I was recently pointed in the direction of an article that brought up the issue that MRA tend to accuse women of demanding chivalry from men without having earned it. (article is linked in previous blog entry).
I wanted to elaborate on this point because it is a trend I have noticed myself and find quite absurd. I have a confession to make, I like having a boyfriend that will treat me to dinner. I am a new age feminist but I like men "taking care" of me in this way.
However, I also like to take care of the men (and women) in my life in similar ways. If I have time I also like cooking for my boyfriend, because he likes that, especially when he is busy with work and such. I suppose you could see it as conforming to traditional gender roles that feminism abhors. I think the important point here though is that both he and I have choice in the matter, and in the end it is just a way of expressing affection and respect. Why else be in a relationship?
The issue of "protection" is also brought up within this discussion of chivalry. It is interesting in the way that yes, if someone was attacking me I would expect my boyfriend to intervene. On the other hand if someone was attacking my boyfriend or another person (regardless of gender) I would likewise intervene.
This may not fit some MRA's definition of chivalry, however that's a moot point, as if that isn't what chivalry encompasses then I don't particularly need or want it in my life.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You could say I have something of a personal grudge against chivalry.
ReplyDeleteI see it as one of the core aspects of Western society which needs to be changed, for the benefit of men and women.
I am happy for you if you have such an understanding relationship; I hope such ideals could spread.
The issue of chivalrous protection is more than getting into a street fight. It is the male-only draft, it is the trivialization of violence against men, it is the special protections afforded to women.
I have written several pieces on the topic, which you can read(if you like) on my blog here:
http://beardreel.wordpress.com/tag/chivalry/
"I see it as one of the core aspects of Western society which needs to be changed, for the benefit of men and women."
ReplyDeleteI see it as a moot point
Also we don't have the draft in Australia.
And that is great! I have often said that Australia, England and India are turning into the foreground of the masculist movement.
ReplyDeleteI don't know much about Australian military policy, so I have a question:
In the US, men are required to sign up for Selective Service, which can then lead to being drafted.
Is there any such program in Australia?
If not, good for you!
But, back to chivalry, I will say that it has greatly disappeared, but it still persists in some ways and I find it summarizes many of the gender problems faced in the West in general.
No, men can afford military service if they want.
ReplyDeleteSeeing as how your in Australia, I though I’d add a link to the thoughts of your fellow Aussie, Mark Richardson - Is chivalry to blame?
ReplyDeleteI want to raise an even more controversial topic than what's been discussed so far.
ReplyDeleteAre 'roos really as pesky as I've heard and, if so, how do you include them in your philosophy of caring for animals?
I want a 'roo (and a Koala) for a pet(I mean animal companion), so if you have extras, you can send them to me.
;)
Joking aside, I wrote my piece on chivalry on the original "Advertising" blog, so won't repeat it here.
ReplyDeleteThey are quite a pest yes, I think increasingly as we find ourselves sharing land with them (golf courses and such) as we are spreading civilisation on to the lands they need. Therefore we end up culling alot of them. (seriously don't get me started).
ReplyDeleteSorry mate, all the roos are mine!
Soooo, i can has a Koala?
ReplyDeleteSure, all they do is sleep anyway.
ReplyDeleteAnd grunt very loudly when mating.
Then sleep some more
Cuuuuuuuuuuute! I wanna hug a koala with their 3-inch razor sharp claws.
ReplyDeleteDo whatever makes your relationship work, and feminist philosophy be d-mned.
ReplyDeleteMRAs have a saying, that "chivalry is dead".
This does NOT mean that individuals as individuals don't sometimes practice behaviors that might be classified as 'chivalrous'.
What it DOES mean, is that chivalry as a cultural framework is no longer legitimate or worthy of respect. It is "dead" in the sense that it has no moral sovereignty or moral authority. (People as individuals are free to dispute that, of course, but they are speaking only for themselves.)
The death of chivalry goes in step with the death of the social contract - for which feminism is likewise largely responsible. Such is the objectively historical bearing of matters.
Thus, your relationship with any male person you meet is on an ad hoc basis. Feminist constructs and mental formulations don't even enter into it at all - unless the other person subscribes to a feminist cultural narrative, and agrees to incorpoate certain axioms into an ad hoc social contract which you conclude between yourselves.
The death of the social contract on any but an ad hoc basis is, of course, fraught with concerning implications that are likely to become more evident as time goes on.
More on the subject of "chivalry".
ReplyDeleteCutting-edge consensus among vanguard MRAs is, that feminism itself is simply another demand for chivalry, albeit hypocritically masked beneath an array of rhetorical ploys.
The feminist endeavor is to "have your cake, and eat it too" - and to recruit the larger female population into this project as far as possible.
The current political "state of the art", so to speak, has been called Chivalry 2.0.
The aim of feminism is, and always has been, to put women on a pedestal.
"Cutting-edge consensus among vanguard MRAs is, that feminism itself is simply another demand for chivalry, albeit hypocritically masked beneath an array of rhetorical ploys."
ReplyDeleteYes, I mentioned that claim in my first paragraph, did you have something to add?
"The aim of feminism is, and always has been, to put women on a pedestal."
I think it was more to take men off theirs
"Yes, I mentioned that claim in my first paragraph, did you have something to add?"
