thankful for this sociable treat. The only help an unsympathetic Miss Manners offers you is to suggest that the dinner be scheduled after the games -- or before or after a particular game in which this crowd is most interested -- and that the other guests be warned.

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: We recently buried my mother-in-law. I was not involved with the funeral arrangements or the writing of her obituary or biography. However, reading the obituary and bio, it was clear to see that it was written to show how the deceased felt about certain family members.

The authors of my mother-in-law's obituary chose to list devoted in-laws and undevoted ones. I was listed as one of the undevoted in-laws. Needless to say, I was offended.

What is the proper etiquette for listing family members in an obituary and a biography? Also, how can I bring this proper etiquette to the author's attention without being as rude as the author?

GENTLE READER: Now, now. It didn't really say the lady was survived by her undevoted son-in-law, did it? It merely applied that conventional adjective unevenly, and it happened to be omitted before your name.

Not having mandated the description of survivors' emotions in the first place, etiquette has nothing to say about this -- except that public declarations of devotion have a peculiar way of suggesting opposing feelings.

Miss Manners hopes she can comfort you by pointing out that if you were devoted to your mother-in-law, it is unlikely that the lady countenanced a posthumous expression of antipathy toward you. Wills, not obituaries, are the place of choice for that.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: I work for a large independent day school whose constituency is wealthy, generous, but busy with their many activities. When we send out invitations to a group of parents or alumni for an event such as a luncheon, we ask for RSVPs so that we can plan for food, room size, etc.

After the deadline for RSVPs has past, it has become our modus operandi to call on the people that have not responded to make sure they received the invitation and ask if they plan on attending.

I believe this is a waste of time. I believe that if they planned on attending, they would let us know. Granted, the courtesy of replying to an invitation is a lost art, but do we really need to follow up with these people, especially given their social status?

The responses I get to my follow-up phone inquiries border on rude, as if I am pressuring them to attend. (Did I mention I work in the fund-raising office?)

GENTLE READER: It is worth mentioning. Invitations that imply that the guests should attend accompanied by their checkbooks, no matter how sanitized or glamorized the event, are not in the same category as invitations for their company alone.

Heaven forbid that Miss Manners should offer the slightest shelter to those who fail to answer invitations. It is unconscionable to keep in suspense those kindly people who only want to shower hospitality.

But while it is undeniably inconvenient for those planning charitable or business events when their invitations are ignored, they cannot expect everyone they choose to put on their mailing lists to be as diligent. If people had to respond to all the fund-raising "opportunities" being offered these days, they would have no time available to help the needy.

So Miss Manners agrees with you that calling these people is unnecessary. Alas, that is only what private hosts must do when their offers of no-strings-attached hospitality is rudely ignored.

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: Last year, my ex-husband was waiting in line at a supermarket checkout when someone cut in front of him. Words were exchanged and this led to one punch being thrown. The punch put my ex on the floor with massive head injuries, from which he died the next day. All over a place in line at the supermarket!

My son's anger at the loss of his father was subdued somewhat when he saw the store's security tape and it showed his dad had said the first impolite words. Still, two lives are lost, one to death and one behind bars charged with involuntary manslaughter. At least part of his sentence is anger management classes. Maybe we all need to look inward for anger management in today's world and practice more etiquette toward each other.

GENTLE READER: Indeed. When people dismiss etiquette as trivial, they forget how easily feelings over minor offenses turn lethal. Miss Manners offers her sympathy that your family had to learn this so tragically.

Such fights, if not deaths, happen with enough frequency -- not only to etiquette vigilantes such as your ex-husband, but on the part of street thugs who are quick to feel that they have been shown disrespect -- as to suggest that rudeness has become dangerous. This should give pause to those who believe that rudeness is best cured by punitive rudeness, when that only escalates the antagonism.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: A friend recently invited me to a non-hosted dinner at one of our city's finest restaurants in honor of her birthday. I had to work that evening, and so declined her invitation gracefully (I hope), with a promise of taking her to lunch at a more, shall we say, proletarian eating establishment.

However, she knows my work schedule is somewhat flexible, and seems hurt that I haven't made arrangements to be there.

The truth is, an evening at that restaurant would simply cost far too much without me making a spectacle of myself by ordering a starter salad and glass of water (tap), and saying, "No, really, I'm not that hungry." Most of us in our group of friends are on limited budgets, and I know others who genuinely like this person and are attending somewhat grudgingly.

Is there any way to politely inform her that we would enjoy celebrating her birthday in a manner that doesn't require a month's grocery budget?

GENTLE READER: You did, and she didn't take it well. Miss Manners finds it a bit of a stretch for a non-host to be offended when a non-guest declines a non-invitation. Besides, you were gracious enough to indicate an interest in celebrating her birthday another way. We can only hope that your friend will mature enough to figure out the problem before next year.

: