Is chivalry dead?

[DejaHo]

Do the female forum participants desire a chivalrous man aka a gentleman?  Does/can chivalry exist in SL?

Has the RL behaviour of the absurdly hypersensitive feminist undermine the SL gentleman?. Isn't it the feminists’ job to defeat anti-female stereotypes rather than validate them?

What do you say?

 

 

 

 

[Vulpinus]

Was chivalry ever alive in the first place?

I'm more tempted to think it's like 'we never used to have to lock our doors' and 'people were more polite in our day'.

Those things might be true... law probably wasn't quite what it is now making 'natural justice' more readily usable. It doesn't necessarily follow that people were any better.

That said, my personal code (RL and SL (mostly, depending on the context)) would probably be considered a chivalric one. I always has been, but yes, you get some people who seem to see it as an insult if you, for instance, hold a door open for them. That's not going to change me.

Anyway, since I'm hardly female and your question is more directed towards those that are, I'd better step aside chivalrously...

[DejaHo]

Vulpinus, thank you for your contribution.  I share similar sentiment; it was a pleasure to read such words. 

 

 

[Muletta]

 

Yes, I like a chivalrous gentleman, and have met quite a lot in SL...so chivalry does/can exist in SL, fortunatelly.

No, I don't think that any feminist can undermine the SL gentleman. If a true gentleman meets a hypersentive feminist, I guess he will make a polite excuse, to keep her away from him.

 

I am sorry, but I do not understand your last question. Isn't a feminist and an anti-female the same? Will you please explain what you mean?

[LlazarusLlong]

If  by chivalrous, you mean treating people with compassion, kindness and courtesy, whether male or female, old or young, of any political or religious persuasion, and whatever their mother tongue, then I am extremely chivalrous.

Unless they are stupid, and insist in behaving in a manner that publicly demonstrates their stupidity, as is the case with many participants in this forum, in which case they are undeserving of such gracious attention from me.

 

[Syo Emerald]

What has male chivalry to do with SL? Nothing, if you ask me. And I don't get that feminist part...are you one of those people on the Internet who cry because they think feminism is oppression of men (lol, hows that supposed to work anyway?) and that women everywhere are already equal to men and therefore should stop all activity to ensure and enforce rights for women?

[LlazarusLlong]

---

Syo Emerald wrote:

What has male chivalry to do with SL? Nothing, if you ask me. And I don't get that feminist part...are you one of those people on the Internet who cry because they think feminism is oppression of men (lol, hows that supposed to work anyway?) and that women everywhere are already equal to men and therefore should stop all activity to ensure and enforce rights for women?

---

I think it is more that stupid women make a hyperemotional fuss about being criticised, claiming that it is because they are women, rather than because they are being stupid.

And it's well-established that rights are merely privileges temporarily accorded, usually for political purposes, by the strong to the weak .

[Derek Torvalar]

We interrupt this thread, until Scylla or Lasky make an appearance, to bring you the Psychedelic Sunday interlude. Today's offering is the classic Spill the Wine, released 45 years ago May.

 

[Pussycat Catnap]

---

Vulpinus wrote:

Was chivalry ever alive in the first place?

I'm more tempted to think it's like 'we never used to have to lock our doors' and 'people were more polite in our day'.

---

Crime, or at least the liklihood of being a victim of a violent act, has actually been steadily going down in most parts of the world for centuries.

The old 'we never use to have to lock our doors' meme is a reflection of a time when random violence was actually MORE common that it is when the speaker is saying it - but reports of violent acts are up, more documented and investigated, so people feel as if there is more, when there is actually a LOT less.

I grew up in an age when parental duties meant the "the suns up, GTFO of the house and don't come back inside until its down"... and that was an age when kidnappings, serial killers, serial rapists, and so on were 'rampant' in the streets, but nobody knew about it unless they happened to be reading the police reports.

I know live in an era and place where parents won't let their kids see what the sun looks like until the kid is 16... keeping them locked away and scheduling "monitored play dates"... and yet in the same police reports, the worst events you'll find are usually road rage brawls or some guy "showing off his goods" on a street corner somewhere... and most 'amber alerts' of a kidnapping, are related to custody battles (which those play dates do nothing for, and throwing the kid in the street would have no impact on).

 

And chicalry only ever applied to white women anyway, so I have no idea what that is like.

 

 

[LlazarusLlong]

---

Pussycat Catnap wrote:

 

The reporting of crime, or at least the liklihood of being a victim of a violent act, has actually been steadily going down in most parts of the world for centuries.

---

FIFY!

---

Pussycat Catnap wrote:

And chicalry only ever applied to white women anyway, so I have no idea what that is like.

---

B*O*L*L*O*C*K*S

If you have never experienced it, then you have deterred it, personally, yourself.

[Coby Foden]

Gentlemen do exist in SL. I have met some. It's charming characteristic.  :matte-motes-smile:

Do I desire it? No, I don't desire it. But whenever I chat with such a person it is a pleasant experience.

[irihapeti]

---

LlazarusLlong wrote:

If  by chivalrous, you mean treating people with compassion, kindness and courtesy,

whether male or female

, old or young, of any political or religious persuasion, and whatever their mother tongue, then I am extremely chivalrous.

Unless they are stupid, and insist in behaving in a manner that publicly demonstrates their stupidity, as is the case with many participants in this forum, in which case they are undeserving of such gracious attention from me.

 

---

on the at least 3 times you were ever gracious to another person on a forum, I thought that somebody else hacked your account

q; (:

[LlazarusLlong]

---

irihapeti wrote:

---

LlazarusLlong wrote:

If  by chivalrous, you mean treating people with compassion, kindness and courtesy,

whether male or female

, old or young, of any political or religious persuasion, and whatever their mother tongue, then I am extremely chivalrous.

