Main > The Round Table
Discussion: Modern Chivalry Dead?
Sir Brian:
Hear hear! Well said by all! I consider it a great honor to be associated with such stalwart and chivalrous comrades! :)
Sir Christopher Warren:
Indeed well said all.
As Sir William said the chivalrous life is a struggle. That is the point I think though. A chivalrous person I feel is one who constantly seeks improvement and is constantly growing.
The other side of the struggle is that in a modern society it is not the popular thing to do. It is the truly chivalrous person who can look at society and say "So what?!" and do the proper thing and act the proper way even if it is not well received.
Joshua Santana:
The article does get the facts right. However, I see Chivalry as a Warrior Code of Moral Principles and Virtues that are never gender based or biased. It is a Code that speaks to all people that are willing to listen and believe.
In terms of women stating that Chivalry is demeaning or biased. They are blind from their false notions of Chivalry and take that to be the truth (this also applies to men sadly). Does this mean that I reject my sense of Honor or Moral Nobility? Never.
Often the notion of Chivalry as demeaning or dead does come from their self-centeredness and egoism. This is the result of popular culture getting into the head of a generation.
But there is hope, we are that hope that Chivalry lives on. We are the people that says "No, you are wrong and we can prove why you are wrong" (with as much Civility and Chivalry as possible).
Sir Patrick:
I agree with everyone that chivalry is not dead (we're here aren't we?). Yes, we live in an egocentric society, but at what point in history was that not the case? I think the problem for us is that the Victorians distilled chivalry down to manners. While courtsey is important, it is but one facet of a much larger ideal. If courtesy alone is our yardstick of chivalry, then every James Bond bad guy would be considered chivalrous! We must remember that chivalry is an ideal, and to walk the path requires continual self-evaluation and adjustment. There are many facets to the ideal, and the parts that come easy to me may be a struggle for someone else (and vice versa). So yes, we encounter rude people out there, but are they truely unchivalrous, or just struggling at that moment with one element of chivalry? Sure there are bad apples out there, but there must also be more chivalry than we realize, too.
Sir James A:
Should a lady fall, it's both chivalrous and common courtesy to offer assistance; whether they accept it or not is their choice. And counterpoint, should a gentleman fall, a "modern" lady should likewise offer assistance as well. This has nothing to do with the lady's choice to have children or not, to have a career or not, or to have self esteem or not; I believe that as humans we are all created equal at birth, as man or woman, and the only thing that sets our "worth" as greater or lesser between one another is the actions we take throughout life. The world would be a far better place if everyone simply showed one another the common courtesy and respect that seems to have nearly dissolved from existence in modern society.
I have one grievous disagreement with that article, in that the author says
--- Quote ---Each woman must be judged worthy or unworthy of such treatment on her own merits, and in the absence of any information, the assumption must be that she is unworthy.
--- End quote ---
Bollocks, to put it politely. If we go forth assuming every woman is unworthy of being treated as an equal, and that they aren't entitled to chivalrous actions (and even common courtesy) simply because they have an interest in being independent and/or having a career, then we, as a society, have truly failed beyond words.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version