DEAR MISS MANNERS: I am the mother of a 14-year-old girl who is dating a 14-year-old boy. By "dating," I mean that they send a lot of instant messages and e-mails to each other, they talk on the phone a lot, they go to the movies about once a week with a group of friends, he comes to our house once or twice a week and she goes to his house once or twice a week.

The boy's parents, my husband and I all agree that there should always be a parent at home at whatever house they are at. That is not a problem. What I want to know is what to say to his parents when they appear to be assuming that these kids are dangerous sex maniacs.

"Of course, we like your daughter," they say, "but we're just not comfortable with the amount of time they spend together; we don't want anything to happen."

I don't want anything to happen, either, and I do understand the dangers of raging hormones, but these are intelligent kids who are well chaperoned. Is there any way I can civilly let the boy's parents know that their idea that this relationship is a pregnancy waiting to happen is insulting to my daughter and their son?

GENTLE READER: Not if you give the impression that you believe that only sex maniacs cause pregnancy. Miss Manners is afraid that they would begin to worry about your competence as chaperones.

As the comment you quoted applies to their own teenager as well as to yours, there does not seem to be reason to feel that your daughter's chastity has been impugned. However, if you wish to make the point that she would be incapable of being overcome by passion, you could reply, "Ethan is such a nice boy, I'm sure he wouldn't dream of attacking Caroline's virtue."

Your daughter might not thank you for this defense.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: Do the bride and groom have any obligation to provide or help find baby sitters for out-of-town guests?

My family (including my 3-year-old son) is traveling to participate in a wedding where I am the best man; however, the wedding does not allow children. I am really distressed over what I will do with my son during the wedding and reception. I called the bride and asked her about possible baby sitters and she just said that she didn't know any.

This situation has really dampened my enthusiasm for this wedding; am I just being petty?

GENTLE READER: The bride and the bridegroom do not have an obligation to provide or help find baby sitters. It is thoughtful if they try to anticipate what would make their guests' stay easy and pleasant, and some go to the trouble of hiring a baby sitter to look after all their guests' children, but Miss Manners is afraid that concierge service is not on the required list.

However, your best friend has an obligation to help you out, most especially when you run into difficulty in the course of performing honorable service for him. His fiancC ought to be willing to share responsibility for someone with whom she can expect to become close. Oh, whoops, those are the bride and bridegroom, aren't they?

:

Do we have to invite him/her/them?

This is (otherwise) Gracious Hospitality talking backstage, where nobody being proposed for the guest list is supposed to hear. The quest to get amiable guests without their awful connections is decidedly ungracious, but Miss Manners realizes that it is often understandable, if rarely permissible.

Desirable people do sometimes make the most undesirable connections. They marry them, they give birth to them, they room with them, they have them as houseguests, or they met them last week and cannot bear to be separated.

So -- can the host manage to separate them for a few hours?

Oddly enough, the cases in which the hosts most long to do this are when the connections are their very own. They are giving a family holiday party or holding a ceremonial event such as a wedding and remember how little they care for certain of their relatives. Can they invite the uncle who hands out checks but not the one who hands out opinions? Can they make sure the brother's wife doesn't assume that her children are included? Can they let the sister who disciplines her children bring them and exclude the children of the sister who believes in not inhibiting them? Can they make Grandpa agree to leave his new lady friend home?

Keeping family members away from family occasions is a drastic notion that requires drastic measures. And Miss Manners issues a stern reminder that there is no second-class category by which in-laws and stepchildren are optional. Personal preferences do not count, although you need not invite those with whom you have had major feuds.

Sometimes limitations may be imposed, provided that you make no exceptions. No second cousins or no children under 10, for example. Or you can downplay the event -- "Yes, some people did drop by, but it was not really a birthday party," "We eloped on the spur of the moment and only took along the siblings who lived nearby" -- but you have to be sure the story will stick.

Common to all social occasions is the question of whether half a couple may be invited. Considering that we no longer know what makes a couple, this is a tricky problem.

