Previous post
I’m sure you’re all glad to hear it.
Over at The American Prospect, they’ve started a feature called “Ask A Feminist”. It features Ann Friedman of Feministing and someone I’ve never heard of, Dana Goldstein. The video we’ll cover shortly is the third installment. The first installment asked if it was sexist to say that the financial crisis was caused by men (not really answered coherently), and the second asked if it was sexist to question Sonia Sotomayor’s qualifications (no, but only if you’re questioning the “right” qualifications).
Those two were really your typical, run-of-the-mill feminist blather, but when I saw the newest topic my interest was aroused: is it sexist for men to open doors for women?
See for yourself what they said, but I’m sure you can guess:
So, feminist number one, in a giggling frenzy, says that she likes men to open doors for her because it’s “retro” or “tongue-in-cheek”, and she thinks it’s a fun little game (I’ll, like, open the door back! Hahaha!). Feminist number two immediately shuts that down with a look of clear disdain on her face and announces that yup, it’s sexist. And why? Because men specifically opening the door for women is rooted in chivalry, and on this both feminists agree: chivalry is, like, totally sexist.
They then go on to completely misunderstand what exactly chivalry is, characterizing it as a movement that portrays women as dainty and delicate, needing male protection, and is overall a sexist ideology.
I think this quote, though, sums up the point of the video the best:
I guess if a friend, a male friend of mine, opened doors for me every time I hung out with him, it might raise some questions, you know, why is he doing this, he’s being so overt and deliberate about it, what sort of attitudes does he have about women, like, how might he be thinking of me?
It’s OK if it’s a stranger, see, because she isn’t “invested” in that stranger’s politics or worldviews, nor can she influence their worldview. So in that case, it’s OK to just sit back and enjoy. If it’s someone you know, then you better set them straight!!
See, men? If you are dating or are friends with a feminist and try to be chivalrous and respectful towards them, this is the automatic response: suspicion, disdain, distrust.
Funnily enough, these same feminists automatically shriek and complain when men say that feminists are responsible for the death of chivalry. Yet how can feminists claim that their “chivalry is sexist” screed had no effect of the level of chivalrous actions men are willing to take?
The fact is, in a recent study, 84% of the men polled blamed radical feminism for the death of modern chivalry. How? Because feminists, in their own words, “devalued chivalry”, “made it sexist” and that “the I-don’t-need-a-man culture has crippled chivalry in the public sphere”. And it’s absolutely the truth. Feminists describe chivalry as Ann and Dana did in this video: an old, sexist ideology bent on keeping women as dainty, delicate flowers who constantly need male protection. Is that even remotely similar to what chivalry actually encompassed? No, but that doesn’t stop the two of them, along with multiple other feminists, from smearing it.
If only they could understand. The very act of being chivalrous towards a woman gives her power, because that man sees her as someone that he respects so much, he has to treat her with chivalrous actions in order to be worthy of her. It’s so much easier to paint it as sexist, but the truth is, chivalry is empowering to women. Chivalrous men see it as their duty to treat the women in their lives with respect, honor, and courtesy at all times. Why? Because they love and respect the women in their lives enough that they cannot treat them any other way. If it is their girlfriend or wife, they treat them with chivalry so that they can make themselves worthy of her, because they respect her, and because she deserves it.
Someone explain to me how that equals keeping women powerless or dainty or delicate with men needing to protect them. I clearly must be missing it.
Now, specifically, the issue was a man holding open the door for a woman, which was overall deemed as sexist. Do they really believe men do it so that women don’t have to strain their tiny lady arms? I somehow doubt it. Matt, for example, opens the door for me almost every time I get into his truck. I’ve opened the door myself and climbed on in without his assistance, so clearly he knows my lady arms can handle the straining of opening the door, so why, then, might he do it? Could it possibly be because he’s being nice? Or respectful? There’s nothing sexist about it.
And frankly, I think this entire argument shows more about the worldview of feminists than it does about chivalrous, door-holding men. I think it shows just how narrow-minded feminists are, how distrusting and suspicious of men they are, and what lengths they’ll go to find sexism in even the smallest instances. Unfortunately, there are quite a lot of women who have bought into the feminist bullshit.
But thankfully, this woman hasn’t. And neither have most men. There are many women out there who are absolutely yearning for the return of chivalry, and can’t understand why it’s missing from their lives. They cry on the phone to their friends about the men who have treated them so badly, and are missing what they’re doing wrong. The reality is that as soon as women can let go of the man-hating feminist ideals indoctrinated into them at their high schools and colleges, the sooner they can find a respectful, chivalrous man who can make them happy.
Great insight CF.
The folks over there just can’t have it both ways. Until this reminder, I hadn’t really noticed that I have drastically reduced my door holding and other traditional behaviors around women.
BobV says: I generally open the door for anyone behind me if I happen to get there first and there’s a line. Just common courtesy I thought.
I do enjoy the fact that while feminists will rail against trivial advantages they receive for their gender (doors being opened, men paying for a meal, etc), they have absolutely no issue in areas that really matter where women are benefiting from their sex. Just off the top of my head: women receive lower sentences for comparable crimes than men, women have lower rates of suicide, drug abuse as teens, accidental deaths, incarceration rates, are less likely to be cited for behavioral issues in school (because the curriculum caters to girls at the expense of boys), they are more likely to graduate from high school and go to college, more likely to be employed at the moment, are not required to sign up for the draft have always had a greater life expectancy, etc.
I’ll take feminists claims for equality seriously when they address those issues. As is they come across as wanting dominance and revenge more than actual equality.
Cylar says: Some people just have to be able to portray themselves as victims. It’s how they avoid taking any responsibility for their lives or the choices they make.
Frank White says: chicks like this are we we invented anal.
I can attest to this. I’m only 22, and I’ve had women my age get angry at me for holding doors open. I’ve had them get mad when I state that I think that the sexes are equal at this point. They get mad when I state that we might have different, but equal natural roles. They even take offense when I mention that they have THE MOST IMPORTANT ROLE OF ALL TIME, without having to pay $30,000 in graduate school fees. The attack on women by feminism is exactly that, an attack on the things that make women women. Not lesser, not subservient, but women.
mj says: I remember riding in an elevator one day with a woman and two guys she apparently worked with. On the short ride down, she was complaining that her boss expected her to bake treats for office meetings. I wasn’t particularly buying this, but I decided that her expressed feminism meant that I should not worry about exiting the elevator before her, particularly since I was nearest to the door. When the elevator stopped at the main floor, the two guys waited, and she just pushed me to get out first. I’m bettin’ she was never coerced into making cupcakes, though it makes a better story that way.
By the way, you can see some hot feminists at Rightwing News in the The 10 Hottest Liberal Women In Politics article. I would say two (and one photo too fuzzy to be sure), but you may disagree.
Johann says: Cassy, you knocked it out of the park with this statement:
“The very act of being chivalrous towards a woman gives her power, because that man sees her as someone that he respects so much, he has to treat her with chivalrous actions in order to be worthy of her.”
I thank God every day for women like you; for the record, my girlfriend is also like you, in that she knows the real reason for chivalry.
Rob Farrington says: I hold the door open for anyone, male, female, or Confused, on the general grounds that, well, if I was behind somebody who was going through a door, I’d certainly rather not have them let the door shut on my face and then have to spend a couple of hours waiting in A&E before having a nose splint fitted. Or is ‘doing unto others’ a sign of having been brainwashed by a Judeo-Christian imperialistic patriarchal ideology these days?
Rachel Lucas did a post about this kind of thing many moons ago (although I’m not going to look for the link right now because it’s Crazy O’Clock here now in England!). I think that she was basically saying that the qualities that she admired in men were exactly the same as the ones that she admired in other women. Loyalty, compassion, a sense of duty, and one of humour…those are all things that I admire. I suppose that’s why I don’t judge all (or even any)women I meet by the standards of loons such as those at Femifisting, and even manage to read blogs by females every day (although I’m obviously really trying to find out how the ‘enemy’ thinks!).
I also have close female friends, although I’m probably really trying to get into their underwear by using the aforementioned tactic i.e. pretending that I’m really nice by not letting doors shut in their faces. I really don’t know – as males, we’re totally incapable of being self aware, or genuinely considerate of anyone else’s feelings.
It was easier before the invention of doors, of course. Or at least, it probably was on Plant Feministing. We just used to hit women over the head with clubs and then drag them by their hair into our caves. Oh, for older and simpler times…
Rob Farrington says: Sorry, I meant ‘Planet’ Feministing! The ale that I’d distilled from woolly mammoth blood and then spilled over the keyboard as a result of being a clumsy male, affected my typing.
I’d hire a far more competent and careful female assistant to correct my typos, only that’d probably make me a sexist pig.
Hally says: You can just tell that the feminist on the right side of the screen is already questioning what on earth she’s doing. I give her another year, maybe two, before she abandons the nonsense and actually tries to lead a normal life.
Andy says: That was an awesome final paragraph Cassy. It seems completely obvious that women can avoid abusive relationships by seeking out respectful, chivilrous men (who are usually Conservatives). Makes a whole lot more sense than the feminist claim – “Fight Rape and Violence against Women by always voting for politicans who think its alright to kill unborn babies”
Jim Smith says: Funny. I opened the door for two different ladies at the Hardees on Busch Dr. in Jax this AM and they both got slightly flustered and said thank you. They both parted with little smiles on their face. Guess they weren’t mainstream enough to buy into the feminazi crapola…
Jim Smith says: Hey! You are getting traffic from conservative grapevine…cool!
LOL Feminists are dip shits. They exist in my world, I don’t exist in theirs. And in my world, they don’t count for much.
If I want to hold a door open for a woman, I will. If she wants to act like a rude little twit because I do, let her. Either way, I have concerns far weightier than what a frigid, ideologically rigid sexist has to say.
President Friedman says: I tend to open doors for anyone coming in behind me, but one thing I’ve always noticed is that even this simple act of courtesy works different when holding the door open for a man or a woman.
When holding the door open for a man, there is a sort of ‘passing of the baton’ where I hand the weight of the door over to them, and they walk through behind me. With women, it is silently understood that I will hold the door open until they finish walkng through. If I were to attempt to pass the weight of the door on to them, they most likely would slam face-first into the door and then give me a very ugly look. Likewise, if I were to hold the door open for a man until he had finished walking through, I’d likely get an eyebrow raised in my direction.
Knott Buyinit says: I weigh 230 lbs and my wife weighs 110 lbs. This weight ratio between sexes is probably fairly common (especially if you consider only ‘effective’ weight, and not just weight from ‘flab’). Without “chivalry”, my wife – and most women – would be completely at my or most any other man’s mercy, physically.
I love how ‘feminists’ assume a certain level of chivalry from men, but refuse to allow men to go beyond that level. And before you start trying to say that the ‘chivalry’ I’m talking about is just the range of basic rights we guarantee for everyone (the right to not be physically induced to do things against our will, the right to freedom of movement and association, the right to say and do as we please, when we please, etc), consider what the law allows us towards our children.
A century of two ago, husbands had every right to do with their wives the same as they may still do with their minor children (physically restraint or punish them, for example). Sometimes we forget how far we’ve come.
CaptDMO says: So, feminist number one, in a giggling frenzy, says….
Feminist number two immediately shuts that down with….
And we should care what anyone who rhetorically identifies themselves as “feminist” has to say because…?
Patty says: I guess I am raising a sexist son and proud of it. I see chivalry as a way of showing respect and honor to women and I always thank any man who holds my door.
Thomas Jackson says: Thank God for femanazis. Now whenever I go on a cruise I can with clear conscious know that I am right to yank out of the lifeboat any female who is stealing my rightful place. What could our ancestors have been thinking?
lin simone says: In fact, the feminist official party liners clearly understand chivalry. They criticize the practice because it reflects well upon their collective nemesis, men. It is revealing that they are so easily and readily made to feel threatened by such innocuous acts of kindness. They might feel less envious if they could extend chivalry of their own. Chivalry’s roots come from an era in which ethics were revered and the term “civilized society” was recognized as an oxymoron.
Don L says: Once on a long hot bus ride on the “business bus” from the city, I made the mistake of offering my seat to a lady with a heavy briefcase and unbrella. She was waiting for such a fool -she excoriated me as a sexist pig loud enough to stop all talking in the entire bus. When she was through, I just said that I wasn’t offering her my seat because she was a woman, but because of her obvious advanced age. She got off at the next stop to jeers and laughter!
