Yes, chivalry is definitely sexist – that’s what chivalry is! The term “chivalry” is most closely associated with courageous Knights of the Round Table being chivalrous and rescuing fair damsels in distress. Chivalry is not dead, and we should be glad that there are still men who think enough of women to come to the rescue when one needs rescuing. In our quest to make all things equal between men and women, we should stop a minute and make sure we realize what we are doing, for there is a strong possibility we could kill chivalry off in the process.
Chivalry equals misogyny. Assisting women with simple tasks like opening doors or carrying luggage, is just clarifying that women are not physically capable to do anything, and is also showing that women are weak. I believe that chivalry should be used by both genders and only when the person is either disabled, pregnant, occupied with a child/children or elderly.
Chivalry traces back to the Medieval period where knights used to first defend women from any possible danger during wars. I would like to state to all those people who believe that chivalry should and always will be a tradition, that, if you want equality between men and women, chivalry is contradicting all that. If you want to be a feminist, believing in chivalry is not the way to go.
-11yr old feminist
I don't know how to answer this with anything but ...Duh. Men sacrificing their money, dignity and lives just to treat a woman like she is some sort of angel that might deign to notice them if they prove themselves worthy.
Oh wait. You might mean the feminist trope that it is sexist against women. Well, yes. But it is a privileged form of sexism which is why most women that call themselves feminist are all for it. They like infantiilizing women so long as it keeps them in a position of power over men. They complain about it from time to time, but never try to seriously do anything. Let's see women in the street hollering, abolish women first rules on ships, draft women, women need to spend more money on men, time women got down on their knees and begged men to marry them.
It culturally conditions boys from the day of their birth that men are innately less valuable than women, and that women's wellbeing and whims, should always both supersede and go at the expense of men, both at the expense of their lives as seen with the sinking of the Titanic, or with their hard earned cash, like paying for all leisure activity's as well as all other living expenses, women here who think this issue concerns whether or not it's sexist to women or not show how blatantly egocentric they are, the question here is whether or not it's sexist to men, and it is, men are taught their lives are expendable and innately inferior to women's lives. And those women who bring up the issue of holding open doors are dwindling over petty affairs, the expendability of men's lives is what's so devious and insidious about Chivalry.
How anyone could argue it's not sexist is truly beyond me.
If women really want complete equality then they should expect exactly that...Equality, no one sex benefits from another, because if another benefits then it's no longer equal. For example, being a gentleman means that a male would be in a sense "serve" the female, because it's the "right" thing to do, because it's chivalrous. But what people should realize is that the idea of a gentleman existed from a time when sexism was actually very rampant and the norm, the female would be the housewife, not doing the heavy lifting etc. But apparently it's the only sexist thing that survived that era.
It implies that men should act like slaves to women, or that they are less important, which is sexist because both genders are equal, and anything that's sexist is automatically wrong, it's like saying that you should hold the door open for someone just because they are black or because they are white, sexism is no better than racism. If it's anyone holding the door open for anyone regardless of gender, then that's fine, but the idea that men should always hold the door open for women and basically act like slaves, is sexist and therefore wrong.
The U.S. Constitution is strange, but its first words do not state anything for men or women. I hold the door for everyone. I do not focus on one gender. I do not care what gender someone is and have no bias toward them because of how I interpret their gender to be. That would be sexist, and sexism (a form of bigotry) makes me extremely angry. It sounds like to defend those who need help is what I did in 2009. But it was not because of the gender of the person, it was because defense was necessary. I do not see women as weaker or stronger than men. I see them as equal.
Chivalry stems from protectionism, which is more or less the belief that women must be sheltered from the big bad world. Used to argue against various women's rights, such as suffrage. In addition, it is heterosexist because it assumes that the woman in question is interested in men at all. BUT WAIT THERE'S MORE. It's also cissexist. By offering your far-superior man door-holding powers in the name of chivalry alone, you are assuming that the recipient even identifies as female. No bueno, friends.
Chivalry is about manners?
Manners are good. Holding doors, for example, is good, if done equally for everyone. If you are entering a room, for example, HOLD THE DOOR OPEN FOR THE PERSON WHO FOLLOWS YOU. Regardless of their gender. (There are more than two, you know.)
