On Navigating a World Without Manners

Ah, the way things were back then.

There is a scene near the end of Pride and Prejudice where the irrepressibly arrogant Lady Catherine de Bough confronts Elizabeth regarding her supposed ‘designs’ on Lady Catherine’s nephew, Mr. Darcy. Lady Catherine accuses her of violating social convention and tries to extort a promise from her never to become engaged to her nephew. Elizabeth refuses to agree to “Anything so wholly unreasonable” and coolly demonstrates that she is not, in fact, in violation of any rules of propriety at all.

I bring this up to illustrate a key difference between today’s world and the world of Miss Austen’s characters. In that day and age, social conventions were fairly strict, well-known, and laid out in black-and-white. This had the inestimable advantage that everyone actually knew what they were.

Thanks to the liberating efforts of two centuries, however, we no longer have to put up with strict, objective, known rules of decorum. We have to put up with strict subjective and unknown rules of decorum.

The result is that when two strangers meet, neither knows which actions the other will regard as welcome courtesies and which she will regard as unacceptable aggressions. This means it is now practically impossible to know ahead of time how to politely approach someone of the opposite sex whom you don’t already know.

As if dating in today's age wasn't already difficult enough.

For an example; just the other day I read a woman claiming that it is inappropriate behavior for a man to compliment a woman on her looks if they are not dating. Not long after, on a different site, I read a man recounting how he did just that in a (successful) bid to cheer up an evidently unhappy stranger.

Now, suppose a man who thinks it is an act of kindness compliments a woman who believes that such behavior is inappropriate. We immediately have a conflict in which one thinks she is being mistreated and the other thinks he is being rebuked for an act of kindness.

The immediate point isn’t which one is right; the point is that neither can justly claim the other did anything wrong, as far as this little scenario goes, because they were each following what they believed to be appropriate. Only there is, at present, no objective and exterior standard which both may be expected to know and to which both can appeal.

To make matters worse, the same man may receive a completely different response from a different woman, meaning that even his own experience cannot serve him as a guide.

Since we no longer have customs for dating etiquette, what must a well-intentioned man do?

Thus, the answer often given when this problem is brought up—“Just don’t act inappropriately”—misses the point entirely. The problem isn’t so much that people behave inappropriately, it’s that the word ‘inappropriate’ in this circumstance has no content.

To say ‘act appropriately’ is meaningless unless there is an agreed upon, objective standard for ‘appropriate’ that both parties can be expected to be aware of and to which both sides can appeal. We simply do not have that in modern Western society (we are not discussing here obviously aggressive behavior such as physical grabbing or open solicitation). 

Now, the obvious solution is “then we need to establish new standards!” Unfortunately, it doesn’t work that way. No one sits down and says, “our society shall have these manners and these norms for this reason.” These things develop over time, born of ethics, custom, common beliefs, and so on. All that’s mostly been torn up and thrown out of our culture, and restoring it is beyond the scope of any one of us. 

No, my point is much less ambitious; it is simply to encourage charity. Being aware that the other person is operating under such uncertainty ought to make us more patient and less quick to judge when he does something we consider inappropriate. This alone would smooth out many if not most of the friction that occurs in such cases.

Charity still prevails.

In a society such as this, where manners are dependent less on what someone does than on how you receive it, charity demands you receive it as kindly as you can. If a person does something that you would consider rude or inappropriate, don’t be too quick to assume that was the intention. If you feel you have to say that you consider it inappropriate, let the other person explain himself. If he does, then don’t berate him and don’t try to instruct him; just accept his apology and move on.

For the other side of the equation, if a person takes offense at something you meant to be innocuous or complimentary, then let her know that you did not mean to give offense, but that you are sorry if you did so and, if necessary, explain what you did intend. If she persists in being offended or tries to ‘instruct’ you, you absolutely have the right to tell her she is behaving unreasonably. But if she simply says, “I prefer you not do such and such,” then acquiesce (if it isn’t a serious matter) and move on. Not deliberately causing pain is also part of charity.

The fact is, neither of you have the authority to say what is or is not appropriate behavior in today’s world, but you can say what is just and what is reasonable. Taking offense at someone for doing what he thought was polite is both unreasonable and unjust. Do not treat other people like this and do not date anyone who treats you like this.

Misunderstanding, explanation,apology, move on. That is the proper sequence for navigating this world we’vemade.