![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I wandered around the ballroom, feeling sleepy and bored, waiting for my crew chief to give me a job to do but not really wanting him to come up with anything because I was too sleepy to really be in the mood for work that day. A few yards away, several of my coworkers, including those in my own department, were also not doing anything. Instead, they were standing in a circle, having an animated conversation. I saw John, Phil, and Jim, and a few others who looked like they were peripherally aware of the conversation, but not actively a part of it.
As I got closer John said "Here, let's get a female perspective & ask Joreth."
"Because we're all the same person and have exactly the same perspective. Go ahead, what's the question?"
"No," John said, "I know you're not all the same person, but you're more like them than like a man."
"You obviously don't know me very well," I said.
"Well, ok, whatever, do you like roller coasters?" John said.
"Yes, I love roller coasters, why?" I said.
"Because I have this girl I want to take out on a date and I wondered if Busch Gardens was a good date place?" John said.
Phil jumped in with "I say yes, because they've done studies, and when girls get afraid, they get aroused, and they like to hug on you and be all protected and stuff."
"Yep," I said. "That works GREAT ... for those it works great for. It's a TERRIBLE idea for those girls it doesn't work for. Problem is, you don't know which one she is until you do. I have a novel idea, why don't you ask her if she likes theme parks?"
"Because girls never tell you what they like, they always say 'oh, I like whatever you like' and they want you to take charge and be in control," Phil said.
"Have we met?" I asked. "I don't know a single girl like that. I'm sure they exist, but my point is, again, that we're not all the same person and you have to treat a woman how SHE wants to be treated, and you don't know what that is until you ASK her."
From there, ensued a discussion that involved rising voices and everyone talking over each other, as each of the guys tried to insist that there was a One Right Way to treat women that all involved being "a gentleman", and I tried to explain that being a "gentleman" actually defeated the purpose if the intended recipient didn't actually like that particular behaviour.
"But men are supposed to hold open doors for women and stuff, that's how I was raised and it's a cultural thing." John said.
"I HATE it when men hold open doors for women only and not men. It is most definitely NOT polite, it's insulting and obnoxious. I actually had a guy run from down the street, tripping someone else, in his effort to beat me to the door so he could hold it open for me, but he was on the wrong side, so I would have had to walk under his arm, and he was blocking the people trying to come OUT through those doors. That's stupid and it is no longer a nice gesture when you inconvenience everyone else around you just because you're 'supposed to' do something," I said.
"Well, then I'll know from now on to treat you like a dude," John said, offering me a fist-bump.
"How about you treat me like a human being?" I asked.
"No," insisted Phil, "you're supposed to do these things. Like, when I'm walking down the street, I'll put the lady on the inside, to protect her from cars and stuff."
"I absolutely, fricking HATE that," I said.
"No, it's nice!" Phil said. "Like when you walk with a 5 year old, you put the child to the inside to protect him."
Blink blink.
"You seriously don't see anything wrong with treating an adult woman like a child?" I asked.
"No." Phil said. "It's to show her that I care about her that I want to protect her."
"You put the child to the inside because the child doesn't know any better not to run out into traffic. Putting the woman on the inside & comparing it to the child is implying that she also doesn't know any better and needs you to keep her from running into traffic. You can't see how this is insulting?" I demanded.
"If I let a woman walk on the outside, a Latin dude would think I'm offering her up as a hooker. But if I walk on the outside, the Latin dude will approve and know that I'm protecting her," Phil tried to explain (He's Puerto Rican).
"I don't give a fuck what some random Latin dude thinks, the person you should be concerned about is the woman you are insulting," I said.
This is why I'm bitchy. I'm sick of being treated like a child for the guy's approval rating in the eyes of other guys.
Why the fuck is this concept so difficult to grasp? Is it really so complicated to understand that a gesture of politeness or concern should be based on what the RECIPIENT wants, and not what makes the GIVER feel better, and that the way to find out what the recipient might like is to fucking ASK them what they might like? Don't answer that, I already know the answer and it's too depressing.
"If I ask my girl what she wants, she'll just say she doesn't know," John said, trying to bring the conversation back to the original topic.
"Well then it's her own fucking fault if she doesn't get what she wants, isn't it?" I said.
"Forget it," John said, "I'm not asking you about girls anymore, I'm going back to what the guys say".
So, apparently, the trick to figuring out the "opposite sex", is to poll all your friends of the incorrect gender, ask one random person of the same gender to be representative of that entire gender, and then throw out all the answers that don't confirm your original presumption.
I've had enough chauvenistic sexism for one day.
As I got closer John said "Here, let's get a female perspective & ask Joreth."
"Because we're all the same person and have exactly the same perspective. Go ahead, what's the question?"
"No," John said, "I know you're not all the same person, but you're more like them than like a man."
"You obviously don't know me very well," I said.
"Well, ok, whatever, do you like roller coasters?" John said.
"Yes, I love roller coasters, why?" I said.
"Because I have this girl I want to take out on a date and I wondered if Busch Gardens was a good date place?" John said.
Phil jumped in with "I say yes, because they've done studies, and when girls get afraid, they get aroused, and they like to hug on you and be all protected and stuff."
"Yep," I said. "That works GREAT ... for those it works great for. It's a TERRIBLE idea for those girls it doesn't work for. Problem is, you don't know which one she is until you do. I have a novel idea, why don't you ask her if she likes theme parks?"
"Because girls never tell you what they like, they always say 'oh, I like whatever you like' and they want you to take charge and be in control," Phil said.
"Have we met?" I asked. "I don't know a single girl like that. I'm sure they exist, but my point is, again, that we're not all the same person and you have to treat a woman how SHE wants to be treated, and you don't know what that is until you ASK her."
From there, ensued a discussion that involved rising voices and everyone talking over each other, as each of the guys tried to insist that there was a One Right Way to treat women that all involved being "a gentleman", and I tried to explain that being a "gentleman" actually defeated the purpose if the intended recipient didn't actually like that particular behaviour.
"But men are supposed to hold open doors for women and stuff, that's how I was raised and it's a cultural thing." John said.
"I HATE it when men hold open doors for women only and not men. It is most definitely NOT polite, it's insulting and obnoxious. I actually had a guy run from down the street, tripping someone else, in his effort to beat me to the door so he could hold it open for me, but he was on the wrong side, so I would have had to walk under his arm, and he was blocking the people trying to come OUT through those doors. That's stupid and it is no longer a nice gesture when you inconvenience everyone else around you just because you're 'supposed to' do something," I said.
"Well, then I'll know from now on to treat you like a dude," John said, offering me a fist-bump.
"How about you treat me like a human being?" I asked.
"No," insisted Phil, "you're supposed to do these things. Like, when I'm walking down the street, I'll put the lady on the inside, to protect her from cars and stuff."
"I absolutely, fricking HATE that," I said.
"No, it's nice!" Phil said. "Like when you walk with a 5 year old, you put the child to the inside to protect him."
Blink blink.
"You seriously don't see anything wrong with treating an adult woman like a child?" I asked.
"No." Phil said. "It's to show her that I care about her that I want to protect her."
"You put the child to the inside because the child doesn't know any better not to run out into traffic. Putting the woman on the inside & comparing it to the child is implying that she also doesn't know any better and needs you to keep her from running into traffic. You can't see how this is insulting?" I demanded.
"If I let a woman walk on the outside, a Latin dude would think I'm offering her up as a hooker. But if I walk on the outside, the Latin dude will approve and know that I'm protecting her," Phil tried to explain (He's Puerto Rican).
"I don't give a fuck what some random Latin dude thinks, the person you should be concerned about is the woman you are insulting," I said.
This is why I'm bitchy. I'm sick of being treated like a child for the guy's approval rating in the eyes of other guys.
Why the fuck is this concept so difficult to grasp? Is it really so complicated to understand that a gesture of politeness or concern should be based on what the RECIPIENT wants, and not what makes the GIVER feel better, and that the way to find out what the recipient might like is to fucking ASK them what they might like? Don't answer that, I already know the answer and it's too depressing.
"If I ask my girl what she wants, she'll just say she doesn't know," John said, trying to bring the conversation back to the original topic.
"Well then it's her own fucking fault if she doesn't get what she wants, isn't it?" I said.
"Forget it," John said, "I'm not asking you about girls anymore, I'm going back to what the guys say".
So, apparently, the trick to figuring out the "opposite sex", is to poll all your friends of the incorrect gender, ask one random person of the same gender to be representative of that entire gender, and then throw out all the answers that don't confirm your original presumption.
I've had enough chauvenistic sexism for one day.
Re: Chivalry/Sexism
Date: 4/5/11 03:45 am (UTC)From:As I said, with the sexist meanings underlying the gestures, all forms of "chivalry" are "annoying" because they're all sexist, and it is sexism that I want to write off. The problem is that most people don't bother to question it, so that is the part where you see bits and pieces to be salvaged. Plus, plenty of people see no reason to question the status quo when they think they can benefit from it (i.e. girls getting free drinks at bars - why would a girl want to give that privilege up?) I don't believe we can be a free society when anyone is privileged above any other, so I do not take my form of privilege as a benefit to me or to society. Privilege can be just as confining, if more subtle, than some forms of discrimination.