This makes no sense to me, if anything is aimed towards women its sexist yet if it harms men its absolute perfection and its a great thing, thats chivelry in a nutshell. And if anything even happens to a women she can allways just use the non-existing "Sexism!" As an excuse. How about they do something for us for once, or they get down on there knees and beg us for marraige, or they get drafted, or they do all the goddamn word, or they have a single F*cking problem in their lives
Chivalry is benevolent sexism. Benevolent sexism is "a paternalistic attitude towards women that idealizes them affectionately." If a man is treating a woman as if to protect her like a parent would protect a child, then the woman is automatically below the man. Parents love their children and respect them (if they are good parents), but still have authority over them. Men should not be in that role of authority. A woman and a man in a relationship should be equal in every aspect, different maybe, but still equal. Their opinions and decision making should be viewed as equal. I hate when guys are chivalrous. If a man wouldn't do a chivalrous act to another man, then he shouldn't do it to a woman. Anything that determines treatment solely based on gender is sexist.
Chivalry isn't sexist, because to me, it's the man putting the woman above himself. He's saying that she is more important than he is. That he will open the door for her, so she can just walk right through it, while he does the work.
It's not saying that women are weak. It's saying that men are unimportant when compared to women (this is coming from a man by the way).
There is nothing sexist about being chivalrous. Chivalry is simply a act of kindness for someone who does (and even doesn't) deserve it. As a woman, I don't feel inferior when a man holds a door open for me. I think it's very thoughtful and I always say thank you. And when I hold a door open for a guy, I hope he doesn't feel that I am "robbing" him of his masculinity or whatnot, because I am not. I'm just doing something kind for someone. I like when people do kind things for me and I am confident enough in my femininity and independence to not assume that when someone gives up their seat to me or pays for me THEY are assuming I cannot stand or cannot pay for myself. That is not the case. and will never be.
We need to stop the whole notion that if a man doesn't give up his seat to a women than he is a rude pig, and if he does than he is clearly misogynist. There is no way to win. Men AND WOMEN both should be giving their seats up to help the elderly, infirm, pregnant,whoever needs it, regardless of gender. Chivalry should not be a man helping a woman, it should be both helping each other.
Anyone that says chivalry is sexist and that "oh you think woman can't take care of themselves" is just looking for attention. Yeah physically men are superior to woman but neither is better than the other. Some girls are stronger than guys but not by nature, chivalry is only showing respect to women. There is nothing disrespectful about trying to be kind to others, women should love chivalry.
Chivalry is about respect, not sexism. It's about a man feeling like a man & a woman feeling like a woman. Nature has a yin & yang aspect and no matter how "pc" we try to be you can't ignore or deny the differences in the genders, those differences make life exciting.
Personally, I open the door for everyone, not just the girl. Being a chivalrous person means that you are respectful towards everyone and that and that and that and that and that and that and that and that and that and that and that and that you can't be stupid
There is nothing wrong with men going out of their way to be polite to others. I don't understand why society will complain the men today have no morals. But the one thing that did prevent them from going off the deep end (which they have ) is being rejected.
I'll let the door slam in your face, never help you when you drop your books. If you're carrying a heavy load I'll just leave it to you to carry it on your own. If you're having problems with friends or society I will just ignore you. I won't buy presents for you. I won't ask to be your partner in a project or any other activities. If you missing supplies I wont let you use mine.
Now does that sound nice? No, it isn't, so shut up and be grateful that I took the precious time out of my life to hold the door open for you.
I hold the door open for everyone and I assist as many people as I can, whether they be a man or a woman. I don't mind paying for dinner if I am on a date because I care about the girl I am with and I want to treat her well, it's not some hidden meaning about how she can't pay for herself or that she is weak. I know that women are strong and independent, so what's wrong with being chivalrous? My mother taught me to be nice to everyone and always act like a gentleman, how is that wrong? Would you rather have me shut the door in your face and leave you the check and call you sexist? When my girlfriend wants to, I let her pay for her portion of the meal or whatever it is, but that doesn't change the fact that I love her and want to take care of her the best I can and show her that I would do anything for her. Guys don't just want to get in a girl's pants all the time (which is a sexist assumption by the way), guys are chivalrous because they care.
Offering my seat to a woman or elderly folks is not in any way being sexist. It's being respectful. Additionally, when I open a door for a woman, I'm protecting her from germs on the handle, ok I'm being facetious with that comment. However, allowing a woman or elderly to go ahead of me into the bank or line up that we'll both be in is expected no? If I can't open a door or offer my seat then there shouldn't be ANY special treatment at all. Perhaps, from now on I'll hold open doors for seniors but make sure to cut in front of women and children. Does that make sense?