If you are a feminist, then you must be equally willing to have sex with women as you are with men, or else you have abandoned the principles of feminism.
I am ok with this.
Actually, a surprisingly large percentage of the women I've been romantically involved with have been truly bi (exactly in the middle of the Kinsey scale?). I find that I get along with people who are attracted to the same things I'm attracted to.
As far as Chivalry goes, I guess I'm a bit old-fashioned? I generally hold the door for both women and men, and I know all of the customs to lighting a woman's cigarette (SUBTEXT!). I'll give anyone my coat if it's cold out, but usually men don't complain about the cold.
Just FYI, SCA stands for Society for Creative Anachronism, basically a Ren Faire/Boffer kind of thing. Their website is www.sca.org for anyone who finds that sort of thing interesting.
Just FYI, SCA stands for Society for Creative Anachronism, basically a Ren Faire/Boffer kind of thing. Their website is www.sca.org for anyone who finds that sort of thing interesting.
I'll hold the door for any wo/mans, but typical responses include: -- slow womans: take their time. won't hold door that long. -- quick mans: OH NOES womans holding door for me!? Must hold door! -- nice peeps: thanks for holding that door! -- stampede: never ending flow of humans enjoying opened door
Well, real in that people do it. Not real in the sense that nobody is actually a king or knight or whatever. But we pretend to be, and everyone acts like you are. Sort of.
Well, if you are pretending to be ren or what ever. Do it for reals. No women kinghts, people are scared of Moors and most people are covered in shit and are dirt farmers.
Chivalry was a code for knights and knights are male only.
Nope! The Order of the Hatchet Knights were exclusively female, as was the Italian Order of the glorious Saint Mary. It was common enough in France for there to be two distinct terms in common usage - chevaleresse, which was the wife of a knight, and chevalière, which is a female knight. Though most women attacked to the order were medical staff and nuns, there is at least one Female Grand-Cross in the Order of Saint John. Order of the Garter accepted women from it's inception, as did the order of Santiago.
While it was harder for women to become Knights - in the sense of Knights who fought in combat, not just to hold land under a knight's fee, which was relatively easy if you had the coin, or being inducted into a knight's order - and it was less common than male knights, it was in no way banned, outlawed or impossible.
Because in our silly modern world, we've never redefined any social constructs or principles. It just can't be done. Confound the stagnant nature of life.
You're correct, Social constructs do change - for example, the perception that a woman cannot be a knight was only formed well after a knight became little more than a ceremonial title we give to famous people under the English crown.
I'll hold the door for any wo/mans, but typical responses include: -- slow womans: take their time. won't hold door that long. -- quick mans: OH NOES womans holding door for me!? Must hold door! -- nice peeps: thanks for holding that door! -- stampede: never ending flow of humans enjoying opened door
My favorite thing is when ladies are all surprised what I'm holding the door for them and say "thank you", to which I can turn and say "of course".
Now I'm not sure if you're being a troll. I made veiled pop culture reference to Dave Chappelle which you interpreted as me being a raving male chauvinist. Then I attempt to quickly present my actual, practical view of Chivalry and you call it lame.
According to Wikipedia, here are some bullet points about Chivalry...
- Duties to countrymen and fellow Christians: this contains virtues such as mercy, courage, valor, fairness, protection of the weak and the poor, and in the servant-hood of the knight to his lord. This also brings with it the idea of being willing to give one’s life for another’s; whether he would be giving his life for a poor man or his lord.
"mercy, courage, valor, fairness, protection of the weak and the poor, and in the servant-hood of the knight to his lord" As I do not have a lord to which I am an earthly servant, I can skip that part but I do believe in those other behaviors. It seems I'm doing ok so far.
- Duties to God: this would contain being faithful to God, protecting the innocent, being faithful to the church, being the champion of good against evil, being generous and obeying God above the feudal lord.
This is a tough one. At my core I believe in a higher power of sorts although I am still, and will probably until the end of my days, trying to figure out just how this higher power and I should be getting along. I do what I can to feed the homeless aka innocent (volunteering once a month at a shelter I also donate food to) which also covers generosity, and if given the linear choice between good or evil, I'll take good every time. I'm an optimist, it's what I do.
- Duties to women: this is probably the most familiar aspect of chivalry. This would contain what is often called courtly love, the idea that the knight is to serve a lady, and after her all other ladies. Most especially in this category is a general gentleness and graciousness to all women.
Most familiar, indeed. This is why I got the angry response I did. I am nothing but kind to all people I encounter, male or female. The only time this goes south is if you're too obnoxious or stupid, at which point I actively avoid you.
A touch more fleshed out. Think what you will, trolloltsundere
At my core I believe in a higher power of sorts although I am still, and will probably until the end of my days, trying to figure out just how this higher power and I should be getting along.
I laughed when I got to Avoid cheating and Avoid torture. Not Never, like attacking from behind, or charging an unhorsed opponent, Just kinda...Avoid it.
Does that mean make it look as thought I'm courageous and full of manners and self discipline, but on the inside it doesn't matter? Great! I'm there already.
I think it means "Don't kill unnecessarily." Knights killed a whole lot of motherfuckers.
It was necessary. Can't let those peasants get uppity.
Yeah, knights in theory held to the code of chivalry, but in practice, they were not the nicest of people.
To be sure. But, y'know, quashing a rebellion or smiting a smart-mouthed underling was a necessity for knights. A gentleman knows when to raise his fist in righteous fury.
Yeah, knights in theory held to the code of chivalry, but in practice, they were not the nicest of people.
Same with Samurai and the Bushido code.
It's not really the history that's up for debate (or is it, since some people are handicapped beyond researching before they attempt to educate), but the definition of chivalry now and whether or not any of us apply it to our modern social lives. The idea that a modern sense of chivalry will naturally clash with feminism is still inane, IMO. That is, unless you're really subscribing to the idea that women "can't" be chivalrous - then they do clash and you do sound stupid.
Comments
http://wiki.2kgames.com/civ5/index.php/Chivalry
Actually, a surprisingly large percentage of the women I've been romantically involved with have been truly bi (exactly in the middle of the Kinsey scale?). I find that I get along with people who are attracted to the same things I'm attracted to.
As far as Chivalry goes, I guess I'm a bit old-fashioned? I generally hold the door for both women and men, and I know all of the customs to lighting a woman's cigarette (SUBTEXT!). I'll give anyone my coat if it's cold out, but usually men don't complain about the cold.
-- slow womans: take their time. won't hold door that long.
-- quick mans: OH NOES womans holding door for me!? Must hold door!
-- nice peeps: thanks for holding that door!
-- stampede: never ending flow of humans enjoying opened door
While it was harder for women to become Knights - in the sense of Knights who fought in combat, not just to hold land under a knight's fee, which was relatively easy if you had the coin, or being inducted into a knight's order - and it was less common than male knights, it was in no way banned, outlawed or impossible. You're correct, Social constructs do change - for example, the perception that a woman cannot be a knight was only formed well after a knight became little more than a ceremonial title we give to famous people under the English crown.
Also fun: holding the door for someone a little too far away. Usually, they make an awkward speed-waddle to the door. teehee
According to Wikipedia, here are some bullet points about Chivalry...
- Duties to countrymen and fellow Christians: this contains virtues such as mercy, courage, valor, fairness, protection of the weak and the poor, and in the servant-hood of the knight to his lord. This also brings with it the idea of being willing to give one’s life for another’s; whether he would be giving his life for a poor man or his lord.
"mercy, courage, valor, fairness, protection of the weak and the poor, and in the servant-hood of the knight to his lord" As I do not have a lord to which I am an earthly servant, I can skip that part but I do believe in those other behaviors. It seems I'm doing ok so far.
- Duties to God: this would contain being faithful to God, protecting the innocent, being faithful to the church, being the champion of good against evil, being generous and obeying God above the feudal lord.
This is a tough one. At my core I believe in a higher power of sorts although I am still, and will probably until the end of my days, trying to figure out just how this higher power and I should be getting along. I do what I can to feed the homeless aka innocent (volunteering once a month at a shelter I also donate food to) which also covers generosity, and if given the linear choice between good or evil, I'll take good every time. I'm an optimist, it's what I do.
- Duties to women: this is probably the most familiar aspect of chivalry. This would contain what is often called courtly love, the idea that the knight is to serve a lady, and after her all other ladies. Most especially in this category is a general gentleness and graciousness to all women.
Most familiar, indeed. This is why I got the angry response I did. I am nothing but kind to all people I encounter, male or female. The only time this goes south is if you're too obnoxious or stupid, at which point I actively avoid you.
A touch more fleshed out. Think what you will, trolloltsundere
*hunts for suit of armor... must be in storage*
Does that mean make it look as thought I'm courageous and full of manners and self discipline, but on the inside it doesn't matter? Great! I'm there already.
It's not really the history that's up for debate (or is it, since some people are handicapped beyond researching before they attempt to educate), but the definition of chivalry now and whether or not any of us apply it to our modern social lives. The idea that a modern sense of chivalry will naturally clash with feminism is still inane, IMO. That is, unless you're really subscribing to the idea that women "can't" be chivalrous - then they do clash and you do sound stupid.
But I'm glad to see that a few of you don't.
Feminism and chivalry simply aren't mutually exclusive concepts. Furthermore, chivalry and courtesy are not the same concepts.