DEAR MISS MANNERS: I am a single man in my 20s who goes on many blind dates with women to whom I have been introduced by mutual friends. I often do not pursue a second date and had always assumed that the proper way to do that was not to call for another date. But a woman I went out with only once told me she was hurt and offended because I didn't call to tell her I would not be asking her out again.

I was shocked by her suggestion that it would be polite to specifically phone her to deliver an unsolicited rejection, and there was certainly no relationship to break off. It seems to me more polite and less hurtful to just not follow up when one has had only one casual meeting.

Of course, if I go out with a woman a few times and thus establish the beginnings of a friendship or relationship, I would always tell her honestly and directly if my intentions changed. But, when dating is just casual, under what circumstances is a breakup conversation called for?

GENTLE READER: Do you promise Miss Manners that your exit line on the date wasn't, "I'll call you"?

The meaning of that has long been a source of contention, as gentlemen believe it means "Goodbye," while ladies believe it means "I'll call you" and are mightily miffed when no such call is made.

There is also a dispute between those who want everything spelled out and those who can pick up simple, conventional social signals. Thanking a lady for a pleasant evening and saying goodnight with no mention of the future should make it clear enough that nothing more is planned.

In thinking she wanted more, the lady was hoping to spare herself a week or so of waiting for the telephone to ring. Miss Manners thinks she ought to consider how much longer the memory would last of having been told, however delicately, that she just wasn't all that interesting.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: I have an odd question, or at least everyone I have asked thinks that it is. My grandmother had the habit of signing all of her correspondence "Mrs. John Brown." I always thought that this was terribly romantic and now that I am married would like to do the same.

I married a man who shares the same name as his father (e.g., John Doe Jr.). When I sign my married name, should I add the "Jr."? I would be embarrassed to confuse someone, who may think that I was married to my father-in-law instead of my husband.

GENTLE READER: What would be odd here would have been if your grandmother had actually signed her name as "Mrs. John Brown."

That is the way she would have been addressed formally, and she might have put it in parentheses under her signature on a business letter so that her correspondents would have known how to address her. But her signature would have been "Evangeline Brown." Those who disapprove of a lady's using her husband's full name do so on the grounds that it erases her identity, but it does not confiscate her given name entirely. Oh, and yes, you take the "Jr." along with his name as long as your father-in-law is alive.

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: On several occasions, my husband has accused me of being rude because I am easily distracted by our children and not paying attention to his talk about work.

Although I would like to give him my undivided attention, he talks to me about his work using acronyms and engineering details knowing that I have no idea about what he is speaking. It is so boring and when our children interrupt to talk to me, it is natural to answer since I cannot follow what he is talking about anyway.

Do manners require that I must listen uninterrupted for, say, 15 minutes of boring talk when the person knows I cannot possibly understand? I love my husband, but wish he could talk about something interesting to both of us. He is hurt that I do not listen and I think he is rude for not considering that his talk is foreign to me.

GENTLE READER: You believe that your husband is rude for not realizing what a bore he is? For wanting to talk to you about his life's work? For expecting you to spare 15 minutes for him? Oh, and for not understanding that the children should feel free to interrupt him?

Have some free etiquette advice. Miss Manners assures you that it is more of a bargain than you will get from a divorce lawyer.

There is no more effective way to belittle and insult someone than to indicate that he bores you. We all encounter bores in life, but polite people find that when they cannot deter or avoid them, enduring a bit of boredom is better than inflicting humiliation.

And you are talking about your husband. Has it not occurred to you that you have an obligation to him -- not only to refrain from hurting him, but for taking an interest in him? If you do not understand the language of his profession, get him to teach it to you. If, for the sake of common courtesy, you fake an interest until you begin to understand, real interest is likely to follow.

Meanwhile, Miss Manners would like to suggest gently that you improve your own domestic job performance. You need to work on your scheduling so that you have uninterrupted time to talk to your husband without neglecting the children, and you need to teach them respect for their father as well as the manners not to barge in on others' conversation.

Depending on their ages, you might suggest that your husband explain his work to them as well. He is likely then to keep it simple. And if you find that the children and he are having an interesting time with this, Miss Manners begs you to remember not to interrupt them.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: What is the proper way to offer a teacup or mug filled with a hot beverage to a guest? It seems rude to hold the cup by the handle and force the guest to grab the hot cup itself, but I fear that trying to offer the guest the handle with my own hands on the hot cup could result in an embarrassing spill.

GENTLE READER: It's called a saucer.

:

Time to start the social season. Gentlemen, please remove your baseball caps. Ladies, please remove your, ah, baseball caps. And it might be a good idea if all of you could locate your shoes.

Miss Manners' idea of a social season does not consist of parties given to honor a perfume or an illness, worthy and dressy as those events may be. Neither does it consist of "Why don't we catch a movie?" or "Come on by, I think I've got some pizza in the freezer, and if not, we can order in," comforting and easy as those events may turn out to be.

There is nothing wrong with either of these, except that the first isn't really social, and the second is how you spent the summer season. The onset of autumn is supposed to suggest that one could bestir oneself once in a while and do something more.

Didn't we learn that in school? Summer's end brought the resolve that this school year one would keep up with the assignments and never have to go into a panicked frenzy. Applied to social life, it seems to have the same success rate.

Yet people crave change, which is why we have seasons in the first place. Places with insignificant temperature changes may brag about their perfect climates, but even perfection requires contrast to be appreciated. Theirs, which they may neglect to mention at the time, tend to be hurricanes and earthquakes.

(It is also why we have rules to go with the seasons. The white-shoe season is about to end, and Miss Manners doesn't want to hear any flak about it.)

And it is why we still have two popular styles of entertaining, even if they have deteriorated. We used to have Formal and Informal. Now we have Showing Off and Not Bothering. Showing Off is for weddings, proms, business and fund-raising; Not Bothering is for seeing people you really care about for the sheer pleasure of it. Miss Manners finds something wrong with the priorities here.

The argument in favor of not exerting oneself on behalf of family and friends is that it is more casual, comfortable and spontaneous. And she agrees that relaxing among friends is indeed a wonderful thing.

But not when they are so spontaneous that they don't show up when they said they would, or show up when they haven't said with people they haven't mentioned. Or so comfortable that they take telephone calls and watch television instead of talking. Or so casual that they forget to reciprocate or they expect their guests to pay.

The basic rules of hospitality remain in effect regardless of the style. And indeed, people are now being as cavalier about formal events as about informal, although that was not the idea.

Discounting rudeness as an advantage that one can enjoy among friends still leaves not dressing up, not making elaborate arrangements and not planning much ahead. Admittedly, these can all be pleasures. But don't people who share them deserve a treat now and then?

DEAR MISS MANNERS: During the day earlier this summer, I attended an invitation-addressing event for a charity function at the home of a woman in our community. Upon arriving, we walked through the beautifully appointed home to the backyard. We were informed that the hostess "just can't have people in her house," and were directed to sit in the backyard.

Given the importance of the task, I stayed for as long as I could stand the heat and left. I trust that I behaved appropriately, but was there anything else I could have done?

GENTLE READER: Added the lady to your list as a beneficiary. If her house is not fit to receive visitors, or if she is not allowed to bring anyone home, she may be in need of charitable assistance. If she doesn't think others are good enough to be in her house, she needs to acquire some charity.

The hostess's announcement eliminated the possibility that she thought, however mistakenly, that the garden would be more pleasing to her guests. So Miss Manners would not have blamed you for saying (in a gracious tone that seemed to blame your delicate constitution), "I'm so sorry, but I'm afraid I'm a bit warm in your lovely garden; I think I'll take my envelopes home, and drop them by when I'm done. Anyone is welcome to join me."

: