n0nsensical

i totally agree. this whole gender role thing bothers me, and thats exactly what chivalry is all about, gender roles. i don't want a woman who wants a permanent submissive role, and i don't want a permanent leader and protector role. my ideal is an equal relationship. the whole system is based on the assumptions that there are neither women who are more assertive nor men who are more passive than their predetermined gender roles suggest.

this discussion reminds me a lot of another one I've read on some blogs about who makes the first move in a relationship, something that's traditionally the man's place. women who never make the first move as a matter of principle, including many who have feminist ideals, say they assume that if the guy is interested, he'll make a move, and they don't want to risk rejection from someone who's not interested, and because leading the chase makes them feel, you know, desirable and appreciated. this seems to suggest that a guy will always make a move if he's interested, and, somehow in contrast to a woman, doesn't fear rejection and doesn't have a need to feel desirable himself. this may get me the typical tfp response that they should just get over it (and accept their role) and do it, but the reality is there are a lot of guys who aren't able or willing to get over it, and if she were the more assertive type who might otherwise approach him but for the assumption that it's the man's role, thats two people who could possibly be perfect for each other and together but aren't.