Poll: Is treating women in Gentlemanly way Sexist?

[Ambitiousmould]

where i come from, women open doors for men a lot more than men opening them for women. i think that this is wrong, not because it should be the other way, but that there should be a balance.

besides, i think that there is a certain happy vibe when men are gentlemanly. it's not at all that the women are incapable, it's that they are being respected. i'm 15 but i still prefer SOME of the old fashioned social rules.

i can see why in some instance women would get angry with over politeness. like i said before, at a certain point being polite is just a cover up for being a dick. but at the same time i would be chuffed to bits if people kept opening doors for me.

 

[Ambitiousmould]

i see being gentlemanly as a sign of respect for whoever the gentlemanly deed is being done for. being gentlemanly towards a woman, therefore, should be a sign of respect. up to a certain point. because, like i said before, at a certain point, politeness becomes being a dick.

besides, i'd be chuffed to bits if people kept opening doors for me.

 

[tensorproduct]

Here is an interesting comparison whenever I see people talking about how treating subset of humanity X, if we treated everyone equally, what would happen to the mentally disabled? If treating people differently is wrong, what happens when different people NEED to be treated differently. Basing decisions off of ones state of being is perfectly acceptable as long as you don't discriminate in a way that results in one party being lessened because of it (see segregation).

This may be a novel concept, but how about treating people differently is okay when there is in fact a difference that warrants it. See, women have arms so they can pull out their own chairs for instance. They do not need men to do it. Treating them differently there doesn't make sense. Same with doors. Maybe if you open for everyone, sure. But women are capable of opening their own doors, so there's no reason for a difference.

Yeah, see, almost nobody pulls out chairs, or opens doors for a woman because they genuinely believe a woman /can't/ do it. It's more often a case of believing a woman /shouldn't have/ to do it.

It seems like people try to equate this form of sexist behavior with misogyny, which isn't necessarily the case. Sexism isn't inherently evil. Yes, it's not ideal, but it's not always driven by malice.

Could you elaborate on why women shouldn't have to do these things which they are in general every bit as capable of doing as a man?

For the same reason that I'm capable of slaughtering a cow and turning its meat into hamburger, but I'd much rather buy a pound of ground beef from the store.

I don't think I follow you. Let me know if this is on the right track:

A farmer is more capable of rearing cattle, and a butcher more capable of slaughtering livestock and of dressing and grinding the beef. So, of course you don't do those things for yourself. You don't have the expertise or training to do effectively or efficiently.

This analogy breaks down quite a bit when applied to the act of moving a chair. This requires next to no training and (unless chairs are built quite a bit more sturdily where you come from) very little strength, so I don't see why you think it's relevant.

 

[hazabaza1]

Doing anything to anyone at any time for any reason is sexist nowadays.

 

[jdogtwodolla]

It's not inherently Sexist but it can be depending on the Motivation to do so.

 

[Ambitiousmould]

i'm trying to provide my personal experience. not theory, but thiese actions in practice, but i'm not sure how valid this experience is because i live in barnsley, and i'd rather not.

 

[Launcelot111]

Here is an interesting comparison whenever I see people talking about how treating subset of humanity X, if we treated everyone equally, what would happen to the mentally disabled? If treating people differently is wrong, what happens when different people NEED to be treated differently. Basing decisions off of ones state of being is perfectly acceptable as long as you don't discriminate in a way that results in one party being lessened because of it (see segregation).

This may be a novel concept, but how about treating people differently is okay when there is in fact a difference that warrants it. See, women have arms so they can pull out their own chairs for instance. They do not need men to do it. Treating them differently there doesn't make sense. Same with doors. Maybe if you open for everyone, sure. But women are capable of opening their own doors, so there's no reason for a difference.

Yeah, see, almost nobody pulls out chairs, or opens doors for a woman because they genuinely believe a woman /can't/ do it. It's more often a case of believing a woman /shouldn't have/ to do it.

It seems like people try to equate this form of sexist behavior with misogyny, which isn't necessarily the case. Sexism isn't inherently evil. Yes, it's not ideal, but it's not always driven by malice.

Could you elaborate on why women shouldn't have to do these things which they are in general every bit as capable of doing as a man?

For the same reason that I'm capable of slaughtering a cow and turning its meat into hamburger, but I'd much rather buy a pound of ground beef from the store.

What does this even mean? Making your own ground beef requires raising or buying a cow as well as having the knowledge and equipment to slaughter it and grind the meat. That's time, resources, and expertise that I tend to doubt you or most people have. Opening a door requires arms. Is your argument that men are specialists in the art of door opening? That men are better equipped to handle random trivialities in one's daily life? This is a terrible analogy

 

[krazykidd]

Good grief . I read the first two pages and i'm assuming the other pages are the same . It's sexist to be a gentlemen to women now? And this my friends is why chivalry is dead , and women always go for the assholes . This is ridiculous!

OT: no it's not sexist , it's being fucking nice . Can't a man be nice to a woman without being called sexist ? Fine , i'ma start slamming doors in their faces , let them freeze if it's cold and not give them a hand if they ask for help . Theres your equality.

 

[nuba km]

It's not sexist if you do it for men too. And if you're doing it for people regardless of gender, then you can call it gentlemanly, but it's essentially just politeness.

Hoorah for being polite!

indeed, I am equally polite to everyone(you now say please and thank you, say have a nice day, keep doors open etc.), though I am still considered rude because I am blunt.

 

[astrav1]

So, afew people on here have called me sexist. What for? For suggesting that men treat women in a gentlemanly manner. Now, I can see that too a certain extent, like the whole "The world is unsafe for women, So I will keep you away from the world" style of gentleman-re IS sexist. However, what I was refering too was holding the door open for a women, pulling out her chair for her, offering her your jacket if it is cold, things like that. THAT is what I fail to see as being sexist.

So escapist, does the fact I want to be a gentleman make me sexist?

Well if you only do it for women giving the reason that they are women, then yes, but really it's important to act how you want.

 

[soren7550]

I'm a woman, and I say no, it isn't sexist. Hell, holding open a door and so for is just being nice in my opinion (I do it a lot, as does Mr. Boyfriend).

 

[Orekoya]

Does the fact I want to be a gentleman make me sexist?

This isn't the same question you have in the poll.

A gentleman is a civilized, educated, sensitive, or well-mannered man. It's not gender-specific; you can be a gentleman to anyone. Sexist is a person who has the attitudes or behavior based on sex. Therefore just being a gentleman isn't sexist. Your poll question is "Is treating women in a gentlemanly way sexist?" Well, if you are a gentleman only to one sex, then yes, it's sexist.

 

[Ambitiousmould]

this is bleeding stupid now. political correctness gone mad. just be polite to people, it doesn't take bloody genius. i say "gentlemanship". i'm sure that some government person eager to be all like "equality" will make it illegal. so women, i would enjoy it while it lasts.

 

[FalloutJack]

Well, I'll tell you what. I will be a polite and gentlemanly person until someone objects. And then, I will be a downright asshole to that person from then on for being a dick about it. Fair?

 

[Thyunda]

OT: no it's not sexist , it's being fucking nice . Can't a man be nice to a woman without being called sexist ? Fine , i'ma start slamming doors in their faces , let them freeze if it's cold and not give them a hand if they ask for help . Theres your equality.

So is that how you usually treat men? Because if you bothered to read at all the reason its sexist is that it treats them differently for no real reason. Gender being irrelevant to door opening and shit, thus not a real reason.

You...actually make me ill. There's no other word for it. I feel the poetic flair in my heart dying every time I read something you say.

OT: Yeah it's sexist. By...definition it's sexist. But I couldn't care less. I'm a gentleman and I'm damn proud of it. Not sure why this is such an issue with people. Gentlemanship, as you call it, is one of the things that makes life for living and not for existing.