DEAR MISS MANNERS: Have I missed some change in the culture of taste and decorum in the last few years?

When we leave work, the security checkpoint requires placing items on a table before going through the magnameter. Often this is just for ease with such things as keys, cigarettes, newspapers, food and the like being placed on the table.

That was, until the other day. One of the ladies also leaving put something down that caused me to do a double take. It was a box of tampons. Not in a bag, or peeking out of a purse, flat on the table like a pack of cigarettes. I guess that takes the mystery out of her product choice.

Did I miss something here? I thought there was a level of decorum still in play despite celebrity disrobing, marriage disposal by politicians and alternate uses of golf clubs.

Or is this the new Bold Age, whereby anything goes, along as you do it in public? I thought on some things the mark had not moved. Could I be wrong?

GENTLE READER: Uh, how do you like the new airport body scanner?

Miss Manners also regrets the passing of modesty, but she makes a distinction among that which is sacrificed to apparent necessity, that which is surrendered voluntarily, and that which is exposed against one's wishes.

If by disrobing, you mean appearing in public scantily dressed (or let us say more scantily dressed than is now customary), that is usually, although not always, voluntary. So it counts as immodest unless you are in the fashion business. But surely you would not condemn a patient who is trying to make it down the clinic corridor in a hospital gown without being recognized.

The revelation of political and celebrity marriage troubles is usually against the will of the participants. But leaving aside the question of how unpalatable the details may be, ordinary citizens in droves are only too eager to reveal their formerly private lives -- on the Internet or television, if possible, and if not, by cornering anyone they can trap. Additionally, much grooming is now done in public, from the salons with picture windows to those who brush their teeth on public transportation.

Miss Manners joins you in deploring all this. But now let us return to your colleague who is leaving work. Perhaps she has been told to empty everything in her purse, or perhaps she forgot what besides shampoo was in her bag from the drugstore. Or perhaps she expects you to be tending to your own belongings rather than peering at hers any more than if you had been in line behind her when she bought them.

In any case, there are enough blatant examples of flagrant immodesty around without bothering this poor lady who is just trying to get home from work.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: Do you think it's appropriate for a guest at a funeral to comment negatively to the family afterwards? I think it is insensitive, and I wonder what their motives are.

GENTLE READER: You don't mean, "It is terrible to lose him," do you?

Miss Manners supposes not. She realizes that everyone nowadays fancies himself a critic, but no, it is not a comfort to the bereaved to be told that the funeral got a thumbs-down rating.

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: I was widowed after a successful 30-plus-year marriage. I took time to mourn and heal before I began to date and sincerely believe I'm ready to pursue other relationships. I've met several genuinely nice, caring men whose company I enjoy.

My concern is that, without exception, the men I've dated (in the 60- to 70-year-old range) seem far more entrenched in traditional gender roles than I am. My husband and I were equals -- personally, professionally and financially. The gentlemen I'm dating seem extremely uncomfortable at the mere suggestion that we split the cost or I pay for them, regardless of how expensive our outing is.

I've attempted to discuss with each of these men that I'm not comfortable being a perpetual recipient of their hospitality and prefer a more equal allocation of expenses.

All of them tell me not to worry about it, that they enjoy "spoiling me." I don't want to be rude, but I don't aspire to be spoiled or a stereotypical "dependent woman."

Because I'm uncomfortable with the inequality of the gentleman assuming all financial obligation I've taken to reciprocating their hospitality by inviting them to my home for meals. I'm an excellent cook and hostess, and all of them seem accepting of this traditional male-female arrangement. But frankly, I'd much rather pay my share of the expenses when we go out and invite guests to my home because I want to enjoy their company rather than to satisfy a social obligation I didn't want to incur.

I'm a feminist. I believe that men and women are and should be equal, and I've lived my life based on that belief. But I don't believe that one's ideology or ego is an excuse for poor manners.

Should I simply accept that I live in a time when gender roles are in flux and my life experiences may have positioned me outside the norm? Or should I be more assertive about satisfying my concept of fairness?

And, if so, how do I do it without making some lovely, generous men feel that I'm judging their life experiences and preferences as "wrong" or demeaning?

GENTLE READER: Did we learn nothing from the way opening doors and yielding seats for ladies were stamped out?

Yes -- judging from the way Ladies First was replaced by Me First So Get Out of My Way, we learned nothing.

What we should have learned is: Do not reject courtesies; return them. And yes, Miss Manners appreciates the fact that you are trying.

But when you accept a dinner invitation and attempt to hijack the bill, you are rejecting the gentleman's hospitality. In contrast, when you invite them to your house, you are returning that hospitality.

We will let pass the crack about doing this only to satisfy a social obligation and not because you want to enjoy their company, although it does make Miss Manners wonder why you go out with them. But you could also initiate hospitality by inviting them to something for which you bought tickets or gave instructions that you should be given the bill. Self-respecting ladies have been doing that for generations.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: Is it proper to ask parents of newborn babies, "May I hold the baby"?

GENTLE READER: If you know the parents and are engaged in admiring the baby, yes; this is the proper alternative to grabbing. Miss Manners trusts that if you do not know the parents, you will neither ask nor grab, which would constitute kidnapping.

:

DEAR MISS MANNERS: What is the appropriate form of congratulations for a couple who have lived together for many years and recently married?

When I congratulated two such couples, I was told in each case, "We only did it for the insurance."

A third couple had publicly stated numerous times over 20 years that they did not "believe" in marriage, even going so far as to ask me why my then-fiance and I were bothering with marriage. However, after the man developed terminal cancer, they were married to avoid legal problems for the woman and their two children. After he died, about six weeks later, the widow sent us an e-mail, sarcastically thanking us for the congratulatory card we had not sent on their wedding.

I was dumbfounded, as they had made it quite clear that it was a marriage of legal convenience. Under the circumstance, we could hardly have wished them many more happy years together, and we did not want to offend them by suggesting that it was "about time."

This will undoubtedly be coming up again. I am getting tired of being rebuffed on the one hand and chastised on the other. To make matters worse, the divorced sister of the widow has just announced her engagement. I fear that the widow will see any congratulations to her sister as a personal insult.

GENTLE READER: Ah, yes, romance! Miss Manners finds it amazing that those who do most to deny it still crave it.

Well, pooh on them. To disparage congratulations is nasty; the only polite response is to thank someone who offers them. When the response is negative, you may say sadly, "I was only trying to wish you well."

And blandly wishing people well is about all you can do under such discouraging circumstances. In the case of the widow, it would be kind to ignore her rudeness and write her a letter of sympathy for her loss. The sister, who we hope is less of a cynic, should be sent your best wishes.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: My partner and I have been having a disagreement recently about the etiquette of having sex when staying in other people's homes. I feel that it is extremely rude and should be avoided at all costs, while she feels that it is expected and normal, particularly if we are staying with friends/family for more than a couple of nights.

I asked my sister and her husband what their views are, and my sister informed me that they plan to have regular sex when they stay with us in our new home. She also informed me that other visitors would expect to do the same.

As our new home has my first-ever guest bedroom, which up until now I had been looking forward to having occupied by friends and family, I would be grateful if you would help clarify whether guests should have sex in guest bedrooms, and if this is conditional upon the relationship and length of stay.

GENTLE READER: It is conditional on their not making it known to others in the house, before, during or after the event. Your sister has already violated this, but Miss Manners acknowledges that she can claim that you provoked her.

: