Chivalry is alive

Image: Melmagazine

We’re all familiar with the usage of the word ‘Chivalry’ today and this piece looks at the take on chivalry by some advocates of feminism. I recently read comments attributed to one of my favourite and most inspiring people (in an interview she granted) where she argued for I would describe as a more balanced and gender-neutral inclined substitution for chivalry. I discovered while researching the topic that this particular view has actually been around for a while.

My choice of advocate for feminism as opposed to outright ‘feminist’ is deliberate as it represents my current understanding and struggle with what feminism truly means. I have and will always believe that men and women are equal (and this is where I differ with some feminist ideologies), but different. What I hear some, (again permit me) advocates of feminism averring, is the ‘same’ treatment for men and women. Same here should not be confused with equal, they mean different things. I will attempt to illustrate.

Men and women should get equal opportunities in the workplace, governance and leadership. It is fair. A woman, should be assessed based on her experience, qualifications and capabilities; indeed everyone should. Sadly this isn’t the reality for so many women, as there are many obvious prejudices against women in the home, workplace and society. This reflects in women getting less pay and generally less opportunities than their equally (sometimes less) qualified male counterparts. Still, not everything will be the ‘same’ between a man and a woman; for instance men and women don't get the same amount of leave for child birth, it is called maternity leave for a reason. Only women give birth and so a policy addressing this might give the man at best a brief compassionate time off but instead focuses on the woman. Stay with me.

By extension, it stands to reason that on account of the different physiognomies of men and women, they can never be treated in exactly the same manner as they have different needs. These days, there’s practically no job function a man can do that a woman cannot, but that doesn’t take away the fact that men are physically stronger than women are. And so I wouldn’t assign exactly the same physical task to both a man and a woman as an equal test of their strength or endurance in the name of pandering to a 'balanced' ideal of feminism. This does not mean that they are not equal or that a woman is weak but rather only acknowledges the differences between them.

Back to chivalry. Me offering my umbrella to my lady friend or my wife in the rain isn’t an act that should come across as patronising, it is borne out of thoughtfulness and consideration. Chivalry is not about women needing protection, it is not a societal auto response act; it is a choice, a noble one at that. Again, putting women and children first in crisis situations is the most selfless thing any rational thinking man can do and to argue otherwise is just ridiculous. We put them first because typically, a man is capable of outrunning a woman and child, hence triage would put him as the least at risk (but still at risk).

To argue - as this my favourite person did - that we should put weak people first ahead of women  for instance, suggests that we’ve been pretty callous as a people if we are only now just heeding this advice from her. Of course we do! Would I prefer to hold the door for my hot date when there’s a man in a wheel chair, elderly man or ‘weak’ person in the picture as well? I’d like to think majority of men would put the weak person first.

I don’t know of any athletic world record where the female record bests that of the male, (I'm certain they exist) or a female heavyweight boxer willing to go head to head with the male counterpart. My point is not that it is impossible for women to beat men in physical activities, I’m pretty sure this happens every day, but rather to show what the norm is.

A woman's role as a mother and a wife should also never be trivialized, it is probably one of the most important jobs in the world. Be it a rural mother of two in the village who only knows how to farm or one as accomplished as Hillary Clinton, they both deserve honour and praise. Nancy Pelosi (who as House Speaker held the highest ranking political office in American history) puts it best when she says all her achievements in congress are nothing compared to having a new born baby. She says her greatest accomplishment is her family and sees her role in politics as an extension of her role as a mother.

We shouldn’t pander to this trait-neutral notion that conveniently ignores our differences in the name of furthering feminism. Before long a misguided feminist will advocate for one toilet for both sexes and demand for abolishing male and female toilets in the name of equality; or banishment of the female football league, they should be able to play with the men, heck, while we’re at it, let’s just do away with female sports totally, there should be no distinction between men and women in sports, where does it end? Men and women are equal but they are also different.  

Today, there are still many repressive cultures that treat women little better than slaves, in many societies, girls and women do not even have the right to an education. Only this year were women given the right to drive in Saudi Arabia and violence against women is still rife in our societies. The truth is everyone should be a feminist and push serious matters like this to the front burner and the fact that we’re instead discussing men not opening doors for women as progressing feminism is rather shameful; for us all.