Breast is Best?

...There were, at our school, certain axioms for living the good life - good in its moralistic rather than hedonistic sense.

There was no published list, nor were these axioms exactly taught in any explicit manner. One merely came across them and, somehow, absorbed them by osmosis as one went through the years, emerging with all safely and properly internalised.

Change would not be counted in a shop, seats would always be given up on public transport for a lady (doors similarly always opened), one might be cross but never angry, 'thank you' letters would be written and posted promptly...and so forth.

Possibly slightly mannered, but founded on the rock of manners.

I do not recall any hierarchy of expectation of behaviour - the whole package, as it were, being required of a gentleman - but there were two exhortations that, to me, stood out as having greatest significance, demanding complete adherence.

The first - as perhaps it should be - was a collation of strictures concerning sexual behaviour and the young woman: not to seek to intoxicate her with alcohol prior to any seductive assay; always stay for breakfast if invited but never if not; never pretend one couldn't remember one's telephone number or - worse - give a false one. Those sorts of things. (I would like to see that as a form of proto-feminism, though I'll not be checking with Ms. Greer for confirmation.)

Later, of course, one learnt deeper refinements such as that given in the excellent 'Zorba the Greek', whose eponymous hero rightly opined that God is a loving fellow who will forgive much, but He can never forgive a man who is summonsed to a woman's bed but refuses to go. That is true wisdom and charity.

The apogee of this whole approach to the 'woman question' - as given by Uncle Bertie at a Sixth Form seminar on life beyond the confines of the school gate - was 'Try not to get a woman preggars, but by golly if you do then stand by her. No bunking off into the night. Having lain in one's bed one must, perforce, stay and help make it.' (Sound if stern advice, Uncle Bertie.)

On another tack altogether - though each part playing a role in the whole - it was given as a complete must do - or rather a must not do: no gentleman should be spotted sporting a pen in the outside breast pocket of his suit jacket or blazer. Only pimps or bookmakers would be seen thus and, logically, it was argued that one would not wish to be mistaken for either - unless of course one were one, or indeed both, such.

What then should be made of the prominent fact that dear Gilbert & George - gentlemens to their very core - most often are to be viewed identically suited and both with the forbidden pen in the prohibited pocket?

Not being personally acquainted with either fellow - though I suppose knowing the one but not the other would, in their case, be an impossibility - I can only surmise that theirs is but one more tease, another railment against the world, such being the medium of their artistic work over the years. It can only be intended, I am sure, as an 'ironic statement' - and although irony, as a thing in itself, was one more matter one was taught to avoid as ungentlemanly, in their case I shall allow it.

I shan't, however, start being 'ironic' myself in this way. We tend not to do irony in the Wolds. Far too smart for the likes of us.