Chivalry is Sexist, Your Opinion?

[Sir Steven T.]

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080512193422AAqDvAg

Came across this today, I know how I feel about it, how about you?

[Sir Edward]

I'm tempted to write a new reply. The problem is, I'd want to write a long essay.

[Sir Wolf]

but chivalry is not just man for woman. its for all mankind is it not?

[Sir Brian]

I'm tempted to write a new reply. The problem is, I'd want to write a long essay.

Chill KC, I got this!

I agree somewhat with the ‘best answer’ selected by the one who originally posed the question insofar as how the modern perception of chivalry has been devolved to nothing more than an archaic form of courtesy, however I found this below answer even more misguided and inherently askew from my concept of chivalry.

As a feminist (LOL FEMINAZI LOLOLOL) and thus someone who believes in equal rights regardless of gender or sex, I am opposed to chivalry for a number of reasons.
1) It is sexist against men.
Chivalry promotes the idea that men have an obligation to women, and that they must take on certain things in a relationship just by virtue of being male.

2) It is sexist against women.
Chivalry encourages the stereotype that women are weak, and turns women into dependents. It also creates a system of obligation on the woman's behalf to repay the "kindness."

3) It encourages gender roles.
Gender roles restrict our social mobility and create homophobia.

People should treat one another with respect because the other person is a human being, not because s/he is female or male.

Overall I hold mankind (the male gender) ultimately responsible for allowing this erosion of manliness and chivalric principles to decline by first of all not being men in allowing lesser males and overly assertive females to redefine men’s perception of manhood. – By overly assertive females I mean women who over compensate their reactions and perceptions subjectively based upon their lack of self esteem and discipline.

My perception of chivalry is far more simplified: It is a code of conduct I impose upon myself not for the praise of others but for my own self and how I have chosen to live. It also is neither out of weakness nor servility that I conduct myself towards women, children and other non-combatants in a gracious manner which has never been inspired by haughtiness but by poise and conscientiousness. The key to my distinction of whether I deem someone as a non-combatant is their demeanor. Certainly my life experiences have affirmed in my mind that most women and children do not convey themselves to be physically adversarial as some males are also apt to do in these modern times. Yet for us men we are ‘hardwired’ in various degrees to recognize and react to perceived antagonists.

The above quoted and self-described ‘feminist’ would obviously take exception with me and my sentiments and thus I would appropriately deem her and others like her to be an adversary and potentially subject to being treated just as any other impending foe. – With absolute austerity.

In essence men are beasts. If our natural inclinations were never tempered then humanity would have never progressed beyond the dark ages and it is my firm belief that chivalry is the forge in which humanity’s dross is purged away.

[Lord Dane]

'Chivalry' is a manner of mutual respect, decency, and good behavior reflective of how we treat we each other regardless of the gender of the recipient. If a feminist is so unaccepting of its good intent, like I said before... I will treat you as you treat me. Remember this, I can hold the door open for you because that is my way of showing kindness or I can slam that same door in your face. Take your choice of which you prefer. Dwell on that thought & see what response you get.

[Thorsteinn]

Yes. Chivalry is very sexy.

[Sir Brian]

Yes. Chivalry is very sexy.

Except the after armor part...the missus insists I shower before going to bed.

[B. Patricius]

Yes. Chivalry is very sexy.

LMAO literally 

I'm tempted to write a new reply. The problem is, I'd want to write a long essay.

Chill KC, I got this!

I agree somewhat with the ‘best answer’ selected by the one who originally posed the question insofar as how the modern perception of chivalry has been devolved to nothing more than an archaic form of courtesy, however I found this below answer even more misguided and inherently askew from my concept of chivalry.

As a feminist (LOL FEMINAZI LOLOLOL) and thus someone who believes in equal rights regardless of gender or sex, I am opposed to chivalry for a number of reasons.
1) It is sexist against men.
Chivalry promotes the idea that men have an obligation to women, and that they must take on certain things in a relationship just by virtue of being male.

