Buyer's remorse can't compare to renter's shame....

Another person looking for something to be upset about: 

Dear Miss Manners: My husband and I are renting a nice home in an upscale neighborhood outside Washington, D. C. Since moving in, at least a dozen neighbors have approached us with the off-putting welcome of “So, you are renting this house?”

We both find the question to be rather forward and rude.

Without knowing our reason for renting, it puts us on the defensive for not being “able” to buy a home, when, in fact, we are more than able to; we just choose not to in this current market.

Could you help us with an appropriate comeback that lets them know that yes, we are renters, but that in no way makes us second-class citizens and we don’t appreciate having to defend our status?

Gentle Reader: Don’t you want to get the curtains up before you start sparring with the neighbors?

Miss Manners is not at all sure that you have any cause. She has no tolerance for pure nosiness, real estate or otherwise, but surely you understand that neighbors have a legitimate interest in what is going on in the neighborhood. Maybe they hate your landlords and hope they are gone for good. Maybe they like you and are hoping you are there to stay. Maybe they also rent.

Besides, don’t you know that nowadays, seeming rich is considered more offensive than seeming poor?

Everything about this is really weird.  If this woman was trying to make her neighbors look intrusive and boorish, she didn't inject nearly enough drama into her rendering of their question.  Although the details of their finances are of course private, and should be, whether a house in a neighborhood is owned by you or someone else is not.  And an "upscale" neighborhood seems especially likely to be conscious of these details.  Aren't property holdings public information?  Maybe not (I invite any of my readers with knowledge about information policy to weigh in). 

Even without digging into local records, the neighbors have probably seen the "for rent" in front of the house, or knew the previous renters.....there are so many clues that make "Are you renting this house?" a perfectly reasonable question to ask.  

Not to mention that, according to this writer, the question is not "Why are you renting?" but simply "Are you renting?"  They are.  Why does that require offering any explanation at all?

I think it's fair to say that when someone  reacts to an innocuous question this way, it's usually because THEY have a problem with the situation being asked about--not that the inquirer does.   Perhaps her husband made the call that "this market" was not the time to buy a house and she disagrees, or perhaps she's bitter about paying out years of rent in a particularly pricey neighborhood if they want to be prepared to buy a few years down the road.  Or maybe it's just a neighborhood attitude thing--perhaps she expected the residents of this neighborhood to be snooty and look down on her, so that's what she's seeing.  Or maybe she's new to big cities where many "first class" citizens rent their entire lives. 

There could be countless reasons....but whatever the issue is, it seems to lie with the renter, not her new neighbors. 

Maybe she should fill her house with really expensive furniture and throw a fancy party, so they'll all understand that, whatever her situation, it's NOT because of the money. At least not her own. 

Birthdays Gone Bad

File this one away under "do these people have ANYTHING better to think about???"

DEAR ABBY: We recently celebrated my stepdaughter's 40th birthday. After dinner I placed the birthday cake, along with the knife, cake server, plates and forks, in front of her. We sang "Happy Birthday," and she blew out the candles.

Shortly afterward, I realized she was not cutting and serving the cake, so I asked if she wanted her father or me to do it.

I was raised with the idea that the person whose birthday it is should serve the cake to those celebrating with her (or him). Now I have begun to wonder, what is the proper custom regarding who should cut and serve the birthday cake? -- CURIOUS IN SAN FRANCISCO

The correct answer is.....WHO GIVES A FLYING f***? Just, well, let them eat cake.

Paranoid, protective, or just private?

Does this mom seem unreasonably sensitive, either prudish about the human body herself, or paranoid about the perverts out there who are after her baby? Or is she reasonable to expect privacy in public and restraint from strangers?

Dear Miss Manners: I was changing my baby’s diaper in a public restroom the other day. The changing table had no privacy whatsoever, and anyone walking in or out of the restroom had full view of what was going on.

