DEAR MISS MANNERS: Now that same-sex marriages are upon us, how does one address an invitation to a same-sex couple? Is it "Mr. and Mrs."? "Mr. and Mr."? "Ms. and Ms."? "Mrs. and Mrs."?

If one female partner prefers the "Ms." title while the other is more traditional, would it then be "Ms." and "Mrs."? How is one to know who which partner is "Mr." and which is "Mrs." (or "Ms."), etc., etc.?

I can see that tracking these preferences will test the limits of my personal address-book software. And how should one inquire as to the same-sex couple's appellation preferences without seeming overly pedantic or perhaps even a bit satiric? I'm not sure the conventions to determine the answers to the above questions have been developed as yet; if not, surely they must be underway now.

So who is involved in this process? Is there an unofficial standards board responsible for couple titling? Are gays represented on this council? Are you?

GENTLE READER: At the Etiquette Mavens' High Council we do not discuss one another's personal lives. Other people's of course, since they so often call upon us to arbitrate, but not our own.

Speaking of which, Miss Manners is afraid that you need basic instruction on matters related to gender, as well as some new software.

The act of marriage does not change people's genders, and it may or may not change their names. Two gentlemen who marry would therefore each be addressed by his full name with the appropriate honorific (Mr., Dr., Colonel) unless they take the same surname, in which case they would be addressed jointly as, for example, "The Messrs. William and Harry Fitzgibbon."

Similarly, two ladies would be addressed as "Mesdames Emily and Lucia March," but if they had different surnames they would be addressed individually with the title each holds or prefers, if you know it, and "Ms." if you don't. Miss Manners may not be in the technical support department, but she knows that the simplest programs are equipped to register any title you type in.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: It's coming time to send out invitations for our daughter's bat mitzvah, and we're wishing for a way to make clear that these are not solicitations for checks. Our daughter agrees with this sentiment wholeheartedly, and even intends to donate what monetary gifts do arrive to charity.

Our concern centers on friends for whom we know money is tight. I wish invitations of this sort did not come with the implied obligation of a gift. But they seem to have evolved into that. Am I being overly concerned?

GENTLE READER: Not overly, but unnecessarily. That is to say, yes, people take it as such -- cynical as it is to imagine that the only reason people would want their friends at their ceremonial occasions is the hope of profiting from them -- but it is unnecessary because there is nothing you can do about it. You are sending the invitations with good faith, and can only hope that they are received in that spirit.

:

Yes, children, we did used to have blogs. We called them diaries, and they got us into almost as much trouble as yours will get you.

The impulse to record one's every thought, feeling, opinion and experience long pre-dates the home computer. It does not, Miss Manners hastens to add, pre-date the notions that one has a uniquely sensitive nature to which the world does not show proper attention and appreciation, and that one day it will be realized what a blunder that was on the part of the world.

Friends are not the ideal receptacles for daily confidences that keep making these points, as it does not take long to discover. Their minds wander, making them misunderstand or forget what they were told. They are especially prone to forgetting that they had been told not to tell others. Their emotions don't always come out the way they were supposed to, and they make irritating remarks, such as "You're not being fair," or "I don't see what you're so upset about." Their loyalties shift, leaving them with choice material to use against the very person who had supplied it.

Hence, the diary. It had an insatiable appetite for grudges, gossip, love affairs, cultural pronouncements, social criticism and whatever else one chose to put into it. It was the ideal companion, an eager and sympathetic listener who would never betray you in the present but hinted at helping you to fame in the future.

Blogs have a similar lure for those who keep them, with what seem like additional advantages. It is not only technologically that they work faster. They are supposed to supply fame and hordes of eager and sympathetic listeners in the present.

With a diary, the danger was that someone might sneak a peek at it or even steal it and expose one's secrets. With a blog, the fear is that nobody might do so.

Miss Manners realizes that the society's ideas about privacy have changed, if, indeed, anyone is still familiar with the concept. Ingeniously, people have found an easier way to cope with what was always considered shameful behavior than attempting to hide it -- or even stopping doing it.

The solution has been to publicize it, and blogs have served as an outlet for those unable to book their confessions on television. Whatever this does for the general tone of society, etiquette has no rule against people spreading unflattering gossip about themselves. Miss Manners would only caution those who do so that both social standards and personal circumstances often change, and they may not always be pleased to have this material floating around.

What is of concern to etiquette is the way bloggers write about other people. Miss Manners has a perhaps more realistic approach to gossip than those who condemn it absolutely, and then go on to more interesting subjects, such as who is doing what to whom. People will always talk about people.

The polite person at least gossips discreetly and without malice. Blogs do not qualify as being discreet. For those who must write down their critical observations about people they know, Miss Manners recommends a small blank book that comes with a lock and key and can successfully be hidden in the sock drawer.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: Every year at the same time, I have a fish fry/picnic and invite family members. I provide everything from food to eating utensils. We eat outside and use paper plates, but I do have flatware rather than plastic forks.

My sister-in-law always brings her own plate and flatware for herself. I am offended by this. I just wanted to know if this falls in the "bad manners" category.

GENTLE READER: It depends on how old your sister-in-law is. Up until the 17th century, it was considered polite, indeed necessary, for guests to bring their own cutlery. Now it is the reverse, so perhaps it is time for you to tell her that as her hostess, you are happy to provide the eating utensils. As for the plates, Miss Manners will conceal her sympathy with your sister and agree that she should accept what is offered.

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: Until a few days ago I was having a romance with a celebrity. We kept quiet about it to avoid the tabloids.

A couple of months ago, a slight acquaintance who I have never liked overheard him say to me, "I'll see you tomorrow." She demanded that I take her along on our meeting, and begged me to make similar outings with her.

I refused, politely but persistently. When pressed for a reason, I said, "We're 'friends,'" putting as much emphasis on the word "friends" as possible. A toadstool would have realized that I wanted to be alone with this man for personal reasons, but she did not. She kept badgering me to include her in my dates with the celebrity.

A few days ago, she frankly asked him for a date, right in front of me. To my chagrin, he accepted. Later, in private, he and I had a fight about the incident -- end of romance.

Obviously, if he was so quick to make a date with another woman he was ready to break up with me anyway. Still, I think the little groupie should face some consequences for taking my man before I was done with him. I intend to give her the snubbing of her life. How can I make her shrivel with guilt and regret, while being utterly charming?

GENTLE READER: Oddly -- and irritatingly -- enough, this is done by not snubbing her. Doing so would only convince her that she succeeded in snatching a prize away from you.

But, as you realize, she did you a favor. The way to engender her regret is to thank her for getting you out of a difficult and tedious situation.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: I recently received an anonymous letter in my mailbox saying that we are disturbing the peace of the neighborhood.

We just moved here, and were surprised to find that we could hear all of our neighbors so clearly. This is due to the fact that everyone lives with their windows open in the heat. I can literally hear my neighbor sneeze when I lay in my bed at night. We were even thinking of moving because of the noise level.

So I was shocked when I received the note, but I admit that my 2-year-old is having a hard time dealing with his new baby brother and has been crying a lot lately. Otherwise, I really feel that we are on par with the rest of our neighbors. The note sounded rather angry, and said that they can hear our conversations and that our children keep them from sleeping in on the weekends.

I feel bad that I am annoying someone, but am disturbed and paranoid because I don't know who wrote the note. I would like to apologize to them and make sure that they understand that we aren't trashy or rude people. Do I write an apology to all of our neighbors (especially since I can't keep my kids quiet all of the time), or just let it go?

GENTLE READER: Just let it go until an already enraged neighbor is driven over the brink? Miss Manners would not advise this.

Although anonymous letters are rude and scary, she recommends treating this one as an opening for discussing the problem that everyone in the neighborhood shares, with a view to cooperating to make life more pleasant for all.

Whether this can be accomplished through a policy of strategically closed windows Miss Manners cannot say. People do converse, and children do cry. But it will establish your goodwill, which tends to make others more tolerant.

Besides, if you refer uncritically to having received an anonymous letter, you may be sure that people who know everyone in the neighborhood will have a good idea who the writer is, and that it will not be attempted again.

: