Chivalry is fundamentally sexist, because it obligates males to protect and provide for females without any reciprocal obligation on her part. If a man wants to be chivalrous to his wife/partner/family, that's his personal choice. But the expectation is sexist.

People in a relationship can behave however they please as far as I am concerned, as long as it is consensual.

Chivalry is an obligation on all men to protect and provide for all women. Remember when the men threw themselves in front of bullets during the Colorado theater shooting, and everybody praised their heroic chivalry? Remember when that Costa Concordia disaster happened, and people bemoaned the lack of chivalry among the men? Clearly chivalry extends far beyond opening doors for your wife. Do you believe all men should have the obligation to protect and provide for a woman, on point of death? Because that is chivalry.

Also, I challenge you to walk up to a group of women and tell them that they are weaker than men, and should therefore be nice, polite, and cook meals. I doubt that would even fly at a tea party rally, let alone among mainstream feminists.

So since we currently live in a society where the vast majority of women expect equality, and feel no obligations to men, why should men be obligated to protect and provide for women?

"Many decades ago it seems like that went without saying, judging from the popular culture from that time. Just check out some old movies and tv shows from the 40's and 50's and see how different things were."
Yeah, I also notice those movies erased or tokenized anyone of color. In the 40s and 50s we still had segregation. Feeling nostalgic for that, too?

"The mistake that most young people today make is that we assume that the way things are now socially are natural and have always been the norm."

The mistake that most older people today make is to assume that the way things were when they were young is natural and was always the norm. You seem to be ignorant of the fact that the "golden" 50s were a backlash against the burgeoning feminism of the 30s war era. But maybe you just saw it as putting women in their appropriate place.

Nice. Agreed.

Indeed. Civility is not sexist. Men and women should be civil to each other.

I am of two minds when it comes to chivalry.

On the one hand I try my bet to be chivalrous and do what is expected of me by society, as man. On the other hand the "modern" woman seems to have almost zero social obligations and even less obligations as a "woman".
I just don't see how this can work out, we tell our young boys to respect women and treat them like ladies but we teach young girls to do whatever they want. Maybe the reason chivalry is on the decline is due the fact that most men don't see most women as ladies any more, but simply other men.
I think I will limit my chivalry to my family and partner, I will not be chivalrous towards a woman who pushes past me and then shouts at me that she is going to "give me a whoopin" when I don't respect her.

James.

I think the real problem here is that people need a refresher on history.
Chivalry is not the same thing as courtesy and respect. One can impart that to another regardless of their gender.
Chivalry is the sexist doling out of socially acceptable behaviors like courtesy and respect provided that everyone fit nicely into their gender roles and provided that women agree they are weaker and thus need to be put high up on pedestals and given special privileges. I note that you have expressed agreement that women should act like ladies in order to deserve chivalrous behavior. What people deserve is common courtesy regardless of their gender and without caveats placed on them to perform a certain gender role.

No matter what anyone says men and women are different. As stupid as that sounds this whole 'equality' things puts more fog on common sense than it does clear things up. Women ARE (generally) weaker. Fact. Because the life cycle needs men and women together to perpetuate the species we do what do through what biology intended. Males protect. Women nurture. We are not going back to cave man times where women are haphazardly grabbed and taken to be mated. We have instead put them on pedestals. We have intellectually acknowledged that a woman's role is just as important as a mans. Many times we are in awe! We show respect by not only accepting that women are weaker but we want to show them that we will fight even more fiercely for them. Small gestures of complimenting and holding a door is a mans way of admitting that we need them to be complete. We're not rigged to break out in song like Singing in the Rain or stand in front of balcony's looking for what light comes through yonder window... Instead we hold doors and notice how nice you look. Behind every compliment there is gratitude, a little awe and a man ready and willing to wield a sword in your defense.

Such as women have babies and men pee standing up... Biology has made us what we are. If you don't want to accept a certain gender role then fine. But being mad at men for treating women special is kind of dumb don't you think? If I like women who dress in dresses as apposed to women who dress in sweats then that's what I like. Unless your desire is that both sexes become so neutral in their looks, habits and likes that we become indistinguishable? Then thats a pretty sad world to live in.Women are made to be nurturers... Men protectors. That's not my opinion thats nature. How we make it work is what culture is. No matter what you think women should look like or how men should act your never going to change the fact we are what we are. We are different. We are incomplete without each other. You can't have love with out hate. You can't have life without death. And you can't have male without female. As the song goes..."The fundamental things apply , ..."