I R A Darth Aggie says: a respectful, chivalrous man who can make them happy
No one can do that. People must find internal peace and happiness on their own. No one can make them.
Sadly, one can be made miserable by others…
Suzie says: At my office, I notice that the men hold open the doors and let the women enter and leave the elevators first. I like it. I don’t think they are being demeaning. I think they are being respectful.
If I get to a door first, I don’t wait for the man behind me to open it. But, if we arrive at the same time, the main will usually open it.
I’ve never considered it sexist. It just the way people in the South were raised.
Suzie says: Not the “main”. The “man”. I cannot type. Ugh.
grayjohn says: My ex wife is a feminist…
Suzie,
EXACTLY. My mama woulda beat my ass for not holding a door open for a woman, a kid, someone very handicapped, some small dood, etc etc.
Point being, I’m not even thinking of being sexist or racist or anti-feminist or whatever the hell I’m supposed to be doing now, I’m just being a friendly person. It’s sad that our society is so touchy about chivalry and yet so cool with jokes about abortions, racism, and rape.
TPK says: My husband opens doors for me because it is a small, everyday, visible way of showing that he loves me and is thinking about me. Why would I reject such an act of love and kindness? Why would any woman do so?
(Unless, perhaps, the old “it’s sexist for a man to open a door for a woman” claptrap is a type of covert jealousy, originating with that whinging little voice inside a feminist’s mind that says, “Why don’t men ever open doors for ME?” and morphing over time into “Well, if they don’t do it for me, they shouldn’t do it for anybody!”)
In defence of the feminists: men “up North” believe that the only reason that they would hold doors for women or pay for their meals is if they are a) trying to get into their pants or b) because the women are too weak/poor/helpless to do things for themselves. The other problem that feminists have with chivalry is that, traditionally, such acts were the crumbs thrown to women. Back when women could not vote, hold office, get a college degree, own property in their own names, or get custody of their children after a divorce, having a door held open was almost insulting.
When you’ve grown up in an environment where traditional acts of chivalry are not inherently respectful (and can be done with a total lack of respect), you can’t blame women for acting rationally in response to that.
In fact, that best exemplar of this attitude is mj’s tale about the woman with the cupcakes and the elevator. I would, any day, rather be the last out of the elevator and to not be the office cook than to be given the unimportant signs of respect (door-holding, etc) while being absolutely disrespected in the office.
While I presume that a chivalrous man, in 2009, is doing so out of respect for women (especially if he was raised in the South!), I think that we should be real here and acknowledge the valid reasons that women have for being leery of chivalry. That does not, in any circumstances, give them the right to be impolite to men (as per the woman in Don L’s story), but it does mean that men and women who would like a return of chivalry should ensure that the gestures communicate the respect that Cassy talks about.
I know it’s late and I’m rambling, but consider the idea of one person sitting while another person stands. This can be a sign of respect to the seated person (as on a subway or perhaps in a person’s office), but is a sign of respect to the standing person in other situations (e.g. when giving a speech, the audience sits quietly to let the speaker have the stage). Likewise, other gestures (holding a door, paying for a meal, etc) can be a sign of respect or disrespect, depending on the context. Let me tell you, that “context” is often a euphemism for “north or south of the Mason-Dixon line.” I’m betting that these women are from the Northeast or California, and I’m betting that Cassy has never lived outside of the South.
Tennwriter says: Roxeanne,
I’ve lived in both North and South (there are a LOT of us Transplant Yankees. Something to do with Michigan’s economy imploding, in part, and good AC, and other reasons.)
I think you’re reinterpreting MJ’s story from what this guy said. I think he has quite a perceptive point. Who among us has not met a drama queen? (and yes, ‘queen’ is the right term. Men are traditionally expected to not be quite so eager to engage in hyperbole.)
My grandmother who saw her first Model T when she was 12 might, then again…95 or so in the late nineties…so born in 1900 ish…so right to vote in 1921…so she might have had to wait a few years for the right to vote.
Ladies that are younger than her have no cause for complaint, I would think on that issue.