Marriage is a sure qualifier, which is why those gold-diggers and freeloaders who forced their way into the family get to accompany the blood relatives. So, now, is para-marriage. People who are living together in romantic partnership must also be treated as a social unit.

This means that love-one-can't-stand-the-other friendships are pretty much confined to weekday lunches. That is also a good time to see people with un-enchanting children, although children do not have to be invited to events designated as grown-up. Nor do dates or houseguests.

There are polite answers other than "Of course" to "May I bring...?" or even "I'll be bringing..." These answers all start with "Oh, I'm so sorry, but..." and end with "But I'd love to see him/her/them on another occasion." In between are "I'm afraid it's a grown-up party" or "I don't really have room for more." Hosts, as well as guests, have to know when to decline.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: With the smoking bans in restaurants now, what is the proper etiquette for those who smoke and those who have been left at the table? I do not have a problem with those who smoke getting up (between courses) to go outside to smoke, but recently I was chastised for continuing to eat when the next course was served and they weren't back. Should I have let my food get cold till they returned?

GENTLE READER: If the smokers weren't back, you must be telling Miss Manners that a nonsmoker chastised you, declaring that it would be rude not to sit there with your hands in your laps to give the smokers time to enjoy their cigarettes.

Does such a person exist? In any case, no such rule exists. If eating had to be suspended mid-meal whenever a guest excused herself from the table for whatever purpose, dinner table conversation would soon deteriorate to the level of "Do you think she fell in?"

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: Is there such thing as "interline dating etiquette," or would that be an oxymoron? I confess that I am new to the genre, but here is my dilemma (and it is not an isolated situation).

I have had several pleasant phone conversations with a man who is an articulate and pleasant professional; we have a lot in common, and have exchanged photos. He suggested we meet at 7:30 p.m. (my dinner hour) on a Friday night. He lives 45 minutes away and will drive to my city after work. Considering the time, I assumed this meant the evening meal, and asked what type of restaurants he prefers so I could arrange a meeting place; he said he was suggesting a drink, "possibly" dinner.

I am a bit put off by this. I see some logic in foregoing dinner if we don't feel a connection. I also feel as two adults who enjoy one another's conversation that we could pass an enjoyable hour over dinner regardless of any attraction (or lack thereof). Frankly, I am a bit uneasy with the notion that I am to be "on trial" over drinks, and will be honored with his company for dinner only if I pass muster; otherwise I will be summarily dismissed prior to any meal! This reeks a bit too much of the cattle auction for me -- check her teeth, and then, if she looks like a good breeder, pony up the funds for feed!

Maybe that's just how it's done in these days of Internet dating, or maybe I'm old-fashioned, or both. Am I being too picky in feeling that a gentleman and a lady out on a date should both be able to commit to graciously dine together (and that this makes a much more appropriate "date" than wine on an empty stomach, as dinner, after all, "might" be in the offing), regardless of whether there is a Grand Attraction? Am I missing something here?

GENTLE READER: Yes, and Miss Manners would have thought she would be the last person in the world to explain it to you.

She can at least assure you that your problem is not being old-fashioned. If that were the case, you would not be meeting strangers with the purpose of frankly checking each other over as possible candidates for romance. If the cow were as free and eager to choose a farmer as the farmer is the cow, then "cattle auction" would be an apt term.

However, the modern form recognizes that it is harder to choose a romantic partner, and therefore the convention is to keep the initial time commitment to a minimum. Your prospect is already putting an hour and a half driving time into it.

Perhaps if you stop thinking of it as a date and think of it as an interview, you will realize that you cannot expect this encounter to observe the time-consuming niceties of courtship.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: Is it appropriate behavior to clip your fingernails at work? There are no offices or doors.

GENTLE READER: And no bathrooms?

Even if there are, working conditions must be dreadful. If your workday is so long that your fingernails grow out during the course of it, Miss Manners suggests that you spend that time looking for another job.

: