Evening star., 1935-11-24

W. jects further are not
only welcome be-
c;itc broadening to my own point of view
but delightful because answering them makes
what Alice in Wonderland would have called
conversation.
From young woman in this newspaper s
Office comes letter asking why in my article
on the almost vanished chaperon (printed
week before LAST skinned over the surface
OF the prophecies, dropped few bombs upon
a smoke-screened general territory, but threw
no light upon any of the definite things that
she eagerly looked for in my copy.
Not word of advice to young woman
on that most important question of going
alone to mans apartment to lunch or to
dine nothing about how late she might stay:
not even so much as mention in this or any
other article ever about drink of anything
that is definitely alcoholic, no indication of
when and where and to what degree cocktails
or other varieties of wines and liquors are
approved by modern convention. Nothing
was said about why there should be any diff
ference in the propriety of her going to his
apartment or of his coming to her apartment
in which she lives alone. The letter asks
further:
What disadvantage can there be in know
ing men exactly as they are? Surely you
wouldn't have us 60 back to the preposterous
formalities that those of yesterday tell us
about? And yet. what did you mean by the
warning against lost Romance through being
unable to sense its fastidious requirements?
And so for just this once, Mrs. Post, won't you
please give not only me, but all your younger
readers completely straight answer"
In reply to this, can't help saying that
think it might have been better - safer Ger
tainly - had kept in the clear and shallow
end of the subject of etiquette among the
spoons and forks instead of going off the
deep end into the turbulent cross currents of
ethical controversy. However. if am to be
completely frank and straight answer
could be nothing less - the truth is that /
really hate to voice the misgivings feel about
certain trends of behavior whichrepudiate the
fundamental precepts of propriety.
From my point of view then, any attempt
to apply the rules of ropriety to a young
woman's going alone to the apartment of a
man would be the same as to attempt to give
directions for applying flame to high ex-
plosive Plenty of explosives can be ap-
preached with fame - so they say. Plenty
of young women do dangerous or foolish or
stupid things and suffer not the slightest
effects - either ill or otherwise And yet that
doesn't alter the fact that being shut in behind
the latch-locking door in mans rooms alone
is from every angle. as fragrant reversal of
propriety as is possible to { ,cribe.
In answering this have in mind a certain
element of attraction between the woman and
the man. If there is not the slightest personal
interest further than stone-cold liking would
she be going to see him? True, she might dine
with him on an evening when she had nothing
else to do. Or perhaps they are old friends
rom the same home town and both more or
ess lonely strangers in an unaware city. The
situation in either case is in no way deviation
rom convention.
But let's get down to individual cases. You
lsk me to answer this question completely