[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I think many of you are missing the point, at least that I was trying to make, that giving up your seat, for anyone, has more to do with what I feel, as a man, I should do because I am a man not because the person is old, a woman, etc…
It’s part of what I believe separates men and boys by my definition.
You can do whatever you want as far as I’m concerned. Me, 9/10 times, I’m giving the seat up.
[/quote]
In fairness, as a female, I give my seat up to ANYONE who needs it more than me. It’s not dependent on sex/gender; it depends on your humanity.
I think people are confusing equality, in the eyes of the law, and personal behaviors, like manners. Just because women have equal protection under the law doesn’t mean that they are just like men, and vice versa. It doesn’t mean that women are to be treated like men, and men like women, when it comes to personal behaviors. I try not to swear in front of women, that is my personal choice when it comes to my personal behavior, because it was how I was raised and how I believe a polite society should be.
Maybe some militant feminists and confused males don’t want there to be any distinctions between the sexes however I, by trying to follow the “rules” that were taught to me by my parents and grandparents (both male and female) and following the lead of real men, both historical and fictional (yes, maybe they were idealized), defy those who would have there be no distinctions between the sexes and create some neutered/spayed world where it’s OK for men to wear skinny jeans and mascara. It’s in that world a waif like Orlando Bloom plays a knight.
The flip side to men treating women “equally” (like other men) is women treating men like women. Good luck with that, boys. It’s bad enough they want us to be able to think like them.
Why would I give up my seat to a healthy, middle aged (or younger) woman?
Is she any less capable of standing than I am? Or than some other healthy guy on the train?
The whole point of giving up your seat to someone is that they, for some reason, have difficulty with standing, and you don’t.
I’ll be damned if being a woman somehow means you have more of a right to sit than a man does.
And ain’t no way I’m getting up for an entitled, demanding woman who takes for granted her right to have me stand so she can sit.
Some of you need to remember WHY it is the “right thing” to do sometimes, and not just act like a conditioned rat. [/quote]
The reason I give up the seat has nothing to do with whether or not the woman has difficultly with standing.
Some of you are combining the fact that this woman was demanding, entitled, trashy, etc. with the fact that OP wouldn’t give up his seat. The OP should have given up his seat before the woman even said anything and it shouldn’t even have gotten to that point. Ipso facto, the point about the woman is not relevant. Furthermore, I don’t look at the scum of the earth around me and use that as a basis to judge the morality of my actions. This woman being a scumbag has nothing to do with whether or not I should be giving up my seat to a woman on the train.
And for the rest of you looking, grasping for some absolute line of logic as to why men should be giving up their seat for women in the first place, keep looking. It’s probably lost among the myriad of other polite, classy things you never do.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
Oh boy, I think Lanky’s gonna need another 2 year hiatus after this thread.
Also I’m 95% sure you replied to a post meant to be satirical.[/quote]
Lol, I quoted that post and just kinda went on a rant. Although if it was satire, I completely missed it.
Btw, I didn’t get your PM about your visit to Philly until after my hiatus, glad to hear you had a good time. And cheese steaks are not overrated, you just gotta get the right one.
This thread is, for the most part, disheartening. Over the course of my life, I have seen acts of chivalry decline in noticeable measure. Chivalry is not limited merely to being courteous towards women either. Why is it that most everything I read here ends back up at something being racist or sexiest? Whatever happened to aiming to be the best, most noble, generous person that you can be, regardless of how others act?
Also, for the life of me, I fail to see how any woman (or man) would be offended at having a seat offered or the door opened for them. Seriously? No matter what, I always plan on being gracious if ones intentions were honorable. Honor, meaning a person with good sense in moral conduct rather than all of this finger pointing and thinking that politeness equals sexist behavior. Good grief.
Thank you to the men in here that still practice chivalry. Here is a woman that appreciates it.
[quote]Jackie_Jacked wrote:
Thank you to the men in here that still practice chivalry. Here is a woman that appreciates it.[/quote]
Well the other women are ruining it for you :/[/quote]
I will still be gracious towards anyone with manners. Women don’t define each other. Everyone is responsible for their own actions, not those of others.
[quote]Jackie_Jacked wrote:
Thank you to the men in here that still practice chivalry. Here is a woman that appreciates it.[/quote]
Well the other women are ruining it for you :/[/quote]
I will still be gracious towards anyone with manners. Women don’t define each other. Everyone is responsible for their own actions, not those of others.
[/quote]
That’s not what I’m insinuating. I just mean that most of the females I see nowadays are deincentivizing chivalry and so it is just sort of going away regardless of your or my feelings about it.
