manners and politeness -- not for me

[piranha]

i am posting here instead of as a reply where i found this, because LJ doesn't leave me feeling free to participate in threads in other people's journals -- it's ok if i am off an a tangent with the journal owner, but if i do it with a third person, it feels like i am taking over that thread. and i already did that once this week, and so it feels weird today.

this was the premise: I wonder how many relationships could be saved by manners and politeness.

i'm not sure they should be saved that way.

i use manners and politeness with the mass of humanity surrounding me -- they're mostly fake in order to get along with people whom i don't know and don't actively care about; social grease. in truth i don't care about these people at all; they're often in my way and do stupid things that annoy me. manners clamp down on my impulse to tell them exactly where they should get off. :) being as i think most feel that way about me, manners keeps us from killing each other in the streets. a good thing, for that purpose.

but for relationships? that's a whole different level of interaction than i have with strangers. and i value honesty, not manners. i've seen relationships be toxic despite lots of manners being displayed; having been inside one of them i say it was worse than if there had been fighting and nasty words. it was harder to extricate myself, and (at the time it mattered because i was young and naive) nobody else saw how toxic the thing was, everybody thought this person was such a catch.

my mother was also big on manners, and beat the shit out of me to teach me how to be polite (just how that was supposed to work -- don't ask me. she taught me that might makes right instead.). that other bad relationship taught me to make a distinction between courtesy and politeness, the latter being defined by it just being a veneer, the former being the real thing; a basic respect for the other person that informs one's actions. neither my mother nor the polite hosebeast knew courtesy from a hole in the ground; they were all about the image. i do feel some courtesy towards other living beings as a matter of course, but it covers such things as basic human rights, not base human stupidity -- for that i need politeness.

what i use with my partners and close friends is 180 degrees from manners and politeness, it's based on, and grows from courtesy defining us as having equal rights. we have and show respect for each other. we try to mean the words that we use (unless something is defined as a game). it springs from actually caring, and taking an active role in preventing hurt (rather than feeling sorry afterwards because allegedly we hurt those we love the most). yes, we can disagree. but it's entirely possible to do that without being an ass -- and since we presume good will on the part of the other person, there is no need to be an ass. we don't fight. i don't know whether it's possible to do so without being an ass; i hear people talk about "fighting fair" but i haven't seen it -- any demonstration of it has sounded mean to me, or not like a fight, *wry grin*. and i raise my eyebrows when somebody claims that one can't have a healthy relationship without fights. i think mine are healthier than most i see. oh, we slip now and then when we're in a crappy mood about something else, and snap at each other -- but that's nothing that a quick kick in the behind can't cure (not kicking each other, kicking ourselves). it's happening less and less too; i don't actually remember the last time with the paramour. we really try to be excellent to each other, each and every day.

if i were to pick one thing out that's been more important than others for the ongoing success of the relationships, it's the presumption of good will. i accept that my partners do not wish me ill, that they're not just in the relationship to get the most out of it for themselves, but that we're in a true partnership, and all the nastiness out there will not put us asunder. therefore if i hear something come out of their mouths that seems like an attack, it is surely a misunderstanding, because why would they want to attack me? in retrospect my failed relationships didn't have this certainty, and did instead have lots of power struggles because both of us were protecting ourselves from the other getting some vaguely perceived upper hand.

Comments

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

I believe in manners and politeness in a relationship, because I believe that they are ways of showing respect.

[pir-anha.livejournal.com]

while they can be used that way, my impression is that commonly they're only pretending to do so. which makes perfect sense if one takes into account why manners came to be in the first place -- to keep people from killing each other. since i am not worried about my partners killing me, and i don't care about pretense with them, i rather do without and express my respect in less formalized and more individual ways.

i am reminded of richelieu allegedly having the tips ground off his dinner knives, because he was disgusted with people using them to clean their teeth. richelieu as a poster child for manners -- it's all about respect, baby! *heh*.

"behind every rule of table etiquette lurks the determination of each person present to be a diner, not a dish," -- margaret visser. i recommend her book on the rituals of dinner; it's fun and informative.

[telophase.livejournal.com]

Your description of your relationships with your partners and close friends is exactly what I'd define as "manners and politeness."

[pir-anha.livejournal.com]

so what do you call the fake stuff? the forced smiles politicians give to their constituents? the hollywood air kisses between people who'd rather stab each other in the back? all those manners that pretend a respect that doesn't actually exist? which is IMO the majority of my daily encounters with manners and politeness.

i don't want any of that even remotely attached to my relationships, which is why i am refusing the terminology.

[telophase.livejournal.com]

I call it fake stuff. That's playing politics, not exhibiting manners. If you were taught that those were manners, then you were done a serious disservice. Manners and politeness do not require you to tolerate someone or something that you find intolerable.

They may require you not make a public fuss about it if it would cause others to be uncomfortable - if you're at a friend's wedding and another guest starts sounding off about a political position you despise, it would be rude to your friend to start a public argument. In that case you are well within your rights to excuse yourself and find someone else to talk to, or to change the subject with something like "We'll just have to agree to disagree for the moment. So tell me, how do you know James and Susan?" That's about showing respect for your friends - who you, presumably, genuinely respect otherwise you wouldn't be at their wedding in the first place - and not messing up their wedding, not about pretending to respect a dumbass because it's polite.

[pir-anha.livejournal.com]

"fake stuff" never came up as a term when my parents discussed manners. whether it was fake or not was not a matter of concern, whether it was considered rude or not was. "showing respect" was a term used frequently, not "feeling respect".

Manners and politeness do not require you to tolerate someone or something that you find intolerable.

on the contrary, i think this is their primary reason for existence. i certainly don't need them to handle people i find a delight to be around, and situations that i enjoy.

and no, i wasn't done any disservice in this regard, except of course in the manner of teaching; i was taught manners which have served me rather well in quite varied circumstances across the world -- i certainly know how to behave at a wedding when a bore starts mouthing off. but you've just shown precisely my point: there is nothing actually respectful about evading a bore politely. i'll think "fuckwit" while i make my excuses; manners just require i not say it out loud, really good manners demand i not even show it via a snub. to do otherwise would be rude, period, regardless of how i feel about the bride and groom.

i have been at weddings for people i had no respect for; children in my family were not asked for their consent for what events we'd get dragged to. but i know it's not good manners to be rude to bores at such a wedding either. :) again, having respect not required.

[telophase.livejournal.com]

on the contrary, i think this is their primary reason for existence. i certainly don't need them to handle people i find a delight to be around, and situations that i enjoy.

So ... when you're around your friends you see no problem with not apologizing for stuff, with talking about topics that you know make them uncomfortable, with asking prying questions into their personal and financial lives, and in general not considering their feelings before saying or doing something? *That's* what politeness and manners are - considering another person's feelings.

They didn't evolve just to keep people from killing one another. They evolved in order to smooth the edges out and make social interaction less bumpy. It's not about faking stuff, it's about keeping others from being publicly embarassed and humiliated if it's uncalled-for. If you find something intolerable, you learn how to gracefully get out of intolerable situations. You find ways to change the subject of a conversation. You arrange signals with your partners that mean "Rescue me from this jerk before I bite his head off." You pretend that someone is signalling you from across the room. You pretend that your phone is on vibrate and say "Excuse me, I have to take this call."

there is nothing actually respectful about evading a bore politely.

You are showing respect to your friends, not the bore.

i have been at weddings for people i had no respect for; children in my family were not asked for their consent for what events we'd get dragged to. but i know it's not good manners to be rude to bores at such a wedding either.

You are showing politeness by not making a scene, in that case. One of the arbitrary rules of etiquette is that children have to put up with more rules than adults do, and learning to put up with stuff with a minimum of grace is one of the Life Lessons that carries over into adult life.

