Poll: Is treating women in Gentlemanly way Sexist?

[MeChaNiZ3D]

I think it is sexist, partly because of its roots in chivalry (where men did things for women because they were percieved as too delicate to do them themselves), and partly because, at least in my case, I wouldn't give up my seat for a male of my own age unless I knew them, but I would for a female. So I am giving preferrential treatment based on gender alone, which is a sexist thing to do. That said, there are also no downsides to it. Girls get free seats, guys get to fell good about themselves and other guys don't even notice because they don't expect anything.

 

[xdom125x]

If you are only behaving like a gentleman towards women or are behaving in a more gentlemanly way because they are women, it is sexist. Also, it would be helpful if you provided a link to the thread in which you were called a sexist, because this is one of the few times we can actually get some context, O.P. But if my memory serves, your belief in chivalry was what got you called a sexist in the other thread because it calls for you to treat women differently than men simply because they are women.

I try to treat everybody nicely but don't want to say I am a gentleman because there seems to be this thought in my head that "gentleman is what somebody that believes in chivalry calls himself", while I believe chivalry is dead and feminism is one of the nails in it's coffin.

Also, I am not quite sure which poll choice I should pick because the question is kind of leading, but my gut is telling me to vote "yes, male". Treating women in a gentlemanly manner isn't sexist unless you don't do the same for men.

 

[smokeyninjas]

There nothing sexist about having manners & being a gentleman

Can't believe people are still struggling & debating this.
As intelligent & civilised animals we should aspire to treat everyone with respect and politeness.
Your reason for acting that way may be sexist but that dosen't make being a gentleman sexist it makes your motivation for acting that way sexist.

Personally i decide whether or not to hold a door open based on how far behind someone is but even if you are the kind of person who only holds doors open for women & not men your still not being negative to women your being negative to men by deciding their not worth the common courtesy of being polite.
The very concept that the act of being nice & having manners makes us negative & bad people is laughably stupid.

 

[katsumoto03]

Don't be a gentleman towards women. Be a gentleman towards everyone.

 

[BrassButtons]

If you are only behaving like a gentleman towards women or are behaving in a more gentlemanly way because they are women, it is sexist. Also, it would be helpful if you provided a link to the thread in which you were called a sexist, because this is one of the few times we can actually get some context, O.P. But if my memory serves, your belief in chivalry was what got you called a sexist in the other thread because it calls for you to treat women differently than men simply because they are women.

First it was because of his statements that women should be treated a certain way because it's what "feminists" wanted (so women are apparently a collective devoid of individual thoughts and desires), and then because he brought up chivalry (explicitly stating that he treats men and women differently, while claiming to be fighting sexism).

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/528.371679-Poll-Polygamy-or-Monogamy#14362906
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/528.371679-Poll-Polygamy-or-Monogamy?page=2#14365943

I don't expect any of that will make it into the OP though, because the entire purpose for this thread was, I think, for him to get a poll showing a lot of people agreeing with him.

 

[Galletea]

The answer to this is waaaayyy simpler than you people are making it. It's just a question of definition.

According to the Oxford dictionary sexism is
prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex

Therefore yes. If you are only holding the door open for women, then it is 'positive discrimination' which is still discrimination based upon gender, and thus sexist, which is still bad, as it harbours resentment.

I suppose it's easier to say that the answer is yes, because you're being sexist against men in this scenario.

 

[Abedeus]

Well, I try to act as gentlemanly as I can, but... only if a woman deserves it. Random strangers? Sure, I don't judge them, treat them well. Girls I like? Same, treat them well. Annoying bitches that have superiority complex or think they're in the center of the word? Hell no.

You can expect to be treated like a woman when you act like a woman.

What do you mean by "act like a woman"? What sort of behaviour lets someone deserve to be treated like a woman?

For one, not acting like a jackass. A loud-mouthed douchebag that, if she was a he, would probably get a kick to the teeth after one too many stupid comments or rude insults.

