DEAR MISS MANNERS: I am a senior in high school. The program I am in is very competitive and produces very high-achieving students. Because of this, quite a few of the students apply to places such as Stanford, UC Berkeley and the Ivies.

I was very lucky -- I was accepted into my first-choice school very early in the year and my classmates, even the ones to whom I am not very close, were (or at least pretended to be) very happy for me, and I will be happy to do the same for them. What I'm wondering is how to properly expresses my regret to people who do not get accepted into their top schools. Also, what is the correct response to people who get deferred? And do the answers to these questions change depending on whether the student in question is a good friend or just a casual acquaintance?

Should I say anything at all if a third party told about someone else's rejection/deferment? So far, I haven't, mostly because my friends tend to tell me about their rejections from universities (though some are tight-lipped about their acceptances).

GENTLE READER: You should do everything you can to stay out of any such conversations with anyone. If told directly about deferments or rejections, say something like "That's insane -- it's such a lottery" and then quickly change the subject: "Are you going to the game tomorrow?"

This is because there is nothing you can say that will not be interpreted as patronizing. "Forget them; you'll get into a good school" will bring on the thought of "easy for you to say," and even "I was just lucky" calls attention to the contrast between your situations.

Miss Manners understands how unfair this is. You only want to be kind and polite. You are not comparing yourself to them, so why should they?

They shouldn't, and perhaps they would not. But they were gracious about your triumph and you should spare them having to muster that much generosity again.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: Is it acceptable to turn down a wedding invitation because of the sheer cost to get there?

I have a friend who is getting married next summer in a remote location. It would take me a few hours to fly there and five hours to drive from the airport. The monetary cost for my husband and me is very high.

This is a friend we rarely see and are not close to. We feel it would be easier for us to send a nice (possibly expensive) gift and send our regrets. Is that OK?

GENTLE READER: A wedding invitation is not a summons with the fine already attached. Of course you may turn one down for whatever reason -- that you are not particularly close to the person being married, that you cannot easily afford the trip and the time or that you just don't feel like going.

All Miss Manners requires is that you answer the invitation without any such explanation (none is needed) and wish the couple well. You don't even have to send a present, but if you want to do so, you needn't feel that its worth has to make up for your absence.

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: I am a middle-aged woman. I tend to be conservative in what I wear, but remember fondly dressing a little less conservatively in my younger, slimmer days.

I wonder whether I have gotten too conservative in my fashion tastes when I see women my own age dressed in the revealing styles that younger women have adopted. Indeed, sometimes when it is very obvious that there are no undergarments hindering many women, both middle age and younger, as they walk about on the streets, I find myself torn between shock and dismay.

I am very much for women's rights, but am conflicted when I see my "sisters" exercising their rights in such an outgoing way. I find myself wondering whether, in exercising their right to dress as they please, they have gone a little too far.

Have I gotten too conservative in my middle age?

GENTLE READER: You have gotten confused. Dressing lewdly is not an expression of women's rights.

Miss Manners commends you for dressing in good taste. But she assures you that the bad taste you observe has nothing whatsoever to do with claiming an equal right to run around with no underwear.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: I am a gay man planning to become engaged in the near future. While I'm looking forward to getting married, I am dreading the questions from friends and family about the legality of the wedding, such as "Are you going to go to Massachusetts?" or "Is that legal in Maryland yet?"

At best, the questions throw cold water on what should otherwise be a joyful and congratulatory moment. At worst, it puts our attention on the rather painful subject of marriage inequality. I do not wish to sound angry or confrontational in my reply by saying something like, "No, did you travel to a strange state to get married?" or "Well, I'm not waiting around for Maryland to get its act together!"

We intend to have a minister preside and to be as lawfully joined as possible, but I do not feel as if this is something I should have to justify to others; nor do I feel my wedding must be some sort of political statement.

I've contemplated appropriate responses, such as, "Oh, of course not," but I worry that will only lead to further questions. What is a proper, polite and effective response to a question about my pending marriage that I do not wish to answer?

GENTLE READER: Precedent here is that most people love to talk about their wedding plans and take the slightest show of interest as license to go on and on until others are weak with boredom.

There is no reason that you cannot achieve this effect. Just follow Miss Manners' rule of answering the question you want to deal with rather than the one that was asked. It got her through school.

"Right now, we're talking about the cake," you might say. "He likes chocolate, but one of my aunts is allergic to chocolate, so I'm thinking that maybe we should have cake that she can eat, but chocolate pastries on the side for those who want them."

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: At the risk of sounding political, and that is the furthest thing I wish to do -- is protest mutually exclusive from etiquette?

This dilemma has come up many times during the past few years, and it has caused some heated discussions with my friends.

My position, I could be very wrong, is that I don't mind protesting. Sometimes, I truly do not like the manner in which people choose to protest. For instance, with large graphic pictures and swearing; however, living in a free society, I've learned to accept this.

What I do have trouble with, and this is where my friends and I disagree, is how some protesters engage with the public. For example, giving children graphic pamphlets, telling children they have bad or abusive parents, calling individuals names, commenting on people's apparel, barring people from entering a facility and grabbing at people. I've seen all of these.

My friends say there is no room for etiquette in protest. I think when dealing with people in public one should at least try not to be rude to them. Who is correct?

GENTLE READER: Of course protest, like every other human activity, requires etiquette. Have your friends never heard of civil disobedience?

The saddest thing about using rude tactics is that they damage the causes for which they are used. Rather than the targets thinking that they are being shown a way in which the world would be improved, they focus on the immediate way in which they are being mistreated. These people may claim to want to make the world better, their victims conclude, but are actively making it worse.

Miss Manners would think it obvious that in order to persuade people about an issue of justice they had not considered, you must open their minds to your arguments. People who are humiliated shut down and turn defensive.

But when they see orderly picket lines or sit-ins, or hear speeches or read leaflets and articles by people who seem to be well-intentioned and reasonable, they just might stop to think.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: My wife and I were recently invited to a birthday party for a relative. The event was to be black-tie optional. One week prior to the event and after we had responded to the first invitation, we received a second invitation to the same event. The second invitation specified that the dress for the occasion was now casual and the event now had a different theme. Also, the second invitation specifically said no black tie.

Isn't this a breach of etiquette to switch the dress for an event so close to the date and after the date invitees were supposed to respond?

GENTLE READER: Because now you are committed to something that sounds like less fun?

Miss Manners' guess is that the invitees did respond, and rudely at that. She is guessing that they were carrying on about what wonderfully casual people they are and how much they hate to get dressed up until the host gave up and agreed to dumb down what was to have been a festive occasion.

While that is a shame, canceling would suggest that it was dressing up, and not celebrating your relative's birthday, that originally led you to accept.

: