...Chivalry is Not Dead, It Just Needs a Resurrection...

[kimodragon]

What does chivalry have to do with the number of humans on the planet?
_________________
From you I receive to you I give
Together we share
For this we live

[Shiari]

Having problems keeping up with the natural migration of conversations? Don't worry, it happens a lot.

Skyfire said that women are *genetically* more emotional, yet I have males on both sides of the family who are no less emotional than the women, even in public. A good portion of male stoicism is, as I said, a cultural expectation. However, no matter what culture men *do* tend to have problems expressing strong emotions verbally, will avoid eye and physical contact when talking about something that is bothering them, etc. This does not make them *less* emotional as the post I was replying to said.

If you worked in the veterinary field, you wouldn't say that women are more easily 'grossed out'. And even as mothers we have to deal with puke, diarrhea, colds, the placenta.. And on a similar note, right now I have constipated foster kittens. I've had more *men* go "ewwwww" when I talk about having to encourage them to poop and having to give them enemas and they then refuse to touch the kitten. In fact, I've yet to have a single female do that.

I remember watching cartoons as a 4 or 5 year old... that had a women standing on a chair screeching about a mouse. My mom is old enough to remember when it was thought that educating a women would *harm* her because women are frail. So... how much of that is cultural? I bet that the women living in rural parts of Africa, Australia, or Asia don't have to retire to a fainting couch if they see a mouse.

[kimodragon]

Well the chivalrous man would help the lady to the fainting couch, and get her a glass of water and stay by her side until she is feeling better. And then go take care of the mouse.

Teaching men about chivalry is teaching men on how to assist women. Not to subjecate or demean women. How to be a champion of women's virtues and morals.

The teachings are meant to show men how to become true and strong leaders of their communities.
_________________
From you I receive to you I give
Together we share
For this we live

[SkieFireYokana]

And I don't see why it should really be gender-specific; the way you talk about it is portraying it in a very positive light. Men can help the women out, et cetera, become strong and true leaders of the society... but who is there to say women can't do that? They can do all of that! I try to be "chivalrous" (really just courteous) to everyone, regardless of gender, because gender roles like "men becoming strong and true leaders of the society" should not be around in this day and age. I am in support, however, of "PEOPLE becoming strong and true leaders of society."

In other words, yes, teaching men about chivalry is teaching them to assist women. But there's no good reason for this to be restricted TO women; there's no good reason not to teach it to women; people should be champions of people's virtues and morals, not the men champions of women's virtues and morals. Let's put this into a different light so you can see the problem: "Teaching whites about anti-discrimination is teaching whites how to assist blacks. Not to subjugate or demean them. How to be a champion of black virtues and morals." Well... um, what's so different about black people? It's nice that you're not subjugating them or demeaning them, but here's what you are doing: you're singling them out. You're making them different when really there shouldn't be a difference. So you can hold the door open for a girl. That's nice and polite and good. But if you let the door close for a man, that's NOT nice and polite and good. It's socially acceptable, but it's not nice and polite and good. Don't help women because they're women. Help them because they're people.
_________________
Happy Fourth of July everybody! The funniest thing about this signature is that I wrote it on the fourth of July, 2010, and it's probably going to be here for several months.

[kimodragon]

Chivalry has to be gender specific in order to teach men how to treat women because they ARE a different gender. If you did not teach men this then they would, and have, treat women as property that they own. Just like they have treated all races! Not just the black man.
But to teach young boys to become chivalrous men, is to teach them to value their wives, mothers, and sisters because they are WOMEN. It teaches the young male to cherish ALL of womenhood. Not just the women that they may be related to.
_________________
From you I receive to you I give
Together we share
For this we live