I'm going to apologize in advance-- I'm not nearly as eloquent as many of you. I'm one of your younger, sillier Atheists. I hope though that you still give my ideas a chance. Who knows, maybe my directness will prove refreshing!

Chivalry has always baffled me. In my mind it generally equates to "Men repressing the asshole side of their personality so that you will bear their young". To others, it means, "Open the door for me, pussy." I've always felt like men sort of do that sort of thing because their parents have always told them they have to. Like church. But maybe I'm wrong?

There's this boy in my art class. He took one of my besties to prom. He happened to hear that I went to a feminist lecture and he laughed a light (but direct), condescending laugh... which I ignored because I'm so... feminine. A few days later, I walk into class, and it's the first period of the day so the chairs are all stacked on top of the desks. I go to take my chair down, and this kid immediately starts yelling and runs over, takes my chair, and sets it down. I yell at him, mostly joking, and I point to Joe, sitting across from me and ask why he had to steal my chair instead of Joe's.

Him: "Because Joe's a MAN!"
Me: "Haahh, so you stole my chair because I'm a woman?!?" <-- Thought I was joking
Him: "YES!! ...It's not a BAD thing..."
Me: *says nothing in utter shock*

I marvel at this boy's idea of the world. He's in for a good shot of disillusionment in college. I've heard men complain at how women will get mad if you open a door for them, and also get mad if you won't. I've never seen this happen, personally, I think it's mostly a paranoia.

This is a bit different. This is not anything groundbreaking or horrid, but it did make me think. It's the equivalent of stopping a girl from 20 feet back, pushing her away from the door, and then opening it for her. It doesn't make anyone's life any easier. Meanwhile, poor Joe may be carrying a stack of boxes, and no courtesy is shed upon him.

So what have I done to deserve the "respect" that is portrayed through the opening of doors, walking of home, and picking up of pencils? (Maybe I'm not accustomed. When I went to prom, and the door was opened, I would literally wait a second or two before realizing it was for me.)

It sounds nice enough on the surface, but really, I don't think my vagina qualifies me for anything special that we can't bestow upon men as well. I've never been a huge fan of the feminism where we treat women like men. Really, I think we should be treating men like women.

Views: 510

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

So weak she cant open doors? Thinking she cant open doors is like treating her like a baby. Its infantalizing.No one likes to be treated like theyre that incredibly weak and youre not doing anyone any favors by forcing that outdated idea on women, even when shes echoed the idea that she doesnt appreciate it. Thats far from 'chivalrous' and is more controlling than anything. Especially if its an old guy....chances are shes actually stronger than he.
I believe most women would feel like they're being treated with respect and dignity rather than as a weakling.
You dont have data to support that and the replies here suggest otherwise. No one likes to be treated like they are physically incompetent. The thing is, is also feelings are distortive. Many women thought that they would lose their special 'lady status' if they got the right to vote. They felt like they would not be treated with dignity and respect (ironically) if they had the vote. It was seen as chivalrous to keep women out of politics. It was said, 'leave the dirty politics to men.' I dont think being treated like an invalid is in anyways dignified or respectful. Autonomously from feeling I dont think you can defend that claim that its respectful or dignified. Some men (as have written on this forum) dont really like it as well. They wonder, why is it only the women get doors held for them?
I have the empirical data of never having had a female show any sign of being offended. By your estimation, perhaps they are all acting. If so, then they should get Academy Awards, because their smiles and "thank yous" seem quite genuine.

Maybe one day you and I will arrive at a door at the same time, and I will open it for you. Feel free to show disgust and anger over my transgression of being nice.
Again, you live in Texas. Its not a place known for progressivism and progressive attitudes among women. Remember they are also women and less likely to affront a guy than a woman. It may be that they are secretely displeased but dont want to show it. Especially if its a place like Texas where archaic mannerisms are prevalent and they feel outpowered. Regardless the attitude that if she doesnt like it its her problem is very attagonistic and controlling. Thinking that women are sooooo weak that they cant even hold doors open for themselves is offensive regardless of whether or not women in Texas are smart enough to know that. Also women supporting negatie ideas about themselves I nothing new. Before womens suffrage of the anti-suffrage organizations a majority were run by women. Prevalent attitudes especially negative ones about women arent something that women who live in these areas are immune to. The issue autonomous from feelings or lack of retort it is wrong to treat women and exclusively women like they are too weak to even open doors for themselves. It is also dismissive of men. It also reinforces screwed up ideas about women such as the idea that they either act like they are invalids or they are being mean. It privileges the docile and punishes the assertive. Again I am not showing anger at you 'being nice' in this hypothetical scenario but I am showing anger at you treating me like a physical incompetent to make yourself feel big.
I have to finally speak up here - you keep saying that opening doors for women is due to their being weak, but it's essentially the opposite: that women are inherently deserving of men's respect and concern. If anything, it's misandronistic, not misogynistic.

It's the same thing as the tropes about men throwing their jackets on the ground so that women don't have to step in the gutter, or standing up every time a woman gets out of her chair, or taking off your hat whenever you speak to a woman, and so on: the idea behind them all is to show respect to women, to treat them like royalty. Originally, the women being shown these affects were royalty, but eventually it came to be viewed as proper, refined behavior for everyone. Chivalry has more to do with female worship than subjugation.
Well, I think chivalry has more to do with God worship than female. Heck, I am thankful my neighbors don't practice this.

I will pick out the goods ones from "The Ten Commandments of the Code of Chivalry"

1. Thou shalt believe all that the Church teaches, and shalt observe all its directions.
2. Thou shalt defend the Church.
6. Thou shalt make war against the Infidel without cessation, and without mercy.

lol, so under the code of chivalry, you should kill all atheist right away and without mercy.
They are two sides of the same coin. I find it a stretch to think that women would be offended at chivalrous gestures; if anything, like most people, women are quite adept at accepting double standards. However, these traditional mores are too rigid and outdated. One should just be polite to everyone as circumstances dictate.
Its not treating them like royalty but like they are delicate fragile flowers who cant survive without men. Its not real respect but faux respect. I think youre overlooking the reality of what 'chivalry' is meant to imply about women. It was even used to try and keep the vote from women. It salso a little hard to think how something created by men could be sexist to them.
Not to mention but you simply dont apply respect to people whom youve never met before nor when you dont know the content of their character. That sounds like you apply a lower standard of respect for women than men, meaning that you expect a man to prove himself while you dont the woman? Its like saying you just apply the same brush stroke because the standard is lower. Why isnt it then that men wouldnt be deserving of it as well? And if its common courtesy then it should be applied to both men and women?
Yeah I hate that. My experience is that its good to be reciprocally polite, like one can open the door for people behind you man or woman but its not supposed to be 'rush over and hold the door open for her all the while smiling expecting some big thank you.' Chivalry was really for the mans benefit and not the womans. That guy sounds like a pig. Like hes forcing it on you to reinforce some archaic gender role crap because he doesnt like to see women help themselves, like he likes to see them vulnerable. Creepy.
lol, yeah.. opening a door for someone (man or women) isn't exactly chivalry, its common courteously. I think the term is being taken out of context in this thread. I am sure the guy that rushes over and opens the door for a female isn't thinking "Man, that women is so weak, I better run over there and open the door... maybe I will get a number." It probably stems from his parents bitching at him during his childhood for not be "respectful to women".

Just to be clear, I agree it is stupid for someone to rush over to open a door for anyone who doesn't have their hands full, or rushing to pick something up that you dropped (unless it is needed, ex. someone hands as full). But there is nothing wrong with people being simply courteous, but it shouldn't be based on sex.

If someone is behind me, or coming in as I'm going out, I hold the door for them (unless they do it for me first). If they found it offensive, then that is there own issue which they can work on.

But on the other hand, I was raised to judge my actions according to sex in some situations, which I would stand firmly behind still today. I was always taught not to hit women, and not just in the angry husband form, but in general.
Example, if I anyone comes to me aggressively, I always attempt to defuse the situation without violence, a defensive position, but if a man physically attacks me, I have no hesitation to switch to an offensive mode. But, if a women attacks me, I would remain in a defensive position, and simply try to evade the attacks and physically restraining her, while not causing any harm. The only way I would hit a female is if I felt it was my only option to evade death or serious injury.

My wife used to get yelled at when she worked as a server from her northerner boss who didn't like her "southern hospitality" (I live in Florida). So, this was proof to me that some people, men or women, do take offense to kindness... which is kinda stupid if you ask me. Either way, the corporation fired him a few weeks later because he was an ass hole.

I guess these acts being label as chivalry stems for Courtly Love, which is found in chivalry, which is typically thought of as the gentleness and graciousness to all women. But I supposed that could be interpreted in a negative fashion.

Here are the "Stages of courtly love", brought to you by Wiki.

* Attraction to the lady, usually via eyes/glance
* Worship of the lady from afar
* Declaration of passionate devotion
* Virtuous rejection by the lady
* Renewed wooing with oaths of virtue and eternal fealty
* Moans of approaching death from unsatisfied desire (and other physical manifestations of lovesickness)
* Heroic deeds of valor which win the lady's heart
* Consummation of the secret love
* Endless adventures and subterfuges avoiding detection




Update Your Membership :




Nexus on Social Media:


© 2018   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service