Unfortunately, too many women push back at the idea that chivalry should die. Why? Because we’ve gotten used to it – even the subtler forms of it. We like the special attention. We appreciate that men offer us seats on a crowded bus, that doors seemingly magically open in front of us, that strangers are willing to help us with our luggage. Because society has taught all of us that women are ladies – princesses even – and we shouldn’t have to do such things as manual labor. We enjoy not having to pay a $10 cover at a club whilst our male friends pony up the dough, and we like that men will rush to help us if we are lost or seemingly unable to fend for ourselves. Chivalry has many short term benefits for women.
So yes, preserving a women’s honor was part of the code, but it certainly wasn’t the defining feature. Chivalry was a code wherein a knight promised to defend and protect the weak, the helpless, and the vulnerable. To act graciously, to be generous and truthful. Frankly, these are traits that I think all honorable people should strive for – not just men. And such behavior is certainly not mutually inclusive with special protection and courtesy for women.
Chivalry Must Die: On Women’s Expectations and Men’s Obligations
September 28, 2012 by Abigail Collazo
After the women’s liberation movement of the 1960s, which insisted on the equal treatment of women in all domains of life, feminists dismissed chivalry as sexist. They still do. A new study, published in the feminist journal Psychology of Women Quarterly, questions the entire enterprise of male chivalry, which, in an Orwellian flourish, it calls “benevolent sexism.