Chivalry

[debrand]

Lately, we've had a couple of threads that dealt with chivalry. The word bugs me and I want to explain why.

Growing up, I was taught by my Nan to value hospitality. Not only was I supposed to be hospitable but I was also taught to try to make the other person comfortable. Later when I had children, I wanted them to not just be polite but to be honorable. I wanted them to give up their seats to the elderly and pregnant women, to open doors and , most importantly, to stand up for what they believe in and defend those who are unable to defend themselves.

The word, chivalry bothers me for several reason. First of all, historically, men didn't really act chivalrous to women. Yes, they might show women certain outward signs of respect but that didn't mean that women were treated with actual respect. Not being able to own land or leave an abusive marriage is not respect. In order to get a few tokens of pretend respect, women had to give up a lot of power and be in vulnerable positions dependent on men that didn't always have their best interest in mind. Also, even those outward signs of respect did not usually extend to women of lower social status.

I've never understood why acts of kindness and respect are supposed to come from men toward women. I like doing nice things for others. Making certain everyone is comfortable and having a good time gives me pleasure. I'm weird but I like opening doors for people. Why would I wait for a guy when I can be nice and open the door for him?

But I also think that chivalry is something that some fundie guys do to make themselves feel good. It has very little to do with the woman and more to do with their version of manhood. If that wasn't true, they wouldn't get so outraged about women refusing their gestures of outward respect.

Also, the entire line about dying for me really bugs me. How likely is it that we have to give our lives for someone else? And why should bravery only apply to men? Women can be brave. To be honest, I'd much rather a guy promise to do the dishes and take out the trash everyday then die for me.

So, do any of you have problems with the word, chivalry?

Here is a series on chivalry that I thought some of you might find interesting.

sisterskeepers.wordpress.com/2008/02/19/true-chivalry/

And here is a parody on teh song Grenade by Bruno Mars that I think makes me laugh and really does apply to this subject. (I swear it does)

[crassy]

Chivalry is just another word for benevolent sexism. I disagree with people thinking that women deserve respect just because they are women, or that anyone deserves respect for X or Y. We should respect all people regardless of what is between their legs, what colour they are, how much money they make, or what they believe. I don't believe in putting any group on a pedestal for any reason.

Courtly love was based on the idea of Mary being the saintly virgin that she is. Women were held to that standard but seen as little more than adult sized children.

So yeah, the word annoys the fuck out of me.

[alysee]

Chivalry is just another word for benevolent sexism. I disagree with people thinking that women deserve respect just because they are women, or that anyone deserves respect for X or Y. We should respect all people regardless of what is between their legs, what colour they are, how much money they make, or what they believe. I don't believe in putting any group on a pedestal for any reason.

Courtly love was based on the idea of Mary being the saintly virgin that she is. Women were held to that standard but seen as little more than adult sized children.

So yeah, the word annoys the fuck out of me.

My feelings exactly....

[debrand]

Chivalry is just another word for benevolent sexism. I disagree with people thinking that women deserve respect just because they are women, or that anyone deserves respect for X or Y. We should respect all people regardless of what is between their legs, what colour they are, how much money they make, or what they believe. I don't believe in putting any group on a pedestal for any reason.

Courtly love was based on the idea of Mary being the saintly virgin that she is. Women were held to that standard but seen as little more than adult sized children.

So yeah, the word annoys the fuck out of me.

This. And women who were not virginal or in the right social sphere were not given even token displays of respect.

[Deleted03]

Chivalry is based on the exploitation of some women. It is impossible to talk about chivalry for all women, all those holding the door, putting your cape on a puddle (dude I'm not that stupid, I CAN go around the puddle) those are associated with the distinction between the women you marry and women you have sex with. When guys talk to me about that it just makes me mad: so what category do you put me in? What category do you put that other woman in?

Either you respect human beings for being human beings, or you have no respect.

I swear some guys won't let me open the door for them...

[Clementine]

Chivalry is just another word for benevolent sexism. I disagree with people thinking that women deserve respect just because they are women, or that anyone deserves respect for X or Y. We should respect all people regardless of what is between their legs, what colour they are, how much money they make, or what they believe. I don't believe in putting any group on a pedestal for any reason.

Courtly love was based on the idea of Mary being the saintly virgin that she is. Women were held to that standard but seen as little more than adult sized children.

So yeah, the word annoys the fuck out of me.

^^ Plus men were only chivalrous to women who behaved according to their own standards and belonged to their own class.

I guess they treated women from the lower classes or the prostitute or maid they were fucking a lot differently.

[Soldier of the One]

I'm all for reclaiming chivalry as a generic social virtue of kindness, courtesy and hospitality - regardless of gender. I do think there's something to be said for cultivating an intentional culture of social interaction and a lot of traditional etiquette - when stripped of social context and class bias - serves that purpose. But of course it is clear as daylight that this does not (or should not) be bound to gender. There's nothing wrong with a woman holding the door open for a guy :)

Maybe we need a new term? Just something a bit more elegant than merely 'being nice'? :)

[crassy]

^^ Plus men were only chivalrous to women who behaved according to their own standards and belonged to their own class.