Actually, Roxeanne, I’ve spent a lot of time in the northeast. My entire family lives in Massachusetts. Aside from the time I’ve spent there, I’ve also spent a considerable amount of time in upstate New York, near Rochester. And I never encountered much sexism. Reading your comment, it comes off as if you’re making your observations based on your personal experiences and those of your friends than “fact”. Just because you may have had personal experience with men acting respectful just to get into your pants does not mean all northern men are like that; it means you need (or needed) to be more discerning about who you dated. And knowing northern women, I can tell you right now that no northern man would be so stupid as to mistake a northern woman for being weak and helpless. They’d get an earful, if not a whack on the back of the head. Northern women are undoubtedly just as tough as any northern man, not to mention just as brash and in-your-face.
Men from the north are not inherently sexist. Frankly, I find it somewhat insulting that you would say so.
“In defence of the feminists:…”
I thought that feminists didn’t need defending. Isn’t shooting their empty-headed mouths off whenever and whatever comes into their heads enough?
A brief history of oppression:
1. Nero had Christians covered in tar, then set on fire to burn alive.
2. Medieval rulers had their enemies tied to a rack, then slowly stretched out until their arms and legs were ripped out of their sockets.
3. Stalin deliberately caused a famine so that entire classes of people that he thought might someday oppose him would starve to death.
4. The American Patriarchy subjected women to the horror and humiliation of having doors opened and restaurant bills paid for them.
Roxeanne de Luca says: Men from the north are not inherently sexist. Frankly, I find it somewhat insulting that you would say so.
Well, Miss Cassy Fiano, it’s a good thing that I didn’t say that.
As for the rest of your comment: irony is lost on you. Apparently, YOUR experiences are incontrovertible fact, while the experiences of other people are just random anecdotes. [Snort of laughter.]
I know that it’s your blog, your rules, et cetera… but you obviously have some growing up to do.
Q says: I stopped dating women “up north” because too many of them were reflexively suspicious of anything a man did and the attitude tended to suck all the the fun out of life.
Know anyone like that, Roxanne?
Roxanne,
(yawn) BTW, that’s generally my standard reply to feminists. But let’s talk about the maturity thing, shall we?
“men “up North” believe that the only reason that they would hold doors for women or pay for their meals is if they are a) trying to get into their pants or b) because the women are too weak/poor/helpless to do things for themselves”
This was what you wrote. I’m sorry, but I don’t see how Cassy misunderstood your comment. In fact, that’s exactly what you meant, so I don’t see how you can say “I didn’t say that.”
You basically came here to start crap and then when the responses didn’t fit your narrow vision, you ‘snorted’ and declared that we were now immature. Since your reply has a tinge of “nyah nyah” to it, I’d say you’re the one who’s immature.
Roxeanne de Luca says: Cassy, presumably, can defend herself.
As someone who has spent more years in New England than the aforementioned young lady has spent being alive on this Earth, I do feel somewhat qualified to discuss the subject matter at hand. Moreover, unless I’m mistaken, Cassy has spent a lot of her adult years in the South. The cultures are radically different.
I know both men and women in New England who think that chivalry is sexist. Non-sexist, kind, caring men then worry that traditional chivalry will come off badly, so they don’t do it. Then nice, caring, sweet women see awesome, great guys who aren’t into chivalry, which increases the disconnect between respect and chivalry.
When you have male friends who are genuinely decent people (but hey, if Cassy wants to attack my friends, well, that says more about her than it ever will about me or people I know) and say that they, as men, find chivalry to be demeaning and would not do it, reasonable people will tend to get the opinion that chivalry is demeaning.
I can only opine on why those things came to be; I was mostly trying to explain what the state of affairs in many parts of this country is.
On a final note, I happen to think that the best way to return to a more chivalrous world is not to attack the opponents of chivalry, but to understand their perspective, demonstrate to them that chivalry is not (by any means) inherently wrong, and, in the 21st century, acknowledge the tension between feminism and chivalry. (My personal ideal would be to understand that equality in a board room does not obviate the need for chivalry in society.) One has to wonder how that is “starting crap.”
Roxeanne de Luca says: Q – please read the first 17 words of the fourth paragraph in comment #30. Then, demonstrate that you’re a gentleman and apologise.
Q says: Nah, you’d only be leery of any apology I might offer. And with good cause: an apology is but one of the thousands of insidious ways in which I oppress the womenfolk without even trying.
“Cassy, presumably, can defend herself.”