[quote]Jackie_Jacked wrote:
Thank you to the men in here that still practice chivalry. Here is a woman that appreciates it.[/quote]
Well the other women are ruining it for you :/[/quote]
I will still be gracious towards anyone with manners. Women don’t define each other. Everyone is responsible for their own actions, not those of others.
[/quote]
That’s not what I’m insinuating. I just mean that most of the females I see nowadays are deincentivizing chivalry and so it is just sort of going away regardless of your or my feelings about it.[/quote]
Sorry if my post came off that way. It wasn’t meant to sound hostile. The opposite, actually.
I agree with your observation 100% and, although it may seem old fashioned…well, I suppose I’m just old fashioned. lol The horror!
Jackie i dont think you know what chivalry is. you are using it synonymously with goodwill.
Men were chivalrous only towards women they considered worthy -those who are chaste, pure of reputation, monogamously loyal and delicate of manners. When a man holds open a door for a woman, or carries her heavy bags, he is doing so under the guise of an implicit pact between himself and all of womenkind. He assumes her relative weakness, modesty and submissiveness, and she assumes his strength and leadership. There is an unspoken agreement that both sides will hold up their end of the bargain. Implicit, too, in chivalry is a subconscious awareness that women are reproductively more valuable than men. Without a man?s confidence in these assumptions, the rationale for chivalry, and the desire to grant it, dissipate like the memories of so many one night stands.
So I ask, are you willing to hold up your end of the bargain Jackie?
[quote]therajraj wrote:
Jackie i dont think you know what chivalry is. you are using it synonymously with goodwill.
Men were chivalrous only towards women they considered worthy -those who are chaste, pure of reputation, monogamously loyal and delicate of manners. When a man holds open a door for a woman, or carries her heavy bags, he is doing so under the guise of an implicit pact between himself and all of womenkind. He assumes her relative weakness, modesty and submissiveness, and she assumes his strength and leadership. There is an unspoken agreement that both sides will hold up their end of the bargain. Implicit, too, in chivalry is a subconscious awareness that women are reproductively more valuable than men. Without a man?s confidence in these assumptions, the rationale for chivalry, and the desire to grant it, dissipate like the memories of so many one night stands.
So I ask, are you willing to hold up your end of the bargain Jackie?[/quote]
And you sir are clearly no knight. Obviously chivalry doesn’t mean to us what it did. It was never chivalry that would have made a knight give a lady his seat. It was considered to be good manners by generations past. Now its obviously up in air.
Chivalry would have said something like treat women with honor and give charity to widows amongst a bunch of other rules. There would have been no part of it that was a bargain. It was a code some of it moral that you lived by. What kind of shitty moral code depends on some type of implicit bargain that another will act like you expect them to.
Most of a chivalric code has little or nothing to do with women.
To fear God and maintain His Church
To serve the liege lord in valour and faith
To protect the weak and defenceless
To give succour to widows and orphans
To refrain from the wanton giving of offence
To live by honour and for glory
To despise pecuniary reward
To fight for the welfare of all
To obey those placed in authority
To guard the honour of fellow knights
To eschew unfairness, meanness and deceit
To keep faith
At all times to speak the truth
To persevere to the end in any enterprise begun
To respect the honour of women
Never to refuse a challenge from an equal
Never to turn the back upon a foe
[quote]therajraj wrote:
Jackie i dont think you know what chivalry is. you are using it synonymously with goodwill.
Men were chivalrous only towards women they considered worthy -those who are chaste, pure of reputation, monogamously loyal and delicate of manners. When a man holds open a door for a woman, or carries her heavy bags, he is doing so under the guise of an implicit pact between himself and all of womenkind. He assumes her relative weakness, modesty and submissiveness, and she assumes his strength and leadership. There is an unspoken agreement that both sides will hold up their end of the bargain. Implicit, too, in chivalry is a subconscious awareness that women are reproductively more valuable than men. Without a man?s confidence in these assumptions, the rationale for chivalry, and the desire to grant it, dissipate like the memories of so many one night stands.
So I ask, are you willing to hold up your end of the bargain Jackie?[/quote]
And you sir are clearly no knight. Obviously chivalry doesn’t mean to us what it did. It was never chivalry that would have made a knight give a lady his seat. It was considered to be good manners by generations past. Now its obviously up in air.
[/quote]
Be glad that he isnt, because a)he could not read and b) even the tone of what you just wrote would have been enough to bash you head in with a morning star.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
Jackie i dont think you know what chivalry is. you are using it synonymously with goodwill.