ReplyDeleteI have examined that paragraph closely, and I cannot see that you made any such reference.
Anyway, in the learning process, review and reiteration are proven methods. And more: since you have made known that you wish to learn, I thought you would enjoy knowing what the cutting edge MRAs are saying.
"I think it was more to take men off theirs"
Think as you wish. Thought is free. I know mine is.
"I have examined that paragraph closely, and I cannot see that you made any such reference.
ReplyDelete"I was recently pointed in the direction of an article that brought up the issue that ****MRA tend to accuse women of demanding chivalry from men without having earned it*****. (article is linked in previous blog entry)."
"Think as you wish. Thought is free. I know mine is."
Sorry, but your contributions to my blog of late have been quite useless.
****MRA tend to accuse women of demanding chivalry from men without having earned it*****.
ReplyDeleteCompared to THIS:
"Cutting-edge consensus among vanguard MRAs is, that feminism itself is simply another demand for chivalry, albeit hypocritically masked beneath an array of rhetorical ploys."
The two passages are superficially linked, but they are communicating separate ideas. Furthermore, my version is more cutting-edge.
And finally, your glib, secondhand summation of something I'd not seen, was so slight and briefly stated as to court invisibility. Your own words do not stand out as saliently in the eyes of others as they do in your eyes.
"Sorry, but your contributions to my blog of late have been quite useless."
Because I am not telling you what you want to hear. You are running a typical feminist show; we MRAs are well acquainted with your kind. What the hell, this feels almost like "Feministing"!
You are quite clearly uninterested in learning about The Other Side.
And I do mean OTHER. (That would be the existentialist "Other".)
Here's a helpful hint. When you are dealing with non-feminists (or in this case, the MRA subset thereof), you must bear in mind that you are dealing with a sovereign power.
Let that sink in.
Repeat after me: Feminism is not the world... Feminism is not the world...Feminism is not the world..."
"Because I am not telling you what you want to hear."
ReplyDeleteWell more because you are not telling me anything, you are just repeating yourself and in some cases me. That comment itself has been repeated many times in my blog, I am bored of it, say something else.
"Repeat after me: Feminism is not the world... Feminism is not the world...Feminism is not the world..." "
No it certainly isn't, and it isn't even all of me. There are many parts of my personality and identity that don't make it to this blog, but that is because this is a blog primarily about feminism. If you don't wish to talk about it please don't comment on my blog, and if you do then please think about whether your comments actually have something to offer.
@slwerner
ReplyDeleteI finally got around to reading that article. It didn't really have any new information in it. Was there anything in particular in that article you wished to discuss?
oh and about this statement
ReplyDelete"Do whatever makes your relationship work, and feminist philosophy be d-mned."
I feel as if what I outlined above fits into feminist philosophy.
@Fidelbogen:
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't mind discussing these issues with you, but your responses come across as somewhat arrogant and condescending. It causes me to step cautiously into a conversation as I'm not interested in a fight or being talked down to.
That being said, you raised some points here I'm interested in hearing more about. Death of chivalry, death of the social contract, and this:
When you are dealing with non-feminists (or in this case, the MRA subset thereof), you must bear in mind that you are dealing with a sovereign power.
What does that mean? For chivalry and social contract, I'm interested in understanding what both of those mean to you and when/what led to their deaths. Don't just say "feminism" as I imagine there is more to your point of view than that.
Your ball.
When I think of chivalry I think of men expecting something in return..sad but true. I don't trust men who are chivalrous for fear of them expecting something from me, I'd much rather do it myself, and give myself a hearty pat on the back. However, I'm not against good deeds as to me a deed is paid back in like as opposed to paid back in what the giving party deems suitable. In other words I feel as though chivalry (at least today) is a debt that women can never pay back, women can not be considered chivalrous as it's traditionally a man's role, so what is equal to chivalry? What is a woman's role? submissiveness perhaps? No thank you, I'd rather just dole out the good deeds, and be happy that I may have made someone else's day easier.
ReplyDelete@marriedfem, I definitely agree with you. I see chivalry now for the most part as a good deed. For example if I burst the tyre on my car, a guy helping me change it would be considered chivalrous, however I think it is a nice thing to do as my physical strength is not up to the challenge. Just as when older ladies get on the bus, I stand up and let them have my seat. It is just a nice thing to do, I don't expect old people to then owe me a debt. That is absurd.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate when women openly identify as feminists although I can usually figure it out. I know to offer no chivalry, which means I offer them the same level of courtesy and deference I would offer to a man. It either insults them or is an act of discrimination which they wouldn't or shouldn't want.
ReplyDeleteChris
ReplyDeleteI am more firm in my viewpoints then previously. I pretty much think this "chivalry" thing is bullshit.
Men putting coats on puddles so women could walk over it is the stuff of movies and fairy tales.
Stopping to open a door for someone. Well that isn't chivalry, that is being a social person...
Chivalry aint dead, it just never existed
I agree with treating feminists with the same common courtesy I would normally offer men, which is pretty basic. However, I do go the extra mile for most women (as most don't ID as feminists) in extending kindness and courtesy, which almost all seem to enjoy and appreciate.
ReplyDeleteThis arrangement works out fine for me and for those I come in contact with: feminists get the equality they want and the ladies get the chivalry they prefer.
So feminists aren't "ladies"?
ReplyDeleteNice