Ladylike?

[Robyn Katie]

By the way yes, I meant "ladylikeness" to refer only to behavior, not to social caste, social setting or wealth bracket.

On the rare occasions I've bumped up against wealthy people, I haven't found "ladies" markedly more prevalent among them than among the middle class... The rich seemed to have a greater tolerance for variety of personalities: everything from gaily insouciant, shrinking violet, vague, distraught, amiably anarchic, or wacky to, in a few cases, outright nasty.

The middle class, and the respectable poor, were and are a whole lot more anxious about gentility than upper classers ever bothered to be. Thus Mom's drive to teach the virtues as she had learned them from her own mother.

Love, Robyn Katie

[Virginia]

CJ,
you know I love you, but...............if Roxanne would allow you to dress, and if she would allow you to go out with her and if she allowed CJ to go with her to one of her "political/social" events, I can guarantee you that CJ would be REQUIRED to dress appropriately, act appropriately, and be appropriate to the situation. I would further guarantee you that that definition would fit the terminology in question = LADYLIKE! I think CJ could pass and in passing comes the requirement that she "blend-in" which means not looking or acting like some 19 year old who was coming to or from some "head-bangers hardrock rock concert!" Old school or new hospital guess it would be your choice.

There is a time and a place for Elizabeth's approach and there is a time and a place for the "old school" approach.

Love ya,

Virginia

[Absaroka]

Being a lady or a gentleman originally was a class distinction. Poor people were by definition not ladies and gentlemen. Along with that went a cluster of manners who's basic message was "my S---doesn't stink" Back in the day ladies were shielded from the "lower elements"

Well we've moved quite a bit away from those ideas and are a democracy here in the states and likely where ever else you might be reading this from. And so all are free to try to escape the barriers of class, although it is far more difficult than we are taught. We are all viewed as being capable of good manners also which is far more feasable. And there are still circles where it is considered okay to be disdainful of someone who uses the wrong salad fork. Just like there are folks who look on others with disdain for snorting coke through a one dollar bill instead of a fifty or whatever is currently used. Disdain is bad manners.

I was taught that the bedrock of good manners was consideration of others. Which means that when you are in the 5 star restaurant or the opera you act accordingly. Likewise when you are in a dive shooting pool you don't put on airs and act better than the people there. A true lady will either blend in and fit with her surroundings or politely leave without making her host uncomfortable. And I have known a few people like that, the sort of folks who could hold their own having tea with the queen or drinking beer with Hell's Angels.

I've also gotten to see a lot of reverse snobbery, the disdain and rejection of someone economically and socially better off than you. It's still snobbery, still bad manners, and in my opinion too prevalent here in America.

As for me, my femme persona is a sexy tomboy. Since she doesn't interact with others she doesn't worry about a lot of things but if you talk to her on the phone she will be pleasant and polite just like my male self.

I married a very thoughtful and considerate tomboy also. Personally I've got little interest in a woman who won't get sweaty and dirty and who doesn't swear if she hits her finger with the hammer. But I've got even less interest in a woman who is unkind and thinks she is better than other people.

Absaroka

Here's a couple of thoughts on the old cliche of gentlemen hold doors for ladies. I always thought that was a really stupid form of deference. However not holding doors is rude. My solution, after I was done with my obnoxious teens, was to hold doors for both men and women. Then along came father hood in my thirties. And suddenly women were holding doors for me all the time, albeit only when I had a baby with me. Initially very surprising and interesting and a very reassuring lesson in good manners.

Today I find that younger women are far more likely to hold the door if I am walking into a building a few steps behind them, whereas I am often non existent to older women. An encouraging sign of better manners in the youth in my opinion.

[Elizabeth]

...
There is a time and a place for Elizabeth's approach and there is a time and a place for the "old school" approach.

Love ya,

Virginia

I agree there is a time and a place for what type of behavior or in this case, how one dresses, that we exhibit. When I was in divorce court where a strange man I have never met has control over my life, I wore a suit and tie. Yes there were many there in jeans and a t-shirt, but I wanted to present the idea that I was willing to conform. I did it because I thought it gave me an advantage I otherwise would not have.

There are many people, in fact most people, who's fear of public embarrassment vs the benefit of compliance is a no-brainer. But if one does not fear public embarrassment, there really is no consequence to say "wearing bluejeans and t-shirts" to a five start restaurant.

I guess what I am saying is not that Virginia is wrong, but that we need not be compelled by such unwritten rules. Because the same rules that require one to dress nicely in a five star restaurant also say that a person should not crossdress at such an establishment. So to believe in one of these unwritten rules, I am compelled to belieive in the others.

Having said all that, if I had to return to court now, I would not wear a suit. At least not one made for a man.

Love always,
Elizabeth

[Absaroka]

Elizabeth that is a wonderful perspective on it. The truly ladylike thing for us to do MIGHT be to dress in drab in deference to the feelings of others.

Absraoka