I don’t think that was ever the question, so don’t get into a tizzy. Since you addressed your initial comment to all of us, I’ll consider it fair game, whether Cassy answers or not. But thanks for caring…
“I know both men and women in New England who think that chivalry is sexist. Non-sexist, kind, caring men then worry that traditional chivalry will come off badly, so they don’t do it. Then nice, caring, sweet women see awesome, great guys who aren’t into chivalry, which increases the disconnect between respect and chivalry.”
Well, your initial comment was directed at “northern men” in general. As for those other guys you mentioned, they’re most likely emo-twits. I see a lot of them roaming around the campus I work at these days. As for those “sweet, caring women,” most likely they’re feminuts with a chip on their shoulder. As for “worrying” about what a woman thinks when I open a door for them, I could honestly care less. I do it because it’s the right thing to do, not because of some silly ideological implications. I wish more men would get a backbone. Personally, if a woman took offense at me opening a door for them and started to browbeat me, I’d simply tell them to go “eff” themselves and move on with my life. See? Wasn’t all that difficult. I’m not looking for a one night stand when I do this, but I don’t think a “thanks” is really too much to ask, is it (well, considering your position, it probably is)?
“When you have male friends who are genuinely decent people (but hey, if Cassy wants to attack my friends, well, that says more about her than it ever will about me or people I know) and say that they, as men, find chivalry to be demeaning and would not do it, reasonable people will tend to get the opinion that chivalry is demeaning.”
Well, that’s really the difference between liberal and conservative men, isn’t it? I don’t think it demeaning nor unreasonable to believe in chivalry. I am well aware of plenty of guys who try to use the concept of chivalry to get into a woman’s pants. You know what? That isn’t chivalry. Never has been, never will be. Those guys are posers and snake-oil salesman and to use them as an example of anti-chivalry is pretty silly.
” I can only opine on why those things came to be; I was mostly trying to explain what the state of affairs in many parts of this country is.”
I see that you still have not answered my previous post. I find that highly intriguing.
“On a final note, I happen to think that the best way to return to a more chivalrous world is not to attack the opponents of chivalry, but to understand their perspective, demonstrate to them that chivalry is not (by any means) inherently wrong, and, in the 21st century, acknowledge the tension between feminism and chivalry. (My personal ideal would be to understand that equality in a board room does not obviate the need for chivalry in society.) One has to wonder how that is “starting crap.”
Ah yes, the “we’re only trying to be reasonable after we attack” argument. Standard liberal tactic by the way. You come in, start crap (yes, I did use that term), and then are utterly shocked when people don’t agree with you. You call us names and then you have the audacity to say “you shouldn’t attack, but try to understand us.” Why? Attacking at the drop of a hat doesn’t seem to be a problem with you. Your “defense” was an attack, so don’t be surprised if someone calls you on it. Wow, talk about a tool…
Mat – You called me a liberal. Can I just presume that everything else you said is equally as idiotic?
(If you need help figuring out my political ideology, I provided a link to my old blog. Perhaps the first thirteen letters after the “world wide web” part might clue you in.)
Q – apology is still owed. Last time I checked, basic human decency is not conditional. (Besides, if you think I’m a bit of a witch, why not give yourself the opportunity to be classy and me, the opportunity to not be so?)
Wow, you tried to get the last word in. I’m shocked, absolutely shocked. Ok, I can play this juvenile game too.
Actually, I did look at your blog before I wrote my post. I hardly think it idiotic. You hardly sound conservative (for example, one hardly needs to be liberal to think we should back up Israel, that’s just common sense). Perhaps a RINO that seems to pervade the current Republican thinking? The way you talk, I think your “men suck” feminism pretty much trumps the other attributes. By all means, keep up the name-calling because you still
have not answered my basic question several posts ago. Smokescreen anyone?
Q says: Mat: The fact of the matter is, one cannot adhere to the feminist mind-set AND simultaneously be intellectually honest.
No matter how much evidence you adduce against a feminist argument, the feminist never changes her mind. Oh, maybe she’ll resort to more evasive language and hedge her statements more cleverly, but she’ll never change her mind in any fundamental way.
Consider three root assumptions which lie at the bottom of all feminist writings: 1. any behavioral difference between men and women has to do with socialization rather than any kind of innate propensity 2. human behavior is overwhelmingly about the exercise of “power” and 3. people make behavioral choices based upon what maximizes the power of the sex which they belong to.