---------------------
email: to.be.or.not.to.be.green@michelleobama.name
---------------------
ANOTHER GREEN ESSAY FROM to be or not to be green

"VALLEY VETERINARY HOSPITAL" IS NOT SEXIST
---------------------
this "green" letter, environmentally-friendly because no paper was used in its creation or distribution, is meant to justify the legitimacy of any green business which has an all-female workforce. it was inspired by a green letter/petition that i had found online which (quite unfairly) singled out one pet hospital (which must be surrounded by the beautiful green mountains of my childhood hometown). since this essay is not about the hospital, since the essay is only inspired by someone who had written about the hospital, i will refer to and regard the hospital (and all pet hospitals) only as "valley veterinary hospital".

i will proceed to say that the "valley veterinary hospital" is being singled out by the petition/letter for what is claimed as "sexist hiring practices" regarding a workforce of 13 females and 0 men. i am writing this green letter in defense of every green business, including the green "valley veterinary hospital" (well, i hope that the hospital is green) which has a workforce consisting entirely of Strong Women...whether they are "green ladies" or not

i have found that the aforementioned green petition is currently posted at TWO websites, linked below
-----
http://www.pghcitypaper.com/pittsburgh/chillin-dylan/Profile?oid=1608910 and http://www.change.org/petitions/boycott-green-valley-veterinary-hospital-for-their-blatant-sexism-stop-being-sexist-in-your-hiring-practices
-----
first off, i must state that from nevada to pennsylvania and from montana to louisiana, i have seen plenty of all-female staffs - it's nothing new. let me repeat that: i have seen plenty of all-female staffs, it's nothing new

brighton sheffield, if i may bring up a television show watched while on a pennsylvania ski-vacation near pittsburgh, didn't have a problem walking into his home to find females everywhere. his father was simply holding auditions for showgirls. i realize that there is a difference between an all-female ensemble of showgirls and an all-female staff at a hospital. i realize that showgirls need to be female while hospital workers don't. i realize that showgirls are required to have somewhat large and protruding mammary glands, as well as small-enough builds to fit into tiny bikinis or petite, leopard-skin tights and bras. i realize that men cannot be hired as showgirls because mens' lack of milk-producing mammary glands, paired with their larger builds and broader shoulders, just wouldn't allow them to properly fit into the "showgirl" attire which was designed for the bodies that are smaller and more breakable. i also realize that the female gender is what men with any sense of masculine gender-identity would want to see at a "burlesque" type of show. i realize that the majority of men don't want to see other men dancing around in skimpy attire at a "burlesque" show, but i can understand how the writer of the above-linked petition would not expect the environment of a strip club to present itself at a veterinary hospital. i'm sure that the writer expected a bit more of professionalism on display at the hospital - professionalism which, in today's society, would be representative of both genders

so, given that i can understand where "chillin dylan" finds grounds to complain about an all-female staff (be it at a green "valley vet" or at a green "hillside neurosurgeon"), i still think that he is wrong to regard any all-female staff as sexist. i am a feminist, though, so maybe my thoughts should be taken with a grain of salt

i do not agree with "chillin dylan" (or anyone else) who thinks that an entire staff consisting of one gender makes the whole business a mark of sexism i have not spoken to any members of any all-female staff, but i'm sure that sexism is not the reason that the female owner of any green organization would go and hire 12 more members of her own gender. i can't be sure that the attitudes of all 13 females who work at any green "valley vet" would be as wholesome as the whole "green" movement is, but the apparent lack of gender-diversity displayed at any business with an all-female workforce does not a legitimate charge of sexism make. it takes more than an entire workforce being comprised of one gender to justify sexist attitudes and/or ideals, does it not? of course it does

i'd hate to mention my personal feelings in this letter, only because it would seem like i am trying to justify what the writer of the above-linked petition ("chillin dylan" or "dylan terreri, i") regards as sexism, but isn't it about time that us Strongwomen are taken seriously? for far too long, men have been the heads of companies and the heads of state, so isn't it time that we, AS WOMEN, justify our abilities as competent enough to do anything a man's abilities can do? isn't i