• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Is Chivalry Sexist? (The modern version)

You could write whole volumes about the context and motivations behind the idea of modern chivalry. The truth is each situation is different. In the case of your friend, I think what he did was pretty clearly too far. But obviously the idea of being courteous to strangers, especially to women, is not in itself a sexist ideal.
 

wazoo

Member
A woman who's on her own who declines to get into a car with a strange man isn't "illogical" behavior. It's basic common sense, in almost any culture or society. What's illogical here has been your strangely resentful and chastising attitude towards the woman refusing to climb into your car.

No, Logic is to protect you from the rain.

Social behaviour is not to do it because you fear the stranger. social behaviour can be shared by many cultures, it does not make it logic, just common sense, as you said, which is not the same as logic. Social behaviour can be completely understandable also.

And no, I do not care. I was just discussing around it. I am not the one starting the topic. As I said, it is an old story and I did not try more 'do you want to stay in the rain ? Yes, have a nice day" What is your agenda to make people appear as weird people ? End of story for me, anyway.
 
The thing is the lesson is never framed as 'ALL' strangers are dangerous, just the ones that approach you for no reason. Kids know the difference between approaching a stranger and a stranger approaching them.

If the child is actually lost or feels endangered most would start crying which would gather alot of people's attention anyway.

Personal experience? I was lost as kid after missing my bus stop. Didn't hesitate to ask people for help.

But their parents often don't. The level of paranoia and helicoptering in today's parents really can't be emphasized enough, to the point where the most common answer in the "Would you help a lost child" thread from a few months ago was an emphatic "no" because people feared potential misunderstandings.

But anyway, that's a topic for another time. Women do need to be careful, but I'm sure they can protect themselves just fine without the need for modern knights to aid them.
 
So I wanna address something in the OP. You lay out chivalry and sexism really well and I pretty well agree with your approach. So, yes, what Jeff did is sexism. Or we can say it's grounded in sexism.

You had this urge then to defend him. He's not a bad guy! And there's the rub. Jeff probably isn't a bad guy. This doesn't make him a bad guy. It doesn't make him a nice guy, either (though maybe a Nice Guy; I don't know him). But it means he is the product of teaching and reinforcement grounded in sexism. Same as any system gets passed down (racism, white supremacy, etc). It's relatively innocent in this case - yeah, your dude came off as creepy maybe but it's fine - but the idea that a "capable young man" has to protect those who "need" him is sexist on many levels. It reinforces certain masculine ideas about strength and weakness, it's probably grounded in ideas about women, etc.

Doesn't make him a bad dude. Just a dude who may need to do some grappling with the world. I hope he has the awareness to do it someday.
 
Is it worth framing all strangers as potential predators just to avoid the <1% chance your kid will run into someone who actually means them harm?
Factual answer from the perspective of their social and emotional development: NO!

Worse yet, what if your child is actually lost or feels endangered, but has no idea of how to seek and/or accept help from others? Stranger Danger for kids is a myth, there's zero data that indicates children are placed at risk in any way by speaking to strangers.

Adult women, on the other hand, are waaaay more likely to be "groomed" and preyed upon by opportunistic men masquerading as nice/concerned bystanders.

Yes. Because the risk vs reward scale tips in favor of avoiding the risk. Little is actually gained by kids talking freely with strangers but a lot is risked.

As for your slippery slope. Teach them exceptions to the rule.
 

Mesoian

Member
Well, predictably, the girl is just surprised for the first block, and then when waiting at the next intersection, rebuffs him, and tells him she's fine and that he can leave. I didn't hear this conversation obviously but I imagine that after he insisted "It's no trouble, m'lady" she told him to fuck off because it's creepy to walk right beside a stranger in the pouring rain and that she'd be fine without his "protection".

giphy.gif


Chivalry isn't dead but Jesus christ...
 

Steel

Banned
No, Logic is to protect you from the rain.

Social behaviour is not to do it because you fear the stranger. social behaviour can be shared by many cultures, it does not make it logic, just common sense, as you said, which is not the same as logic. Social behaviour can be completely understandable also.

