Not all of chivalry is just mere "good manners". Some parts, such as opening doors, should be applied to everyone, regardless of gender. Others are sexist and need to be gotten rid of.

This is a code that existed before any real laws were around. Do you think they investigated murders in the dark/middle ages? No, you had to have honor. You needed unity. Anyone can be chivalrous really. It's all about respect and honor, IMO. When I hold the door open for you it's not because I feel you are inferior to me. It is just me being courteous.

..And if a person has to see how you are first before extending chivalry, that's not honor at all. Honor deals with people you haven't even met yet, even those who treat you poorly (which is why I recommend distancing from bad people rather than engaging them).

I don't listen to that crap about it promoting inequality.

The medieval code of chivalry has devolved into indentured servitude for modern men, and something which actually reinforces female chauvinism. It's not only outdated, but actually aids in men's disempowerment by rewarding women regardless of their behaviour. 'Common civility' serves as a more fair and inclusive replacement.

Quote from NowHearThis

I notice that some MRAs don't care for chivalry.

ok, take note of your choice of words here... "don't care for" vs what you come back with shortly...

Quote from NowHearThis

They believe that showing any level of respect to women (even if it's just a little) is tantamount to being a white knight and/or a mangina.

No, this is not even close to a common theme on AM (nor on most MRA sites). People like Dr. Phil, who persistently claims women as victims and bawls at men - even when the woman is clearly in the wrong - these are the kinds of people who are called out as white knights or manginas.

Quote from NowHearThis

Personally I don't see a problem with chivalry.

Chivalry is not limited to men giving and women receiving. See other posts above for explanations.

Quote from NowHearThis

I don't think that we should disrespect women (just because they are women) any more than we should be disrespected (just because we're men).

Right.. Who said otherwise? No one has said "don't show women respect or else!" but giving respect just because she is female is pretty much giving a pussy pass unless the same respect is given to men on an equal footing.

Quote from NowHearThis

Of course when a woman behaves in a manner to earn disrespect, then that's exactly what she'll get.

Right - and this works all ways around. When a man behaves like a prat, people lose respect... but also, when people act in the best interests of others and make good judgements, they earn people's respect.

Quote from NowHearThis

So to the guys and gals of AM, what do you think?

I think you've misunderstood.

Quote from NowHearThis

Do you think that being chivalrous and being an MRA are incompatible or mutually exclusive?

There's nothing to compare here.. the two are entirely unrelated.

Quote from NowHearThis

Do we as men "give in" to women when we exercise good manners? Or is it only when we take it to the extreme and behave as if we're slaves to women and will do anything they tell us to do? Is it possible to be kind to women without "putting them on pedestals" as it were?

Thoughts?

The answer is simple... treat women the very same as you would a man.

It is women, not MRA's, who will scold you for being 'disrespectful' when all you're doing is giving them full frontal equality (see my sig).

Quote from NowHearThis

So to the guys and gals of AM, what do you think? Do you think that being chivalrous and being an MRA are incompatible or mutually exclusive? Do we as men "give in" to women when we exercise good manners? Or is it only when we take it to the extreme and behave as if we're slaves to women and will do anything they tell us to do? Is it possible to be kind to women without "putting them on pedestals" as it were?

Thoughts?

It depends upon what form of Chivalry and its attendant beliefs you consider form modern interpretations of Chilvary. if you consider the courtesies of doors, chairs and language then Chivalry, in the modern context, can be applied both ways. From my reading a lot of MRAs are supportive of equality and would have little objection to this.

It is where Chivalry is conflated with financial posturing then some MRA's may not agree. For example, the cultural habit of the man paying for the woman's meal, movie ticket or any sundry expense of dating, or even just casual outings, is not Chivalry. This is financial parasitism on the part of the woman dressed up as Chivalry. Another is emotional blackmail; men being encouraged to be gentle with women just because they can cry at the drop of a hat. Certainly, genuine grief is to be respected, in women and men, but it doesn't take much effort to detect crocodile tears used for the purposes of manipulation. On this same front, Chivalry is sometimes used to excuse women hitting men and men not replying in kind. Again, this flies in the face of equality that the modern, western world says it believes in.

In general I support courtesy as a good starting point for any social interaction, but I am not supportive of the conflated ideas some people have regarding Chivalry.

I believe in gender equality all around. And still, I submit to my boyfriend's decisions and will. When we are together I cook for him, clean for him, and do him favors. Does this mean I'm not for gender equality? No, I still believe that society should give men and women equal rights, responsibilities, and opportunities. I don't think that because I am submissive, that I am better than other women, or that submission is the only right way for a woman to act toward a man.

I show courtesy to everyone. But submission is a show of respect for someone, above and beyond what you'd consider common courtesy. And I only submit to people who I deem worthy of that sort of respect, and who I truly love and choose to give that respect to.

How does that have anything to do with chivalry and MRAs? Well, chivalry, like submission, is a show of respect that is above and beyond what you'd consider common courtesy. And a man can believe in furthering gender equality through the MRM, and still choose to show chivalry to a woman who he deems worthy of that sort of respect, and who he loves and chooses to show this respect to. It shouldn't be expected of him, and he shouldn't be considered a lesser man if he doesn't choose to be chivalrous. Like I said, chivalry, like submission, is going above-and-beyond what can reasonably be expected for a person to do for another person. But still, to be chivalrous or not is his choice to make.

So long as he does not tout his personal choice to be chivalrous as an ideal for all men to follow, and does not act like because he is chivalrous, he is better than men who are not, and does not act like chivalry is the only right way for a man to behave with a woman, he can still believe in equality for men.

A final parallel. Anyone who saw my submission as their "birthright," so to speak, wouldn't get it. Similarly, a woman who sees a man's chivalry as her "birthright" shouldn't be shown chivalry by any man, MRA or otherwise. It would just reinforce her entitlement complex. But if a man, MRA or otherwise, so chooses, he can show chivalry to a trustworthy partner who appreciates it and treats him well in return, just as if a woman so chooses, she can show submission to a trustworthy partner who appreciates it and treats her well in return.

But still, I repeat, neither chivalry nor submission should be considered "expected" of anyone, nor should receiving either one be regarded as any individual's "birthright."

Look, some men believe in traditionalism (chivalry, financial responsibility, the whole deal) and some believe in sexual 'sameness' (I'm not your dad and you're not a princess so I'm doing for myself). Some take elements from both, some are confused, and some apply selectively. MRAs are not "special" amongst men. There are traditionalist men and there are new age herbivores (and every single variation inbetween the two) all over the place. Men in general either believe in the shit or dont. Nothing to do with being an MRA or not.By-the-way, chivalry doesn't fucking equal respect for women. What the fuck is wrong with you? Not showing chivalry means a person isn't doing another person any special favors. Chivalry is a set of rules a human being follows in respect to others; such as one knight not slaying another, etc. It's not all about women. I respect women as I respect every other human being so ovaries hold no greater value to me than my own testicles.

The last few times i held a door open for women was at the grocery store-was out of common courtesy-it really had nothing to do with chivalry as i would have done it for anyone.

It was the scowls and looks that i recieved from a couple of women...like "i don't need your help" with the no thank-you attitude that turned me off-but i still do it,as i feel it is only courtesy.

Would i be chivalrous in any other cases-i doubt it very much-but thats just me.

A few weeks ago i was at a friends when a younger good-looking female walked in-no one moved to give her a seat when one guy started bitchin' about how rude we were by not giving up one of our chairs to the princess.

I told him that that would be unfair to the girl and that it showed her as being weak-i said i am only respecting her equality as a person and she could fight for a seat like anyone else--this girl became instantly friendly toward's me and respected my answer.

The guy who was bitchin' ended up giving her his seat and stood around the rest of the evening bitchin there was no where to sit- lol

courtesy and chivalry are two diff. things.

I actually had a very similar situation. I held a door open for a girl when I was at college, but that had nothing to do with chivalry either, I would have done it regardless of gender, and I put NO special emphasis on the fact that she was female whatsoever. She said "Thanks you're so cute" in a sarcastic voice. Either she thought it was chivalry and/or she believed in the made-up idea that ALL straight males are attracted to ALL females, believe me I have heard people believe that.

That was actually before I even knew what chivalry was, and I didn't even know that a special emphasis was put on females when opening doors at the time. Ever since I found out, I've been wary about opening doors. It wasn't until I learned about the sexist policy on who should pay for a date (I had known it used to be like that, but it was only after a while that I learned it still happens in the 21st century) then I looked that up and found out about chivalry and all the other misandry stuff.

I've also noticed that since I became wary and started only opening doors when it was neccesary that I've gotten respected more.

I agree, chivalry and courtesy are different things. Chivalry is preferential treatment for females based on gender, courtesy is good manners for everyone.

Please god noooooo! ..... not another chivalry thread ........ Seattle Traditionalist will be along any minute

OD: courtesy and chivalry are two diff. things.

Exactly.

Thank you for all the responses. The last thing I want to do is beat a dead horse. Let's consider this thread closed.

Quote from nivek

Seattle Traditionalist will be along any minute

Naw, we're safe - Tera is no longer active here so he won't come around these 'ere parts no more.

Quote from Zerbu

Chivalry is preferential treatment for females based on gender, courtesy is good manners for everyone.

Not quite, what you're defining it as is what feminists have told us... Chivalry isn't what feminists define it is - although they are very clever at making us believe words have new or twisted meanings.

Just for the record:-
White knight or Black knight depended on whose side your were on, how much they paid you and who won.
Knight's were mercenaries.
Their armor weighed around 25 kilos - much less than the modern soldier has to carry into battle.

They were they football/rock stars of their day and attracted a lot of groupies. The richer women (at least the sexually satisfied ones) decided to turn them into heroes and history was re-written.

What else is new?

Quote from NowHearThis

As I read the AM forums (and the forums/articles of other MRA sites), I notice that some MRAs don't care for chivalry. They believe that showing any level of respect to women (even if it's just a little) is tantamount to being a white knight and/or a mangina. Personally I don't see a problem with chivalry. I don't think that we should disrespect women (just because they are women) any more than we should be disrespected (just because we're men). Of course when a woman behaves in a manner to earn disrespect, then that's exactly what she'll get.

So to the guys and gals of AM, what do you think? Do you think that being chivalrous and being an MRA are incompatible or mutually exclusive? Do we as men "give in" to women when we exercise good manners? Or is it only when we take it to the extreme and behave as if we're slaves to women and will do anything they tell us to do? Is it possible to be kind to women without "putting them on pedestals" as it were?

Thoughts?

How about women being as chivalrous to men as we are to women?

How come that never enters into any non-MRA discussion about chivalry?