2) It is sexist against women.
Chivalry encourages the stereotype that women are weak, and turns women into dependents. It also creates a system of obligation on the woman's behalf to repay the "kindness."

3) It encourages gender roles.
Gender roles restrict our social mobility and create homophobia.

People should treat one another with respect because the other person is a human being, not because s/he is female or male.

Overall I hold mankind (the male gender) ultimately responsible for allowing this erosion of manliness and chivalric principles to decline by first of all not being men in allowing lesser males and overly assertive females to redefine men’s perception of manhood. – By overly assertive females I mean women who over compensate their reactions and perceptions subjectively based upon their lack of self esteem and discipline.

My perception of chivalry is far more simplified: It is a code of conduct I impose upon myself not for the praise of others but for my own self and how I have chosen to live. It also is neither out of weakness nor servility that I conduct myself towards women, children and other non-combatants in a gracious manner which has never been inspired by haughtiness but by poise and conscientiousness. The key to my distinction of whether I deem someone as a non-combatant is their demeanor. Certainly my life experiences have affirmed in my mind that most women and children do not convey themselves to be physically adversarial as some males are also apt to do in these modern times. Yet for us men we are ‘hardwired’ in various degrees to recognize and react to perceived antagonists.

The above quoted and self-described ‘feminist’ would obviously take exception with me and my sentiments and thus I would appropriately deem her and others like her to be an adversary and potentially subject to being treated just as any other impending foe. – With absolute austerity.

In essence men are beasts. If our natural inclinations were never tempered then humanity would have never progressed beyond the dark ages and it is my firm belief that chivalry is the forge in which humanity’s dross is purged away.

QFT - how many times I hear "girls" talk about how men should go "metro" in the coffee shops.  It really saddens me.  Nothing is wrong with a sharp dressed man, but every "metro" guy I've seen really doesn't seem to have much of a backbone either, and it seems to be a requirement to fit in lately. 

Yet it takes that backbone to believe in something and defend it, and that to me is the essence of chivalry.  They stood up for and died for what they believed in.  Now, people like that are labeled "extemists" which is just a politically correct way of saying "@$$-holes with a differing opinion" it seems. 

Clint Eastwood, Viggo Mortenson, Ed Harris, John Wayne, Sam Elliot - those are men for boys to look up to, at least in their "image" sort of way, I have no idea about their political or personal lives, I don't care for any of that.

I do enjoy it was on "yahoo answers," sometimes I check those out just for a good laugh.  Other times, it can be enjoyable.  At least the people who replied have opinions and appear to stand by them.  So many people now don't take accountability for their actions anymore, and it isn't even just online either.  Pisses me off.  Then when I do get upset and grill em a bit (seriously a 3 out of 10 in a military "chewing" scale) they freak out. 

I think that is the problem.  No backbone, no values, no ethics.  Just "tolerance."  Chivalry, like anything taken to its barest and most extreme could be construed as "bad" or in this case "sexist."  But here at least, people say "mornin'" and open the doors and step aside for the ladies, that isn't sexist.  It's being polite.

[royalist89]

Stupid quote, not in agreement at all, 'sexist'!!!

Chivalry is a moral obligation from one human being to another, it doesn't debase people based on gender or any kind of sex, race or condition. Its all about doing whats right to help others, I can't see anything wrong with that.

I think to be so liberal in a sense that you have to challenge the foundations of anything, is sexist, its like making a big deal out of nothing... based on gender, race, sexual preference or condition!! even knowing many of those actual sub groups couldn't give a.....

We had the same discussion in Church, why is it that men have to be feminized and can't be men? why do we have to be mice rather than lions because things have changed in today's society? I just think things have gone too far the other way, would be nice if people just sought balance..

[Sir James A]

Chivalry is Sexist, Your Opinion?

No, it is not.

Yes. Chivalry is very sexy.