And no, I do not care. I was just discussing around it. I am not the one starting the topic. As I said, it is an old story and I did not try more 'do you want to stay in the rain ? Yes, have a nice day" What is your agenda to make people appear as weird people ? End of story for me, anyway.

The logical parsing of this is the following:

A) Get a bit wet. She's probably already wet anyway so it really wouldn't have much of a tangible benefit to get in someone's car(You mention she made it to the train station about the same time you did anyway, so there wasn't even time savings).

B) Get in some random stranger's car. At best she feels awkward as fuck during the drive and embarrassed for having to be helped in this way. Potential downsides on top of that are: person expects a reward in the form of a date or other attention(a significant likelihood), person has more ill intentions.

Logically there's absolutely zero reason to get in the car.
 

Two Words

Member
We don’t have to pretend that men are generally nicer to women when it comes to chivalry because of the potential for sex. I’d say it’s best to temper that way of thinking. I am not immune to it either. I’m sure I’ve helped women more than I would have helped a guy due to being trained to do so impulsively. But I try to keep it in mind and temper it. If you don’t, that’s how you end up either becoming a door mat or getting upset when your 101 favors didn’t lead to sex.

Just ask yourself this:

1. If the girl was dating somebody/married, would you still do help?
2. If the girl later began dating somebody else, would you be upset?
 

Zaphrynn

Member
No, Logic is to protect you from the rain.

Social behaviour is not to do it because you fear the stranger. social behaviour can be shared by many cultures, it does not make it logic, just common sense, as you said, which is not the same as logic. Social behaviour can be completely understandable also.

Logic is:

A) The rain makes me wet, but I already am, and I'm also almost at the station. There is no actual harm involved in me continuing to walk.

B) I get in a car for a short ride. I'm temporarily out of the rain. There is now a huge risk because this person could drive off/kidnap me. I'm at the train station, so it could be hours or days before someone realizes I'm missing. There is now also risk that this person will try to touch me, get my number, get aggressive with me, etc.

B has a much higher risk if things go wrong, so logically A is the best choice if I'm trying to avoid harm.


And I forgot to quote the person and am on mobile but: Men are VERY persistent about being "polite" to women (even in the OP the dude was insisting to help after the woman said no! AND he took her rebuff as some personal slight against him).
Damn, if I was in the rain and some dude burst out of a car to walk beside me under his umbrella, my alarm bells would be going off like crazy .
 
Yes. Because the risk vs reward scale tips in favor of avoiding the risk. Little is actually gained by kids talking freely with strangers but a lot is risked.

Again, and I'm not trying to sound rude here, but this is totally untrue. Socialization, community-mindedness, mentorship, and understanding the experiences of older generations are all incredibly important aspects of a child's development that have fallen by the wayside because of blanket prejudice and bigotry.

This is absolutely akin to saying "I don't want my kid socializing with black people, they're not going to gain anything from it and I've heard those people are dangerous" because they see a small number of black people committing crimes on the news. Normalizing a lack of contact between two groups of people for any reason is always a mistake and only leads to increased prejudice and profiling.
 

Laekon

Member
Now, an anecdote, from tonight: We've got a new guy on our crew, one that I sort of identify with. I work in a field (golf course management) that doesn't attract many nerds like myself. You find a ton of guys that like golf a ton, many outdoors-men, that sort of thing. But this new guy, let's say Jeff, is way into Magic: The Gathering, video games, and internet culture. So, sensing a kindred spirit, I invited him out to drinks after work today, since we left early.

Giving up a seat on the subway or holding a door is one thing but walking an unknown distance is just idiotic. Hell just offer her the umbrella at that point if you care so much.

Off topic but golfers are outdoors men? Driving carts on paved paths and manicured grass where other carts bring you beverages isn’t an outdoor sport even though it happens outside.
 

TraBuch

Banned
I was driving in the rain once and saw a pregnant woman walking to what I assumed was work, so I offered her a ride and she accepted and I took her to Denny's. I've driven by dudes walking in the rain and have never offered a ride before.

Is that sexism? I feel like I only offered because she was pregnant, but I can't say for sure.
 
No, Logic is to protect you from the rain.

Social behaviour is not to do it because you fear the stranger. social behaviour can be shared by many cultures, it does not make it logic, just common sense, as you said, which is not the same as logic. Social behaviour can be completely understandable also.

And no, I do not care. I was just discussing around it. I am not the one starting the topic. As I said, it is an old story and I did not try more 'do you want to stay in the rain ? Yes, have a nice day" What is your agenda to make people appear as weird people ? End of story for me, anyway.

If someone really wanted to help, they could give the woman the umbrella or buy her a cheap one from the nearest convenience store. But it's rarely about actually helping
 
Okay i'm like 70 percent sure that wazoo guy is trolling, it's just hard to fathom how dumb his logic is in that situation.
Also OP's friend is a total creep, goddamn dude. The "waah im just being nice" shit doesn't hold much when like 90 percent of the whole "muh chivalry" shit is just dudes creeping on girls.

Just be nice to people, don't overdo it. And if a girl rejects your "chivalry" and your first thought is "wow so rude" maybe take some time to reflect on how much of a creeper nuisance you're being.

No, Logic is to protect you from the rain.

Social behaviour is not to do it because you fear the stranger. social behaviour can be shared by many cultures, it does not make it logic, just common sense, as you said, which is not the same as logic. Social behaviour can be completely understandable also.

And no, I do not care. I was just discussing around it. I am not the one starting the topic. As I said, it is an old story and I did not try more 'do you want to stay in the rain ? Yes, have a nice day" What is your agenda to make people appear as weird people ? End of story for me, anyway.

No, it's fully logical for women to reject getting in to a strangers car even if he's just being "kind :¨)". Because sexual harassment, misogynistic violence and rape targeted at women from men is still fucking super present in our entire world.
 
Again, and I'm not trying to sound rude here, but this is totally untrue. Socialization, community-mindedness, mentorship, and understanding the experiences of older generations are all incredibly important aspects of a child's development that have fallen by the wayside because of blanket prejudice and bigotry.

This is absolutely akin to saying "I don't want my kid socializing with black people, they're not going to gain anything from it and I've heard those people are dangerous" because they see a small number of black people committing crimes on the news. Normalizing a lack of contact between two groups of people for any reason is always a mistake and only leads to increased prejudice and profiling.

Jesus christ. No it's not.
 

Airola

Member
I personally seem to treat people differently in this order:
Old people - handicapped people - pregnant women - women with babies - women - men
I think children goes somewhere in that list too, but I'm not quite sure where.

It's not intentional. I just have noticed that for some reason I seem to think that's the order of people who I for a reason or another think deserves to be helped more than others. Generally I will help anyone regardless of age or gender but I have noticed that I tend to notice people needing or wanting help in that order. And by noticing I just mean that's how I think how it is, not that it definitely is that way.

So yeah, maybe I'm sexist and ageist and whatever else.


Then again if I think what I'd do in a situation where I would have to rescue only one person from a flaming building and each of them would be just as easy to rescue but I could rescue only one of them, I would probably choose to rescue either a child or a woman before anyone else (and after a possible relative or a person I know too).



The chivalrous thing to do would've been to give her the umbrella and walk away. The non sexist thing to do would be to be willing to do that with both men and women.

I open doors for both men and women, I really don't get the people that make a distinction in those circumstances based on sex.

Then again if the reasoning behind giving the umbrella and walking away or doing it also for men is to show one is not sexist because "look how I sacrifice my umbrella and look how I do this also for men", then it could be sexist too. It's the intention that counts. Not how you do it.
 

Supast4r

Junior Member
I would say that it’s definitely sexist in almost every situation that can be brought up for discussion. It doesn’t really matter that it’s well intended, because sexism among other things is so casually ingrained into society. It’s much simpler to just be nice to everyone regardless of their gender.
Annnndddddd we are done here
 
No, Logic is to protect you from the rain.

Social behaviour is not to do it because you fear the stranger. social behaviour can be shared by many cultures, it does not make it logic, just common sense, as you said, which is not the same as logic. Social behaviour can be completely understandable also.

And no, I do not care. I was just discussing around it. I am not the one starting the topic. As I said, it is an old story and I did not try more 'do you want to stay in the rain ? Yes, have a nice day" What is your agenda to make people appear as weird people ? End of story for me, anyway.
No, logic is not putting yourself in a potential dangerous situation. Your post here reads like you blame others for not getting into your car, which is creepy as hell.