While most people seemed to avert their eyes, there was one woman who, while waiting for her children to wash their hands, kept looking over at my daughter while her diaper was off, and it made me very uncomfortable and upset. I don’t feel that staring at anyone, no matter how old, in that position is right.

What would be an appropriate way to say, “Would you please stop staring at my half-naked daughter, it’s quite rude”?

While I guess it's sort of odd that this woman was stealing glances at the baby--maybe fondly remembering her own children's younger days? Or waiting for the changing area to be cleared so she could make use of it for a not-yet-potty-trained child?--the mom seems too eager to read creepy invasiveness, even pedophilic voyeurism, into her actions, which to me seem relatively innocent. Most people, I think, especially moms who have pushed little humans out of their nether regions and then changed thousands of their diapers, don't see much difference between an infant with a diaper on and one with a diaper off.

The mom may have wanted some space, and if the woman were actually hovering over her, she could use Miss Manners's response ( Gentle Reader: “Would you like to help?”). Otherwise, I don't know, this seems overly sensitive to me. People look at babies all the time. Babies run around naked all the time. People look at the babies while they're running around naked. This mom seems unusually concerned about baby nudity and privacy, and the other woman (also a mom, it seems worth noting) has no way of knowing that.

Carolyn, and most other advice columnists, recommend taking gut feelings of fear or general "not-right-ness" very seriously....perhaps they would think I'm being careless in assuming that if a woman is out with small children in a public restroom, that she must 1) be their mom and 2) be sane, healthy, and have good intentions for her own children and all others.

Of course it's possible this is not the case, though, I admit, I think it's unlikely. (A related issue: the "find a mom" rule for kids who get lost. Is a woman with children always safer than a man by himself? Of course not. Some moms are crazy, some bad people probably pose as moms in public. But are the odds higher that a mom will be just a mom, and that she'll be sympathetic to and protective of a lost child? Probably).

Do you think this mom should have done something more active in response to her "uncomfortable and upset" feeling? Or if she doesn't want to see anyone in public while changing her daughter, should she seek out single-person/family restrooms where she can have privacy and lock the door?

You Must [Not] Have Been a Beautiful Baby....

This week Prudence brings us another column featuring 21st-century concerns about hypothetical reproduction (See last week's, on being your own golden goose):

"A Face Not Even a Mother Could Love" (man, I can't even compete with her titles)

Dear Prudence,
My boyfriend and I are in a healthy and loving relationship, and we are beginning to talk about marriage. We both want the same number of kids at the same point in our lives. It is presumed that these will be our biological children. The issue is, I'm not sure that I would want to bear my boyfriend's children. While he is incredibly intelligent and has a great personality, he is markedly less physically attractive than I am. We get occasional lighthearted comments from friends and family about the discrepancy. Having biological children has never been important to me, and I think adoption is great. I believe that he will be an amazing father and that our children, biological or adopted, would be bright and well-behaved as a result of good parenting. Should I bring these thoughts up with him? I think he would be open to the idea of adoption but would also be hurt by my rationale. At what point should we discuss this more seriously, and how should I tell him how I feel?

—Skinny Bitch

What? WHAAAT?

**pause to regain powers of speech, and to lower eyebrows**

First of all (of many, I should say), why would you be in a relationship with someone whom you find so unattractive you couldn't bear to look at a baby ( your own child!) carrying only half of his ugly little genes? I mean, great brain, great personality, fine, but if you have no physical attraction to him, why are you even wasting his time? Perhaps a more important question is why is this "incredibly intelligent" person remaining in a relationship with someone who openly admits that they don't find them attractive? But he didn't write in, she did.

Second, what kind of family and friends (and whose family and friends?) make "lighthearted" comments on the discrepancy between their levels of attractiveness? Do they also make "lighthearted" comments on the discrepancy between their levels of intelligence? And their ability to be tolerated in social settings?

Third, if she wants pretty babies that badly, she should handpick a sperm donor because adoption makes no guarantees of attractiveness. Is she thinking she'll get to select the cutest one from an array of babies displayed neatly before her? Or that she can return it if it gets awkward and ugly when puberty hits? Does she know anything about how the process of adoption works? Or does she simply think her boyfriend is SO hideous that ANY child would be more attractive than one he would spawn?