I guess they treated women from the lower classes or the prostitute or maid they were fucking a lot differently.

Yes, but it was for different reasons. They actually believed that the lower classes were essentially a different species. The general belief was that poor people were poor because that is who they are. Poor people were forbidden from eating certain foods because they were believed to be too rich and too harmful. Same goes for upper class people. They also believed in the hot/cold body and that the poor were cold and the rich were hot.

The whole concept of human rights and respect, in my opinion, cannot really be applied to historical societies because their entire outlook was so completely different. Their idea of self/community/family/love/relationships were nothing like ours are now. This is the main reason why things like chivalry and the bible should be done away with. It comes from a time when people had a much different outlook on life and it just cannot and should not be implemented into modern society.

[geniebelle6901]

As a general rule, I say whoever does the asking pays. I don't mind having doors opened for me, because I do the same for anybody of either sex. But, as sexist as this sounds, I don't put up a fuss when my date insists on paying so long as he's not being a jerk. There have also been times where I have picked up the tab or gone dutch. It just depends on how well I know the guy.

Oh, and as a general rule guests in my home (not a random stranger, btw) are always offered something to drink upon arrival (usually water, soda, decaf coffee or tea..I don't have caffeine or alcohol for medical reasons). They are also invited to stay for lunch or supper. That's just something I've always been taught to do, and it's kind of nice to have company over for a good time.

[Clementine]

Yes, but it was for different reasons. They actually believed that the lower classes were essentially a different species. The general belief was that poor people were poor because that is who they are. Poor people were forbidden from eating certain foods because they were believed to be too rich and too harmful. Same goes for upper class people. They also believed in the hot/cold body and that the poor were cold and the rich were hot.

The whole concept of human rights and respect, in my opinion, cannot really be applied to historical societies because their entire outlook was so completely different. Their idea of self/community/family/love/relationships were nothing like ours are now. This is the main reason why things like chivalry and the bible should be done away with. It comes from a time when people had a much different outlook on life and it just cannot and should not be implemented into modern society.

I agree. When I hear the word I think of medieval knights (wrote poems to their noble lady and then went to war to kill men and rape women in a foreign country) or 19th century men from the South ("gentlemen" who owned slaves and raped some of them). The word doesn't give me any good associations at all and I personally think that it should be seen as a word from the past that really has no place in our society today.

[QAF_Rocks]

I have major problems with the concept of chivalry. I was raised in an egalitarian lesbian household, so honestly a lot of the expectations for women in heterosexual relationships just seem wrong to me. Like, I would never, ever, ever allow a man to support me financially. I feel like a relationship should be between two equal partners. The thought of staying at home and not working (we have no children to take care of) gives me chills.

So I would never want a man to treat me with some kind of weird, deferential respect simply because I'm a woman. I'd want him to treat me with respect because it's the way both partners should treat each other. But the idea of being taken care of, or protected like a child, just strikes a sour note with me. I'm not five years old. If a man offered to fight other people on my behalf, or made a big show out of opening doors for me, or anything like that, we'd have to have a long, serious discussion.

[ladyamylynn]

Chivalry is just another word for benevolent sexism. I disagree with people thinking that women deserve respect just because they are women, or that anyone deserves respect for X or Y. We should respect all people regardless of what is between their legs, what colour they are, how much money they make, or what they believe. I don't believe in putting any group on a pedestal for any reason.

Courtly love was based on the idea of Mary being the saintly virgin that she is. Women were held to that standard but seen as little more than adult sized children.

So yeah, the word annoys the fuck out of me.

Thanks! I totally agree with you. Sexism sucks, whether or not you benefit from it. You might get some free dinners or doors opened for you, but at what cost? Capitulating to a system that denigrates an entire class of people because of their genetics is no trade off for a few perks. BTW, if you are fat, poor, black, homeless, or fall into any number of categories, chivalry probably doesn't apply to you anyway. So you are basically subject to all of the degradation with none of the benefits. I blame the patriarchy.

[notacleverpony]

I'm all for reclaiming chivalry as a generic social virtue of kindness, courtesy and hospitality - regardless of gender. I do think there's something to be said for cultivating an intentional culture of social interaction and a lot of traditional etiquette - when stripped of social context and class bias - serves that purpose. But of course it is clear as daylight that this does not (or should not) be bound to gender. There's nothing wrong with a woman holding the door open for a guy :)

Maybe we need a new term? Just something a bit more elegant than merely 'being nice'? :)

I nominate "courtesy." It's got the problematic root of "court," and all that upper-class kinghts-and-maidens bullcrap, but it's a beautiful sounding word that applies to all genders. Anyone can be courteous to other people, men to women, women to men, old to young and vice versa. So next time a funditard calls you on opening/not opening a door for someone of the approved gender, just tell them that you know what it means to be "courteous." And then watch them squirm.

