Chivalry--where did it go?

[DarkLight]

I am presuming of course, that men and women reading a Catholic forum are looking for chaste partners and committed to chastity themselves. Otherwise I’d ask why they are here.

 

[chevalier]

… (re: the scorn of the nice guy)

Well, I’m not sure to what extent you could call me a modern man, but I’m somewhat wary in turn of smart modern women who are wary of ‘nice guys’.

Some women will react rudely as a sort of intentional test (a special sort of test that has its own special name that includes a four-lettered word ). If that happens, she has probably killed any prospect of friendship, let alone ‘something more’, especially true if she doesn’t seem to care that she’s throwing accusations or insults lightly, which different from simply opting not to associate. Not because I’m vindictive but because we apparently have a deep-seated philosophical/ethical difference.

I understand and sympathize with women’s difficulties these days, so I try to be tolerant, especially given how a lot of people are tired, stressed and edgy (I have a bit of a short fuse myself on some days), but I don’t tolerate intentional rudeness as a response. And since obviously neither she nor I are going to rethink our respective ethical paradigms any time soon, I’ll call it a day. ‘Thank your for your time. Have a nice evening.’ Then I’ll flash a warm, charming smile, pay the tab plus extra for a taxi for her when she’s done, and I’ll be gone and won’t be picking up calls any time soon, if at all.

This may sound cold, but expectations of etiquettal prowess should be higher of a woman than of a man of comparable upbringing or standing, being the more social gender. And, with your permission and with quite some sadness for coming to speak so frankly, I’m just tired of women taking so many licences these days; it just appears too self-centred to me, which I consciously reject on moral grounds but which my system also subconsciously rejects in the sense of not getting the chemistry. And this is more about the ethical differences than about etiquette anyway, I’m not being elitist here.

There also seems to be a common misconception that a nice male is a beta male. In my 35 years of life, that has led to a number of hilarious surprises. These days I just don’t care, though it obviously does no service to my ego. I’m more amused than anything else, once the initial seismic wave passes. In doing that, those women simultaneously fail my thinking test (not the size of IQ, but the act of thinking), which means my interest in them had been misplaced to begin with. At least in dating situations. It’s worse if I have to work with them, not like I can’t manage. I know how to correct the misimpression, I’m just loath to expend the energy. I’m really getting old… I found CAF as almost a teenager. So much has changed. I was just reflecting about how much had changed, or developed rather, since I came up with this nickname, in the context of this thread. It was hard not to.

 

[chevalier]

There’s a particular art to learning to be polite and kind to everyone without allowing one’s self to be taken advantage of.

Yup, wholeheartedly. And men rise a lot in the eyes of women when they learn it, incidentally. However, at about the same time those men begin to have their own expectations of behaviour that, if unmet, will kill the prospect of any relationship.

For the record, there’s also a kindred art of denying people without being gratuitously rude to them (for many people, especially women when dealing with men, it’s hard to resist the temptation), where the second step (a degree higher, as it were) is to intentionally soften the blow to avoid hurting someone’s feelings, where the very care to not hurt others’ feelings needlessly, or lack thereof, speaks volumes about a person’s character. The ultimate step would be making the blow softer in such a way that doesn’t effectively make it even harder, but let’s not expect too much from people, now shall we.

 

[chevalier]

I am presuming of course, that men and women reading a Catholic forum are looking for chaste partners and committed to chastity themselves. Otherwise I’d ask why they are here.

Usually, but not always, especially on dating portals. I know from my friends that guys from there can outright proposition a girl for sex or even demand it, despite the claims of commitment to chastity made in the profile. In short, guys lie, guys find ways of justifying things. And the gals sometimes find ways of justifying things too, for example in my neck of the woods it’s standard procedure for the woman, in dating, even dating through a Catholic service, to at some point start throwing some innuendo, some allusions to sex, herself in a sexual situation, herself naked, etc., just to check the man’s reaction. According to one of my friends who at some point talked frankly to me about what goes on on the girl side, the reason is the girls’ fear of ending up married to a man of little appetite. I’ve had it done to me by the majority of my last dates, and given enough repetition the moment, the dynamic is quite noticeable — it does stand out, and it happens just before my getting friendzoned, apparently in consequence of my failure to pick up on it and escalate. And I’ll obviously sooner die single than knowingly and willingly escalate. And I don’t feel like coming up with a smart counter to defuse the situation. I feel more like friendzoning the woman myself and moving on.

 

[chevalier]

Probably should be mandatory reading in all schools, though so ‘passé’ in the eyes of the modern world.

 

[JimG]

OK, I had to go back and re-read the linked article. It seems to me that even though it is about chivalry, there is very little about relations between men and women.

True, chivalry is defined as a code of conduct for men, a part of which is to protect the honor of women, but that’s only part of it. He goes on to define the elements of chivalry as love of God, loyalty to the Church, pursuit of wisdom, development of physicl prowess, the practice of empathy and mercy, the attainment of piety, rejection of materialism, and striving for perfection. Not much there about games between the sexes.

 

[chevalier]

Not much there about games between the sexes.

Protecting the earthly honour of women… There already you have scores of mail-clad betas jumping at each other’s throats with the cry of, as translated into modern English: ‘the girl who friendzoned me is sexier than the girl who friendzoned you!’ And getting involved in the intrigues of bored heiresses with nothing better to do than trading thinly veiled verbal insults and other intangible damage among themselves, over which their testosterone-bursting orbiters would shed and spill tangible blood. Ugh. But I’d rather believe it was originally about volunteering to represent those who couldn’t put on 100 lbs of steel to properly engage with mediaeval alternative dispute resolution or remind the chieftain that the sixth commandment applies to captives too and to families of traitors and enemies.