Finally, I have to suggest that at least part of the reason S.B. isn't interested in giving birth is that it will mess up her hot bod (perhaps reducing her to the level of hideousness displayed by her guy). Why is she dating this guy anyway? Does it just make her feel better about herself to constantly be able to say "I deserve and could get someone so much hotter" without actually having to DO it? Shudder.

As an aside, clearly wanting the same number of kids at the same time in your life does NOT mean you are compatible and should marry and procreate! If all people who wanted 2 kids in their early 30s after they had a job and a house would be happy together for the rest of their lives, finding a mate would be much easier.

Prudie, as always, puts it well:

Dear Skinny,
You're wise to avoid the potential tragedy of reproducing with your boyfriend: Your children could get his looks and your personality. Perhaps your boyfriend's already got an inkling of how you feel because of the Leonardo DiCaprio mask you ask him to wear when you make love. And although Brad and Angelina are both fecund and support adoption, I'm not sure they're going to agree to place any of their future progeny with you just to help you avoid the embarrassment of having a child who looks like your boyfriend. I'm trying to imagine how you initiate this discussion with him. Something like: "I look forward to spending the rest of my life with you. But when it comes to having kids, I'm sure that if we adopt we'll have a better shot of having decent-looking ones than if I let you impregnate me with your hideous sperm." That should go over well! What's supposed to happen when you are in love with someone (who also happens to be intelligent and have a great personality) is that you discover, despite objective measures, that person is beautiful to you. Your boyfriend sounds like a catch, so maybe you should toss him back so that he has a chance to find someone who's not permanently stuck in the shallow end.

—Prudie

No Such Thing as Happily Ever After....

In reality, married life is fraught with pain and strife:

DEAR ABBY: Please help my husband and me settle an argument. He hates when I step out of the shower onto the bath mat to dry off, leaving it wet. I think that's what the bath mat is for. Who's right? -- LISA IN LEXINGTON, S.C.

DEAR LISA: You are. The alternative would be to step out of the shower onto a tile floor -- which could cause a slip and fall, or onto carpet, which would become moldy. After you have finished drying off, however, the bath mat should be hung up to dry.

Oh PUH-LEEEEZE. I am the queen of getting unreasonably upset about minor, ridiculous things, and even I think this is absurd. I wish Abby had said as much, rather than granting this woman the triumph of being "right," and thus validating that there is even something to argue about here.

Looking for Trouble?

Today's totally random post of the day comes from Dear Abby:

DEAR ABBY: I have a friend who leaves full bottles of liquor on her kitchen table for days at a time. She has an 8-year-old son who eats at the table. Is this good for the boy, or can it affect him in any way? I need to know if I should say something. -- RUTH IN DAYTONA BEACH

and Abby says:

DEAR RUTH: Unless you have reason to think that your friend's son is sampling the booze, I see no reason for you to interfere. You did say they were FULL bottles of liquor, didn't you?

What? What is this? Is she concerned about the image, that the child will come to associate booze with breakfast cereal? Or that the toxic liquor will leach through the glass, through the table, and into his undeveloped bones? Or that he's being invited/encouraged/tempted to sample? Or perhaps that he's learning it's OK not to put groceries away promptly? I don't understand the aim of her question. And since Abby doesn't seem to either, I'm not really sure why she opted to publish this one out of the thousands of letters written to her each week by people who actually have problems.

**Upon reflection and discussion** I have decided that if you keep alcohol in your house and are concerned that your child may get into it, the kitchen table is the BEST place to keep it. It's much harder for them to snitch it in broad daylight/the middle of the house than it would be from a cupboard under the sink or above the fridge. And locking it up? That only makes it more "forbidden." When you eat your cereal and read the label of the vodka bottle, the mystery and romance is gone. And you also see the surgeon general's warnings.