This perfectly explains the comment below.
Okay, well not perfectly. (Need to learn to explain myself!!)
The comment that states that chivalry died when women got rights is ignorant, plain and simple. As defined in dictionary.com, chivalry is defined as a gallant warrior or a gentleman. A gentleman is defined as a man who is educated, civilized, and well-mannered. A man performing a chivalrous act is in no way attempting to demean a woman and her rights of equality, it is simply a gesture of kindness.
Although, this is sometimes not the case. I, myself have definitely experienced 'chivalrous' acts where the intent was to prove superiority. It's unfortunate really.
My honest belief is that the simple act of a man holding a door for you is a kind gesture. Chivalry is the simple act of respect and kindness, except more definitive for men. It's unfortunate when men take this to an extreme where they believe that they need to act this way in order to prove that they are 'men'. What's even more unfortunate is that society needed to provide a label for men to act upon.
Chivalry isn't dead, and it most certainly isn't because women got fucking rights. Yes, I understand that there are situations where this case is not applicable, but to make a statement in order to be humorous is more ignorant than anything.
That is my two cents, but I am most certainly open to debate. What better way to broaden the mind then to have someone (respectfully) decline your opinion with intelligent evidence as why they believe so?
Bring it on post-secondary.
I love that picture. Definitely. But sometimes when men try to hold the door open for me I will purposefully go through another door. I can open my own door, thanks. I feel like it assumes I can't help myself, like they HAVE to help me in order to feel manly. I hate it. It bugs me.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteO I definitely know what you mean. I dated a guy who, every time opening a door for me would say "chivalry isn't dead." Such an obvious why to prove he was a 'man'. I could be completely wrong, perhaps chivalry back in the day had the honest intention to prove a boy was a 'man', but I would like to think that in this day and age that we've gone past that and the intention of chivalry has gone past that. Or maybe I'm just naive and have too much hope for the human race.
ReplyDeletedeleted comment contained a typo .. effing can't stand typos.
ReplyDeleteChivalry, back in the day, meant that I man would show his love and respect for a woman by being nice, aka courtly love. It's related to knighthood. It didn't necessarily mean "getting the girl" or actually being in a relationship with a girl. It wasn't usually practised between wife and husband which goes to show it has nothing to do with being in a relationship, even though some men seem to think it does. It just meant being nice and respectful. But it's changed into something that is SOMEHOW supposed to show manliness at all times. It's sexism, plain and simple. It's like how women are supposed to be skinny, white dumb assess who stay at home and raise kids. It's a stereotype nowadays you know? I don't think it should exist. People should be nice and respectful to one another REGARDLESS of gender, sex, orientation, race, whatever.
ReplyDelete