Chivalry/Gentlemans' Etiquette

Morf

There are the long-held expectations of men of good character but which ones still apply today?

For example my mother a couple of years ago let me know if was good manners if walking with a lady to be on the side of the path nearest the road or to allow a lady the side away from the road when passing if possible.

I'm just curious what other kinds of acts like this still apply in modern society. I will hold doors for a lady or less physically capable person but I don't universally expect a pleasant acknowledgement.

Leaving out gender equality as it would apply to disabled or elderly or any person who could benefit from some kind of assistance or courteous gesture what would these cover?

I'd like to point out that it's not limited to men to have this expectation on them but historically it has been in place.

OldRio

Manners maketh the man.

Open a door. Open a car door. Take a coat. Pull a chair from under a table to allow lady to sit. Stand when lady sits at table. Serve lady first. Do not eat food until lady starts to eat.

Some of the things I was taught to do and still do.
Good manners cost nothing.

DoctorEdgeWild

I would consider a lot of it to be out dated nonsense. I prefer to be polite and courteous to people regardless of gender.

I'd be extra helpful to someone older or disabled but I wouldn't consider women as needing special help or treatment purely because of their sex.

baby and crumble

Manners and etiquette are something that was drilled into me as a child, and I'm glad of it. Even though I'm female I tend to act on the more guy-like side of manners. It just feels normal for me. Particularly when I'm with my girlfriend or older people.

Holding a door open.

I do always walk on the road side, unless I'm with my Dad.

Holding my gf's jacket when she's putting it on.

Giving her my jacket if she's cold.

Not looking at my phone during dinner or conversation.

If I'm in a restaurant, always waiting until everyone at the table has their food before starting.

Giving up seats on the bus.

Please and thank you.

My Mum used to get lots of comments when we were kids about our manners and politeness which always made her happy. I've just continued with it.

OldRio

DoctorEdgeWild wrote: »

I would consider a lot of it to be out dated nonsense. I prefer to be polite and courteous to people regardless of gender.

I'd be extra helpful to someone older or disabled but I wouldn't consider women as needing special help or treatment purely because of their sex.

'outdated nonsense' Sorry but I disagree.
As for 'women needing special help' ? I always find when people (whatever gender) smile life is better.

DoctorEdgeWild

OldRio wrote: »

'outdated nonsense' Sorry but I disagree.
As for 'women needing special help' ? I always find when people (whatever gender) smile life is better.

I agree with you. I'm all for manners, 100%. It's the 'deciding who to apply those manners to based on gender' that I would question.

Paco Rodriguez

There are certain things I do and dont.

I do walk roadside beside a girl, pick something up if someone drops it, give way to people, holding off on eating until they have recieved theirs....

But I wouldn't hold a door open, put on their jacket or hold a chair. As a previous poster said, they are not incapable.

I hold a door open for anyone behind me and don't start eating until everyone is served and ready to start...

fiona-f

DoctorEdgeWild wrote: »

I agree with you. I'm all for manners, 100%. It's the 'deciding who to apply those manners to based on gender' that I would question.

I think though some of it, while rooted in outdated notions of feminine weakness, still is valid as a shorthand for sorting out minor social situations. Take holding the door open, if a man and women arrive at the door at the same time, applying the standard rule of woman walking through first simply means you don't have to get unit the "you first", "no, no, after you" discussion. It's just an easy practical solution which eases life just a tad and so I don't see it as disrespectful regardless of the origin.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

bluewolf wrote: »

I hold a door open for anyone behind me and don't start eating until everyone is served and ready to start...

i hold the door open for anyone but I place a little black X beside the name of anyone, in my big black book of bastards, who tries to make me wait to eat my food

Andrew_C

I too had good manners drilled into me as a child. I still do all the usual stuff - hold that door, give up my seat (for females - I can no longer say older gents , cos I'm almost one of 'em), don't start till everyone is served etc etc etc.

