(no subject)

[rivka]

Dude. It's been an awfully long time since anyone called me a man-hater.

Is it wrong that, instead of feeling pissed off, instead I feel vaguely nostalgic?


(Someone else's journal, so I'm not linking because I don't want to unleash my hordes of flying monkeys. Perhaps later I will write more about this, in a post tentatively entitled "Anyone Who Informs You That He Is Chivalrous Is Giving You An Advance Sexism Warning.")

Comments

[eeyorerin]

I misread that as "man-eater" teh first time and my first thought was "Well, gosh, if Alex doesn't even like potatoes, I don't know how Rivka's going to serve her man..."

[msagara.livejournal.com]

Is it wrong that, instead of feeling pissed off, instead I feel vaguely nostalgic?

No :D

... although I want a flying monkey button now, which may be wrong...

[txanne.livejournal.com]

Ooh, do we get those cute little outfits too?

I once stopped dating a guy because he absolutely insisted on opening doors for me. If I got to a door first and held it for him, he'd hold it open until I went through first. The twit.

[roadnotes.livejournal.com]

*snerk* I hadn't thought about it that way, but I shall add "chivalrous" to my list of buzzwords. It's like someone telling me he's a real gentleman. Yeah. Right.

[micheinnz.livejournal.com]

Or a Nice Guy?

[kalmn.livejournal.com]

seems perfectly reasonable to me!

[fiction-theory.livejournal.com]

I'm just so darn proud to be considered among the hordes of flying monkeys.

Perhaps later I will write more about this, in a post tentatively entitled "Anyone Who Informs You That He Is Chivalrous Is Giving You An Advance Sexism Warning."

Yeah, it does seem like most chivalry comes from a decidedly disrespectful kind of view of women, doesn't it?

Although my little Southern heart still has a soft spot for gentlemen who are kind enough to surrender their seats on the bus/subway for the elderly, people with small children, or those who obviously need to sit down.

But I think that's just Common Courtesy and that comes from a place of respect for Other People In General rather than the paternalistic misogyny of "chivalry".

[tchemgrrl.livejournal.com]

It's proclaiming it on the Internet that smacks of the person not being especially chivalrous in the first place. I know many lovely gents of the old school that will hold a door, but they're not going around bragging about how nice they are.

[jhetley.livejournal.com]

I hold doors for people, no sex considerations. It's part of civilized behavior, not chivalry.

[aendr.livejournal.com]

Yes indeed. For example, I (female) have opened and held a door for a young, healthy man, with a large box. He was very surprised and grateful, but it was a simple case of taking very little of my time to make a small moment in his life a lot easier. Holding the door for anyone, making way, standing up if someone else needs a seat more, helping with a pushchair etc. is nothing more than a little consideration for fellow humans, and should not be ageist, sexist or ablist.

Now, chivalry really ought to be an equal application of that attitude, and so someone saying they try to be chivalrous might just be like my brother - generally courteous but rather liking archaic words - or could be denoting an attitude which is not equal or, in saying it, might be trying to brag about their behaviour. It's the latter two I dislike, but can be hard to distinguish from the former.

I also dislike when a woman gets on their high horse about a man standing up for them without giving them the benefit of the doubt that the stander thought they were more in need of the seat. That can make it harder for men to be courteous to women even if they apply that courtesy equally across the board according to need. It's almost easier for a woman to be courteous than a man in these situations.

One thing I do find awkward is when an elderly male, respecting the attitudes of his youth, needs a seat more than I but hesitates to accept it because I am female. Another thing I find awkward is when my balance is playing up. I am usually fine standing and to all appearances perfectly healthy, but there are occasions I have no sense of balance and either cling for desperation to a pole (being too short to reach straps) or I am lucky enough to have a seat. If I do have a seat, I am then very reluctant to get up for the elderly/pregnant/disabled/small (in case I then fall on top of them) but can feel I'm the only one who might actually act on their need. Others may have noticed it, but a lot of people seem to resolutely ignore it. (Judging by the way they actively avoid meeting the needy stander in the eye.)

*sigh* trying to be a courteous person can be so much harder than it would need to be if everyone was.

[rivka.livejournal.com]

One thing I do find awkward is when an elderly male, respecting the attitudes of his youth, needs a seat more than I but hesitates to accept it because I am female.