And once you grow up, if you do not respect the person, you do not attend their wedding. And you don't make a fuss about it publicly - you just say "I'm sorry, I can't make it." You tell the truth to close friends and family members you trust not to start a feud by running to someone else and saying "You'll never believe what that ungrateful wretch said!!" Everyone else gets a noncommittal reply, because honestly, it's none of their business. That's not lying.

again, having respect not required.

And having respect and showing respect are absolutely not the same thing. I dislike our current president and his policies, but if I were in a situation where I was in the same room with him - let's say if he came to be a speaker at the university I work at and vistied the library for some unknown reason - I would /act/ respectful by either staying down here in my box in the basement and not going up to the reception, or, if I couldn't get out of it, nodding and saying a chilly "Hello Mr. President" and nothing else. Doesn't mean I respect him, it means that I am choosing to behave in a polite manner in order that a worse transgression of manners - that of causing my institution undue embarassment - not take place.

You are also able to give people a social cut if you absolutely cannot stand them - the standard way to do that is to look them in the eye, then look away without acknowledging their presence. If they have transgressed to the point of absolute unforgiveness, then you can give the cut direct - when they attempt to make conversation, give a chilly stare and say "I do not know you, sir/madam," and walk away. A women on one of the newsgroups I met did that to Oliver North when she ran into him in a bookstore he was signing at and he attempted to shake her hand. I had the opportunity to do that to one of O.J. Simpson's lawyers when *I* ran into him in a bookstore and he attempted to shake my hand.

That's still perfectly polite and more-or-less acceptable etiquette. Emily Post would be horrified, but Miss Manners approves - and I do suggest checking out one of Miss Manners' books. She's very funny, approachable, and full of common sense about acceptable behavior and what etiquette really is.

[pir-anha.livejournal.com]

i am not sure why you're lecturing me on specifics of how to get out of uncomfortable situations -- are you somehow under the impression that i don't know them? didn't i just say that what i've been taught serves me well? you're talking to me in a way that leads me to think you consider me a not particularly well-educated teenager. it's starting to feel a little ... not exactly rude, but presumptuous? maybe it's just a difference of style -- i generally prefer a personal exchange of ideas and experiences over a lecture on what various manner mavens think.

the OJ simpson bit is interesting -- if you don't consider it rude to inquire, i wonder what makes you feel that good manners don't apply to those specific defense lawyers. i can grok giving OJ simpson the cut direct (though i am not sure i would; complicated -- did he or didn't he do it despite being acquitted? i've shaken the hand of a murderer before, but he was remorseful. and if i think he did it, do i really want to piss off a murderer?). but his lawyers? see elsewhere in the thread for what i think i'd do with bush -- it'd be very calculated, and part of that calculation would be that he's a powerful person whom to piss off might be unwise. no respect from me for him, however.

when you're around your friends you see no problem with not apologizing for stuff, with talking about topics that you know make them uncomfortable, with asking prying questions into their personal and financial lives, and in general not considering their feelings before saying or doing something?

hrm? which part of the OP talking about how i interact with my loved ones left that impression? you obviously made the connection originally that what i do is what you consider "manners", but somehow you lost that connection now. generally with my friends i work out on a highly personalized level just what things are uncomfortable or taboo, and how to handle it -- however not because those things are "good manners", but because i care about my friends and their feelings. i don't need manners to interact with them; i have love, respect, observation, and questions to find a good path through the interpersonal morass. manners are for when i don't care, when i don't have any particular respect, when i only care about my own safety, or when i care in a very different, non-personalized way. for me, personal relationships are a completely different thing from non-personal ones, and different rules apply.

and again, your examples show that the manners you talk about are not about respect for the person with whom the hypothetical me is interacting -- and that's pretty much been my main point all along, and why i don't have any room for that sort of thing in my personal relationships. i don't need respect (for the nuptial couple, or an institution, or anyone else) to show good manners to strangers; i do it because otherwise they'd kill me it makes interactions with random human beings safer and more smooth (and i generally do not act from a position of wanting to hurt/embarrass/annoy random humans). but i don't need those kind of rules to show loved ones that i care, because i am motivated by love (not in its fuzzy-wuzzy romantic incarnation, but in its "love is a verb" one). i don't, in fact, want loved ones to think i do certain things for them out of good manners, because that would be a misinterpretation of what drives me.