Again, and I'm not trying to sound rude here, but this is totally untrue. Socialization, community-mindedness, mentorship, and understanding the experiences of older generations are all incredibly important aspects of a child's development that have fallen by the wayside because of blanket prejudice and bigotry.

This is absolutely akin to saying "I don't want my kid socializing with black people, they're not going to gain anything from it and I've heard those people are dangerous" because they see a small number of black people committing crimes on the news. Normalizing a lack of contact between two groups of people for any reason is always a mistake and only leads to increased prejudice and profiling.
You seriously going to compare not having your kid talk to strangers to not talking them to black people? I don't even know how to respond to this, it is such a strange comparison.
 

Snakeyes

Member
We stop at an intersection, and in the crosswalk in front of us a slim woman in a hoody walks alone, hands in her coat-pockets, in the rain. I don't blink an eye.

Jeff, without hesitation, emboldened by a few high ABV craft beers, grabs his umbrella, says "I'm gonna help her out, see you later man" and darts out the car, unfurls the umbrella, and begins walking alongside the woman shielding her from the rain.
That's hilarious. You should probably have a chat about the limits of being polite with your friend, that's pretty extreme even for a country boy.
 
Again, and I'm not trying to sound rude here, but this is totally untrue. Socialization, community-mindedness, mentorship, and understanding the experiences of older generations are all incredibly important aspects of a child's development that have fallen by the wayside because of blanket prejudice and bigotry.

This is absolutely akin to saying "I don't want my kid socializing with black people, they're not going to gain anything from it and I've heard those people are dangerous" because they see a small number of black people committing crimes on the news. Normalizing a lack of contact between two groups of people for any reason is always a mistake and only leads to increased prejudice and profiling.
That's quite the reaching of equating adults to black people. Pretty sure kids are not specified what ages of adults to avoid and which are ok, it's kind of all of them. Which sure, is a bit of stranger danger and facts bear out people more likely to be kidnapped will know the victim. But I don't think there is ageism going on the level of racism here. I'm not even sure how important kids hanging out with strangers is to their development.
 

driggonny

Banned
Modern chivalry is weird. I'd call it sexist but not like super hardcore obviously.

It's a really big deal where I live that guys give seats to women on the bus when all the seats are taken and I genuinely don't get it. We can stand just fine, nothing stopping us. I'd understand if she was pregnant or something but there's nothing making women less capable of standing for a bit.
 
Modern chivalry is weird. I'd call it sexist but not like super hardcore obviously.

It's a really big deal where I live that guys give seats to women on the bus when all the seats are taken and I genuinely don't get it. We can stand just fine, nothing stopping us. I'd understand if she was pregnant or something but there's nothing making women less capable of standing for a bit.
These are able-bodied women? Yeah, that's weird. Only time people give their seats to women here in UK are if they have a child, pregnant, or elderly.
 
I'm chivalrous to the women I date simply because I want to. I don't go in thinking "hey since I've opened the door for you, you now owe me something." Be kind to people because you want to not because you expect them to give you something nice in return.
 

Kevtones

Member
I just asked my girlfriend and she really appreciates my sexism. I do it because it feels honorable or near it.


I try to be kind to both genders though.
 
This is one of the few cases where I’m comfortable subscribing to the notion that we’re taking things too far as a culture.

Chivalry is a pretty word for courtesy, it’s not gender specific despite the assumption that the word is male to female in all scenarios. If chivalry is sexist, then I suppose it makes me sexist to pull my fiancé’s chair out for her or hold the door open? I think this is a case of reaching too far for a narrative, there’s really nothing sexist about kindness. I hold doors for everyone. I’ll pull out a chair for whoever. It’s not gender specific, just basic manners.

All that said, Jeff went above and beyond the call there. That wasn’t sexism, just some creepy emboldened confidence that caught a poor woman off guard, a largely unnecessary action. Again, that’s not sexism from my POV, just a bit... creepy and unnecessary.
 

Laekon

Member
Modern chivalry is weird. I'd call it sexist but not like super hardcore obviously.