I've noticed a reluctance on the part of a small percentage of women of any age to accept the proffered seat on the bus (do I look THAT old?).

But here's what really gets my goat. Hold the door open for the person behind, and they breeze through without as much as a nod of acknowledgement. But that's no reason not to hold the door......

We're (as a race) not here for very long (watch a documentary about the Universe to get a perspective on it). We should make the most of it, including the little pleasantries towards each other.

DoctorEdgeWild

fiona-f wrote: »

I think though some of it, while rooted in outdated notions of feminine weakness, still is valid as a shorthand for sorting out minor social situations. Take holding the door open, if a man and women arrive at the door at the same time, applying the standard rule of woman walking through first simply means you don't have to get unit the "you first", "no, no, after you" discussion. It's just an easy practical solution which eases life just a tad and so I don't see it as disrespectful regardless of the origin.

Yeah, I understand where you're coming from in those examples and it would ring true in my own life where I would hold the door open for my good lady when we're out and about.

I just tend to question anything that draws a division between men and women, especially when it infers, or could be seen to infer, a weakness on one side or the other.

OldRio

Sorry but good manners does not infer weakness.

DoctorEdgeWild

OldRio wrote: »

Sorry but good manners does not infer weakness.

I think you may need to read my posts so far again.

For clarity - applying good manners ONLY to one group of people, based on gender alone, infers that they are more in need, or more deserving of, those manners.

I believe in good manners for all.

Snake

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

I place a little black X beside the name of anyone, in my big black book of bastards, who tries to make me wait to eat my food

Same as myself.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

i hold the door open for anyone but I place a little black X beside the name of anyone, in my big black book of bastards, who tries to make me wait to eat my food

You knock it back and run out though :pac:

We don't make you wait. We'll just stare judgementally :pac:

OldRio

DoctorEdgeWild wrote: »

I think you may need to read my posts so far again.

For clarity - applying good manners ONLY to one group of people, based on gender alone, infers that they are more in need, or more deserving of, those manners.

I believe in good manners for all.

I do not need to read your posts again. I respect your view but do not agree.
I do not put a coat on a man but i do put a coat on a lady. Does that infer the lady is incapable? I would say no. The lady smiles and says thank you.
No big deal for either party involved but a smile has been produced. A sense of 'niceness' for want of a better word.

Only the other day an elderly man doffed his cap at my wife. Is that bad? Is that wrong? Is it inferring weakness?
I would say no. And yes the wife smiled. A small action that brought about a little joy.

Maphisto

Does putting the seat down count?

DoctorEdgeWild

OldRio wrote: »

I do not need to read your posts again. I respect your view but do not agree.
I do not put a coat on a man but i do put a coat on a lady. Does that infer the lady is incapable? I would say no. The lady smiles and says thank you.
No big deal for either party involved but a smile has been produced. A sense of 'niceness' for want of a better word.

Only the other day an elderly man doffed his cap at my wife. Is that bad? Is that wrong? Is it inferring weakness?
I would say no. And yes the wife smiled. A small action that brought about a little joy.

I'm not judging you on your actions, they are really no business of mine. I'm just answering the question posed by the OP. I simply don't believe in treating people differently based purely on their gender. Some people do and that's fine by me. My personal choice is be polite to all, male, female, white, black, tall, short etc.

Pawwed Rig

I would hold a door open for anyone and would expect a thank you from that person. Also it is general manners to wait until people have their food before tucking in but neither is gender specific. Pulling a chair out or opening a car door is OTT if you ask me as is the whole 'ladies first' mentality.
I would never give up my seat on a bus or train for a girl just coz she is a girl. If she was pregnant then yes or any old person male or female.

Generally I try and treat people equally.

Give someone my jacket? You must be kidding me. I will not pay for another persons lack of forsight.

Walk on road side? Why?

To treat someone different because of their gender implies that one does not believe in equality.

Maphisto

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Walk on road side? Why?

