Actually, he was extremely close with the family (ran with him as well) and they didn’t feel the need to dress like schlubs. This guy took the sentiment too far. Yes, the family was glad to see the show of support first and foremost, but I think it struck most of us as a bit rude.
Ah. And what would those reasons be?
While it might be a stodgy, outmoded idea for a 28-year-old woman to have, I don’t think it’s completely outlandish to expect some decorum from attendees at a funeral, including having enough respect for the family not to show up in shorn sweatshirts and dirty sneakers.
First off, we have no idea if the people at Kalhoun’s nephews funeral were really doing the deceased’s wishes or not. Also it is a good question as to whether or not a funeral is for the benefit of the deceased or for the survivors of the deceased.
But if the friends were genuinely doing what they thought was their friends wishes, and if they were truly serious about their feelings towards their friend. Then tell me this.
Who is showing more respect for the dead,
The person doing what they believe is correct according to the dead person’s wishes
or
The person worrying about what other people at the funeral are wearing?
If the Nephew’s friends were really mature and polite, they should have contacted their friends nearest relative (probably Mother) and explained that they felt that their friend would wish them to go to his funeral dressed as they would always dress when spending time together. And asking her permission to dress in a way they would feel is most befitting of the situation. Then they should have accepted the decision of the nears relative in this matter. That said, I would never hold it against someone to fail to think that far into a situation, especially in a time of grief like a funeral.
cf. also “snausaging”, which is when the sausager does so in the nasal voice of the cartoon dog in those TV spots for Snausages dog treats. 
Because common politeness isn’t as common as we might think – hence the need for a formalized code of etiquette to remind the many self-interested people out there how to behave towards each other.
Also, because politeness usually involves sincerely treating the other person at least as imporant as your self. This attitude requires a lot of development, and I’ve known quite a few people who never developed this attitude.
Unfortunately true. But that gives those who understand the rules a great deal of power.
Everytime you follow some rule of etiquette, you are sending out a social signal that says you are willing to interact on a basis of respect. Of course many of the actions are arbitrary, as are the systems of hierarchy. But the arbitrary choice of which action will be the signal does not mean that the message being sent is meaningless.
It is like wearing a tie. It is largely arbitrary that a colored piece of cloth is the signal for a certain set of social signals. But the signals being sent are very meaningful, and not arbitrary at all.
If you show up for some solemn occasion dressed as you would for the most informal kind of relaxation, you are willy-nilly sending out a social signal. And that signal is not “I am a free spirit”. It is “I attach no more importance to this occasion than I do a trip to the beach”.
Rules of etiquette are, by and large, a form of shorthand designed for communication with strangers who nonetheless share the same cultural background. You can no more change the rules than you can arbitrarily decide that when you say C-A-T, you mean that animal who barks and drinks out of the toilet. Language and etiquette are a social contract. All symbolic communication is a social contract. If you change the rules without notice, you are not communicating what you want to communicate, you are communicating whatever signal is agreed upon as conveyed by whatever you are doing. Showing up for a funeral in cut-offs means “This is not particularly important, and neither are you.” Not offering your seat to a lady means “Fuck you, bitch - I am more important than you”.
But as the general level of rudeness increases, those who buck the trend and continue to employ the social signals gain power over those who cannot or will not. I have trained my children very deliberately in knowing the rules, and abiding by them where appropriate. They can turn it on or off. One of my co-workers was tickled almost to death when he met my (then five-year-old) son. I introduced my son to my co-worker. Whereupon my son did exactly what he was trained to do - shook the older man’s hand, looked him directly in the eye and said, “Pleased to meet you, Mr. <his last name>”. And has referred to him as Mr. <lastname> ever since. Thus sending the very strong social signal of respect to an older man.
Etiquette is power. I got my second job in the industry where I work because I was the only one of the five who interviewed for a position who sent a thank-you letter after the interview - just as my sainted mother taught me to do. My great-aunt remembered my and my childrens’ birthdays every year (which she did not do for all her nieces and nephews) because she got a thank you note every time she did. My parents fell in love with the lovely and talented Mrs. Shodan not only because of her charming personality, but that she brought a hostess gift the first time I brought her home to meet them.
You are sending out social signals whether you want to or not. The only choice is what signal you send.
Regards,
Shodan
I once read an interview with musician Chris Isaak where he commented on his formal dress. He almost always appears on stage in heavily sequined suits which have to be the hottest, most uncomfortable things you could wear during a performance. The interviewer asked him why he wore these things when everyone else in SF was performing in torn jeans and tshirts. Isaak said it was about respecting his audience. You couldn’t lounge around the house in these suits, so it was obvious to everyone that he had put some effort into appearing at the show. It served as a reminder to him and a sign to the audience that the performance was for them, not him.
I think that sentiment applies to a lot of etiquette being derided in this thread. Whether it’s proper attire for a formal ocassion or table manners at dinner with friends, it’s all about showing the other people that you care enough about them to go out of your way. Anything less is selfish regardless of any “just doing your own thing” rationalizations.
I’ll admit here that I haven’t read all the posts to this thread - they started getting very silly.
Etiquette is like programming syntax - it works and other stuff doesn’t. The purpose of social standards is simply to save one the effort of thinking about it. If everyone accepts the same standard, one simply has to follow it and know that you are offering no offence. That’s good enough.
This is only true if your actions are fitted to the situation. It has nothing to do with the specific act. It’s quite possible to be very, very rude while following various “rules of etiquette”.
Quite frankly, most of the people who have loudly lamented the decline of politeness are, IMHO, wrong. Politeness is, in my experience, all over the place. The thing is that politeness in one context is not politeness in another. If all you ever see is the context of your own normal social group, it’s easy to forget that there are other, equally valid, social groups out there with their own codes of etiquette.
People talk about “culture” as if there is such a thing as one large homogeneous set of behaviors and traits in a particular geographic area. This isn’t true in the slightest. The social expectations at your local country club are likely very different from the social expectations at your local gamers group. Neither is more polite than the other. They’re simply different. It doesn’t matter that they co-exist in the same town, in the same time period, possibly even in the same economic class. They’re still different, culturally.
It does not mean that. It means that to you, and others who share your code of etiquette. In my social circle, offering your seat to a woman (there are no “ladies” in my social circle, thank goodness) you are insulting her by treating her as an inferior. Not offering her a chair is polite (or at the very least, not rude) because it shows you respect her abilities to find her own chair or make do.
(Someone probably wants to respond to that with a rolleyes. Please don’t. It’s rude. 
)
Are you saying that in at least some cases, being polite is fundamentally about self-interest?
No. People believe they are receiving signals whether you are sending them or not. The end result is pretty much the same, but there is a difference.
Please explain how you talk in most other situations, and why that would make your coworkers uncomfortable? Frankly, I don’t believe that for one moment.
Funerals are for the living, not the dead. The nephew was not there to see all the sloppy dress; his family was, however.
How is not offering a chair to someone polite? As stated before, what if they’re elderly or tired? Just because your perception of politeness is different from someone else’s does not make the person forced to stand any less tired or elderly. Also, I find it bizarre that a woman would be offended by a man offering her his seat. If she is uncomfortable with this little kindness, she should just refuse the seat. For a woman to assume that a man is offering her a seat because he thinks she can’t find one on her own is just plain obnoxious, and it shows that the woman is actively seeking to find fault with the man who is just trying to make her comfortable. I think that’s rude.
Miss Manners Rescues Civilization is a pretty interesting read. It is truly the only thing from her that I have, in fact, read. It is an awe-inspiring cavalcade of unfounded factual assertions, logical fallacies, and confused argumentation; however, it does maintain through out, as a primitive of its argument, that the single and over-riding goal of etiquette is to not make others feel uncomfortable. While it is a shameful example of poor authorship and below-par reasoning, it is laudable for making that one idea abundantly clear.
(She even goes so far to as to defend the Victorian attitude towards sex: I imagine her sitting at her home, hemming the trousers on her piano and demonizing the polka as a shameful display of obscene sexuality.)
Nevertheless, that one axiom would, in my opinion, go a long way to making life easier for all of us if we applied it more liberally. Chewing with one’s mouth closed, not belching up the gasses of half-digested food, and refraining from obscenities in certain company are hardly arbitrary rules. Then again, not wearing hats indoors and insisting that respect be doled out on the basis of birth order are quite arbitrary.
I’d imagine that etiquette is due for a change. The time has definately come to toss Ms. Manners out on her ear, and instead catalog the etiquette according to context and to become more aware that what we are familiar with is not what is universally accepted–nor should be universally accepted. It seems more than reasonable to expect Eve & the Brini Maxwell* set to have a different form of etiquette than, say, Detroit goths. I’m reminded of the episode of Seinfeld where George had to entertain the front-office guys from the Houston Astros…
*I’m so sorry, it’s just my model of the apotheosis of Manhattanite is dear Eve, and Brini seems to be the image of the apotheosis of Manhattanite, and now they are harmoniously linked in my mind.
I don’t know of a single woman who would think that a man offered her a seat because he didn’t think she could handle that task on her own.
Now, there are some outdated, silly rules of etiquette that are gone, or at least on the way out, and I say “good riddance.” Things like the man walking on the outside of the sidewalk…I understand why it was done, but I don’t believe it improved anything anywhere.
And I’ll never understand the multiple forks thing, either. Two, is fine with me. Yes, it makes for a beautiful setting, but it just seems a bit over the top when you get a gazillion pieces of silverware out there, taking up valuable surface space.
Of course it is, silly. My job involves a great deal of contact with the public. You better believe that it’s in my self-interest to be polite to these people; inasmuch as it’s in my self-interest to continue being employed at this place.
You can make the argument that etiquette is an abitrary set of pointless rules. But Shodan is right. Those who know the rules and are capable of following them gracefully have a leg up on those who don’t.
. . . As much as I disagree with much of your post, if I used a sig, that would be it!
Myth. No one has ever been able to find confirmation of this supposed Victorian behavior.
Your lack of ability to believe it doesn’t make it any less true.
It’s hard to describe how I often talk. I guess you could call it “wordy” or “pretentious” if you’d like. All I know is that there are usually things that I would like to say in a particular way. That way is often at odds with how others would put the same idea into words.
To be blunt, if I spoke how I would like to around my coworkers, they would likely peg me as a “fag” and be very uncomfortable around me.
As it is, instead of saying something like, “This dubious contraption seems to have encountered yet another difficulty,” I would instead say, “The fucking machine is all fucked up again.”
No-one has yet convinced me that I should inconvenience me in order to make someone else not feel uncomfortable.
I am a boofy 30something. One day I was on a bus when an elderly man tried to get off with one of those wheeled bag things. It was a bit difficult and he couldn’t quite manage it. Eventually an old woman sitting behind me got up and helped him. On her way back to her seat she made a sarcastic, disparaging remark about young people not helping old people off the bus.
- Who was in the wrong in terms of etiquette?
- Does your answer change when I reveal that I am disabled and unable to lift things up and down bus steps nor am I able to manipulate heavy or cumbersome objects, and I was suffering from a pain episode at the time?