|
|
Currently no members online:)
You are an anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here |
We have 26 guests online !
|
|
|
|
|
Articles: Chivalry vs. Chauvinism |
Posted by
Psychopixi on Thursday, December 28, 2006 - 12:19 AM PST
Well, being chivalrous and being chauvinistic are pretty much worlds apart, but the thing that brings them together is the fact that both are sexist. Your typical chauvinist pig isn't exactly a master at subtlety, and the sexual discrimination is frank, up front and in your face. The men who consider themselves gentlemen don't seem to realise the sexism they're guilty of.
Don't get me wrong, it's nice for someone to hold a door open for me, generally beats getting hit in the face by it, but why on earth would I need someone to do that for me. Apart from sneak door attacks, I can handle doors (no pun intended) okay by myself! I've also mastered the art of pulling my own chair out, and then sitting on it and scooting it back to the table. I'm practically a pro; I can scoot my reclining chair around while sitting on it, and it ain't light! As for guys standing up when I do - do yourselves a favour lads, and don't bother. You'll be up and down more than a whore's drawers because I drink way too much caffeine. I don't take one fifteen minute loo trip, like most girls; I make three five minute ones in the same space of time, and you know what? I can buy my own drinks, and pay for my own meals as well.
It's nothing but well-veiled sexism; men who want power over women. Men have the money, men have the strength, men have the coat to throw over the puddle, so the lady doesn't have to make the tenuous trip around it. Bollocks to it just being 'nice'. Nice is when you open the door for someone - any someone, be they male or female. Nice is when you buy your friends a drink. It's not nice when it's gender specific, when you're assuming that the woman can't pay, can't stand up for herself, can't open a sodding door without help - assuming that women are too weak to do those things; they must need a strong handsome man to help them!
The best guys are the ones who don't want their wives / girlfriends to work; a woman should never have to do nasty stuff like working! Of course they still expect her to cook, and to clean and raise the hoardes of offspring they've produced... but that doesn't count, that's not 'real' work! I mean, heaven forbid a woman who doesn't have to depend upon the strong male in her life for everything! We'll start off living out of daddy dearest's wallet and doing exactly as we're told, and then get handed over to our husbands where it'll be the same situation, different wallet.
Nah; you can stick your chivalry where the sun don't shine. Your partner should be nice to you; they damn well better be nice, otherwise I'd suggest finding someone else who will be, but we don't need any gentlemanly behaviour. Your partner should do things for you, and you should do things for them. They should make sacrifices, and so should you. The important thing is that whatever you do together, you should do it as equals.
|
|
| |
|
|
Average Rating : 4.0
Total ratings : 2
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chivalry vs. Chauvinism | Login/Create an account | 11 Comments |
| Comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content. |
Re: Chivalry vs. Chauvinism
by feralucce (feralucce@wayoutonthecorner.com)
on Dec 28, 2006 - 09:10 AM
(User info | Send a Message)
http://www.wayoutonthecorner.com/feralucce
|
That...and I disagree with something you said pixi...
It's nothing but well-veiled sexism; men who want power over women....
it may have sarted out taht way, but as a society, we've evolved... and most do it because their parents taught them... "this is how you behave"
"but that doesn't count, that's not 'real' work!" and "you should do it as equals."
depending on the dynamic of the relationship... this can be equals... speaking as the one who did all the housework for the longest time...
|
Re: Chivalry vs. Chauvinism
by MystryssRavynDarque (amanda-at-vibechild-dot-com)
on Dec 29, 2006 - 11:42 AM
(User info | Send a Message)
http://amanda.users.vibechild.com
|
There was actually a section in my psychology of women text book on this. It was pretty interesting, but I don't think all acts of "chivalry" are "chauvinistic". I have to go along with Schizo and Feral here, it is often just what we are taught and if the motives behind it are bad then they are being a jerk. My great grandfather would always open the car door for my great grandmother. It was very cute and sweet that they did it into their very older years.
I have told boys that I have dated that I don't need them to open the doors for me or to pull out my chair me, that I can do it. If it doesn't make their head explode from conflict due to their upbringing, then alrighty. If it seems like it might make their brains gush all over the place, then they can do it just because it is part of their programming. At least someone has told them though that not all women need it.
As for paying for the dinner bill the bill should more than likely go to the person with the funds to pay for it. The person without the funds should be allowed to pick up a check or two every now and then so their psyche doesn't get damaged. If both people are well enough off to pay for the bill then they could discuss it and decide, they could alternate, or they could split the bill. It may not seem as "romantic" to split the bill, but it could save a lot of grief.
