maybe there is a reason for that
Someone mentioned something to me the other day, and I feel its worth commenting on. The statement was simply “Chiverly is dead today.” It should be mentioned that this person was female, and additionally that I don’t think it had anything to do with anything I did. This is actually a subject I have heard discussions/complaints about a lot recently. Usually the topic comes up in response to men not doing what women think they should, like holding a door open, or paying for meals, etc. The interesting thing about this is that these little acts that we collectively call “chiverly” today, I would suspect are rooted in a history that is more practical than polite. Today these practical needs have largely disappeared, leaving behind only the expectation of action for the sake of social grace.
Take for example the practice of opening doors for women. Door opening has never stuck me as being a particularly difficult task, nor does having a door held for me save me any significant effort or time. Add on to this the complications that arise with multiple doorways and such, and then everyone would get through the doors faster if they just held their own doors. Why then do we have this tradition of hold doors for women? My guess, which is backed up by none of that research people hold to, is that the practice game from the time when women had very large and somewhat rigid dresses. To open a door, you have to be reasonably close to the door, maybe even pushing on it with your body, however if your legs where surrounded by a 4 foot hoop, doing so would probably result in the embarassing display of a ladies ankles. To spare these ladies this public humilation, men would open their doors for them. Today, this couldn’t be farther from being an issue.
Now lets look at meal financing. In the not-so-distant past, the chances of a women having money of their own was pretty slim. Women didn’t hold paying jobs, they tended to live with their parents until they lived with a husband, and the only thing that made sense was for the man to pay for him and the woman. Women were basically cared for by the men around them, whether it be their father, husband, or courter. But the reason for this was that they didn’t have any money of their own. That was the system. In the more recent past, that changed. Women start working at the same time as men, and make roughly the same amount of money. Why then if they both have their own money, and the girl is just as likely to have initiated the meeting, should the guy be expected to foot the bill?
Basically, in all this I am not trying to say doing those things are bad. On the contrary, I practice a number of the “chiverlous”� manners, and other I see no problem with at least under certain conditions. What I am saying is that women today shouldn’t be too suprised to find the norms of 50 years ago practiced today. In fact if women, as a whole, have anyone to blame for the death calls of chiverly, it is themselves. The feminist movement has done a pretty good job of convincing us that the genders are equal and equalizing the opportunities and life situations of the both sides. Chiverly, by its definition, is the honoring of women. If everyone is equal, why should one group be expected to honor the other group?
Thoughts?