Oh, okay. So you allow the same standard of behaviour for men and women? I apologise, but I read your original post rather differently than that. If you expect the same level of politeness from both men and women in order for them to avoid a teeth-kicking, then that's not sexist at all.

You're eagerness to resort to violence is rather gentlemanly, by an old-fashioned sense of the word.

P.S. This is a little out of the blue, but I asked you a couple of questions about RTM here: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/9.363263.14239095
I really was interested in a response, but if that's tl;dr that's cool. You don't have to go out of your way to satisfy my curiousity.

My temper has little to do with being a gentleman. I like the satanist (the LaVeyan variant, not luciferianism) rule, law that tells you to be nice to people and respect them, unless they disrespect you.

I don't go around holding doors for ladies and smacking them in guys' faces. If my friend wants to enter a room/building and I'm in front of the door, I will let him/her go in front of me and I'll hold door for them regardless of what is between their legs (or what chromosomes they have). This might seem sexist for women, but only if they ignore that I do same for everyone.

And likewise if you piss me off/attack me, I won't hold back. Naturally I won't punch or injure a woman just like I won't injure a weaker guy, but that's only because of the difference in physique and strength.

About your RTM questions, I apologize as I must've missed it for some reason.

They promised 16 different endings, your choices being shown in the ending and coherent ending.

We have 9 that are basically 3 colors with variations, your choices don't matter (only your war asset number changes the "destroy or preserve" outcome) and there are many, many problems with the ending that other people already explained better than I did.

Did you see the thread where someone found out that they had voices for the Geth armies, Zaeed, Jacob, Grunt and I think one more person in-game, but abandoned them for some reason? We were supposed to have something like the suicide mission from ME2, where we would command armies to strike enemies in key locations, fight with the allies we gathered over the course of the trilogy and have an actual battle for Earth. Not that "kill 5 banshees to get to the illogical cutscene" crap.

 

[tensorproduct]

I don't go around holding doors for ladies and smacking them in guys' faces. If my friend wants to enter a room/building and I'm in front of the door, I will let him/her go in front of me and I'll hold door for them regardless of what is between their legs (or what chromosomes they have). This might seem sexist for women, but only if they ignore that I do same for everyone.

And likewise if you piss me off/attack me, I won't hold back. Naturally I won't punch or injure a woman just like I won't injure a weaker guy, but that's only because of the difference in physique and strength.

I rather disagree with a lot to do with such Satanism, but this is not the place for that discussion. Thanks for the reply on RTM, I have more questions and comments, but I'll pose them in the appropriate thread, if you're up for a discussion. This thread is long enough, without us nerds derailing it completely.

On topic:
I think that it's a shame that people have focused so much on the door issue, as one would have to be somewhat anti-social to let a door close in anybody's face.

I'm more interested in other scenarios, like getting out of a car. The gentlemanly behaviour is very much not gender-neutral. Unless I really do intend to open the door for every single passenger, whether they're male or female. Also, it actively delays the process of leaving the car for all concerned.

Paying for a meal is where it gets really interesting, as it's a non-trivial cost. The gentlemanly behaviour would be to always cover the cost of any lady present. I don't see how anyone would argue that the reason for this is anything but that historically women were not expected to have finances of their own. If you want to buy someone dinner because you're just a nice person, then it shouldn't favour women more than men, but your poor friends more than your rich ones, comrade.

I would say that if you buy dinner for a woman because you're trying to impress her for romantic purposes (hunter-gatherer dominance display and all that) then that is both not sexist (as it's not your default behaviour towards all women) and not gentlemanly (as being a gentleman is not about getting laid).

Excuse me, Abedeus, but a lot of this wasn't really aimed at what you had said. Just things that I have seen come up in the thread over and over.

 

[DeathQuaker]

Is it good to be courteous? Yes. And you should be courteous to people of both sexes. This includes holding doors open for people, carrying items for people when appropriate and given permission, and so forth.

Now, I have experienced a few different situations that involve opening doors, carrying things, etc. where a guy is being nice, and a guy is being a jerk. It all depends on the context of what actually happened.

