You Can Forget About These 11 Laughable Restaurant Etiquette Rules

Fine dining, with its accompanying restaurant etiquette rules, has always been about more than just satisfying hunger. As the wide-ranging collection of etiquette books from the 1800s show, etiquette has historically functioned as social ritual, or performativity, deeply rooted in systems of power and rigid societal distinctions around class, gender, and race. Restaurant etiquette, as we know it, was shaped by European aristocratic ideals blended with uniquely American cultural attitudes that privileged whiteness and wealth, framing civility and "good breeding" as performances meant to reinforce social hierarchies. Adhering to these rules was not just about politeness; it was a marker of class, erudition, and distinction, used to separate the "refined" from everyone else.

Breaking etiquette carried severe social and emotional consequences — humiliation, ostracism, and the risk of being labeled "uncivilized." Even behaviors as simple as knowing which fork to use or the timing of conversation at the table were strictly interpreted as signs of respectability and worthiness. In this way, etiquette served to uphold exclusionary systems, defining who could participate in polite society and shaping notions of inclusion, connection, and even enjoyment itself.

Today, many of these traditions feel outdated and out of step with modern values like equality, diversity, and individualism. As we move toward a more equitable and egalitarian society, it's essential to recognize the socio-historical context of restaurant etiquette and how it has evolved. Some dining rules remain practical, while many others have become laughable relics of the past. Let's explore outdated restaurant etiquette rules and consider how we might reframe the conversation to reflect contemporary values and ideals.

Like many other now outdated rules, the custom of waiting for everyone to be served before eating originates in formal banquets and aristocratic dining, where meals were served in elaborate courses. Waiting ensured that everyone would enjoy the meal simultaneously, and prevented any one person from coming across as gluttonous, greedy, or impatient by being the first one to dig in. Waiting is also thought to honor the host and demonstrate respect for the shared experience.

The Renaissance era work, "The Book of the Courtier" by Baldassare Castiglione (1528), discusses the manners expected in courtly settings, which includes the importance of communal dining practices. Fast forward nearly 500 years, and today, the idea of waiting for everyone to be served before beginning to eat, particularly at home, continues to be a way of showing politeness and camaraderie by beginning the meal together.

But let's be honest: In the world of busy restaurant kitchens, staff do not always get an entire party's order out at the same exact time. Therefore, waiting for everyone to be served might mean letting perfectly warm dishes grow cold and less appetizing. Today, most restaurant diners understand that hot food is meant to be enjoyed hot. There is no need to feel slighted if someone else chows down before everyone's order arrives at the table. A simple, "Please, go ahead," from the host of the dinner event is the modern, gracious alternative to expecting others to needlessly wait to eat.

As previously mentioned, many outdated etiquette rules that no longer resonate in today's world are tied to historical norms around class, gender, and race. Take, for example, the expectation that men should stand when a woman leaves or returns to the table. This practice originated from aristocratic ideals of gallantry and chivalry, meant to show polite respect for the so-called "fairer sex." For men, adhering to this norm signified good manners, proper upbringing, and social standing. Conversely, failing to do so was seen as a sign of lower class, laziness, or even uncivilized behavior. Notably, these gestures of deference were typically reserved for white women, reflecting broader racial and social exclusions of the time.

While such gestures were normalized in the past, today they feel overly formal, even awkward for many people. Most women nowadays do not expect — or want — such attention when simply getting up to use the restroom. It can disrupt the flow of conversation or dining, and reinforces outdated gender dynamics that prioritize strict gender roles and hierarchy over mutual respect. A simple smile or nod of acknowledgment is more than sufficient in our more gender-inclusive society. 

If you do wish to stand, it should reflect genuine warmth and respect for anyone — regardless of gender identity — such as when greeting or saying goodbye with a hug or handshake. This shift reflects a broader move toward etiquette that values equality and personal connection over rigid, performative traditions.

Similar to the expectation that men should stand when a woman leaves or returns to the table, the custom of men assisting women with their chairs was once considered a gesture of courtesy and care for the "fairer" (read: more delicate and helpless) sex. In "Our Deportment: Or the Manners, Conduct, and Dress of the Most Refined Society" (1881), John H. Young outlines the customs of polite society, including this practice as a hallmark of gentlemanly behavior.

While it may seem courteous at first glance, the idea that women need men to assist them with seating underscores a performative dynamic of masculinity and femininity rooted in formalized gender inequality. It reflects a hierarchical view of relationships that feels unnecessary and outdated in today's more egalitarian society. While some couples may enjoy these traditional gestures as part of their personal relationship dynamics, many American women today likely prefer to handle their own seating, finding it more empowering and comfortable. Modern relationships tend to emphasize equality and partnership over performative chivalry, making such rules feel antiquated. 