All three of these assumptions are demonstrably false. I can provide a gigantic biography of studies which show it. The feminist? When confronted with this, she will resort to a bunch of evasive language rather than confront the issue. And when all else fails, when she’s backed into a corner, she’ll yell “SEXIST!” which will constitute an unanswerable victory in her eyes.
One can be intellectually honest or one can be a feminist. One cannot be both.
Q,
I totally agree. In fact, I had most of what you said in mind when I tried to pin her to a specific answer, which she never gave me. I realize it’s mostly a lost cause, but I endeavor to try nonetheless.
What I thought highly amusing was that she considers herself a conservative on her blog. I’m sorry, but the very notion of having a “men suck and are the cause of all evil” view of feminism pretty much screams closet liberal to me. At best, she’s a RINO, and we all know how effective they are.
I don’t think they were saying chivalry in general was sexist, me personally it all depends. If a man or a woman opens a door for me to be respectful I’ll say thank you and move about my day. Hell I do stuff like open doors and give my seats away to men sometimes. But some people use chivalry for the wrong reasons.
Example, one day I was heading to the mall to meet my boyfriend and his friend and a group of guys were outside hanging out. I walked by and they opened the door for me. I walk through to notice that they were trying to get looks at my ass and I heard them actually rating how good my ass looked. To me using chivalry for that reason is pretty fucking sexist.
I told my boyfriend about this and he even said that back when he was in high school, plenty of his friends would do things like open doors for girls to stare at her ass. Now if feminists are talking about things like that, then I can understand have chivalry CAN be sexist.
I have been reading all the comments between everyone and one thing keeps coming out. Anger. Both sides have points that make sense. Believe it or not feminists, there are men out there that open doors,put their coat over a puddle, and jump in harms way because they truly love and respect others. It is a shame that so many people have been wronged that the only happiness some people can find is in putting down others and the way they believe. Point blank…I have two daughters and I am raising them with my amazing wife to be independent, loving, sympathetic, and empathetic towards others. This is one of those cases where many have ruined it for the few. I believe that chivalry is real and should exist, not for the sake of “Man Power” but for the sake of being respectful towards others. People need to stop picking on those petty issues and concentrate on what is important and more often than not a good place to start is with themselves.
Spectre says: *shrugs* See, now, I open doors for *everybody*. Women, men. Old people, young people. Rich people, poor people. White people, black people. People who have their hands full, and people who don’t.
It only takes a second to be courteous.
To me, holding doors for *people* is just one of those basic tenets of civilized society.
If I see you coming towards that door, or you’re right behind me, I’m going to open it for you. Not because I think you’re weak and helpless, and not to sneak a peek at your ass [ego much?] but just because it’s the civilized thing to do.
And, while I can understand there may be some people out there who hold doors only for women, because they think they need help opening doors [really?] or to check her out as she’s passing by [pathetic] and who are likely in need of some brain re-wiring, because that attitude is not civilized in the slightest, I think that there are far larger, more fundamental issues of equality that people really ought to be working on. But hey, what do I know, right?
Lauren says: Um it is sexist. The monitor of this webpage is an idiot. I don’t think that all men feel that women are helpless, dainty girls that are in need of assistance, but I mean let’s be serious. That was what the basis of chivalry was, so therefore these women have the definition perfectly correct. I personally don’t chastize a man if he does it,because I don’t know the context behind their decision to do so, whether it was politeness or they were doing it because ” women should have doors opened for them” I do when I notcie he accelerates his walking speed so that he can get to the door before I do. I mean really? Once when A guy did that I stopped and went in another door. He asked me why and I asked him why he had to speed up to get to the door. I said why did you speed up to be infront of me, or switch to the side that has the handle? Doors should be held open out of politeness. I alos hate it if i’m clearly a good distance away and a man holds the door because “i’m a woman. It is just outrageous!!!!!!!
Ymarsakar says: http://grimbeorn.blogspot.com/2010_10_31_archive.html#8537521691483415120
Posted my comment on this entire auto de fe there.
Ymarsakar says: I don’t want to use the Leftist newspeak:sexist. I prefer to think of the practical policy and applications that exist in the argument.
It is very simple.
Is chivalry, broken down into specific actions or social customs, something that society and individuals should promote or is it something that people should abhor like cannibalism?
I think if you pinned this issue down with feminists, you can get a lot of truth out of them concerning their real goals and intentions.
catch says: The nice thing about dating a feminist is that it’s cheaper and easier. You can treat her like (equal to) a man in terms of social graces. No opening doors, paying for meals, helping with coats, always driving, or any of those other chivalrous acts, etc. If you wouldn’t do it for a man, don’t do it for a feminist.
catch says: I treat feminists with the same courtesy I give to other men. If I wouldn’t open a door for a man or help a man carry something or give my jacket to a man if he’s cold I won’t do it for a feminist. The problem feminists run into is that they sometimes call equality rudeness and insensitivity since they think men are rude and insensitive to each other. They want a better level of treatment than men offer to other men. Sorry feminists, equality is equality, like it or not. You asked for it. Deal with it.
Solaris says: “…I do when I notcie he accelerates his walking speed so that he can get to the door before I do. I mean really? Once when A guy did that I stopped and went in another door. He asked me why and I asked him why he had to speed up to get to the door. I said why did you speed up to be infront of me, or switch to the side that has the handle? Doors should be held open out of politeness. I alos hate it if i’m clearly a good distance away and a man holds the door because “i’m a woman. It is just outrageous!”
I’m not touching the rest of your post, Lauren. We’re all just happier that way.
No, wait. Let’s go for it. You wouldn’t know polite behavior if it walked up and punched you in the face. How dare you walk into someone’s blog and call them an idiot? You don’t even offer a decent argument, you just insult her.
Mm, equality at work. See what I did there? I chastised you just like I would anyone else. No more or less polite about it than I would if we were on the Internet or face-to-face. See about doing the same – it tells far more about you how you treat people on the Internet than it does about the people you mistreat.
Now for the part I quoted. Lauren, I would hazard a guess and say he was doing it out of politeness. Barring any other evidence, doesn’t that seem the most logical reason? I mean, unless you’re going to assume the worst about someone, but why would ya do that about someone whose name you don’t even know? Granted he was awkward about going at it, but you were far ruder for refusing his assistance than he was for trying to be a gentleman to a complete stranger. You seek offense where there was none intended, give offense where there was none warranted, and then you brag about it to faceless entities on the Internet. You seem to be a prime example of why chivalry and polite behavior are leaching out of society.
Unless you *really* wanna argue that whole “Women are weaker and should be protected” thing. I’ve been places that didn’t grow up with that attitude, it tends to go really poorly for all involved. I’ll admit, I’m quite chivalrous to those weaker than me. I hold doors for women, children, and the elderly. I walk on the street-side of the sidewalk while walking with them. I stand when an elder or a woman enters the room and I’m seated. I let them sit first, and prefer them to sit in the most protected seat (away from the door, back to a wall) whereas I prefer the seat that allows the best view of the entrances and exits. I pull out their chair for them before I sit down. Protecting those weaker than myself is what I do for a living. I’ve had to spar in hand-to-hand combat against some of my female coworkers. Unless I went light on them, they came away badly beaten while I wasn’t even sore – excepting the time one of them punched me in the crotch, which ended with a clear victory and a lot of pain afterwards for me. To be fair, that time I went for a technical victory – I threw her out of the ring. I’m a small guy, and I’m strong enough to throw around an average-sized female. Do you see where and how chivalry entered our society? “Thou Shalt Not Hit Girls” is practically the Eleventh Commandment. It’s ingrained into our psyches from an early age – sparring with female soldiers is really hard ’cause I usually have to wait for them to get a couple good hits in before I’m riled up enough to fight back. So yes, I think it a very good thing that our culture teaches men that they must protect and defend women as well as respecting them. I’ve seen too much of cultures that do not to think anything else.
And no, I don’t abuse or dominate any of the females in my family or social circles (outside the sparring ring). A man whose profession is violence must never use violence against those he cares about.
Madam, good manners and courtesy are the foundation upon which a civilized Western society is built. This man you spurned may have just been trying to check you out. He may have been operating under the presumption that you are helpless and incapable of opening a door for yourself. I find it far more likely, given this day and age, that he was simply trying to be polite and gentlemanly. Deal with it.
56 Comments