Chivalry: Another lost art? - Page 4 - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

SirLance · 10-23-2006, 08:01 PM

In the truest sense, chivalry the qualities idealized by knighthood, such as bravery, courtesy, honor, and gallantry toward women.

You can be gallant towards men, too.

I can, and will practice the above. Quite frankly, I don't care what anyone thinks about it, I'll do what I think is the right thing. When I shave in the morning, I want to be able to look that guy in the eyes and know that I'm a good man.

JumpinJesus · 10-23-2006, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charlatan

Hold on there...

There is a big difference between wanting women's lib and saying that women who want to stay home are not in support of women's lib.

The key difference being choice.

Frankly, the crux of this thread is the big bugaboo of "FEMINISM". I can't imagine that *anyone* here would argue against the concept of equal opportunity and equal rights. The problem is that Feminism is a political football that has been abused by all sides of the debate (like most political footballs).

There is anger and resentment still lingering in the Feminism debate on all sides.

This thread is a product of that ongoing debate.

As I said above. We all agree that we should be considerate to others. It's only in the reasons why we should be considerate that we disagree.

While the choice argument is a strong and highly valid argument, I think that women who wish to be independent in every aspect view this choice as a setback. I'm not going to argue whether they're right or wrong, because I happen to agree that freedom of choice should be the goal of every movement. However, when that choice is seen as a return to days of repression and oppression, I can understand a person's anger at those who would make that choice after all the struggle that went into achieving equality.

-------
I had to go back and re-read the OP after sugahbritches' last comment. In it she does state that she does not want to be seen as an equal counterpart to men.

Quote:

And men should now look at women like themselves---same counterparts? Oh man, I hope this never happens!! LOL!

After re-reading it and digesting it a bit, I get the impression that she's lamenting the loss of girls being girls and men being men in the "traditional" sense, so in a way, this thread is evolving in a manner consistent with the OP. It did not start out as a comment on courtesy; it started as a comment on how men treat women in the context of historical chivalry.

Yes, there are differences in men and women, I don't think anyone will ever deny that, but to say that women and men should belong to different classes of citizen is what's causing the uproar. Despite all comments to the contrary, this is the impression I was left with from the OP. I think any heated comments after that are expected from those who got the same impression I got.

aberkok · 10-23-2006, 08:29 PM

There is some dissonance here between this stance:

Quote:

Originally Posted by SirLance

In the truest sense, chivalry the qualities idealized by knighthood, such as bravery, courtesy, honor, and gallantry toward women.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shani

To me its not at all hard to see courtesy as a by product of Chilvary. This is the knights code of Chivalry and Im sorry I dont see one word in here that denotes its only to females...

...I think a lot of people in the world today could stand to live by this

and this one:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gilda

It's helpful to understand where the specific codes that go with chivalry come from. Some are derived from religious traditions, while others come from, strange as it may seem, practical adaptations to the differences between the sexes as they existed and functioned at the time they began. A great many cultural norms developed as a practical adaptation that fit a particular time but remain or are applied in an overly general manner after the conditions that led to their development no longer persist.

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

2. on the word chivalry: jesus christ, why on earth is ANYTHING about the high middle ages an object of ANY kind of nostalgia, seen in any way productive of habits of mind or practice that are worth repeating?

chivalry was mostly about social power. ...

We like to look at history through rose coloured glasses, but a more thorough investigation tends towards a history that is often not as exciting as we thought, and in some cases downright despicable by today's social norms of the West. Those of you citing chivalry as a glamorous old code of conduct can't just throw out the bathwater and keep the baby.

ngdawg · 10-23-2006, 08:42 PM

Quote:

Frankly, the crux of this thread is the big bugaboo of "FEMINISM". I can't imagine that *anyone* here would argue against the concept of equal opportunity and equal rights. The problem is that Feminism is a political football that has been abused by all sides of the debate (like most political footballs).

There is anger and resentment still lingering in the Feminism debate on all sides.

I agree...at some point in time, Feminism no longer was about equality; militant thinking came in with a 'I can open my own car door' mentality and shouting 'male chauvinist pig' and men backed off....
Supple Cow: You weren't even a thought when the Feminist movement started, but you come off as extremely militant as I mentioned above. How you can possibly equate reading romance novels with 'keeping women down' is a mystery to me. Some of us actually embrace our womanhood, with all its strengths and weaknesses, and we realize quite fully we are not second class to anyone. Should we be out perfecting GTA just to prove a point? No more then men should take up sewing to do so....
Toaster: There's a reason women's salaries don't match and the reason is the same as the total hours mismatch: We are still the main caregivers of family, the ones who actually have the kids in that family and therefore are staying home to recover and, in the majority of single-parent homes, we're that single parent. Until all that evens out( and since men can't give birth, it won't), then pay will never be totally equal.
Chivalry as it pertains to the days and legends of King Arthur are indeed, gone. But there are way too many men here who seem to think that a simple act of courtesy is chivalrous and either therefore won't do it or do it with the thought that women are, in fact, deserving of it, much the same way a child needs his meat cut. Both lines of thought are off the mark. Better to do something because it's the right and respectful thing to do, regardless of gender, age or ability.

jorgelito · 10-23-2006, 09:25 PM

I don't think anyone advocating chivalry is actually referring to the historical nitty-gritty oppressive aspects of it. But rather, I think they are espousing the positive courteous aspects of it. All the stuff that Seaver mentioned reminds me of the Marine Corps. In that sense, how could chivalry be viewed as a bad thing? So, maybe we need to see chivalry in a modern context as opposed to this archaic form that no one is advocating but that naysayers keep going back to.

snowy · 10-23-2006, 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ngdawg

Quote:

Frankly, the crux of this thread is the big bugaboo of "FEMINISM". I can't imagine that *anyone* here would argue against the concept of equal opportunity and equal rights. The problem is that Feminism is a political football that has been abused by all sides of the debate (like most political footballs).

There is anger and resentment still lingering in the Feminism debate on all sides. I agree...at some point in time, Feminism no longer was about equality; militant thinking came in with a 'I can open my own car door' mentality and shouting 'male chauvinist pig' and men backed off....
Supple Cow: You weren't even a thought when the Feminist movement started, but you come off as extremely militant as I mentioned above. How you can possibly equate reading romance novels with 'keeping women down' is a mystery to me. Some of us actually embrace our womanhood, with all its strengths and weaknesses, and we realize quite fully we are not second class to anyone. Should we be out perfecting GTA just to prove a point? No more then men should take up sewing to do so....
Toaster: There's a reason women's salaries don't match and the reason is the same as the total hours mismatch: We are still the main caregivers of family, the ones who actually have the kids in that family and therefore are staying home to recover and, in the majority of single-parent homes, we're that single parent. Until all that evens out( and since men can't give birth, it won't), then pay will never be totally equal.
Chivalry as it pertains to the days and legends of King Arthur are indeed, gone. But there are way too many men here who seem to think that a simple act of courtesy is chivalrous and either therefore won't do it or do it with the thought that women are, in fact, deserving of it, much the same way a child needs his meat cut. Both lines of thought are off the mark. Better to do something because it's the right and respectful thing to do, regardless of gender, age or ability.

Personally, I can play an FPS as well as any of my male friends, and I still read bodice rippers. Ustwo's right...it's mostly about it being female porn in my case.

Does the latter somehow make me less feminist? I somehow think not. Actually, most heroines in recent romances, even ones set in historical circumstances, give as good as they get.

Does it make me respect and expect common courtesy less? No.

Do I believe in chivalry? I think it's an outdated concept that most people, whose knowledge of the time from which chivalry comes is romantic at best, usually confuse with the idea and expectations of common courtesy.

A side note: as for my belief in feminism, I think it is about choice, and I am pretty militant compared to most of my friends. Yet, when the time comes, I won't regret the choice to stay home and nurture my children--because it was just that, a choice.

To clarify, I'm using feminism in the sense that Charlatan used it above.

Toaster126 · 10-24-2006, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ngdawg

Toaster: There's a reason women's salaries don't match and the reason is the same as the total hours mismatch: We are still the main caregivers of family, the ones who actually have the kids in that family and therefore are staying home to recover and, in the majority of single-parent homes, we're that single parent. Until all that evens out( and since men can't give birth, it won't), then pay will never be totally equal.

I'm not sure why you said this in response to my comment about wages. I certainly wasn't disputing anything you've written there. In order to do those things, one does have to leave work or spend less time working, which plays into what I spoke of earlier.

ngdawg · 10-24-2006, 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toaster126

I'm not sure why you said this in response to my comment about wages. I certainly wasn't disputing anything you've written there. In order to do those things, one does have to leave work or spend less time working, which plays into what I spoke of earlier.

Eh, it was late and I lost my connection, along with my train of thought.
What I meant to say was, that there seems to be this line of reasoning that states 'women want everything equal, so why should we be 'chivalrous', when, in fact, nothing CAN be equal given those points. Does this mean we garner more respect and chivalry because of it? Not really, yet I find the young male respondents making the assumption that we are saying just that, while stating that we're 'equals' so no expectations of chivalry are legit. So, yes, I agree that we are NOT equals, but your post seemed to come across with an anger about it. My apologies if it was misread.
Damn train of thought derailed again:
I'd also like to point out that, just because some women find doing for their men to be satisfying to them does not mean anyone has the right to knock them for it. If a woman is happy catering and the man in her life does his part, who are we to criticize that? The only time anyone should take issue with it is if it's one-sided or bordering on abuse. I don't feel that just because any woman likes to cook for him, scrub his back or whatever, she's making herself less a human being. When something works, everyone else should just back off and worry about themselves.

shesus · 10-24-2006, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gilda

The guy paying for the meal is a custom that is now more commonly a formal courtesy based on sex that should likely be abandoned, but it originated in an era when men worked and women generally didn't, and the women who did work made significantly less money than men. Men paying grew out of a difference in ability to pay that was sex linked--it was a product of a circumstance that was linked strognly to sex and thus became associated with sex, even when the circumstances changed.

This doesn't mean men should be expected to pay--that is a custom that should be abandoned in favor of something more equitable, or to truly reflect the origins of the practice, if one person, regardless of sex, is significantly more able to pay than the other, she should be the one to do so. I'm really fine with either arrangement.

Just had to respond because Spec and I had coffee today and we were talking about the man paying. He bought me coffee and I called him a chivalrous fellow.

I know he didn't pay to have sex or because he was the man. But the thing is that he knows that I'm out of work and even though I brought money to pay, he was helping out. It was courteous and something that a friend does. Also, there have been times when we've bought him dinner or drinks so it's a trade off.

As I mentioned before, I think we all agree that courtesy is important. Being considerate to all people has nothing to do with women's lib or chivalry. It has to do with being human and a friend.

Halx · 10-24-2006, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shesus

I know he didn't pay to have sex

but he got it anyway?

shesus · 10-24-2006, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Halx

but he got it anyway?

HAHA! No...

Toaster126 · 10-24-2006, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ngdawg

What I meant to say was, that there seems to be this line of reasoning that states 'women want everything equal, so why should we be 'chivalrous', when, in fact, nothing CAN be equal given those points. Does this mean we garner more respect and chivalry because of it? Not really, yet I find the young male respondents making the assumption that we are saying just that, while stating that we're 'equals' so no expectations of chivalry are legit. So, yes, I agree that we are NOT equals, but your post seemed to come across with an anger about it. My apologies if it was misread.

I'm surprised of all the posts in here you got anger from mine, but that's not what I intended. I was just pointing out there are actual reasons women make less than men, and it isn't because they are women. It's because of the workplace choices they make. On an individual basis, you can't find good data to support differently. Or at least, I can't. Once you get the whole group, you can definitely see where certain choices women on the average make could and should make them recieve less money.

ngdawg · 10-24-2006, 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toaster126

I'm surprised of all the posts in here you got anger from mine, but that's not what I intended. I was just pointing out there are actual reasons women make less than men, and it isn't because they are women. It's because of the workplace choices they make. On an individual basis, you can't find good data to support differently. Or at least, I can't. Once you get the whole group, you can definitely see where certain choices women on the average make could and should make them recieve less money.

Actually, it IS because they are women.
First, there's maternity leave, generally 2-4 weeks prior to delivery, 6 weeks after. So right there, you're talking 8 weeks less per year in the workforce. While parenthood is, ideally a choice, it isn't always.
Single parenthood: A disproportionate amount of single parents are women. This isn't always a choice and the jobs they take to support their families is not always an optimum choice as well and many take two or more lower paying jobs due to their personal economics and situations.

Mongolguy · 10-24-2006, 08:20 PM

I blame Elanor of Aquitaine for the confusion. Befor she got involved, chivalry was more of a devotion to God than a devotion to women.

analog · 10-24-2006, 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ngdawg

Actually, it IS because they are women.
First, there's maternity leave, generally 2-4 weeks prior to delivery, 6 weeks after. So right there, you're talking 8 weeks less per year in the workforce. While parenthood is, ideally a choice, it isn't always.
Single parenthood: A disproportionate amount of single parents are women. This isn't always a choice and the jobs they take to support their families is not always an optimum choice as well and many take two or more lower paying jobs due to their personal economics and situations.

I think what Toaster was saying is that there are things that women choose that cause the disparity. Having children is a choice.

"Accidents" don't make pregnancy compulsory; they are the consequences of making the choice to risk pregnancy (especially if not being careful) and engaging in sex.

But: Unless a woman spits out a kid every single year, this would only account for a loss in wages in any year that a woman bears a child. If you only ever have 2 kids, and you work for 35 years before you retire, that should be 33 years of regular pay. I don't think it's having kids that is causing a very large part of the disparity in pay.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Separate issue: I have a friend who says that any woman who thinks it's appropriate for a man to buy her things and pay for the dinners and such is a whore, plain and simple. Why? Because you're essentially paying for sex, as far as he's concerned. The only girls he'll date are ones that realize that both people should be sharing things equally. Now obviously, if one of you is much better off than the other, there may be some accomodations... but by and large, it should be fairly 50/50.

His test is to go on two dinners with a girl, each of similar value. On the first, he offers to pick up the check. If they allow, and don't insist they split it, he waits to see what happens on the second date. If the girl offers to pay because he paid the first time, then game on! Otherwise, if she expects him to continue paying, she's essentially a prostitute in his eyes, and no relationship ever developes.

Note: I won't tell you how many women he's had sex with, but he's only ever dated 2 women. One for a few months, the other for about a year. Hence his constant decree of "women are whores". lol

sadeianlinguist · 10-25-2006, 05:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carno

What about courtesy towards men? Women are all about equality right? Who's going to hold my door open? Fuck chivalry. It's an outdated concept that should no longer be followed, because women are not princesses. They should not be held up on a pedestal, because they are not any better than men. If women want men to follow the code of chivalry, then women had better get back in the damn kitchen and do nothing except look pretty for guys, because that's what they did in the Middle Ages and chivalry is a medieval concept.

I do, however, practice common courtesy everyday.

I actually agree. I open doors for my wonderful boyfriend and offer him seating if it's limited, since he has a bum knee. On the other hand, he's also wonderful to lift heavy stuff for me, open doors, pull out my chair, etc. I happily bend down to pick stuff up since it's harder on him and deal with things that are easier if you're smaller, and he does the stuff that's easier if you're larger. (He's nearly 100 lbs. heavier and almost a foot taller.)

The Rule of Thumb also was started in the same period. The Rule of Thumb in England meant it was okay to beat your wife, so long as you didn't use anything thicker than your thumb.

SugahBritches · 10-28-2006, 07:30 AM

Just when you fine folks here thought I was gone!!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by SirLance

I can, and will practice the above. Quite frankly, I don't care what anyone thinks about it, I'll do what I think is the right thing. When I shave in the morning, I want to be able to look that guy in the eyes and know that I'm a good man.

You might be the last of the last SirLance. Or at least.........in the truest sense (of the word "chivalry"), the last.

Question for you, SirLance...........I noticed your avatar and location. Do you think the word "chivalry" is still used in some of our forces today? And if so, describe what you think it truly means in our forces. And I don't mean just "towards women". I mean the ideal of the word.

I just had the thought of what military would always use in drastic measures. The phrase of, "Women and children out first......" Does this still apply in our armed forces today?

Or if any military member here can answer these questions...........please feel free to do so.

SirLance · 10-30-2006, 07:54 AM

When I was in the army, there were few women so I can't speak well to that. Also, there were no women in combat specialties (and still aren't), although female US soldiers have been killed in forward postings.

I can tell you that our enemies use women and children, and that I've been fired upon (and fired at) both.

There is no chivalry in a firefight, there is only chaos met by training. Things do not happen slowly...

I was a special operations senior sergeant (18Z), kind of the team leader, sometimes they call us the team daddy. It's hard to explain, there isn't an equivalent civilian job for this OS...

The motto of special forces is "de oppresso liber" which is latin meaning "to free the oppressed." Is that not chivalry? Is that not the goal of bravery, courtesy, honor, and gallantry? To treat each person as special, even the uneducated, barefooted, african tribesman who doesn't know what (or if) he'll eat tomorrow? Do we live that? In my unit, we certainly did.

Is it still the case? Yes, I believe it is.

Hope that answers your questions, SB.

SugahBritches · 10-30-2006, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SirLance

The motto of special forces is "de oppresso liber" which is latin meaning "to free the oppressed." Is that not chivalry? Is that not the goal of bravery, courtesy, honor, and gallantry? To treat each person as special, even the uneducated, barefooted, african tribesman who doesn't know what (or if) he'll eat tomorrow? Do we live that? In my unit, we certainly did.

Is it still the case? Yes, I believe it is.

Yes sir, it most certainly is! Thank you so much for replying SirLance. I realize you are limited to your time and I sincerely thank you for giving me this much.

Quote:

Hope that answers your questions, SB.

Yes sir, it answers my recent questions. However, it only gets me started for more!

You and your men take care sir. And I do thank you kindly for answering so soon.

JumpinJesus · 10-30-2006, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SugahBritches

Just when you fine folks here thought I was gone!!!

You might be the last of the last SirLance. Or at least.........in the truest sense (of the word "chivalry"), the last.

Question for you, SirLance...........I noticed your avatar and location. Do you think the word "chivalry" is still used in some of our forces today? And if so, describe what you think it truly means in our forces. And I don't mean just "towards women". I mean the ideal of the word.

I just had the thought of what military would always use in drastic measures. The phrase of, "Women and children out first......" Does this still apply in our armed forces today?

Or if any military member here can answer these questions...........please feel free to do so.

The irony here is that Carno is an officer with the Marines, I believe. I hope that doesn't deflate your romanticism of this whole thing.

And I do believe that the whole "women and children first...." idea applies pretty much everywhere, not just in the military.

Carno · 10-30-2006, 06:34 PM

I think SugahBritches misunderstands me. It's not that I don't believe in being courteous and gallant and everything else, it's just that I don't believe I should be that way because a medieval code tells me to be that way.

First and foremost my parents raised me to be polite and courteous to everyone, second I choose to be that way because I see the value in it, and third my position as a (soon to be (I commission in six weeks)) military officer dictates that I be polite and courteous.

As a Marine, I would never want someone to look at me and think to themselves how nasty I look or act. I always try to conduct myself in a manner becoming that of a Marine officer. My point in this thread was never that I see no value in being polite and courteous, but rather that I don't see any value in an outdated moral code. The original post asked what I thought of the word chivalry, and I gave my thoughts on the word. My posts weren't critical of being nice to people, but rather I was being critical of an archaic code of conduct and what it means.

I was never taught the code of conduct that is chivalry in the Marine Corps, but I was taught customs and courtesies that simply reinforced those taught to me by my parents.

Now, I do realize that on the TFP I am not always a shining beacon of courtesy, but in person I conduct myself much better, as I hope anyone who knows me can attest.

robot_parade · 10-30-2006, 06:46 PM

"""
To dream the impossible dream
To fight the unbeatable foe
To bear with unbearable sorrow
To run where the brave dare not go
"""
(The Impossible Dream, from The Man of La Mancha)

That is all.

SugahBritches · 10-30-2006, 06:52 PM

Thank you Carno for your post. I deeply appreciate it. I thought long and hard about even posting after JJ's post. I had just decided that I wouldn't bother. But, I sure feel better after your post. Thank you.

BTW, is customs and courtesies all that bad????

Just asking, because my daughter loves the ideals of what the Marines stand for and I'm glad to know her Marine husband shows her the respect and love that she deserves. But, I already knew that before he ever became a Marine and before he even knew my daughter.

Mauser · 10-31-2006, 07:04 AM

Worst thing with people today is the idea that the entire world owes them something.

How many time have you walked down a sidewalk and a person is approaching you straight down the middle forcing you to get off? I have this happen all the time while jogging so I started not getting out of the way of people smaller than me.

So far I've had four collisions and none of them have had the guts to say anything when I spin them around or knock them down.

SirLance · 10-31-2006, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SugahBritches

Yes sir, it most certainly is! Thank you so much for replying SirLance. I realize you are limited to your time and I sincerely thank you for giving me this much.

Yes sir, it answers my recent questions. However, it only gets me started for more!

You and your men take care sir. And I do thank you kindly for answering so soon.

SB, I left the army in 1985 (wounded, took disability & medical discharge). Sorry if I gave the impression I am active duty, I am not. But I do pray for our boys every single day.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carno

I think SugahBritches misunderstands me. It's not that I don't believe in being courteous and gallant and everything else, it's just that I don't believe I should be that way because a medieval code tells me to be that way.

Hear hear! It's how you behave that says what kind of man (or woman) you are, not what code you claim to adhere to.

Nobody "taught" me chivalry, but a lot of people, staring with my parents, did teach me how to conduct myself, and I think "chivalry" is the word that best describes that code of conduct.

Crack · 10-31-2006, 02:31 PM

to quote my Journal from about 9 months ago:

Quote:

Originally Posted by me

Where did we all go wrong? These are the days of the no commitment hookup, and the "instant message booty call". Where is the romance, where is the flowers and the candy? Is it such a crime to be civil? I blame women for the most part, for letting guys get away with more and more over the years. If most of us had it our way there would be a string of endless 1 night stands in a revolving door fashion. This should not be the way. Why settle for someone who wants to use you for nothing but masterbation, someone who wants, not to look in your eyes and protect you from the world, but look at your chest, and take advantage of everything that you will let him?
Ladies, quit bitching about asshole guys, I am tired of hearing about it, it's your collective faults for letting it come to this! Find a man that is happy to hold your hand, find a man that will enjoy your company when you are not naked, find a man that you can talk to about things that are important to you without the pretense of sex.
For gods sake women, Find a man. And quit telling people that there are no good men left, there are, we are out there, but you have to look for them, you have to know the right place to find us. I can't tell you where to look, because we are everywhere! We might be your best guy friend that comforts you when the last idiot stole your TV for beer money, we might be at a bar, or the coffee shop, we are everywhere! But there seems to be something predetermined in you women to over look us, why is that you think?
The whole arguement that "girls like bad boys" only holds up for so long, then eventually you have to come to the realization that it might not be the best idea. Women, suck it up and take another look at the "nice guys" out there, we have much to offer as well.
And for the love of god, quit telling us about how the last guy hurt you, we don't wanna hear about it anymore.
Just a friendly message to any women that read this that are having a hard time. No offence intended.

JumpinJesus · 10-31-2006, 03:09 PM

To answer why my last post may have seemed caustic, allow me to explain.

Throughout the course of this thread, I have read comments by "Southerners" who claim that "Northerners" can't possibly understand what it's like to be raised properly and how it is our wish to shit all over the South with our un-cultured ways - or words to that effect.

I've read comments about how, if there is any chivalry left, it must exist in the military, particularly in the Marine Corps.

My experience has shown me that believing such absolutes is foolish and naive. The rudest, most inconsiderate people I ever came across were in the South. Does this mean that I think all Southerners are this way? No, nor would I ever make the argument that Southerners are rude and inconsiderate, but some are. Just like everywhere else.

I also spent 5 years in the military. You might be surprised to know that a lot of people in the military are just as rude and inconsiderate as others in the general population. You should hear the way some men in the military talk about - and to - women. To me, the notion that the Marines are chivalrous is reminiscent of the recruiting ad that shows a Marine in a Knight's costume or Richard Gere in "An Officer and a Gentleman". It's marketing. It's not real life.

My comments about romanticizing groups of people is something I take issue with because it doesn't recognize that people are individuals and one will never be able to peg a group of people as having qualities that no one else possesses, especially when it comes to the issue of courtesy.

Carno · 10-31-2006, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JumpinJesus

I also spent 5 years in the military. You might be surprised to know that a lot of people in the military are just as rude and inconsiderate as others in the general population. You should hear the way some men in the military talk about - and to - women. To me, the notion that the Marines are chivalrous is reminiscent of the recruiting ad that shows a Marine in a Knight's costume or Richard Gere in "An Officer and a Gentleman". It's marketing. It's not real life.

My comments about romanticizing groups of people is something I take issue with because it doesn't recognize that people are individuals and one will never be able to peg a group of people as having qualities that no one else possesses, especially when it comes to the issue of courtesy.

This is an excellent point. Not everyone in the military is a "good" person. People are still people no matter if they are Senators, Governors, Presidents, doctors, Northerners, Southerners, black, white, purple, fat, skinny, clean shaven, Marines, soldiers or airmen, etc, and people will always suck.

And honestly, I know plenty of Marines who treat women like shit.

SugahBritches · 10-31-2006, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SirLance

I think "chivalry" is the word that best describes that code of conduct.

I believe this also. My only wish is that more people would use it---through out the world. And that no matter what state, country you live in or race, gender, cultural backgrounds----or what career in which one chooses, would see the need to practice it.

Baraka_Guru · 10-31-2006, 07:25 PM

Chaucer’s contemporary description of the knight in his Canterbury Tales sheds light on the true spirit of chivalry:

There was a knight, a most distinguished man
Who from the day on which he first began
To ride abroad had followed chivalry,
Truth, honor, generousness and courtesy.
He had done nobly in his sovereign’s war
And ridden into battle, no man more,
As well in Christian as in heathen places,
And ever honored for his noble graces …
He was of sovereign value in all eyes.
And though so much distinguished, he was wise
And in his bearing modest as a maid
He never yet a boorish thing had said
In all his life to any, come what might;
He was a true, a perfect gentle-knight.
Speaking of his equipment, he possessed
Fine horses, but he was not gaily dressed.
He wore a fustian tunic stained and dark
With smudges where his armour had left mark;
Just home from service, he had joined our ranks
To do his pilgrimage and render thanks.

If women think that holding open doors is what is at the heart of chivalry, they need to aim higher. I don't think chivalry is a medium through which males and females interact. It is beyond gender relations.

The "death" of chivalry wasn't brought about by women's social movements. Chivalry was done in be the general moral decay of society... but that is another thread.

10-23-2006, 08:01 PM	#121 (permalink)
SirLance Junkie Location: In the middle of the desert.	In the truest sense, chivalry the qualities idealized by knighthood, such as bravery, courtesy, honor, and gallantry toward women. You can be gallant towards men, too. I can, and will practice the above. Quite frankly, I don't care what anyone thinks about it, I'll do what I think is the right thing. When I shave in the morning, I want to be able to look that guy in the eyes and know that I'm a good man. __________________ DEMOCRACY is where your vote counts, FEUDALISM is where your count votes.

10-30-2006, 07:54 AM	#138 (permalink)
SirLance Junkie Location: In the middle of the desert.	When I was in the army, there were few women so I can't speak well to that. Also, there were no women in combat specialties (and still aren't), although female US soldiers have been killed in forward postings. I can tell you that our enemies use women and children, and that I've been fired upon (and fired at) both. There is no chivalry in a firefight, there is only chaos met by training. Things do not happen slowly... I was a special operations senior sergeant (18Z), kind of the team leader, sometimes they call us the team daddy. It's hard to explain, there isn't an equivalent civilian job for this OS... The motto of special forces is "de oppresso liber" which is latin meaning "to free the oppressed." Is that not chivalry? Is that not the goal of bravery, courtesy, honor, and gallantry? To treat each person as special, even the uneducated, barefooted, african tribesman who doesn't know what (or if) he'll eat tomorrow? Do we live that? In my unit, we certainly did. Is it still the case? Yes, I believe it is. Hope that answers your questions, SB. __________________ DEMOCRACY is where your vote counts, FEUDALISM is where your count votes.

10-30-2006, 06:34 PM	#141 (permalink)
Carno Junkie	I think SugahBritches misunderstands me. It's not that I don't believe in being courteous and gallant and everything else, it's just that I don't believe I should be that way because a medieval code tells me to be that way. First and foremost my parents raised me to be polite and courteous to everyone, second I choose to be that way because I see the value in it, and third my position as a (soon to be (I commission in six weeks)) military officer dictates that I be polite and courteous. As a Marine, I would never want someone to look at me and think to themselves how nasty I look or act. I always try to conduct myself in a manner becoming that of a Marine officer. My point in this thread was never that I see no value in being polite and courteous, but rather that I don't see any value in an outdated moral code. The original post asked what I thought of the word chivalry, and I gave my thoughts on the word. My posts weren't critical of being nice to people, but rather I was being critical of an archaic code of conduct and what it means. I was never taught the code of conduct that is chivalry in the Marine Corps, but I was taught customs and courtesies that simply reinforced those taught to me by my parents. Now, I do realize that on the TFP I am not always a shining beacon of courtesy, but in person I conduct myself much better, as I hope anyone who knows me can attest. __________________ http://how-to-spell-ridiculous.com/

10-31-2006, 03:09 PM	#147 (permalink)
JumpinJesus Junkie Location: Chicago	To answer why my last post may have seemed caustic, allow me to explain. Throughout the course of this thread, I have read comments by "Southerners" who claim that "Northerners" can't possibly understand what it's like to be raised properly and how it is our wish to shit all over the South with our un-cultured ways - or words to that effect. I've read comments about how, if there is any chivalry left, it must exist in the military, particularly in the Marine Corps. My experience has shown me that believing such absolutes is foolish and naive. The rudest, most inconsiderate people I ever came across were in the South. Does this mean that I think all Southerners are this way? No, nor would I ever make the argument that Southerners are rude and inconsiderate, but some are. Just like everywhere else. I also spent 5 years in the military. You might be surprised to know that a lot of people in the military are just as rude and inconsiderate as others in the general population. You should hear the way some men in the military talk about - and to - women. To me, the notion that the Marines are chivalrous is reminiscent of the recruiting ad that shows a Marine in a Knight's costume or Richard Gere in "An Officer and a Gentleman". It's marketing. It's not real life. My comments about romanticizing groups of people is something I take issue with because it doesn't recognize that people are individuals and one will never be able to peg a group of people as having qualities that no one else possesses, especially when it comes to the issue of courtesy. __________________ "I can normally tell how intelligent a man is by how stupid he thinks I am" - Cormac McCarthy, All The Pretty Horses

10-31-2006, 07:25 PM	#150 (permalink)
Baraka_Guru warrior bodhisattva Super Moderator Location: East-central Canada	Chaucer’s contemporary description of the knight in his Canterbury Tales sheds light on the true spirit of chivalry: There was a knight, a most distinguished man Who from the day on which he first began To ride abroad had followed chivalry, Truth, honor, generousness and courtesy. He had done nobly in his sovereign’s war And ridden into battle, no man more, As well in Christian as in heathen places, And ever honored for his noble graces … He was of sovereign value in all eyes. And though so much distinguished, he was wise And in his bearing modest as a maid He never yet a boorish thing had said In all his life to any, come what might; He was a true, a perfect gentle-knight. Speaking of his equipment, he possessed Fine horses, but he was not gaily dressed. He wore a fustian tunic stained and dark With smudges where his armour had left mark; Just home from service, he had joined our ranks To do his pilgrimage and render thanks. If women think that holding open doors is what is at the heart of chivalry, they need to aim higher. I don't think chivalry is a medium through which males and females interact. It is beyond gender relations. The "death" of chivalry wasn't brought about by women's social movements. Chivalry was done in be the general moral decay of society... but that is another thread. __________________ Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing? —Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön Humankind cannot bear very much reality. —From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

10-23-2006, 09:25 PM	#125 (permalink)
jorgelito All important elusive independent swing voter... Location: People's Republic of KKKalifornia	I don't think anyone advocating chivalry is actually referring to the historical nitty-gritty oppressive aspects of it. But rather, I think they are espousing the positive courteous aspects of it. All the stuff that Seaver mentioned reminds me of the Marine Corps. In that sense, how could chivalry be viewed as a bad thing? So, maybe we need to see chivalry in a modern context as opposed to this archaic form that no one is advocating but that naysayers keep going back to.

10-24-2006, 08:20 PM	#134 (permalink)
Mongolguy Crazy Location: My own little world. 'Cause they know me there.	I blame Elanor of Aquitaine for the confusion. Befor she got involved, chivalry was more of a devotion to God than a devotion to women.

10-30-2006, 06:46 PM	#142 (permalink)
robot_parade Junkie Location: San Antonio, TX	""" To dream the impossible dream To fight the unbeatable foe To bear with unbearable sorrow To run where the brave dare not go """ (The Impossible Dream, from The Man of La Mancha) That is all.

10-30-2006, 06:52 PM	#143 (permalink)
SugahBritches Insane	Thank you Carno for your post. I deeply appreciate it. I thought long and hard about even posting after JJ's post. I had just decided that I wouldn't bother. But, I sure feel better after your post. Thank you. BTW, is customs and courtesies all that bad???? Just asking, because my daughter loves the ideals of what the Marines stand for and I'm glad to know her Marine husband shows her the respect and love that she deserves. But, I already knew that before he ever became a Marine and before he even knew my daughter.

10-31-2006, 07:04 AM	#144 (permalink)
Mauser Upright	Worst thing with people today is the idea that the entire world owes them something. How many time have you walked down a sidewalk and a person is approaching you straight down the middle forcing you to get off? I have this happen all the time while jogging so I started not getting out of the way of people smaller than me. So far I've had four collisions and none of them have had the guts to say anything when I spin them around or knock them down.