 

[JimG]

OK, but I find nothing about friend zones and mail clad betas in the original article. Probably de Charny would also have found modern ideas of male female relationships somewhat incomprehensivle.

 

[DarkLight]

I think I mentioned initially that a lot of these things seem to be just Christian virtues. A lot of opposition to chivalry as such is in ways where it seems to make such specific to men (much as has been done with chastity for women).

 

[FirstFiveEighth]

Yes it is very cool actually. I first read the Lord of the Rings when I was around 10. The depth of it didn’t really hit me until I reread it many years later. I had not realized how much Anglo-Saxon history Tolkien wove into the LoTR. I learn more all the time! The Wanderer poem is great imo.

 

[DarkLight]

Some women will react rudely as a sort of intentional test (a special sort of test that has its own special name that includes a four-lettered word ). If that happens, she has probably killed any prospect of friendship, let alone ‘something more’, especially true if she doesn’t seem to care that she’s throwing accusations or insults lightly, which different from simply opting not to associate. Not because I’m vindictive but because we apparently have a deep-seated philosophical/ethical difference.

I am familiar with the term you’re referring to. The more standard advice I’ve heard and given young women is to observe behavior with female service workers, especially if something isn’t going as planned. But especially that one doesn’t accept more than token gifts and pays one’s own way. A guy who keeps pushing for gifts or to pay for things is going to be a red flag.

The test I always saw recommended was simply to observe the man’s behavior around waitresses and other workers (especially women) in the service industry. One can get a good test of someone’s character by watching what happens when the dinner is not what they ordered.

 

[Xantippe]

Chevalier,

I think you may (without realizing it) have some “**** tests” of your own that you’ve been using on women.

I sometimes feel like you’ve scripted a romantic story and you expect to be able to slot the woman of your choice into the scripted role, and are very disappointed when women don’t cooperate, or when women who seem willing to cooperate turn out to not be very nice.

You might find that more egalitarian-minded women have a stronger sense of justice and much less sense of entitlement. But, as Dark Light noted, women like that are not going to be willing to accept lavish gifts.

Chevalier, I know in the past that you’ve talked about giving big gifts or making big romantic gestures. I know that is your style, but the truth is that it is likely to a) scare off nice women who don’t wish to be beholden to a man they barely know and b) attract takers. Tone down the grand gestures and be more sensitive to what scares nice women off (grand gestures, insisting on providing unwanted help, lavish gifts), and you might find that you start meeting a better sort of woman.

 

[Xantippe]

Come to think of it, chivalry is not going to be very popular if it means making grand gestures of generosity that the woman never asked for and never really wanted and maybe even finds embarrassing or demeaning.

 

[Lea101]

This may sound cold, but expectations of etiquettal prowess should be higher of a woman than of a man of comparable upbringing or standing, being the more social gender.

Standards should honestly be the same for both

 

[delrey]

Just be kind. No nonsense rules of chivalry.

 

[cloistered]

Mike Pence’s behavior holds back the career of every single woman he works with. His lack of self-control or his wife’s lack of faith in him shouldn’t punish inoceant female collegues.

I once had a boss that was exceptionally chivalrous and it sucked for me. I was the only female in the office. He went out of his way to open doors for me, to make sure the guys spoke more politely while when I walked up. I was never more aware of being a female in a male office.

 

[Elf01]

Mike Pence’s behavior holds back the career of every single woman he works with. His lack of self-control or his wife’s lack of faith in him shouldn’t punish inoceant female collegues.

If it’s restricted to meal/alchol situations I don’t see why it would hold a woman back.

I suppose to an extent I share his views. I consider a meal alone with someone of the opposite sex a little too datey of a situation and wouldn’t put myself in that position.

 

[cloistered]

Mike Pence’s behavior holds back the career of every single woman he works with. His lack of self-control or his wife’s lack of faith in him shouldn’t punish inoceant female collegues.

I once had a boss that was exceptionally chivalrous and it sucked for me. I was the only female in the office. He went out of his way to open doors for me, to make sure the guys spoke more politely while when I walked up. I was never more aware of being a female in a male office.

 

[cloistered]

I can give you two examples from my own life as to how it hold women back.

1. Sorry, you can’t go on this business trip, it would just be me (male chivalrous manager) and you (female employee) and I am uncomforable with that. This was never said outloud, but pretty darn close and it was obvious that was his rule, like Mike Pense.
2. Three of us were going to go on a lunch business meeting (me, chivalrous manager, and 3rd male collegue). Male collegue has something come up and can’t attend. Manager visibly panicked and desperately went around trying to get another collegue to go. It made me feel singled out, horrible, and so small.

As my husband says, “So much buniness goes on outside the office that unless Mike Pense socializes with no one, he is leaving females out the the real deal making.”

 

[0Scarlett_nidiyilii]

I don’t want protection and defense if it requires me to sit back and let the men do all the “hard work.”

…and to have it used as a cover for favoring men over women economically, such as “we can’t give you this job because a man needs it to support his family. Oh, you don’t have a man to support you? Well then you should get one”.

(BTW, I’m not making this example up. Years ago I heard a man, a relative, unblushingly and unironically state that the jobs should go to the men first, because they have families to support. Then if there are any positions left, women could be given them)