"Politeness" is not the same thing as chivalry, and I am not writing off "politeness", nor trying to discourage anyone from being polite. I want to discourage people from being polite only to one group of people and not any other, especially when those forms of politeness serve to reinforce stereotypes and rigid social hierarchies.
And don't get me started on the bullshit being passed off as "good done by religion". People are good in spite of their religions, not because of them.
Re: Chivalry/Sexism
Date: 4/5/11 03:58 am (UTC)From:Thanks again for the response. And for writing so much insightful stuff (in this and many other posts).
Ewen
PS: You may be right that all the "good bits" belong in "politeness" and not chivalry as I'd originally assumed.
Re: Chivalry/Sexism
Date: 4/5/11 04:28 am (UTC)From:Re: Chivalry/Sexism
Date: 4/5/11 04:28 am (UTC)From:When I was in high school, I dated a guy who was raised to be "chivalrous" but who was, in reality, a pretty egalitarian guy, for a white, upper-class, wealthy, privileged male. When I insisted on carrying my own bags, after only a single conversation to reassure him that I wasn't resisting to play my half of the politeness charade ("oh no, I can carry them ... well, since you insist!"), he let me carry my own bags.
As I explained to him, it wasn't actually about asserting my dominance or independence or any other bully-feminist tactic. I value my physical abilities and I revel in the feel of physical activity. I find it fascinating, on a cerebral level, to analyze my body as it goes through physical activity, and to push my body to see what it's capable of. It is a sheer joy and pleasure for me to exert myself (moreso as a teenager, when my body worked better than it does now). I wasn't insisting on holding my own bags to be a bitch and rub the whole chivalry thing in his nose - I felt good when I lifted something heavy. I felt physically good, I was mentally stimulated, and I felt pride in my accomplishments. It was a Big Deal to me.
One weekend, I went on vacation with his family. We packed up the car, and naturally I carried my own suitcase to the driveway. On my second trip, my then-boyfriend intercepted me and tried to take my load out of my arms. I got pissy and jerked it back, saying "I can carry my own stuff!" He whispered to me that his father had yelled at him when I went into the house, for allowing me to carry my own bag. He tried to explain to his father how important it was to me to carry my own things, but his father wouldn't listen. His father told him that my boyfriend was to insist on carrying my things for me or else my boyfriend would be punished.
Seriously.
So my boyfriend begged me to let him carry my things, just this once, insisting that he agreed with me, he understood my reasons, but just please, can I keep the peace and help him stay out of trouble.
So, I was forced to give up something that I valued very highly, for the sake of "chivalry". That's what these gender roles do. They require people to give up things that they may value in order to save face, or be "polite", or not make waves, or to shore up someone else's sense of entitlement. If it is not a sacrifice, if someone appreciates the gesture, then asking first does not decrease the polite meaning behind the gesture, and, in fact, can be even more meaningful that you asked. When we do not ask every one if we may be allowed to assist them every time we try, we may be taking something of value away from them.
Some women, myself included, are often so beaten down by the constant barrage of having their valuables forcibly removed, that many times we don't even bother to tell people that what they're doing is bothersome. Sometimes, some people feel it's just not worth the effort, because attempting to explain that a person is being more harmful than helpful causes all sorts of social awkwardness. Sometimes people choose to let it go, to give in once more, to allow someone to trample over them yet again, because the fight is too taxing when the result is most likely not a change in behaviour or an apology, but a dogged insistence that we should take their gesture and like it.
So you (the general "you", I'm not trying to pick on *you* specifically) may never even know how many people were irritated or upset by what you thought was a gesture of politeness simply because it didn't occur to you just to ask what the other person might want. As I keep saying - a courteous or polite gesture should be something that is meaningful to the recipient, not the giver. If the giver is doing something for his own pleasure, in direct contrast to the wishes of the recipient, it is not courteous or polite, by definition.
Re: Chivalry/Sexism
Date: 4/5/11 05:22 am (UTC)From:I do hear you that there's a bunch of these things which, as a single once-in-a-lifetime instance probably wouldn't be a big deal, but as a general keeps-on-happening-way-too-often pattern are really irritating. At least in my life I do try to be aware when my "polite gesture" isn't the thing the recipient wanted. And try to keep a look out for "keeps on happening" situations, and avoid being part of the problem.
Ewen
Re: Chivalry/Sexism
Date: 4/13/11 07:59 pm (UTC)From:Re: Chivalry/Sexism
Date: 4/13/11 08:13 pm (UTC)From:But that's a whole 'nother rant.
Re: Chivalry/Sexism
Date: 4/13/11 09:39 pm (UTC)From:Rant away, lady, your voice is a clarion call amid the endless fog of idiocy and oblivion.