A helpful strategy in this circumstance is to get up and walk to the back of the bus or train car without making an explicit offer, or even eye contact. It's a lot easier to just sit down in an empty seat than it is to accept an offer.

[aendr.livejournal.com]

Which works providing there's space at the back (which on a crowded bus/train with people standing isn't always the case) and I'm feeling balanced enough to move that far. I do use that method occasionally, where possible.

[fiction-theory.livejournal.com]

Yeah. Tooting your own horn does sort of ruin the effect, doesn't it?

[brooksmoses]

Yeah, it seems to me that the critical difference with the giving up seats on the bus, there, is whether or not one includes women in the category along with elderly, people with small children, etc., of people who are less capable of standing up on the bus.

I suspect, in a lot of cases, the chivalry is coming from a thought pattern where it would be a perfectly courteous and respectful behavior, except for the fact that follows from an axiom that happens to be insulting and sexist.

(And that's why it's hard to explain what's wrong with it sometimes, I think; people tend to think about the "I was being courteous" thought process, but keep the axiom as an axiom, and from that perspective it's looks like people are telling them that being courteous is bad, which of course makes no sense at all.)

[fiction-theory.livejournal.com]

Yeah, it seems to me that the critical difference with the giving up seats on the bus, there, is whether or not one includes women in the category along with elderly, people with small children, etc., of people who are less capable of standing up on the bus.

I have no problem with healthy, capable women not being in that category. It think among perfectly able-bodied adults, it's just fine to consider men and women equal in the game of First Come First Serve when seats are involved.

I don't expect that a man should be obligated to give up his seat for me when I have to perfectly good legs and can hold on to the rails.

.I suspect, in a lot of cases, the chivalry is coming from a thought pattern where it would be a perfectly courteous and respectful behavior, except for the fact that follows from an axiom that happens to be insulting and sexist.

I concur. I think the axiom bothers me most for two reasons:

a) It assumes weakness in women where weakness does NOT demonstrably exist or has ever demonstrably existed.

b) It's not truly a kindness. They're not being nice to women because they think women are people deserving of kindness and dignity, but because it makes them feel better. "I'm a big superior man, but because I'm so big and superior, I'll be nice to you, just because I can and it makes me feel even bigger and superior, because where would you be without my Big Masculine Kindness?"

[rivka.livejournal.com]

"I'm a big superior man, but because I'm so big and superior, I'll be nice to you, just because I can and it makes me feel even bigger and superior, because where would you be without my Big Masculine Kindness?"

Yeah, there's waaay too much of that. But even when there isn't, chivalry requires the assumption that there are two kinds of human beings: women, and people. Which is fine as long as you are happy being treated like a woman, but quickly wears thin when you would rather be treated like a person.

[kalmn.livejournal.com]

feminism is the theory that women are people.

i am hoping that the people who read your lj are clever enough to not add the usual whiny "and men aren't! feminism is all about oppressing the menz!" bit at the end here.

[brooksmoses]

Yes, exactly.

And a particular "yes, exactly" to this bit --

I have no problem with healthy, capable women not being in that category. It think among perfectly able-bodied adults, it's just fine to consider men and women equal in the game of First Come First Serve when seats are involved.

Not only do I fully agree with that, but I think that putting healthy, capable women in that category is one of the fundamental things that's wrong with (the wrong sort of) chivalry.

[puzzlement.livejournal.com]

I suspect, in a lot of cases, the chivalry is coming from a thought pattern where it would be a perfectly courteous and respectful behavior, except for the fact that follows from an axiom that happens to be insulting and sexist.

I can't speak for what percentage of cases this covers, but I have also heard a number of men say they do it because women 'pay' them with smiles and smiles from women (as opposed to men) gratify them, which really is more problematic all the way down.

Edit: this may correlate with the insulted outrage that some men display when women challenge their role in this sequence or it may not, but I have wondered.

[kate_nepveu]

Yes.

When men hold the first set of two doors open for me, I always hold open the second for them.

It surprises a depressing number of them.

[fiction-theory.livejournal.com]

Seriously? They get surprised when someone returns a courtesy?

[kate_nepveu]

To be precise, that is how I interpret their facial expressions and body language. Pleasant surprise, but surprise.

[curiousangel.livejournal.com]

It often manages to surprise me when it happens. Oh, not when I'm actually with people I know; they almost always return the favor, no matter if it's men or women (and cases where someone is carrying a load or has special circumstances are uniformly recognized). Still, with strangers, a fair number will just blow right past like the concept of returning the courtesy never crossed their mind.