My wife's aunt had her bag snatched by a bloke on a bike in Dublin, I always tend to walk on the roadside.

The rest is just good manners and consideration.

Though if your food comes first, eat it, don't end up with cold food on my account, because I'm genna eat mine if it comes first.

Pawwed Rig

Maphisto wrote: »

My wife's aunt had her bag snatched by a bloke on a bike in Dublin, I always tend to walk on the roadside.

Plenty of people have their bags snatched by non cyclists. I think encouraging more personal security awareness would be a better idea.

Maphisto

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Plenty of people have their bags snatched by non cyclists. I think encouraging more personal security awareness would be a better idea.

Maybe they do and maybe it would, but whilst we don't spend tremendous time analysing it, that's why I walk roadside most of the time.

Morf

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Walk on road side? Why?

My understanding is that it goes way back to times where streets were filthy and nearer the road more likely to get splashed with whatever unpleasantness in the road. Speculating really to be honest.

Siosleis

My dear sirs, if I may.
I believe a potato will root out the underclass.
As you were. "simper"

Dick phelan

Do mostly what has been posted, don't give up my seat though, obviously if they are elderly disables, pregnant ect but if they are a perfectly healthy female why the hell should i have to stand and not them, feck off i feel like sitting it's a pain to stand on transport.

tommy2bad

So what we are talking about are courtesies not manners. Manners are nothing more than social cues to status and should be ignored rejected and anyone insisting on 'manners' should be laughed at.
Holding a door, offering a seat, helping with a coat should be encouraged as they show consideration empathy and respect.

pwurple

DoctorEdgeWild wrote: »

Yeah, I understand where you're coming from in those examples and it would ring true in my own life where I would hold the door open for my good lady when we're out and about.

I just tend to question anything that draws a division between men and women, especially when it infers, or could be seen to infer, a weakness on one side or the other.

I think courtesy stems from a time when women, as those who have abililty to further the species, were seen as more valuable than men. It was that value being protected primarily. Not a particular inference of weakness.

With the industrial revolution, better nutrition and advances in medicine, women survive childbirth usually. There isn't the same weight applied to the ability to produce offspring.

DoctorEdgeWild

pwurple wrote: »

I think courtesy stems from a time when women, as those who have abililty to further the species, were seen as more valuable than men. It was that value being protected primarily. Not a particular inference of weakness.

With the industrial revolution, better nutrition and advances in medicine, women survive childbirth usually. There isn't the same weight applied to the ability to produce offspring.

There's no way in Hell I'm putting my jacket across a puddle for a bunch of stem cells and embryos to walk across!

Seriously though, I would disagree that it was because women were considered more valuable, I have always thought it was because they were seen as the weaker of the two sexes. Although I had never considered your angle before, interesting point.

beano345

I think chivalry's dyeing a slow death look at the Costa Concordia disaster,there was no women and children first as was the case with the titanic when it sank just look at the survival rates.

Pawwed Rig

beano345 wrote: »

I think chivalry's dyeing a slow death look at the Costa Concordia disaster,there was no women and children first as was the case with the titanic when it sank just look at the survival rates.

The Titanic was more a case of rich people first and screw the rest of you. No chivalry there unless you are looking at a really romantic image of the disaster.

To say chivalry is dead due to the Costa Concordia doesn't make sense as 32 people died out of 4,000 odd. Were all the victims women I might agree with you but that wasn't the case. That said do you not think 'women and children first' mentality devalues men as human beings?

beano345

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

The Titanic was more a case of rich people first and screw the rest of you. No chivalry there unless you are looking at a really romantic image of the disaster.

To say chivalry is dead due to the Costa Concordia doesn't make sense as 32 people died out of 4,000 odd. Were all the victims women I might agree with you but that wasn't the case. That said do you not think 'women and children first' mentality devalues men as human beings?

I meant survival in terms of gender,it was witnessed that many lifeboat s went to sea three quartets full and that three men who disobeyed the women and children first rule and tried to clamber aboard were shot:

http://www.icyousee.org/titanic.html

From the Costa Concordia there was many reports from survivors that men pushed past women and children to escape.

Do I think the women and children first mentality devalues men?...course I do,male disposability.

MagicMarker

I don't think I've ever given up my seat on the bus. Though I would for a pregnant woman, or an elderly person if I thought they'd fall on top of me during a sharp turn.

OldRio wrote: »

Open a car door. Take a coat. Pull a chair from under a table to allow lady to sit. Stand when lady sits at table. Serve lady first.

All nonsense.

Morf

I tend to make an effort to greet middle-aged and older people in passing when out and about. I generally get a positive response and some seem very pleased with a cheerful "hello/lovely day".

I feel far more apprehensive about doing the same with similarly aged peers or younger. I'm not as sure I'll get a positive/any response. Partly my own issue, not blanket condemning the youth of today.

Anyone else in my line of thinking? With earphones it becomes pointless a lot of the time anyway.

Are there any recently evolved courtesies that you find yourself doing? Helping an older person at a self-service check-out for example.

Pawwed Rig

beano345 wrote: »

I meant survival in terms of gender,it was witnessed that many lifeboat s went to sea three quartets full and that three men who disobeyed the women and children first rule and tried to clamber aboard were shot:

Ok then the main difference seems to be that on the Titanic there were homicidal maniacs willing to shoot poor souls, who were most likely in a blind panic, to satisfy their own personal value system whereas on the Costa Concordia these lunatics were no longer present. That is progress I would have thought.

It is unfair to judge people by their actions in an extreme situation like the prospect of drowning where instinct takes over. I don't think that has anything to do woth chivalry. Neither do I think it was a case of women and children standing clamly by while the crazed men bashed their way through. Blind panic most probably sezed evverybody where there was a mad scramble for safety.

Seriously?

Personally I hope to god that chivalry is well and truly dead, because when you look at it. All it is is an attempt to establish a societal norm that says as a man your safety and well-being comes second to a woman’s.

You’ll often see where the topic is discussed in public that people will attack those men who oppose it by implying that because they reject it they must therefore treat their wives/partners, family badly.

But chivalry is really about how men are meant to treat female strangers, so this a red-herring to try and shame you back into your box.

The way to treat women is to treat them exactly as you would treat a male stranger.

OldRio

MagicMarker wrote: »

All nonsense.

Thanks for that well reasoned response to my post. I will go away and ponder those telling and salient points.

jackofalltrades

OldRio wrote: »

I do not put a coat on a man but i do put a coat on a lady. Does that infer the lady is incapable? I would say no. The lady smiles and says thank you.
No big deal for either party involved but a smile has been produced. A sense of 'niceness' for want of a better word.
.

And would you still do it if the lady didn't produce a smile? Is this an essential part of the interaction?

Why would you not help a man in a similar situation? Why is it just women that you help?

Just trying to get a full understanding of what motivates you in these scenarios.

OldRio

jackofalltrades wrote: »

And would you still do it if the lady didn't produce a smile? Is this an essential part of the interaction?

Why would you not help a man in a similar situation? Why is it just women that you help?

Just trying to get a full understanding of what motivates you in these scenarios.

If the woman did not like what I was doing I would stop. Obviously.

Holding a jacket and putting it on a woman is something I would do automatically. Never thought of helping a man into a jacket unless the man was struggling.

Pawwed Rig

MagicMarker wrote: »

All nonsense.

Mod note - this post falls below the standard we expect in TGC. Please read the charter for reference.

OldRio wrote: »

Thanks for that well reasoned response to my post. I will go away and ponder those telling and salient points.