It's a really big deal where I live that guys give seats to women on the bus when all the seats are taken and I genuinely don't get it. We can stand just fine, nothing stopping us. I'd understand if she was pregnant or something but there's nothing making women less capable of standing for a bit.

These are able-bodied women? Yeah, that's weird. Only time people give their seats to women here in UK are if they have a child, pregnant, or elderly.
I agree with this coming from the US.
 
I definitely think being overly polite can come off as gross at best and sexist at worst. A lot of "chivalrous" actions are things you could technically do for anybody regardless of sex to be a nice person. Are you holding the door for half a minute at a store while a woman walks up to it from the parking lot? Would you do the same if it was a man instead of a women? If not you probably should stop holding the door that long.

Edit: I should also add that this is for random people or people you don't know as well. Somebody you have a well established relationship (be it girlfriend, wife, sister, mom, etc) may appreciate the special treatment, it really just depends on the person.
 

ShdwDrake

Banned
I say its just dead. I've accidentally held the door open too many times so I have personal experience.

I tried to go on a date a few months ago and the girl got pissy because I opened her car door. Lol

I definitely think being overly polite can come off as gross at best and sexist at worst. A lot of "chivalrous" actions are things you could technically do for anybody regardless of sex to be a nice person. Are you holding the door for half a minute at a store while a woman walks up to it from the parking lot? Would you do the same if it was a man instead of a women? If not you probably should stop holding the door that long.

Don't worry I make sure I'm not holding the door open and if we are walking to the door at the same time I slow down.
 
There is a difference between "chivalry" and harassment. I mean, even if you're friend had good intentions, he have to face the fact that every women have to deal with toxic masculinity when they step a foot into public space. So you have to deal according to it and avoid everything creepy.

And no, "chivalry" is not sexist in my book. It's normal that i take the heaviest bag (for instance) if i'm with my sisters, my wife or female friends since average male have more physical strength than average woman.
 

Cocaloch

Member
How do you even have "Chivalry" in classless society?

What's the classless society you're talking about?

There is a difference between "chivalry" and harassment. I mean, even if you're friend had good intentions, he have to face the fact that every women have to deal with toxic masculinity when they step a foot into public space. So you have to deal according to it and avoid everything creepy.

And no, "chivalry" is not sexist in my book. It's normal that i take the heaviest bag (for instance) if i'm with my sisters, my wife or female friends since average male have more physical strength than average woman.

If you're grabbing the heaviest bag among your family are you doing it because the average man is stronger than the average woman or is it because you know you are stronger than the people in the situation?

Chivalry is absolutely sexist. The question is if that's a bad thing or how much of a bad thing it is..
 
If you're grabbing the heaviest bag among your family are you doing it because the average man is stronger than the average woman or is it because you know you are stronger than the people in the situation?

Chivalry is absolutely sexist. The question is if that's a bad thing or how much of a bad thing it is..

Nope, it's not. Sexism is not about considering that women are different from men but that they are inferior. Treating women with special consideration is not sexist. If a see two men fighting i would probably not intervene, but i would definitely do so if a see a man hitting a woman.

And yes, men in my family would always take the heaviest bags. Why ? Because men (generally) have more physical force. It would be totally unfair to not take that into consideration.
 

Raging Spaniard

If they are Dutch, upright and breathing they are more racist than your favorite player
Its an evoving conversation. I hold the door open for men and women, but a lady friend of mine will NOT go through the door if I hold it open for her so I respect her stance and dont hold it for her.
 

_Ryo_

Member
That is a pretty creepy thing to do, in my opinion. Like, I am not going to get out of the car and start walking with a total stranger, if I were her I'd be super suspicious.

The dude didnt even ask her if she wanted him to do it. And then gets all pissy when she doesnt want his help. No means no, always. Also He should have asked her from the very start, it is the very least he could do. If he really felt he needed to help her out, as some kind of way to make himself feel better and fight his own insecurities he could have just handed over the umbrella for her to keep and went back to the car right away. Buy a new one.

I just find it an extremely weird behavior. I think maybe if he was already walking down the street and heading in the same direction and had an umbrella out he could have asked if she wanted to share it, with a little leeway. As soon as she says she is not interested, it is time to back off. Immediately.
 
Lot of low key defensiveness in this thread. It's natural to want to rationalize - sexism has a bad connotation and if we are good, then what we do isn't sexist. But we need to be able to discuss and accept that certain attitudes are embedded in our socialization and be able to discuss them and, yes, call out certain behaviors, without defense walls immediately going up.
 

Lmo911

Member
Context is everything. Opening a door for someone while you are going into a restaurant is way different than exiting your car and following a total stranger around for an extended period of time, especially in this day and age. Lady probably felt like she was the target of a prank or something worse.

Even a boy scout should have the self awareness to ask an old lady if she needs help before dragging her across the street. It's part of the basic social contract. You don't know the goals or situations surrounding the person you are wanting to help, so you ask before you do. That's manners. That's Chivalrous. If they say no and then you force help upon then, then it was never about doing the good deed, it was about the satisfaction of doing what you perceived as a good deed. That is not cool.

One is about the person, the other is about you. These can easily intersect, but when they don't you carry on.

Ideally Chivalry doesn't have to be sexist, but the term and concepts around it are outdated. Helping others is what you should be aiming for. That never goes out of style.
 
Do people consider it sexist that I open my girlfriend's car door for her, hold the door open and let her walk in and out of a building first, carry her bags when we are leaving the store and so on?
I mean.. kinda. I used to do it more, but as I've become more conscious of it, started to question it and talked about it with my wife, now my wife does it for me too and it's a lot more equal. Mind you, I'm far stronger physically than she is so it's reasonable that I do the physical things (such as carrying shopping bags) more than she does, but she's also plenty capable (obviously) and can do it just fine too, so it would be kind of lame if I did it every time. As if she was so weak that she can't do it.

Why were you drunk driving op?
I'm glad someone else noticed.

OP and his friend weren't shitfaced obviously, but driving under influence isn't cool regardless. Drinking "a few high ABV" beers does affect your driving capability and decision making.

Nope, it's not. Sexism is not about considering that women are different from men but that they are inferior. Treating women with special consideration is not sexist. If a see two men fighting i would probably not intervene, but i would definitely do so if a see a man hitting a woman.

And yes, men in my family would always take the heaviest bags. Why ? Because men (generally) have more physical force. It would be totally unfair to not take that into consideration.
But almost nobody who does something sexist actually consciously thinks women are inferior. I assume you think it's fair to question why one is giving special consideration to one gender right? Now, you know people have all kinds of various biases, so don't you think there's at least a fairly reasonable possibility that you might actually subconsciously think of them as inferior? As if that they can't handle it.

Should the most capable person always do the thing that they're most capable in? Don't you think that's a little silly? Does the best cook in your family handle the cooking every time? Does the person who's the fastest at washing dishes handle the dishes every time? Like, my wife is way more efficient and fast at cleaning than I am, but that doesn't mean she should do it all the time. Hell, she's way more efficient at doing pretty much any housework, but that doesn't mean she should be doing it all every time. To be honest, I'm a lazy bum and I hate it and doing housework makes me miserable, but I still try to do my part because it's not fair for her otherwise.

It's fair to take into account who's the most capable - like my wife still does the housework more than I do - but that doesn't mean they should be the only one who do it. My wife doing all of the housework would be pretty nasty towards her and it would also be pretty condescending for me - as if I was so weak that I can't do any of it (and well, I am weak indeed but not that weak). Men being generally physically stronger doesn't mean women aren't also well capable of carrying their bags at times.

I think it's also fair to ask the question, if you had a man who doesn't do pretty much anything physical and a woman who goes to gym and in general does a lot of physical activities and might well be stronger than the man is, would you assume that she carries the bags then? Correct me if I'm wrong but I'd guess not, and that kind of alludes to that you're just trying to rationalize your sexist idea of chivalry doesn't it? If that sounds condescending or mockery I do apologize as that really isn't the intent - I know you as a poster and I really do think that you're a good person. But that doesn't mean that you can't have unconscious biases too (I know I certainly have those) and it might heavily affect your thinking here.
 

FiggyCal

Banned
We don't have to pretend that men are generally nicer to women when it comes to chivalry because of the potential for sex. I'd say it's best to temper that way of thinking. I am not immune to it either. I'm sure I've helped women more than I would have helped a guy due to being trained to do so impulsively. But I try to keep it in mind and temper it. If you don't, that's how you end up either becoming a door mat or getting upset when your 101 favors didn't lead to sex.

Just ask yourself this:

1. If the girl was dating somebody/married, would you still do help?
2. If the girl later began dating somebody else, would you be upset?

I think its deeply embarrassing, but its something I've got to work on myself. Like I have been in those positions where I'm somehow crushed if a girl I don't even know tells me she has a boyfriend. It's definitely an issue for me.
 

Morrigan Stark

Arrogant Smirk
1) Chivalry is indeed absolutely sexist
2) Your co-worker is fucking creepy, not even chivalrous, just creepy and dumb
3) Drunk driving, really?

Yeah if you things for a woman only because of her gender, it's sexist. Something being sexist doesn't always mean it's that bad in an individual level (like opening a door only for women is pretty harmless), but it can still feed many larger sexist concepts in society. Patriarchy is still strong and certainly realizing that women aren't some weak creatures to be protected and helped at every turn would help.

Also...

...I don't know if I'm the only one here who found this pretty disturbing but why are you both driving under influence? You talk about it so casually too. I don't know how high the limit of alcohol in your blood is in your place, but you really shouldn't be driving especially after "a few high ABV" beers.


There have been plenty threads about the subject so maybe it's better not turning this thread to that discussion, so all I'll say regarding that is that plenty of women disagree and do think it's sexist.
Great post.

In the country where I live, gun carry is not allowed. Of course, US ...
Oh shut up. There's no significant gun violence problem where I live, and I still wouldn't ever get into a car with a stranger and I wouldn't do that anywhere on Earth. Stop it.
 

Syder

Member
My interpretation of 'chivalry' is being polite and respectful to everyone, it may be for the purpose of being more appealing to women to some people but that isn't inherently sexist.
 

_Ryo_

Member
Chilvary has evolved. I hold the door/elevator open for everyone, men, women, children, no matter the age they are unless it is clear they dont want me to and then I dont and I dont feel bad if they dont want me to.

I carried an elderly mans groceries to his car for him before.

I did this for an elderly women as well when I worked at a clothing store.

I dont really pay attention to who gets in or out of an elevator first unless it is clear they're in a hurry.

Basically I try my best to be respectful to everyone*.

And.that is the kind of stuff Id consider as chilvarous today.

*Except Nazis, or anyone wearing MAGA hats. They can go fuck off.
 

THE GUY

Banned
I've never had anyone around me do this kind of thing. Most times the only assistance I give is to elderly people or little kids. People who generally need it under certain circumstances. I'm guessing this is a cultural thing too. Only times I've helped someone else was a few guys when their cars were broken down. But that's quite different from someone walking in the rain and you walking alongside them. I mean, who does that? That's just weird.

A lot of times I hear about chivalry in the modern sense, it feels like it's mostly a white people thing. The whole holding open car doors or pulling chairs out or such. Those kind of little gestures I don't do for anyone except my older siblings and parents.
 
But almost nobody who does something sexist actually consciously thinks women are inferior. I assume you think it's fair to question why one is giving special consideration to one gender right? Now, you know people have all kinds of various biases, so don't you think there's at least a fairly reasonable possibility that you might actually subconsciously think of them as inferior? As if that they can't handle it.

Should the most capable person always do the thing that they're most capable in? Don't you think that's a little silly? Does the best cook in your family handle the cooking every time? Does the person who's the fastest at washing dishes handle the dishes every time? Like, my wife is way more efficient and fast at cleaning than I am, but that doesn't mean she should do it all the time. Hell, she's way more efficient at doing pretty much any housework, but that doesn't mean she should be doing it all every time. To be honest, I'm a lazy bum and I hate it and doing housework makes me miserable, but I still try to do my part because it's not fair for her otherwise.

It's fair to take into account who's the most capable - like my wife still does the housework more than I do - but that doesn't mean they should be the only one who do it. My wife doing all of the housework would be pretty nasty towards her and it would also be pretty condescending for me - as if I was so weak that I can't do any of it (and well, I am weak indeed but not that weak). Men being generally physically stronger doesn't mean women aren't also well capable of carrying their bags at times.

