Chivalry--where did it go?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
stinkcat_14 said:
I think the big problem is that nobody has established that having solo meals has any effect on a person’s career. In my department, I might occasionally have a solo meal with one person, and that is because that person always buys. If my university pays the bill, it always involves several people. Not that any of it had any effect on anyone’s career.
Click to expand...
So it wouldn’t matter if solo lunches with colleagues of both sexes just stopped?
 
It´s a rather funny discussion for me because my job wouldn´t be possible if we had a “no one male-one female situations that could be dinner”.
I´m working as a manager for an museum exhibition. Our organising team is me and two men, one of them not present at the moment because he was sick for some weeks and now his wife gave birth and he needs some time at home with them.
As I can´t plan every meeting on a time when I´m in my office for my other job (he´s a freelancer as well and has often only time in the evening or very early when my office building is still closed) we have to meet somewhere else.
I mean, we have winter here, and If I´d only eat when no workmate is there, I´d starve. So, a meeting connected with dinner or a cup of coffee is normal and necessary for both of us. It was never weird, and yes, If he had such a rule against it, It would have huge negative consequences for my career, as this is a job that is very important for networking and getting further work contracts.
 
Last edited:
A close older friend has been a manager for many years. He had a Mike Pence style rule long before Pence showed up on the national scene. He knew men who were falsely accused and fired at his company (a major Fortune 100 company), hence he felt compelled to limit his interactions with women in this way and he called it protecting his ability to provide for his family.

Makes me glad I work outside in a field with very few women. I don’t miss the office politics nor do I miss the office drama queens.
 
Zzyzx_Road said:
. I don’t miss the office politics nor do I miss the office drama queens.
Click to expand...
Speaking as the wife of an academic, I really want to laugh at the idea that male-dominated workplaces are immune from office politics and office drama queens.

While nearly all of my husband’s coworkers of both sexes are lovely people, the ones that have been the most work (left the biggest messes and/or needed the most hand-holding) have been men.
 
LOL – the drama queens in almost every office in which I’ve worked haven’t been the women.
 
Zzyzx_Road said:
Makes me glad I work outside in a field with very few women. I don’t miss the office politics nor do I miss the office drama queens.
Click to expand...
Consider the Trump White House and how much drama, politicking, and backstabbing there is–and how little of it involves female staffers.
 
I also know of one guy at a former job that I did in fact report for sexual harassment (I turned him down for a date and he responded with a question about whether I liked a particular act, complete with gestures), who insisted that he was falsely accused and we just had it out for him. He didn’t actually deny what he did, he just didn’t think there was a problem.
 
DarkLight said:
I also know of one guy at a former job that I did in fact report for sexual harassment (I turned him down for a date and he responded with a question about whether I liked a particular act, complete with gestures), who insisted that he was falsely accused and we just had it out for him. He didn’t actually deny what he did, he just didn’t think there was a problem.
Click to expand...
I know another guy who was guilty guilty guilty (and very provably so) but if you ask him, he was railroaded.

While it is true that there are false accusations, never expect actually guilty people to fess up. The guiltier they are, the harder they will try to brazen it out and the less of a conscience or sense of self-awareness they have.
 
Last edited:
In case the OP is still following: Chivalry has been dying a slow death since the 60s. And you’re not going to see it come back, at least not on a systemic level. Why, you might ask. Well, let’s look at the definition.

" The sum of the ideal qualifications of a knight, including courtesy, generosity, valor, and dexterity in arms."

Pretty much all of the qualities listed could apply to anyone, but I want to draw your attention to the last one. ‘Dexterity in arms’ is a specific characteristic meant for a very specific purpose: to protect those too weak to effectively protect themselves. In the modern, 21st century world however, we’re all equal. The weak can’t protect the weak, and the strong don’t need protection. Where would chivalry fit into our societal framework? As it stands right now, I don’t know that there is a place for chivalry.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top