If you have a problem with a post report it as normal.

batistuta9

Morf wrote: »

My understanding is that it goes way back to times where streets were filthy and nearer the road more likely to get splashed with whatever unpleasantness in the road. Speculating really to be honest.

is it not from roman times, when they threw rubbish from the windows to the street and the person on the inside was less likely to get hit by it

Morf

batistuta9 wrote: »

is it not from roman times, when they threw rubbish from the windows to the street and the person on the inside was less likely to get hit by it

Could well be. I was mostly pulling a theory out of thin air.

pwurple

beano345 wrote: »

Do I think the women and children first mentality devalues men?...course I do,male disposability.

I don't think it quite sets men as disposable... More that men protect primarily their own children and women, as the children are the carrier of their genes into the next generation, and women were traditionally the children's carers. Most men place a huge value on their own families above all else, which is fairly sensible in the great scheme of things. It extended over time to my brother's children and wife, my neighbour's children and wife, my fellow countryman's children and wives, and so on. -> Extend that same sense of protection to absolutely everyone possible and you get chivalry. Man is setting himself as The Protector, not as disposable.

Roadtoad

Cars with central locking, then remote central locking took the fun out of opening a car door for a lady. My present car doesn't even have a key hole on the guest side.

Lou.m

Morf wrote: »

There are the long-held expectations of men of good character but which ones still apply today?

For example my mother a couple of years ago let me know if was good manners if walking with a lady to be on the side of the path nearest the road or to allow a lady the side away from the road when passing if possible.

I'm just curious what other kinds of acts like this still apply in modern society. I will hold doors for a lady or less physically capable person but I don't universally expect a pleasant acknowledgement.

Leaving out gender equality as it would apply to disabled or elderly or any person who could benefit from some kind of assistance or courteous gesture what would these cover?

I'd like to point out that it's not limited to men to have this expectation on them but historically it has been in place.

How to be a gentleman.

A gentlemen never tells .

Is honorable to his word to both men and women.

Being a gentleman is not simply behavior to women but to men too.

He is considerate of those around him and their feelings and makes an effort to be agreeable most of the time.

No gentleman engages in things like Twitter fights or passive-aggressive Facebook statuses. It’s just not classy.

Own and be able to sufficiently rock at least one suit.

Do your best not to put others (either men or women)down in order to elevate yourself, it reeks of the people who categorize men by their Greek letter status.


Call your parents, even if you have to set up a Google calendar reminder to get yourself to do this.


Be up-front about your finances, because it’s unfair for anyone to believe in the outdated gender roles of “the man should pay for everything.” As long as you’re working hard and trying your best, you deserve to be honest. A lady will admire you for it.

Not paying for anything does not mean you treat the lady in question as anything less than your fathers generation. You just do it in a different way.

Relate to people on an individual basis. You are you and they are them.

Learn how to dance, at least a bit. And if you can't still give it a go on the dance floor it's all about having fun.

Don’t be disdainful of selfies, guys have just as much a right to look and feel good about themselves as anyone else. If you want a selfie, take a selfie! Just don’t be a dick about other people who like to do it, too. Just don't take the piss with it.

Don't be too hard on yourself. Or others. But not too soft either.

Be compassionate, and know that you are allowed to experience the full range of human emotion. Where the gentleman of our grandparents’ generation might have prided himself on keeping all of his feelings in check for fear of seeming ‘feminine,’ a real gentleman knows that the best thing about him is his ability to be kind and empathetic.

Know that you are not disposable you are one of a kind! And good kind people are always very precious.

DoctorEdgeWild

Lou.m wrote: »

How to be a gentleman.

A gentlemen never tells .

Is honorable to his word to both men and women.

Being a gentleman is not simply behavior to women but to men too.

He is considerate of those around him and their feelings and makes an effort to be agreeable most of the time.

No gentleman engages in things like Twitter fights or passive-aggressive Facebook statuses. It’s just not classy.

Own and be able to sufficiently rock at least one suit.

Do your best not to put others (either men or women)down in order to elevate yourself, it reeks of the people who categorize men by their Greek letter status.


Call your parents, even if you have to set up a Google calendar reminder to get yourself to do this.