I think it's also fair to ask the question, if you had a man who doesn't do pretty much anything physical and a woman who goes to gym and in general does a lot of physical activities and might well be stronger than the man is, would you assume that she carries the bags then? Correct me if I'm wrong but I'd guess not, and that kind of alludes to that you're just trying to rationalize your sexist idea of chivalry doesn't it? If that sounds condescending or mockery I do apologize as that really isn't the intent - I know you as a poster and I really do think that you're a good person. But that doesn't mean that you can't have unconscious biases too (I know I certainly have those) and it might heavily affect your thinking here.

I can assure you have a lot of people think and says loudly that women are inferior in regard to driving, or have toxic attitude to women like constantly sexually harassing them etc... Or women that won't you allow you in the kitchen if you're a man. It's seems shocking but it's rather common in my south american country, or even in France (especially the driving part).

About the second side of your question, it's not about capacity but difficulty. If i have a 40 kg backpack and a 15kg backpack, it's obvious that i would take the 40 and give the 15 to my wife/sister/mother. Because if we have to walk several hours with this backpack, we won't feel the same amount of pain. Again, it's a general rule, it dosen't apply if you're especially weak or with a especially physically strong woman. I have a woman family member that are more fit and strong than me and i won't take that in consideration in that case.

I just read the last part of your message now, thanks you for your appreciation, and as you can see, i can surprise you ;)

I definitely thinks that some aspect of what is considered "chivalry" could be sexist, but i don't think we can rule out everything as a rule of thumb. One aspect that is debatable is to hold door for instance, i always hold door for people but i will, unconsciously or not, ALWAYS try to hold door for women. I definitely have sexist cultural standard, i'm not saying that i'm magically cured from that, i think we all have. But i really wonder if giving special consideration to women, in an honoring way, is really sexist as it's core ? I think you could make the argument that it's implicitly saying that they are weaker/inferior than us, but it's a way to interpret it, you could also says that it's could be a way to give them a higher place in society. I heard both views from women themselves, but out of personal experience, most women i knew appreciate those things. Of course, it's just anecdotal.

Of course, i can totally respect and would not impose my "chivalrous" ways to a woman who would be upset by it, out of "chivalrous" spirit ;)
 
I try to be courteous toward everyone, man or woman. I might do things for a woman that I wouldn't do for a man, like offer to walk them home late at night (if she's someone I know) or help them carry a heavy box up the stairs or whatever. Maybe that's chivalry, but idgaf, and I wouldn't insist if she said no.

I definitely would not hop out of a car and get ride up alongside a stranger and hold an umbrella for them in the rain. That's just really creepy.

Basically this.

There's nothing wrong with helping people in need. (I go out of my way to hold doors for older people, and I can't help but call them "sir" and "ma'am.") Similarly, "chivalry" with someone you're romantically attached to is a completely separate thing.

But there's absolutely something wrong with creepily inserting yourself into a situation, uninvited and unannounced, driven solely by your views on gender.

"Chivalry" with strangers just isn't and shouldn't be a thing unless the circumstances absolutely warrant it. Nobody wants to walk home with someone they don't know. They probably don't want to accept an umbrella from someone. They might appreciate a piece of information, like, "Hey, there's a CVS over there if you need an umbrella."
 

KillLaCam

Banned
Yeah kinda. Like I'm not running up to some random girl with an umbrella in the rain just because she's a girl. It's just rain, she's not somehow weak against it because because of her gender. (I would still help her with the umbrella though, but I'd help a guy in the same situation).

I think its because I was raised by my Mom instead of both parents, but alot of chivalrous situations make me feel like you're saying things like "oh you're a girl so you're too fragile to open a door for yourself , let me run across the road to open that door for you". If I get to the door first then I'll open the door for you and let you go first, but I'm not gonna sprint to the door because I see a girl is closer to it than me.


Alot of the time it seems like it's an inconvenience to girls too. Like she has to sit there in the car and wait on you to run around and open the door, instead of just getting out her self. I'd be extremely annoyed if I had to wait on someone to open my car door lol
 
Top Bottom