Scenario 1: I am walking up the hallway, carrying a box that is obviously heavy for me--i.e., I am struggling to hold onto it, stopping to take breaks, etc. A man walks up to me and says, "Excuse me, it looks like you're having trouble with that. Can I take that for you?" I smile with gratitude at the thoughtful person and hand them the box (or carry it with their help).

This is a lovely thing to do, and of course the man is not being sexist. The two important factors here is that a) I am legitimately and obviously in need of aid, and b) he asked to be sure I was okay with his involvement, and c) he's made no (shared) judgments about me regarding my gender or ability to carry a box, etc.

Scenario 2: I am walking up the hallway, carrying a box that I appear to be managing quite fine on my own (keeping a brisk pace, no struggling, etc.). A man stops me in the hall and says, "You're a woman, that's too heavy for you, let me take that," and he proceeds to try to take the box out of my hands without my permission. I proceed to hug the box to myself (he's trying to take something from me without asking), and say, "Excuse me, I've got it," and push past him and move away as quickly as possible. The man mutters, "I was just being a gentleman! *****." ((NOTE: this scenario pretty much has happened to me IRL))

The important factors here are that a) Although I showed no signs of needing help, he presumed I was incapable of carrying something because of my sex, b) he started to take my belongings away from me, and c) He approached me and violated my personal space without permission or invitation. All of these things are the antithesis of being gentlemanly, courteous, chivalrous, or civil in any way.

And in my personal experience, usually I find someone who calls himself a "gentleman" (or gentlewoman/lady for that matter) isn't. Because they're drawing attention to their behavior and expecting to be rewarded for it---showing there is an ulterior motive which has nothing to do with being respectful of other people.

In short: show respect for people and their dignity. Observe the individual rather than make assumptions based on broad categories, ask rather than presume, and never invade someone's personal space. As long as you do that, you are a "gentleman" or "lady."

 

[Abedeus]

I don't go around holding doors for ladies and smacking them in guys' faces. If my friend wants to enter a room/building and I'm in front of the door, I will let him/her go in front of me and I'll hold door for them regardless of what is between their legs (or what chromosomes they have). This might seem sexist for women, but only if they ignore that I do same for everyone.

And likewise if you piss me off/attack me, I won't hold back. Naturally I won't punch or injure a woman just like I won't injure a weaker guy, but that's only because of the difference in physique and strength.

On topic:
I think that it's a shame that people have focused so much on the door issue, as one would have to be somewhat anti-social to let a door close in anybody's face.

I'm more interested in other scenarios, like getting out of a car. The gentlemanly behaviour is very much not gender-neutral. Unless I really do intend to open the door for every single passenger, whether they're male or female. Also, it actively delays the process of leaving the car for all concerned.

Paying for a meal is where it gets really interesting, as it's a non-trivial cost. The gentlemanly behaviour would be to always cover the cost of any lady present. I don't see how anyone would argue that the reason for this is anything but that historically women were not expected to have finances of their own. If you want to buy someone dinner because you're just a nice person, then it shouldn't favour women more than men, but your poor friends more than your rich ones, comrade.

I would say that if you buy dinner for a woman because you're trying to impress her for romantic purposes (hunter-gatherer dominance display and all that) then that is both not sexist (as it's not your default behaviour towards all women) and not gentlemanly (as being a gentleman is not about getting laid).

If I'm on a date or something similar, I'll open doors because... that's what you do in that type of situation. Cultural thing, like kiss on a woman's hand or talking to an older person using "sir/ma'am" instead of "you".

I try to avoid the "pay for meal" thing. It does seem sexist in a bad way, as in assuming that she's poor or inferior. Obviously if she IS less capable financially I will pay, but I would again do so regardless of gender.

...Other issue is whether I would go out for a dinner with a male friend, though then I guess we'd both pay our share anyway.

Excuse me, Abedeus, but a lot of this wasn't really aimed at what you had said. Just things that I have seen come up in the thread over and over.

No worries.