Except the after armor part...the missus insists I shower before going to bed.

:cough cough: Excalibur.... :cough cough:

[B. Patricius]

:cough cough: Excalibur.... :cough cough:

my lady happens to find me all tired and beat after a good day of training to be quite sexy

[Sir William]

If I read that right, the writer would find a simple greeting of 'Good Day' to be sexist in some way, shape or form.  People like that are of little note, other than being placed in the same designation as all others who choose to remain oblivious to the woes that beset society- it is they who actively seek to erode such mannerisms in order to bolster their own innate lack of self-esteem; people like that are to be pitied, not held in contempt.  They, like all others, will willingly cower behind our armored selves and our shields once they realize that the world works as it does, despite their personal points of view.  Worry not, esteemed compatriots- chivalry lives because we live it- our example fairly resonates to such an extent that those who view us have little trouble seeing and believing that we're not a bunch of costumed poseurs, but that we are the real thing.  Those that do not or cannot fathom or understand what drives us- what does that matter to the likes of us?  We don't do it for them...we do it for our own personal reasons but also because we recognize that which is sorely lacking in this day and age...simple virtue, unadulterated desire and a steadfast devotion to the pursuit of all things knightly.  That we each vary in degrees as to how we travel on this Path is a testament to the individuality of each person here- that we each strive to be more knightly, to espouse chivalry in a world that at times can seem to have gone mad is a testament to Chivalry itself.  That we, of such divergent backgrounds, could all find ourselves of an accord and seek to forge a brotherhood such as the Order of the Marshal...well...does that not say enough on its own?

[B. Patricius]

If I read that right, the writer would find a simple greeting of 'Good Day' to be sexist in some way, shape or form.  People like that are of little note, other than being placed in the same designation as all others who choose to remain oblivious to the woes that beset society- it is they who actively seek to erode such mannerisms in order to bolster their own innate lack of self-esteem; people like that are to be pitied, not held in contempt.  They, like all others, will willingly cower behind our armored selves and our shields once they realize that the world works as it does, despite their personal points of view.  Worry not, esteemed compatriots- chivalry lives because we live it- our example fairly resonates to such an extent that those who view us have little trouble seeing and believing that we're not a bunch of costumed poseurs, but that we are the real thing.  Those that do not or cannot fathom or understand what drives us- what does that matter to the likes of us?  We don't do it for them...we do it for our own personal reasons but also because we recognize that which is sorely lacking in this day and age...simple virtue, unadulterated desire and a steadfast devotion to the pursuit of all things knightly.  That we each vary in degrees as to how we travel on this Path is a testament to the individuality of each person here- that we each strive to be more knightly, to espouse chivalry in a world that at times can seem to have gone mad is a testament to Chivalry itself.  That we, of such divergent backgrounds, could all find ourselves of an accord and seek to forge a brotherhood such as the Order of the Marshal...well...does that not say enough on its own?

QFT, very eloquently and inspiring Sir William.  Sounds more and more like the person who first dictated that is a simple sheep, unawares of neither the wolves who threaten them, nor the sheepdogs that protect them.

[Joshua Santana]

If I read that right, the writer would find a simple greeting of 'Good Day' to be sexist in some way, shape or form.  People like that are of little note, other than being placed in the same designation as all others who choose to remain oblivious to the woes that beset society- it is they who actively seek to erode such mannerisms in order to bolster their own innate lack of self-esteem; people like that are to be pitied, not held in contempt.  They, like all others, will willingly cower behind our armored selves and our shields once they realize that the world works as it does, despite their personal points of view.  Worry not, esteemed compatriots- chivalry lives because we live it- our example fairly resonates to such an extent that those who view us have little trouble seeing and believing that we're not a bunch of costumed poseurs, but that we are the real thing.  Those that do not or cannot fathom or understand what drives us- what does that matter to the likes of us?  We don't do it for them...we do it for our own personal reasons but also because we recognize that which is sorely lacking in this day and age...simple virtue, unadulterated desire and a steadfast devotion to the pursuit of all things knightly.  That we each vary in degrees as to how we travel on this Path is a testament to the individuality of each person here- that we each strive to be more knightly, to espouse chivalry in a world that at times can seem to have gone mad is a testament to Chivalry itself.  That we, of such divergent backgrounds, could all find ourselves of an accord and seek to forge a brotherhood such as the Order of the Marshal...well...does that not say enough on its own?

QFT, very eloquently and inspiring Sir William.  Sounds more and more like the person who first dictated that is a simple sheep, unawares of neither the wolves who threaten them, nor the sheepdogs that protect them.

I do believe that Sir William has spoken our minds eloquently.  Huzzah and Well Done!

I can go on a list on arguments to disprove the arguments most feminists will make about Chivalry but it is one thing to prove to them with deeds and actions rather than words. 

Every time I hear their arguments I cannot help but think these questions: "So yo are saying that Honor, Nobility and Courage are dead?"  "You mean that Honor (Chivalry) is a form of masculine oppression?"  or "Your point is that Masculine Morality is oppressive and non existent?"  The essence of my question is the argument of "Is Morality dead in today's society?" (This is a hypothetical question to make it clear). 

This is why we Knights here and around the Country have to speak up and prove our Chivalry in the face of ignorance and apathy.  I know nI sound a bit radical but it is a cause worth fighting for.   

[B. Patricius]

If I read that right, the writer would find a simple greeting of 'Good Day' to be sexist in some way, shape or form.  People like that are of little note, other than being placed in the same designation as all others who choose to remain oblivious to the woes that beset society- it is they who actively seek to erode such mannerisms in order to bolster their own innate lack of self-esteem; people like that are to be pitied, not held in contempt.  They, like all others, will willingly cower behind our armored selves and our shields once they realize that the world works as it does, despite their personal points of view.  Worry not, esteemed compatriots- chivalry lives because we live it- our example fairly resonates to such an extent that those who view us have little trouble seeing and believing that we're not a bunch of costumed poseurs, but that we are the real thing.  Those that do not or cannot fathom or understand what drives us- what does that matter to the likes of us?  We don't do it for them...we do it for our own personal reasons but also because we recognize that which is sorely lacking in this day and age...simple virtue, unadulterated desire and a steadfast devotion to the pursuit of all things knightly.  That we each vary in degrees as to how we travel on this Path is a testament to the individuality of each person here- that we each strive to be more knightly, to espouse chivalry in a world that at times can seem to have gone mad is a testament to Chivalry itself.  That we, of such divergent backgrounds, could all find ourselves of an accord and seek to forge a brotherhood such as the Order of the Marshal...well...does that not say enough on its own?

QFT, very eloquently and inspiring Sir William.  Sounds more and more like the person who first dictated that is a simple sheep, unawares of neither the wolves who threaten them, nor the sheepdogs that protect them.

I do believe that Sir William has spoken our minds eloquently.  Huzzah and Well Done!

I can go on a list on arguments to disprove the arguments most feminists will make about Chivalry but it is one thing to prove to them with deeds and actions rather than words. 

Every time I hear their arguments I cannot help but think these questions: "So yo are saying that Honor, Nobility and Courage are dead?"  "You mean that Honor (Chivalry) is a form of masculine oppression?"  or "Your point is that Masculine Morality is oppressive and non existent?"  The essence of my question is the argument of "Is Morality dead in today's society?" (This is a hypothetical question to make it clear). 

This is why we Knights here and around the Country have to speak up and prove our Chivalry in the face of ignorance and apathy.  I know nI sound a bit radical but it is a cause worth fighting for.   

Joshua, you too, were very eloquently spoken in your words.  I personally enjoy when people tell me honor, chivalry, integrity, or courage are dead, for me that is a challenge to shine