Besides, assisting with a chair can easily lead to awkward moments — a misstep that accidentally pushes the chair too far or causes discomfort might turn a polite gesture into unintended embarrassment. In today's world, a simple offer of help or a kind smile is more than enough, leaving room for individual preference rather than rigid societal expectations.

The expectation that men should always pay originates from an era when men were the sole breadwinners, and dining out was part of courtship and chivalry. In her 1922 book, "Etiquette in Society, in Business, in Politics, and at Home," Emily Post reflects on the early 20th-century attitudes that men should handle all financial matters. This perhaps made sense at the time because it was considered socially unacceptable for upper-class women to work outside the home or earn their own wages. Additionally, women in the U.S. were not legally able to open their own individual credit or loan accounts until as late as 1974, reinforcing their financial dependence on men.

These days, gender roles have evolved and become significantly more egalitarian. Although women, on average, still earn less than men, they now hold leadership roles across industries, manage their own finances, and enjoy financial independence. As such, the expectation that men must always pay feels outdated and unnecessary. A more modern approach is that the host — the person who proposed the date — should pay the bill. Alternatively, splitting the check, taking turns paying, or going Dutch has become common practice among couples and friends. 

Clinging to the outdated notion that men must always foot the bill not only reinforces traditional gender roles, but can also feel unfair, particularly when racial and economic disparities are taken into account. In a world that increasingly values equity and mutual respect, how the bill is handled should instead reflect the dynamics of the relationship.

In earlier centuries, women were expected to remain silent or speak minimally in the presence of men, particularly in formal dining settings. Men were often the sole decision-makers at the table, both in terms of what was ordered and in discussions about the meal. This practice reflected the broader patriarchal norms that kept women in subordinate positions in both social and professional spaces.

Florence Hartley's "The Ladies' Book of Etiquette, and Manual of Politeness" (1860) highlights the social customs of the time, emphasizing the deference women were expected to show in mixed company. This restaurant etiquette of men ordering for women was framed as polite and gentlemanly while simultaneously reinforcing the idea that women were too delicate — or perhaps too uninformed or easily confused — to handle such decisions for themselves.

Today, this rule is widely regarded as outdated and patronizing. Modern dining etiquette assumes that everyone at the table is fully capable of knowing what they want, making decisions, and speaking for themselves. Wait staff typically take orders directly from each dining guest, often going clockwise around the table to ensure fairness and efficiency. Encouraging equal participation in ordering not only respects personal autonomy, but also reflects the values of a more egalitarian and inclusive society, free from rigid gender roles and unnecessary hierarchies.

In "The Rituals of Dinner" (1991), Margaret Visser offers a fascinating exploration of how table manners have evolved to reflect social norms, cultural values, and class distinctions throughout history. Among the many rituals she examines is the development of multi-course meals and the intricate array of utensils that accompany them. The multi-fork table setting became an emblem of refinement, signaling not only the host's wealth and attention to detail, but also the diners' social status. Each utensil had a designated placement and role, from tiny forks for shellfish to specialized knives for carving meat, and knowing how to use them properly was seen as a mark of sophistication.

This elaborate tradition has waned significantly in modern dining culture. While you might still encounter such settings at Michelin-starred restaurants, royal banquets, or high-society galas, the average meal has thankfully become far more casual. Today, practicality trumps formality, with most people opting to use whatever utensil is at hand — or even forgoing utensils altogether in favor of a hands-on approach with dishes like pizza, tacos, and hamburgers. The shift reflects broader cultural changes, emphasizing comfort, inclusivity, and ease over strict adherence to etiquette. In many ways, this relaxed attitude signals an evolution toward dining as an experience focused on relaxed enjoyment rather than performance.

Today, even fine dining is less about mastering an overwhelming array of forks, and more about feeling comfortable and confident in the moment. No snooty judgment required if you grab the "wrong" utensil.

"Mrs. Beeton's Book of Household Management" by Isabella Beeton (1861) serves in part as a fascinating window into Victorian-era social norms regarding etiquette, including appropriate attire that primarily originated from the upper classes. In Victorian England and earlier periods, strict rules about dress, behavior, and etiquette were central to aristocratic and upper-middle-class culture. Formal attire for dining and other occasions served as a way to display wealth, status, and adherence to social norms. These customs were rooted in the idea that appearances were a reflection of one's morality, refinement, and place in society. Dining, whether at home or in public, was considered a formal affair, and the attire needed to match the occasion. Dressing appropriately demonstrated one's awareness of social codes and respect for the company present.

The rise of casual dining establishments in the mid-20th century, alongside broader cultural shifts, have reshaped attitudes toward dress codes. Unless you're dining at an establishment with a specific dress code, there's no need to stress over your outfit for a meal out. Restaurants today welcome patrons dressed in a variety of styles, from casual wear to more polished looks, depending on their personal preferences. 