Though I think the biggest reason why I try to act gentlemanly (except in those situations mentioned) is because that's how I was taught to behave and treat women. Frankly, I'm glad that I'm like this, and not the "jock/asshole" stereotype of males treating females as inferior species that has to be conquered.

 

[tensorproduct]

If I'm on a date or something similar, I'll open doors because... that's what you do in that type of situation. Cultural thing, like kiss on a woman's hand or talking to an older person using "sir/ma'am" instead of "you".

Holy balls, a kiss on the hand?! When and where are you from, dude? I have never, in my entire life seen somebody do that. Hell, if you can get away with it without it appearing incredibly dorky, good for you.

No worries.

Though I think the biggest reason why I try to act gentlemanly (except in those situations mentioned) is because that's how I was taught to behave and treat women. Frankly, I'm glad that I'm like this, and not the "jock/asshole" stereotype of males treating females as inferior species that has to be conquered.

Do you see how it might appear to be treating women as an inferior species that has already been conquered? And how very insulting that would be?

 

[DefiantGoblin]

I don't believe that being gentlemanly is sexist in the slightest. I'd never let the door shut in anybodies face and it's nearly always less effort for me to hold the door than it would be for the other person to hold it again.

Granted, I may be inclined to hold the door longer for an elderly lady with a trolley than say for a healthy bloke but that has nothing to do with gender and more to do with how capable the person would be of opening said door.

I guess I am sexist in the sense that I would always offer to help a lady carry something heavy, whereas I might not always offer to help a man.Personally though I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing though as, while it is different treatment, it isn't negative so much as it is a demonstration of respect.

 

[DefiantGoblin]

Is it good to be courteous? Yes. And you should be courteous to people of both sexes. This includes holding doors open for people, carrying items for people when appropriate and given permission, and so forth.

Now, I have experienced a few different situations that involve opening doors, carrying things, etc. where a guy is being nice, and a guy is being a jerk. It all depends on the context of what actually happened.

Scenario 1: I am walking up the hallway, carrying a box that is obviously heavy for me--i.e., I am struggling to hold onto it, stopping to take breaks, etc. A man walks up to me and says, "Excuse me, it looks like you're having trouble with that. Can I take that for you?" I smile with gratitude at the thoughtful person and hand them the box (or carry it with their help).

This is a lovely thing to do, and of course the man is not being sexist. The two important factors here is that a) I am legitimately and obviously in need of aid, and b) he asked to be sure I was okay with his involvement, and c) he's made no (shared) judgments about me regarding my gender or ability to carry a box, etc.

Scenario 2: I am walking up the hallway, carrying a box that I appear to be managing quite fine on my own (keeping a brisk pace, no struggling, etc.). A man stops me in the hall and says, "You're a woman, that's too heavy for you, let me take that," and he proceeds to try to take the box out of my hands without my permission. I proceed to hug the box to myself (he's trying to take something from me without asking), and say, "Excuse me, I've got it," and push past him and move away as quickly as possible. The man mutters, "I was just being a gentleman! *****." ((NOTE: this scenario pretty much has happened to me IRL))

The important factors here are that a) Although I showed no signs of needing help, he presumed I was incapable of carrying something because of my sex, b) he started to take my belongings away from me, and c) He approached me and violated my personal space without permission or invitation. All of these things are the antithesis of being gentlemanly, courteous, chivalrous, or civil in any way.

And in my personal experience, usually I find someone who calls himself a "gentleman" (or gentlewoman/lady for that matter) isn't. Because they're drawing attention to their behavior and expecting to be rewarded for it---showing there is an ulterior motive which has nothing to do with being respectful of other people.

In short: show respect for people and their dignity. Observe the individual rather than make assumptions based on broad categories, ask rather than presume, and never invade someone's personal space. As long as you do that, you are a "gentleman" or "lady."

I can see why the second scenario is bad, but what if this was done with more tact and less hassle.

For example, seeing someone who is not necessarily struggling with a box, but is clearly finding it a little difficult, and offering "may I help you with that?". Upon being told "no thank you, I'm managing fine" apologising and leaving them to it. While the same sexist undertones may be there it's an act of kindness rather than a blatant asserton of 'power'and is aimed at making someone's life easier.