[king-tirian.livejournal.com]

To the degree that those behaviors aren't hypocrisy or obsequiousness, I'd call that etiquette rather than manners. Etiquette is a knowledge of how much to tip a maitre d' or the expected way to respond if someone farts loudly at a chili cookoff. Manners is a more primal understanding that you oughtn't be rude to a maitre d' no matter how much someone else has bossed you around today or that chewing with your mouth open at a chili cookoff is going to disturb the digestions of everyone around you.

[pir-anha.livejournal.com]

i think that etiquette are the finer points of how good manners are shown -- in a particular culture. chewing with your mouth open is a point of etiquette IMO -- just exactly how one shows one's delight at a meal differs hugely by culture.

not taking out my bad mood on people who didn't cause it, yup, that's manners. not taking out my bad mood on people who caused it -- also manners. i mean, where is it considered polite to snap at the maitre d' even if he was a snotty nincompoop? the high road demands i pretend not to think him a twerp, that i maintain a calm demeanour regardless of his rudeness.

have you watched stephen colbert's interviews with politicians in his sketches "better know a district"? what you see there are politicians displaying their idea of good manners -- to the point of appearing ridiculous because they're not calling him on the idiotic things he says (ok, sometimes they's too stupid, but i am talking about those who do realize he's proposing something idiotic). yup, i think this goes beyond manners and into obsequiousness on occasion, but i wouldn't call it that from the get-go.

i don't think there's anything primal about manners. in fact, they're imposing reins on primal desires, such as judging somebody from another culture as dangerous and uncouth, and acting on that snap judgment.

like, if i were introduced to george w. bush, i might be awfully tempted to not shake his hand at all and to snub him in the coldest way i know how, but oy, that would be terrible manners. and if i wanted to impress any point on him at all, this would be completely the wrong thing to do. that's what manners are for to my mind, handling the intolerable in a way that might result in some concern for my own concerns in return, or at the very least will not result in a riot right there.

[ailbhe]

Manners and politeness are more than the absence of rudeness, where I come from, and seem pretty much like what you call courtesy.

[serenejournal.livejournal.com]

At first, when I began reading this, I was getting ready to disagree with you. ;-)

Then I realized that what I call "manners" you call "courtesy" -- I would call that other thing "being coldly polite" or something, I think.

What I really want to burn on people's brain (courteously, of course) is the goodwill thing. When I lose the assurance (my own internal assurance) that the other person has goodwill toward me, that's when I'm willing to stop trying and move on with my life. Before then, I tend to try and try and try.

Tangent:

That's when I was willing to accept that cute-poet-chick and I were done: when it became clear to me that she had stopped feeling goodwill toward me. It was sad, but it was easier than it would have been otherwise to let her go.

Recently, too, I realized that what I'm still having trouble letting go of isn't her -- it's the bad messages about me in my own head that I gave her voice to. Unfair to her, true, but good to realize so I can continue letting go.

[kalmn.livejournal.com]

Recently, too, I realized that what I'm still having trouble letting go of isn't her -- it's the bad messages about me in my own head that I gave her voice to. Unfair to her, true, but good to realize so I can continue letting go.

if you figure out an easy way to do that short of a belt sander, let me know, eh?

[prairierabbit.livejournal.com]

if i were to pick one thing out that's been more important than others for the ongoing success of the relationships, it's the presumption of good will.

I strongly agree with this, in all sorts of relationships. When I find someone in a personal or a work setting with whom this presumption of goodwill does not exist, I find myself doing what I can to distance myself, emotionally and sometimes physically.

