I came across an article the other day called Why Chivalry is Dead, From a Man’s Perspective. I thought I would like it. I wish there was a way to say this without sounding like a grump, but…
I hated it.
The author basically says that the reason chivalry doesn’t exist anymore is because women don’t make it a standard for men, so men operate at a bare minimum. We don’t force them to bring us chocolate or flowers or swoon us like something out of a fairytale. We let them get away with it, and the minimum becomes even lower. So goes the vicious cycle.
I get where he’s coming from. I do. If I was a chivalrous dude that heard women bitch and moan about how Prince Charming doesn’t exist but then they date some disrespectful, ill-mannered scum who prompts them to banish all men to a similar arena, I’d be frustrated, too. But I just really, really disagree with so much of what he writes, or at least my interpretation of what he writes.
Part 1: Times have changed.
First, let’s talk about the term “chivalry.†Chivalry rests on the notion that there is a mentality that all men should possess in regards to all women, characterized by a certain set of behaviors.
Personally, I think that most of the behaviors that chivalry still encompasses, such as holding the door open for a woman or picking up the check to a date he invited her on, are better suited to the category of Good Ole Fashioned Manners. I try to hold the door open for whoever is behind me, man or woman, because it is the right thing to do. I offer to pay for excursions that are my idea because, hey, I suggested that we do something involving money. I am not a man and that is not chivalry; it is good manners.
Chivalrous mentality is not dead. Neither are men who are willing to live that way, and enjoy it. The reality is that life is very different now than it was when chivalry took its roots. Old-school chivalry is the pretty side of a time when women were expected to not do things for themselves and to just exist, while men were the go-getters, shakers-and-movers, and always had to be in charge. The progressive nature of a woman’s role in society and her lifestyle options has redefined what a woman wants, needs, or expects.
The term encompasses some behaviors that most women DO think are outdated, like pulling out the chair for your date to sit in or standing up when she gets up to use the restroom. But, and this is where that author and I have a critical disagreement: that isn’t inherently a bad thing.
I take offense to the term chivalry because it seems so black and white. What about just being a good man? And, because I know firsthand just how shitty women can be, what about just being good people? Y’know, just like decent human beings.
Part 2: Figure out what you want, then search for it without apology.
I’m actually a little appalled by the fact that this article insinuates that all women should want the same things out of a relationship and all men should be willing to provide those. Sure, there are no-brainer constants — you’d be hard-pressed to find a woman who actually wants a man with poor manners, a disrespectful attitude, or an inability to meet her standards — but all of those look very different to different people.
The real issue is that, while women should seek out men with a chivalrous mentality (kind, polite, respectful, desire to impress and please), men should also hold women to their own standards. Most importantly, the tangibles of this mentality, the behaviors and qualities that “chivalry†is made of, are incredibly subjective between individuals and relationships.
As a woman, I have to ask myself: what do I bring to the table? What do I want a partner to bring? What type of person am I looking for, and am I the type of person he is looking for?
I may go out on a date looking for Mr. Right who pulls my seat out for me, or meet a guy in a bar with the sole hope of a wild sexcapade, or want to casually date around. All of these are fine, as long as I know what situation and type of person I’m looking for, make that known, and make sure that he’s on the same page, too.
Bottom line: it is my personal responsibility to figure out what my standards, needs, and expectations are, and then to find men who meet them. (Deep breath as I try to avoid getting sucked into the tangent of what happens when people stay in relationships with those who continually don’t meet their standards. Oof.)
Being in a sorority, I’m privy to a large number of women and their mentalities. We all want different things out of relationships and are attracted to different types of men. Personally, I don’t expect a guy to pay for all of our dates. Would I be upset if he did? Certainly not. But I  wouldn’t fault him if I discovered he also thinks covering checks should be less one-sided. I can assure you there are plenty of girls in my sorority that would be appalled by this mentality.
When I studied abroad in Europe two summers ago, we often had to carry our luggage up flights of stairs. I’m a pretty strong girl, so most of the time it wasn’t an issue for me, and I didn’t expect guys to carry my luggage. But when I was struggling because I was too hungover and they offered, I let them. I wasn’t pissed off that the guys didn’t try to help the first time, because I had spoken things or acted in ways that implied I wouldn’t normally need or expect their assistance. Unsurprisingly, there were plenty of girls who were sitting down on their suitcases, just waiting for a guy to carry theirs. And that’s a fine expectation for them, but it isn’t mine. They need a guy who will do that for them; I don’t. And none of us are in the wrong.
If a guy wants to be with a certain type of woman but doesn’t treat her right, he’ll need to change (or, it could be a woman not treating a dude right.) If a woman continues to be with men who don’t meet her standards, she should rethink them, reflect on how she’s communicating them, and make an honest appraisal of whether or not she’s necessitating that he meet them.
If I want a hippie, ultra feminist boyfriend who farts in my face and thinks that I should ask him out on dates, cool. If I want a super straight-laced Southern gentlemen who shares my dream of clean-cut, white-picket-fence livin’, great. If I want some insane romp with an edgy musician who actually doesn’t give a particular fuck about me, THAT IS OKAY. At the end of the day, it isn’t about a ticking behaviors and traits off a checklist. Rather, it’s about experiences and how people make you feel.
Rocker man might not remember my name in the morning – I won’t be offended, because I probably won’t know his, either. Sweet southern man might expect me to be his domestic trophy wife, and the hippie might be the most sensitive and communicative man I’ve ever known. Any of the above stereotypes could be jackasses, and all of them could be the kindest, greatest dudes on this earth. My relations with any of them could similarly run the gamut. Just because they don’t abide by some predetermined and outdated set of standards for how a relationship is supposed to look and function (chivalry, for those of you still with me) doesn’t mean they aren’t of chivalrous mentality and great people.
Unlike the author, I don’t think every woman should expect flowers and chocolates (trust me, they don’t), and I disagree with the idea that men have to take women out on a date before sleeping with them. Did I miss the memo about women becoming robots? What’s wrong with a woman who doesn’t prioritize material flattery or doesn’t mind being the nameless girl he met at a bar?
Yeah, nothing.
Chivalry is dead. It died a slow death over the years as the idea that women, men, and their relationships must adhere to some rigid set of behaviors slowly lost steam.
Chivalrous mentality is not, and neither are the hundreds of thousands of men who possess it. I can’t define chivalrous mentality or paint a picture of what it looks like exactly, but that’s why it works: it mimics the incredibly personal and dynamic nature of life, lifestyles, individuals, relationships.