[gardenvarietycitizen]

I'm all for reclaiming chivalry as a generic social virtue of kindness, courtesy and hospitality - regardless of gender. I do think there's something to be said for cultivating an intentional culture of social interaction and a lot of traditional etiquette - when stripped of social context and class bias - serves that purpose. But of course it is clear as daylight that this does not (or should not) be bound to gender. There's nothing wrong with a woman holding the door open for a guy :)

Maybe we need a new term? Just something a bit more elegant than merely 'being nice'? :)

Thing is though, at least to me "chivalry" isn't just about being nice. It's about keeping someone in a weak position in order to be able to do everything for them, and so feel good about yourself.

The big example in traditional chivalry is men vs. women. Certain women are kept up on a pedestal and pampered, told all the time that they deserve this treatment because they're so exalted or precious or delicate or whatever it is, but the result of that treatment is that the women can't do anything for themselves - partly due to the actual laws, and partly due to having no real world experience whatsoever, because the man always does everything and he's the one who learns and gets power in the world. She becomes utterly dependent, and then (when things go bad) the man HATES her for it, and will point out that she'd be nothing without him, because she can't survive in the world, like a hothouse flower.

(But you can see the same creepy relationship in some parent-child relationships too, where a parent does everything for a child (at first of course they have to, because little kids really can't do anything) but then in the next breath belittle their children for being dependent. You hear it in fights, when a parent starts yelling at a kid that everything they have really belongs to the parent, because the kid doesn't earn any money. That sort of thing.)

Really it's like creepy Nice Guy behavior writ large. So when the woman rejects his protection, it's a problem, because she's not content to be subservient, she's not willing to cripple herself to need him, and then where will he be??

Occasionally I will hear (male) coworkers talking about their stay at home wives like this, and it creeps me out.

[gardenvarietycitizen]

I have major problems with the concept of chivalry. I was raised in an egalitarian lesbian household, so honestly a lot of the expectations for women in heterosexual relationships just seem wrong to me. Like, I would never, ever, ever allow a man to support me financially. I feel like a relationship should be between two equal partners. The thought of staying at home and not working (we have no children to take care of) gives me chills.

So I would never want a man to treat me with some kind of weird, deferential respect simply because I'm a woman. I'd want him to treat me with respect because it's the way both partners should treat each other. But the idea of being taken care of, or protected like a child, just strikes a sour note with me. I'm not five years old. If a man offered to fight other people on my behalf, or made a big show out of opening doors for me, or anything like that, we'd have to have a long, serious discussion.

Also this.

I was raised in a heterosexual household, but my mother (who had times of being a "full time housewife" and times of working outside the home, mostly the latter which she preferred) was very frank about some of the actual sacrifices of doing the SAHM thing - you lose your standing in the workplace, and it can be hard to come back and re-enter the wage economy. You have to be VERY trusting of your partner to do that. Similarly she was firm about being sure my sister and I would have some credentials or education that would allow us to ENTER work, if we wished, so that we could support ourselves. (As it turns out, we're both the primary wage earners in our households now.)

This was in the 70's, and she had horror stories of her friends who were divorced and left with nothing.

[bananacat]

There are so many things I hate about chivalry, but my biggest beef is that it's all about show and getting credit, and not about actually helping people.

A SAHM can and will open many doors all day long, often while juggling kids or a laundry basket. And it's considered her duty as a mother to do it. But as soon as she's out in public with a man where they are conveniently in front of an audience, THEN the man has to hold a door for her. Nobody's around to hold doors when she's taking laundry to the basement or trying to drag a resistant dog into the car for a vet visit. If these men really wanted to make life better for women, then public acts wouldn't be the thing to do. Instead, they only care about making a show of it. It's sort of like my workplace where the boss does these little shows of caring about people without actually treating us professionally. I don't care about the award certificate that I can hang on my wall or the pointless Easter egg hunt with some free candy. If she can't pay us fairly and treat us respectfully, all those little things don't even matter.

The other thing I hate about chivalry is that it is too often presumptuous and it can easily be condescending even if you don't intend it that way. I always ask people before helping. Unless there is a language or hearing barrier, that is the better way to go in almost all cases. If I see someone with their hands full or in a wheelchair, I'll ask them if they want me to get the door. And if they say no, then I'll respect that. A lot of people with disabilities have already figured out ways to deal with everyday tasks, and in many cases you can actually get in the way if you just jump in to "help". But I apply this to everyone, not just people with visible disabilities. If a child is struggling to reach a straw or someone drops something, I'll ask if they want help before just jumping in. It's no fun to go to pick something up and end up bumping heads with someone else who is also trying to pick it up. Oh, and those people who hold the door even when you're an awkward distance away are really really irritating. Making me rush is worse than just letting me open the damn door myself.

[bananacat]

Oh, also, it's better to ask before giving up your seat. Several times a man has gotten up from his seat on the bus or metro and I didn't take it because I preferred to stand. Awkwardness ensues. Seriously, if I don't want the seat then just keep sitting.