I don't mind chivalry, but I don't mind common courtesy either. I was at McDonald's picking up lunch for all of the people working on the gaming center and I was trying to balance two big bags full of food as well as drinks. There were two men (doesn't matter that they were men, could've been women) standing right by the door. Certainly they could see my horrible skills of balance and lack of available hands, but neither of them made a move to open the door for me. I had to spin around and push the door open with my back as I prayed nobody came up and pulled it from the other side and that I could manage to not spill anything. That's a lack of common courtesy right there. It still bugs the hell out of me.
Chivalry vs. Chauvinism, I really think that this could be a discussion that could last centuries, or maybe just a few minutes.
|
Re: Chivalry vs. Chauvinism
by Starlight on Jan 01, 2007 - 08:10 PM
(User info | Send a Message)
|
I tend to agree with the idea that the motives behind the actions are what dictate if it's a genuine gesture of respect and courtesy or not.
Likewise, when a domestic living situation comes to be in a way that causes both a wage-earner and a home-maker to feel their relationship is based on mutual respect and concern, then that is more important than which partner does which job.
Both positions are equally important and valuable.
Good subject for a potentially huge amount of debate.
|
Re: Chivalry vs. Chauvinism
by Dolorosa (SixOfSwords@IU.zzn.com)
on Jan 05, 2007 - 09:49 PM
(User info | Send a Message)
|
You know you may be right...
But I'm still gonna open that door for you. (And I'll smile and thank you if you open it for me)
And I'ma knock someones teeth in if he gives you trouble. (And I will cheer if you get to em first)
It may be misguided and insulting on an intellectual level, but I am a stubborn goat on certain things.
Don't pick too hard on us poor knights in aluminum armor, sometimes the sincerety of our actions can mean a lot more than the logical basis of said actions. It means we give a damn, and although it may show strange, it's showing true.
Granted this may be in only a few specific cases, but I felt it neccesary to stand up for the guys who aren't trying to demean women, but rather treat them with what society has taught them to be honorable.
I do feel for ya on the heart of the matter though, gender inequality is some deeply rooted stuff in just about every society I've ever encountered, and it's painful for me to notice, I can only imagine how it must feel on the other end of the deal.
I'm STILL gonna try and open that door for ya though.
|
Re: Chivalry vs. Chauvinism
by Heretic (bleakseason@aol.com)
on Feb 13, 2007 - 06:45 AM
(User info | Send a Message)
|
Come now, Psychopixi. Since when is the desire to do something for someone automatically a desire to gain power over them? Yes, male chauvinism by definition means the belief that men are superior to women. Many of the social manners that are a part of traditional male behavior in Western society were perpetuated as a means of reinforcing and institutionalizing this belief.
However, I take serious issue with the idea that chivalry is merely a passive version of an ingrained sense of superiority. As a student of history, I have studied the social impact of the precepts of chivalry on Western culture. The ideals chivalry represented revolved around faith and servitude, not domination.
The most concise description of this I was able to find comes from Wikipedia:
Medieval chivalry is most easily defined when broken up into three basic but overlapping areas:
1. Chivalry in relation to countrymen and fellow Christians - this contains virtues such as mercy, courage, valor, fairness, protection of the weak and the poor, and in the servant-hood of the knight to his lord. This also brings with it the idea of being willing to give one’s life for another’s; whether he would be giving his life for a poor man or his lord.
2. Chivalry in relation to God - this would contain being faithful to God, protecting the innocent, being faithful to the church, being the champion of good against evil, being generous and obeying God above the feudal lord.
3. Chivalry in relation to women - this is probably the most familiar aspect of chivalry. This would contain what is often called courtly love, the idea that the knight is to serve a lady, and after her all other ladies. Most especially in this category is a general gentleness and graciousness to all women.
This last precept is the one that has gained the greatest influence within our society, in large part due to the impact of the Romantic Movement and Gothic literature. Further study correlates the popularity of Gothic literature with the rise of the Women's Suffrage and temperance movements. What this means is that modern men -- Romantics and Victorians, men of the Enlightenment and the Industrial Age -- began the move away from male-dominated, chauvinistic social mores and sought balance between the masculine and the feminine.
In the tradition of chivalry, men were able to retain the masculine desire for action by harnessing that need in the service of a greater ideal and for the benefit of society as a whole. Modern chivalry then became a mirror to the servitude male society dictated women must submit to. Rather than a master-servant dynamic, modern Chivalry sought a symbiotic dynamic. In essence, the modern men wishes to serve just as much, if not more, that he is served.
If you feel the need to indite the chivalrous man for his desire to serve women, you should be aware that his philosophies and actions are in place to erode the kind of male dominance within our society you rail against. It might be wise to take a closer look at the true motives of the gentleman who felt he should take the time to hold that door for you.
- Heretic
|
|
|