I don't get mad about it; instead, I just see it as my contribution to good karma for everyone. I'm thankful that I'm able to do something nice, and consider that reward enough. I try not to be so obvious about it as to put someone under obligation to respond, and I say "thanks" to people who do respond in kind.

[vito-excalibur.livejournal.com]

I think it's not necessarily (despite what I've written before; I contain multitudes;) that chivalry is bad; I think it's that anyone who feels the need to ANNOUNCE that he is chivalrous is preparing to be a dick.

Sort of like explaining that you are a Nice Guy. These are things that other people have to say about you for them to count.

Do you know, I don't think I've been called man-hating yet once in this kerfuffle. I realize I just jinxed myself; but you know, it's really kind of nice! Yay, internet!

[fiction-theory.livejournal.com]

Do you know, I don't think I've been called man-hating yet once in this kerfuffle. I realize I just jinxed myself; but you know, it's really kind of nice! Yay, internet!

Yep, that is 100% jinxination right there. :) I'm sure right now, as we type, someone is drafting the LJ comment to that affect.

I'm sure rivka will allow you to borrow her flying monkeys. :)

[droewyn.livejournal.com]

If it's not too long, would you consider posting the relevant bits here? I'd be interested in reading the context.

Heh... I just remembered that one spat in a.c. where I was called a Christian pagan-hater. Of course, the poster also thought I was male.

"Anyone Who Informs You That He Is Chivalrous Is Giving You An Advance Sexism Warning."

Yes. Oh, yes.. With "Nice Guy" and a cherry on top.

[ailbhe]

I want you to have a horde of flying monkeys icon.

(Also, it's so cute that you felt nostalgic.)

[akirlu.livejournal.com]

Is that a bit like telling people how humble one is?

I was going to compare it to businesses that put 'honest' in the name of the business, but in fact, as far as I can tell, Reasonably Honest Dave's Appliance really is reasonably honest. (Though they have since scrapped the 'reasonably honest' part of the name.)

[brooksmoses]

I'd read "Reasonably Honest" completely differently than I'd read "Honest", in such a thing. The tongue-in-cheek nature of it changes it, as does the fact that it's clearly not claiming perfection.

[akirlu.livejournal.com]

You're right of course that adding the 'reasonably' makes all the world of difference in making it clearly both ironicly self-aware and playful.

And hey, our stove still works, too.

[naomikritzer]

What if your flying monkeys promise to be good?

[kate_nepveu]

I told the OP he wasn't welcome and then froze the thread because another person asked him a question. The threads had collapsed, so the other person might not have seen it, but it wasn't fair to tell him to stop posting and then leave the possibility of other people asking him direct questions.

[wanderingaengus.livejournal.com]

But did you get called a bra-burner?

[rivka.livejournal.com]

Women who are 36DDs are rarely willing to burn their bras.

[jinian.livejournal.com]

Word.

[sistercoyote.livejournal.com]

Aw, but what if your flying monkeys want to be released?

(We just had an earthquake. I've got adrenaline to spare.) ;)

[kightp.livejournal.com]

Oh, dear.

It must be something in the air. We've just had a long, cranky thread that started with a "chivalrous" post in alt.poly, too.

Just to clarify: These are not the sorts of monkeys that fly out of someone's butt, right?

[klwalton.livejournal.com]

Is it wrong that, instead of feeling pissed off, instead I feel vaguely nostalgic?

Yeah, the Classics. They never go out of style.

[carbonel]

Anyone who informs you that he is chivalrous is announcing that he has a desire to have nine-tenths of all the fun?

[redbird]

Not wrong at all, though I'd be tempted to say something like "I don't hate men…but for you, I'll make an exception."

[kip-w.livejournal.com]

Chivalry? What do horses have to do with -- I'm guessing -- that Gropin' Source nonsense?

[threeringedmoon.livejournal.com]

Man-hater, really? Does the father of your daughter know?

[aquaeri.livejournal.com]

Revel in the nostalgia, I say.

[oursin.livejournal.com]

Unfortunately, 'obnoxious-person-hater' is a bit of a mouthful. Some people always like to think that you're agin them on grounds of generalised prejudice against their demographic: no, this time it is All About Them, no let-outs.