I would see my example as polite rather than sexist and can see no problem with it.

Apologies for the double post.

 

[zefiris]

Don't be a gentleman towards women. Be a gentleman towards everyone.

I wonder, to this day, why people don't get this.

Katsumoto03 is exactly right. So is sky14kemea.

Scenario 2: I am walking up the hallway, carrying a box that I appear to be managing quite fine on my own (keeping a brisk pace, no struggling, etc.). A man stops me in the hall and says, "You're a woman, that's too heavy for you, let me take that," and he proceeds to try to take the box out of my hands without my permission. I proceed to hug the box to myself (he's trying to take something from me without asking), and say, "Excuse me, I've got it," and push past him and move away as quickly as possible. The man mutters, "I was just being a gentleman! *****." ((NOTE: this scenario pretty much has happened to me IRL))

This happened to me repeatedly. Since I'm timid, this included several cases where I just was too polite to object too much.
End result? The guy actually demanded that I'd have a coffee with him. Since he helped me, and deserved a reward, in his eyes. When I denied, I was called an ungrateful *****.

On a task I needed no help with to begin with. The entire objection to "gentlemanly" behavior is situations like this. They happen pretty often.

If you're just a nice person in general (which, yes, means holding a door open to an elderly guy as well), and ask if your help is needed in lifting cases, then nobody will mind you helping.

 

[Ryank1908]

Being 'gentlemanly' is not just a way to be towards women.
Being a gentleman is a way of life - it covers all elements of you in a shroud of mahogany-smelling smoke. You have to tip your bowling hat to your greatest of enemies, refuse any other gentleman's request to assist you (to an end; a gentleman does not refuse a fellow dapper chap more than thrice,) be ready to dash ones coat upon a puddle at a moments notice with a smile on ones face, and a gentleman must hold open the door to the penny shop for any and all, bear them a willy or a fanny.
A gentleman does not just 'act' kind towards women, he IS kind towards all.

 

[Adeptus Aspartem]

Ok, being nice = being sexist.

Seriously, the escapist is a really useless place to talk about anything other than games / movies, because it seems alot of the vocal people on these forums never lived in the real world.

And some people apparently substitute crap about 'the real world' when life experience has nothing to do with definitions. Are you that low on actual thought out arguments you've got to resort to that? Or actually reading what was said about why it was sexist? I guess those are beneath you?

Really? Life expirience has nothing to do with the definitions we have nowadays? Sure. If you believe that, no point in arguing.

You're right. You won the argument.
Good weekend.

 

[BrassButtons]

All I'm saying is that the world works best when everybody does what their best at, and since men are GENERALLY stronger than women, a task which requires physical strength, such as opening a door, is most efficiently performed by a man.

Evidence, please? How much time does the average man take to open a door, vs. the average woman? Because my fiance and I often walk through the double doors at work side-by-side, and I don't see any difference in the time it takes him to open his door vs. me opening mine.

 

[Natasha_LB]

I think being "gentlemanly" only towards women is sexist, but it is not a bad thing as such... what is bad is that you do not treat men the same way to! I have had plenty of guys help me to get my bags up the gap on to trains, and hold doors open for me, and I appreciate that greatly, and if I ever see someone who I feel I can help, I will always offer to, regardless of their gender.

It should come down to capability, rather than gender: The odds of me ever asking one of butch female friends for help with carrying something physical is significantly lower that the odds of me helping one of my camp male friends. I try to look past gender, and assess if I think that person could use my help, and I think they'd want it.

We really need to break down stereotypical gender roles if we ever want to live in a society that can be truly non sexist, and the concepts of being "gentlemanly" and of chivalry, can only stand in the way of this, even if they are meant with the best of intentions.

Every-time I hear a guy say that'd they'd "never hit a girl" I sigh a little inside, you should never hit anyone! But if I do something that would make you hit a guy, then please by all means try and hit me, because that's what equality is! All discrimination is bad, regardless of if it's negative of positive.