GENTLE READERS: The clash between people who don't want to return to the office (employees) and those who want them to do so (employers) is no surprise to Miss Manners. The pandemic might have brought this out, but the work/private life problem has existed throughout history.

Society needs to provide both. Obviously, it needs workers. But it also needs people to attend to family life, community welfare and functions of leisure, recreation and entertainment, as these promote general satisfaction.

Therefore, society has, in different eras, come up with different solutions to staff both realms. And all of them have been terrible.

For centuries, the division was the one that seemed most reasonable to those with the power to enforce it: The poor would work, with only enough of a private life necessary to produce another generation of workers. This freed the rich to pursue such leisure activities as socializing, sports and, when things got really dull, warfare.

But in the 19th century, the Industrial Revolution produced a class of people who were neither rich enough not to work, nor poor enough to put up with forgoing pleasure. So the division changed: All the poor would still work and the rich play, but among the reasonably solvent, males would earn money working, and females would perform the functions that did not pay.

This was adjusted in the mid-20th century to admit females to certain paid jobs (notably, those lacking in prestige), even if for less pay and fewer opportunities to advance. Ever since then, efforts have been made to give females the work advantages that males enjoyed -- including the same work schedule.

But just as the school schedule remains as designed under the presumption that children needed to be free in the summer to help with the crops, the work schedule remains as it was under the presumption that the worker had a partner taking care of the private realm.

The underlying problem was hardly addressed: Who would staff that private realm? For the essential parts, household and child care, it has been either the better-paid female worker or one in a poor-paying job. And the merely enjoyable parts, chiefly family and social life, suffered from neglect.

So that solution didn't work, either -- and people are finally noticing.

Whatever compromise might be worked out eventually will take a great deal of negotiating. Employers, as well as employees, have legitimate concerns about work time and place that must be addressed.

Miss Manners' contribution is to point out that the easiest part to cut is the pseudo-social life that has become a feature of business models: what is now referred to as "mandatory fun." Surely workers no longer believe that after-hours drinks, office birthday celebrations and team-building exercises are adequate substitutes for time spent with people of their own choosing.

And bosses will find that encouraging a cordial, cooperative, cheerful level of professional behavior will be easier and more productive than trying to make employees love one another.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: Can I touch up my lipstick at the dinner table?

GENTLE READER: You'll only get it all over your fork and glass.

(Please send your questions to Miss Manners at her website, www.missmanners.com; to her email, dearmissmanners@gmail.com; or through postal mail to Miss Manners, Andrews McMeel Syndication, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO 64106.)

DEAR MISS MANNERS: In our retirement, my husband and I purchased a large, beautiful home in a famous desert resort area. In addition to the rest of the house, we have three guest rooms that would make any five-star hotel proud, plus a private swimming pool surrounded by palm trees. You get the idea.

Naturally, our home has become a favorite destination for our family, which is wonderful! One of our goals was to create an oasis and a gathering place for our multigenerational family for festive occasions.

We also have three beautiful, well-trained golden retrievers. They are as much a part of our family as the humans, and everybody who comes to visit loves them.

At one large family gathering, with 12 relatives staying in our house, my sister-in-law announced she had invited a college friend from 40 years earlier, plus the friend's husband, to spend an entire day with us. They would join us for the planned celebratory lunch, dinner and festivities.

Then we were warned that the friend, despite being a licensed psychiatrist, has a deathly and obsessive terror of dogs. When she sees any dog, she becomes hysterical, jumps up on chairs, screams, etc.

We tried our best to accommodate her, but it meant locking our golden retrievers -- and this is THEIR home as well as ours -- in a spare bedroom for the entire day. Even taking our dogs outside to do their business was an ordeal, as we would literally have to put the fearful guest in one room, shut the door, then take our dogs out through a side door. (The daily temperature here is often over 100 degrees, so the dogs cannot be left outside for any period of time.)

This uninvited guest was in our house from 10 a.m. until 10 p.m. -- 12 hours. (She originally said she would stop over for just an hour or two.) And this is somebody we do not know. It really ruined the day, the celebration, everything.

We understand that not everyone likes dogs, and we NEVER take our dogs to other people's homes or parties unless specifically invited. We would not even think of doing so.

Another family gathering is coming up, and my sister-in-law has announced her friend will be coming again. This is not amenable to us. How do we get out of this without offending everybody?

I am so frustrated with all of this. What is the old saying? "No good deed goes unpunished"?

GENTLE READER: Indeed. You may therefore reasonably and justifiably say, "I am afraid that while we enjoyed meeting your friend, we simply cannot guarantee a safe environment for her with the dogs. Perhaps we should meet at your home in the future."

While it is true that Miss Manners generally prioritizes the comfort of guests over animals, she makes a notable exception when the guest was never invited in the first place. If your sister-in-law objects, you might politely remind her of that.

(Please send your questions to Miss Manners at her website, www.missmanners.com; to her email, dearmissmanners@gmail.com; or through postal mail to Miss Manners, Andrews McMeel Syndication, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO 64106.)

DEAR MISS MANNERS: My co-worker and I have a routine where we eat lunch together. We like to joke and talk during lunch. A new person started working here, and basically invited herself to lunch with us.

We didn't want to be rude, so we have allowed her to eat with us. However, she seems to get upset when we discuss our personal lives (nothing inappropriate) or make work-appropriate jokes. She ends up leaving.

Should we alter our lunch conversation topics to include an uninvited colleague?

GENTLE READER: Why, when they have proven so successful in getting her to leave you to them?

DEAR MISS MANNERS: Several weeks ago, I sent a lunch invitation to a family whose sons are in both of my sons' classes. The mother accepted the invitation, and yesterday (two days before the lunch), I sent her a reminder text.

She replied that she will check her calendar, as one of the sons may have a track meet. Then she informed me that she has three additional, older children, and asked if they were invited. I extended the invitation to them and asked if she could confirm the number with me as soon as possible.

The lunch is tomorrow. Today, I sent a text asking how many chairs I should set out. She replied that she didn't yet know, and -- here's the part I am a bit miffed about -- that her kids are vegan.

How would you suggest I avoid getting myself into this type of scenario in the future?

GENTLE READER: A bit miffed? This person invited extra people, would not tell you if they were actually coming, and then asserted that if they did come, they would need a special menu. Miss Manners would be livid.

But since you asked, she does see your slight misstep. After you issued the original invitation, the mother accepted. Your reminders only served to exacerbate the situation. Twice.

Next time, quit while you have the answer that you want. Certainly, this person might still have shown up with extra children and their dietary constraints, but at least with no warning, you would not have had to scramble in advance -- and she might actually have felt some embarrassment.

DEAR MISS MANNERS: Decades ago, while traveling to my brother's wedding, my husband and I made a side trip to visit my old undergrad adviser. He and his wife had us over to their house, and my adviser, who'd grown up a farm boy, found out that my husband had once worked on a farm.

He engaged my husband in an animated conversation about farming, leaving me to try to make conversation with his wife. I had met her only once, years before, and despite my efforts, I could find nothing in common with her. I was pretty chagrinned -- I had, after all, come to see him, not her, but I knew that saying so would be rude.

The man and his wife are now long gone, but I still wonder: What should I have done?

GENTLE READER: Found a way to get in on that farm talk. You might have learned something.

(Please send your questions to Miss Manners at her website, www.missmanners.com; to her email, dearmissmanners@gmail.com; or through postal mail to Miss Manners, Andrews McMeel Syndication, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO 64106.)