Be up-front about your finances, because it’s unfair for anyone to believe in the outdated gender roles of “the man should pay for everything.” As long as you’re working hard and trying your best, you deserve to be honest. A lady will admire you for it.

Not paying for anything does not mean you treat the lady in question as anything less than your fathers generation. You just do it in a different way.

Relate to people on an individual basis. You are you and they are them.

Learn how to dance, at least a bit. And if you can't still give it a go on the dance floor it's all about having fun.

Don’t be disdainful of selfies, guys have just as much a right to look and feel good about themselves as anyone else. If you want a selfie, take a selfie! Just don’t be a dick about other people who like to do it, too. Just don't take the piss with it.

Don't be too hard on yourself. Or others. But not too soft either.

Be compassionate, and know that you are allowed to experience the full range of human emotion. Where the gentleman of our grandparents’ generation might have prided himself on keeping all of his feelings in check for fear of seeming ‘feminine,’ a real gentleman knows that the best thing about him is his ability to be kind and empathetic.

Know that you are not disposable you are one of a kind! And good kind people are always very precious.

If wearing a suit, dancing and 'selfies' are par for the course of the gentleman, then count me out. I'll stick to being whatever I am currently.

Dravokivich

Lou.M, that reads like something I'd expect to see in Woman's Way.

DoctorEdgeWild

Dravokivich wrote: »

Lou.M, that reads like something I'd expect to see in Woman's Way.

"Lyk dis status if ur man is a gentleman and treets u lyk his princess." etc.


I suppose the idea of what it is to be a gentleman or a lady changes as time passes. Something that seems the norm today may be seen as very old fashioned in a decade or two.

Morf

I'll be a man in the way that suits me best without intentionally setting out to upset/offend others in an unwarranted/non-constructive fashion and I may choose to do courtesies when I feel the act will give me satisfaction or the response from the recipient will.

Sums it up really.

Lou.m

Dravokivich wrote: »

Lou.M, that reads like something I'd expect to see in Woman's Way.

I wouldn't have a clue. I don't read those magazines much.

You must read a lot of Woman's way to be so familiar with it.

I am sure if you read it then it is a superior publication of course.

Corvo

Lou.m wrote: »

How to be a gentleman.

A gentlemen never tells .

Is honorable to his word to both men and women.

Being a gentleman is not simply behavior to women but to men too.

He is considerate of those around him and their feelings and makes an effort to be agreeable most of the time.

No gentleman engages in things like Twitter fights or passive-aggressive Facebook statuses. It’s just not classy.

Own and be able to sufficiently rock at least one suit.

Do your best not to put others (either men or women)down in order to elevate yourself, it reeks of the people who categorize men by their Greek letter status.


Call your parents, even if you have to set up a Google calendar reminder to get yourself to do this.


Be up-front about your finances, because it’s unfair for anyone to believe in the outdated gender roles of “the man should pay for everything.” As long as you’re working hard and trying your best, you deserve to be honest. A lady will admire you for it.

Not paying for anything does not mean you treat the lady in question as anything less than your fathers generation. You just do it in a different way.

Relate to people on an individual basis. You are you and they are them.

Learn how to dance, at least a bit. And if you can't still give it a go on the dance floor it's all about having fun.

Don’t be disdainful of selfies, guys have just as much a right to look and feel good about themselves as anyone else. If you want a selfie, take a selfie! Just don’t be a dick about other people who like to do it, too. Just don't take the piss with it.

Don't be too hard on yourself. Or others. But not too soft either.

Be compassionate, and know that you are allowed to experience the full range of human emotion. Where the gentleman of our grandparents’ generation might have prided himself on keeping all of his feelings in check for fear of seeming ‘feminine,’ a real gentleman knows that the best thing about him is his ability to be kind and empathetic.

Know that you are not disposable you are one of a kind! And good kind people are always very precious.

When did Twitter, Facebook and "Selfies" become part of being a gentleman?