This evolution in dining attire mirrors broader societal changes, where individuality and personal expression increasingly take precedence over conformity to traditional norms. Whether you're grabbing a quick bite at a café or celebrating at an upscale venue, the emphasis now is on enjoying the experience with attire as an extension of your own unique personality, style, and comfort.

When it comes to social settings, posture plays a critical role in how manners and etiquette are expressed. For example, the often-discussed rule about keeping elbows off the table ties into the broader theme of what our body language communicates. To some people, sitting with your elbows planted firmly on the table can come across as overly casual or even disrespectful in certain settings, particularly during formal meals or professional gatherings. This is because it often causes slouching or leaning, which may inadvertently signal boredom or impatience. On the other hand, resting your elbows on the table while engaged in lively conversation is natural and often more comfortable, and can allow you to lean in closer to your dining partner, which can come across as attentive and attuned.

Other people may, however, prefer to keep their elbows at their sides, resting their hands lightly on the edge of the table as they politely eat their meal with the proper utensils. Sure, sitting like this encourages an upright posture that some might interpret as demonstrating poise and politeness. But for many people, this can feel too stiff and formal, and can also limit their ability to freely socialize due to the focus on sitting up straight and handling the utensils correctly.

While many rules around dining originate in the lavish courts of European aristocracy, the silent dining rule harks back to early American colonists, especially Puritans, who approached dining with a focus on modesty and restraint. For these early settlers, meals were primarily about sustenance rather than pleasure or indulgence, and this utilitarianism extended to their dining etiquette. They frowned upon excess or ostentation, emphasizing humility and gratitude instead. As a result, their dining etiquette was less ceremonial compared to European traditions, where elaborate meals and circumscribed table manners were markers of social status and refinement.

One notable rule that emerged from Puritanical restraint, however, is the idea of keeping conversation minimal during meals. Rooted in the belief that mealtime was a solemn occasion for reflection and thanks, this custom discouraged frivolous talk, laughter, or excessive noise at the table. In Puritan households, meals often began and ended with prayer, underscoring the sacredness of the act of eating, rather than using the meal as an opportunity for social interaction or entertainment.

In contrast, modern dining customs have evolved significantly. Today, dining out is as much about socializing and community as it is about the food. Restaurants are often designed to facilitate conversation and connection, with lively atmospheres that encourage engagement and enjoyment. Sharing stories, discussing the day, or bonding over shared dishes has become an integral part of the dining experience. A vibrant exchange of ideas and laughter can enhance the atmosphere, making the meal memorable for everyone involved.

The rule against touching food with hands in formal dining originates from a combination of cultural and socio-historical factors tied to status and class. In medieval Europe, eating with your hands was common, but as forks and other utensils became more widespread in the Renaissance, they eventually became associated with refinement and civility despite at first being seen as an affront to god. Utensils separated the elites from the lower classes, who might eat with their hands, so this distinction became a marker of social status. The development of etiquette manuals in the 18th and 19th centuries further codified rules about table manners, emphasizing utensil use as a way to demonstrate politeness, restraint, and self-control, values that resonated with the rising middle- and upper-class ideals of the time.

Today, one could argue that the etiquette of not touching your food with your hands should be dropped. Eating with your hands can enhance the dining experience by engaging the senses more fully. Touching food connects you to its texture, temperature, and even its craftsmanship, creating a richer sensory experience. 

In many cultures, eating with your hands is not only traditional, but also considered a respectful and mindful way to enjoy food, fostering a closer relationship between the diner and the cuisine. Additionally, certain foods, like hamburgers, tacos, and chicken wings, are designed to be eaten with your hands for practical reasons in order to enjoy them in a way that feels natural and intuitive.

In the past, sharing food at the table was often considered a faux pas because it ran counter to the norms of formal dining and individualized service, hallmarks of upper-class dining etiquette. Fine dining establishments and well-to-do households prided themselves on personalized, plated service, where each guest received their own carefully curated portion. This approach emphasized exclusivity and refinement, reinforcing social hierarchies and the distinction between formal and casual dining. Sharing food could disrupt the presentation of the meal and was sometimes seen as lacking sophistication.

Additionally, individual plates signified abundance and hospitality, ensuring that each person had enough without needing to share. Offering guests their own portions reflected status, wealth, and attention to detail. In such settings, asking for a taste of someone else's dish or splitting items could be viewed as improper or even gauche, as it blurred the boundaries of decorum and personal space.

Today, however, dining has become much more relaxed and socially inclusive. Sharing food is celebrated as a way to connect and create a communal experience. Restaurants often encourage sharing food by offering shareable plates, family-style service, or menus designed for sampling and collaboration. Double dipping aside, sharing food is a common and delightful practice that enhances the enjoyment of modern dining. Whether it's tasting a friend's dish or splitting a dessert, sharing elevates the communal experience. Just be sure to ask before grabbing that fry.