Men were chivalrous only towards women they considered worthy -those who are chaste, pure of reputation, monogamously loyal and delicate of manners. When a man holds open a door for a woman, or carries her heavy bags, he is doing so under the guise of an implicit pact between himself and all of womenkind. He assumes her relative weakness, modesty and submissiveness, and she assumes his strength and leadership. There is an unspoken agreement that both sides will hold up their end of the bargain. Implicit, too, in chivalry is a subconscious awareness that women are reproductively more valuable than men. Without a man?s confidence in these assumptions, the rationale for chivalry, and the desire to grant it, dissipate like the memories of so many one night stands.
So I ask, are you willing to hold up your end of the bargain Jackie?[/quote]
And you sir are clearly no knight. Obviously chivalry doesn’t mean to us what it did. It was never chivalry that would have made a knight give a lady his seat. It was considered to be good manners by generations past. Now its obviously up in air.
[/quote]
Be glad that he isnt, because a)he could not read and b) even the tone of what you just wrote would have been enough to bash you head in with a morning star.
[/quote]
Bah he’s no true knight and you’re never supposed to back away from combat with an equal no?
[quote]therajraj wrote:
Jackie i dont think you know what chivalry is. you are using it synonymously with goodwill.
Men were chivalrous only towards women they considered worthy -those who are chaste, pure of reputation, monogamously loyal and delicate of manners. When a man holds open a door for a woman, or carries her heavy bags, he is doing so under the guise of an implicit pact between himself and all of womenkind. He assumes her relative weakness, modesty and submissiveness, and she assumes his strength and leadership. There is an unspoken agreement that both sides will hold up their end of the bargain. Implicit, too, in chivalry is a subconscious awareness that women are reproductively more valuable than men. Without a man?s confidence in these assumptions, the rationale for chivalry, and the desire to grant it, dissipate like the memories of so many one night stands.
So I ask, are you willing to hold up your end of the bargain Jackie?[/quote]
My husband doesn’t complain.
Although I know what you mean, I have to respectfully disagree with your thoughts that chivalry is only code of conduct towards women. Also, I would think that monogamous loyalty and such wouldn’t really apply in a situation such as giving up your seat.
When I think of what a man is – he’s a mature, strong individual that carries himself in a respectful way even if placed in a situation where being rude would be understandable. I guess I feel like real men wouldn’t be threatened or offended by something trivial.
If you like, replace the word chivalry with manners.
-If see a couple of teenagers harassing a younger kid/elderly person etc I will quite likely intervene.
-If I see a guy fall off of his bicycle, I’ll at the very least ask if he’s ok.
*The crucial difference between the above examples & automatically giving up my seat for a lady is well, their is little to no DIRECT social pressure to act in the above situations (most people have a walk on by attitude)+ when you do something like help out a lost kid etc, you are doing this for a SPECIFIC purpose.
Automatically giving up your seat for a lady…well…why?
If I am sitting in the first place, there’s a reason for it. I generally stand in these situations because I know it isn’t going to be an issue for me, and I know other people like to sit. But L O fucking L at the idea that, if I am sitting, I should be just itching to give up my seat to first woman that happens along because “it’s the right thing to do.”
You want to talk about creating a sense of entitlement in a person, then teach them they deserve to sit and others deserve to stand for no discernible reason whatsoever. My Grandma? Sure, I’d expect anyone to offer an elderly woman in her 80s their seat. My Mom? Nah, she’s able-bodied and needs exercise wherever she can get it. My daughter? Go fuck yourself for teaching her to be such entitled bitch. That’s the last thing a goddamned kid in the modern world needs is to have yet another area where they feel they are owed something.
Bottom line: If I offer a seat to a woman, I’d also offer it to a man…pregnant women excepted. THAT is what it means to be polite because my generosity is not contingent on gender.
I’d also say, regarding the be: Super-duper-nice to people even if they are not nice to you:
About a year ago I was queuing up in a shop (almost at the till) & I momementarily broke out of the queue to grab an extra item. I rejoinjed the queue a few seconds later & TECHNICALLY cut in front of some dude. Initially, the guy said nothing, though, just as I was about to leave, the guy in response to the cashiers question:
‘How are you doing’? said: ‘I’m ok, apart from people cutting in front of me!’.
I turned around & apologized.
Bottom line is, as much as that lil fella was a bit passive-aggressive in ‘calling me out’ for acting like a dick, he was completely right to do so.
Sometimes, even the best of people need a lil wake up call.