To me, the distinction between what you refer to as courtesy and manners is largely a question of intent, and so it is something that isn't necessarily clear to an observer. If I offer to let a colleague walk under my umbrella, I may be doing it because I truly like and respect that person and know that getting wet may make them unhappy, or I may do it because it seems to be what that person expects and I hope it will keep them from getting cranky and sniping at me later. (I've done it for both reasons, recently.) To someone watching, it would probably look the same, which makes it a more useful distinction for me to make about myself than others.

[pir-anha.livejournal.com]

that's a really good point about intent, yes. thank you!

i am generally quite careful with presuming goodwill because i've made some really bad experiences with it in work and social situations and found that it won't work for me to act the same there as i do in personal relationships. i operate from a basic, small pool of goodwill at the very start, but the person has to then prove themselves fairly quickly, or i'll pull back.

[lizw.livejournal.com]

I don't make a distinction between manners/politeness and courtesy. I suspect that perhaps the person whose comment you quoted did, though; it seems an odd comment to make otherwise.

[pir-anha.livejournal.com]

i don't think so, actually; i think it's overwhelmingly common to use those terms as synonyms. the conversation was about a person who was belittling his wife in front of other people, and the excerpt followed from this person having "not shaming each other" as part of zir vows. (which i think is a fine thing to have.)

i just pulled that one sentence because it didn't work for me.

[boxofdelights]

For my part, I don't at all mind other people having interesting conversations in comments in my journal. I came here from usenet too; I miss continuing convesations! But since LJ doesn't support continuing conversation, it makes sense to promote a new topic to a new post, so that others will see it.

And this is a very interesting topic. I agree with you that, in the original situation, the people's loss of goodwill was far more important than whether they expressed their illwill by politely ignoring each other or rudely making little digs at each other.

And yet... I do want politeness from my dear ones. I want politeness and honesty, and where I can't have both, I choose the honesty... but I do want politeness.

[pir-anha.livejournal.com]

yeah, i never know with the ongoing conversations in LJ, *sigh*. i dislike the fragmentation that happens if one pulls a post or part of it into another LJ, but i dislike the "this is my sandbox" feeling too, and the lack of continuation after the second day. *grump*. and the people who write LJ simply don't listen, they don't realize how frustrating this is to those of us who have had better -- they never did, and they don't actually know what they're missing.

when you say you want politeness, do you want the faked stuff because that's at least a veneer over outright unpleasantness, or do you mean you want the respect that expresses itself in being courteous to a partner? (see, this is why i want a separate word, because they're lightyears apart in my mind.)

[boxofdelights]

Yeah. I see that.

If I am in a close relationship with someone who feels dislike or contempt for me, I want to know that, and to get out of the relationship. I do not want any politeness.

But there are times when someone who sincerely loves and respects me is unkind due to a transient unhappiness; at those times, I would prefer not to hear "Why are you so mean?" even if that is honestly what they feel.

Perhaps this is an issue for me only because some of my nearest and dearest are young people who do not yet have enough practice considering the feelings of others when their own feelings are clamouring. Certainly, if my husband is upset enough to be rude to the children or me, my concern is not "You were rude!" but "What has distressed you so much that you behave in this extraordinary way?"

[djm4]

what i use with my partners and close friends is 180 degrees from manners and politeness, it's based on, and grows from courtesy defining us as having equal rights. we have and show respect for each other.

Interesting. I don't see manners and politeness as 180 degrees from courtesy and respect - they're not the same, to me, but I will often be polite and use good manners towards people I respect as a matter of courtesy.

I admit that I will sometimes be polite and use good manners towards people I don't respect on a general 'not letting them get to me' principle - and sometimes almost as a points-scoring exercise. I also have a nasty temper at times. But the 180 degree thing ... isn't how I think.

This may, however, be similar to my reaction to the word 'romantic'. To many people this has very goos associations, and I can actually see how that works, but in my brain 'romantic' is synonymous with 'fake'.