Unless they are stupid, and insist in behaving in a manner that publicly demonstrates their stupidity, as is the case with many participants in this forum, in which case they are undeserving of such gracious attention from me.

 

---

on the at least 3 times you were ever gracious to another person on a forum, I thought that somebody else hacked your account

q; (:

---

I think that conclusively confirms how stupid most people are here.

[irihapeti]

---

LlazarusLlong wrote:

---

irihapeti wrote:

---

LlazarusLlong wrote:

If  by chivalrous, you mean treating people with compassion, kindness and courtesy,

whether male or female

, old or young, of any political or religious persuasion, and whatever their mother tongue, then I am extremely chivalrous.

Unless they are stupid, and insist in behaving in a manner that publicly demonstrates their stupidity, as is the case with many participants in this forum, in which case they are undeserving of such gracious attention from me.

 

---

on the at least 3 times you were ever gracious to another person on a forum, I thought that somebody else hacked your account

q; (:

---

I think that conclusively confirms how stupid most people are here.

---

jejeje (:

you really cant help yourself can you. you big egg jejeje (:

[LlazarusLlong]

---

irihapeti wrote:

 

you big egg

---

There's your answer D'Ho; chivalry is NOT dead!

[LaskyaClaren]

Speaking (as Derek has divined that I would) as an "oversensitive feminist," I can only say . . .

What a very silly question!

What exactly do you mean by "chivalry"? What is this thing?

If by that term you mean the medieval ideals associated with the cult of courtly love some 600 or more years ago, well, yes, it's very much dead. Along with other such charming relics of that bygone age as feudalism, witch burnings, and the Black Plague.

Do you mean the highly-romanticized (and historically inaccurate) resuscitated neo-gothic version of the 19th and 20th centuries? The one built upon entirely unrealistic expectations about the relations between men of a certain socio-economic status, and the women of their peer group? Well . . . mostly the class to which that applied (a gentrified middle class with pretensions and aristocracy) are dead and gone now too.

And, as Pussycat has noted, it really only applied to white women -- and women of a higher social status -- anyway. It was always kind of a myth rather than a reality. Just ask the women and children who were massacred along with prisoners at Ayyadieh in 1191 by that Paragon of Chivalry, Richard the Lionheart.

Or by chivalry do you mean basic courtesy, politeness, and kindness?

I don't think that THAT is dead at all. In fact, I like to think that I practice it!

Am I allowed to be chivalrous if I am (just) a woman? And an oversensitive feminist too?

[LlazarusLlong]

---

LaskyaClaren wrote:

 

I don't think that THAT is dead at all. In fact, I like to think that I

practice

it!

---

Dammit woman, you've been contaminated by your semi-literate southern neighbours!

[LaskyaClaren]

---

LlazarusLlong wrote:

---

LaskyaClaren wrote:

 

I don't think that THAT is dead at all. In fact, I like to think that I

practice

it!

---

Dammit woman, you've been contaminated by your semi-literate southern neighbours!

---

Canadian practice is a bit fuzzy on that. When I'm writing something that I think people will actually read (i.e., not here), I do often practise the distinction. But I think that mostly it's not observed here, really.

 

I'm one of the few people I know here who still use "programme" rather than "program."  So, yes, we have been "infected," as you put it.

 

 

[LlazarusLlong]

I distinguish the use of program in computer parlance (the geeks like to shorten everything) from programme when it relates to television presentations or a multiplicity of conjoined projects.

But that's just me.

[LaskyaClaren]

---

LlazarusLlong wrote:

I distinguish the use of program in computer parlance (the geeks like to shorten everything) from programme when it relates to television presentations or a multiplicity of conjoined projects.

But that's just me.

---

That's a very chivalrous attitude to the geeks. 

 

But do you open doors for them?

[LlazarusLlong]

---

LaskyaClaren wrote:

---

LlazarusLlong wrote:

I distinguish the use of program in computer parlance (the geeks like to shorten everything) from programme when it relates to television presentations or a multiplicity of conjoined projects.

But that's just me.

---

That's a very chivalrous attitude to the geeks. 

 

But do you open doors for them?

---

You have to; they tend to stand in front of them and expect them to open automatically with a StarTrekkian "swoooosh".

Unlike computer salesmen, who just slide through the gap underneath.

[DejaHo]

---

LaskyaClaren wrote:

 

If by that term you mean

the medieval ideals associated with the cult of courtly love some 600 or more years ago, well, yes, it's very much dead. Along with other such charming relics of that bygone age as feudalism, witch burnings, and the Black Plague.

 

Do you mean

the highly-romanticized (and historically inaccurate) resuscitated neo-gothic version of the 19th and 20th centuries? The one built upon entirely unrealistic expectations about the relations between men of a certain socio-economic status, and the women of their peer group? Well . . . mostly the class to which that applied (a gentrified middle class with pretensions and aristocracy) are dead and gone now too.

.

Or by chivalry do you mean

basic courtesy, politeness, and kindness?

 

I don't think that THAT is dead at all. In fact, I like to think that I practice it!

Am I allowed to be chivalrous if I am (just) a woman? And an oversensitive feminist too?

---

Yes, that's what I mean, Lassie. 

And no, you are not allowed. . .  because of the reason you gave.

 

 

[DejaHo]

---

LlazarusLlong wrote:

You have to; they tend to stand in front of them and expect them to open automatically with a StarTrekkian "swoooosh".

Unlike computer salesmen, who just slide through the gap underneath.

---

Well, they can fit. 

[LaskyaClaren]

---

DejaHo wrote:

---

LaskyaClaren wrote:

 

If by that term you mean

the medieval ideals associated with the cult of courtly love some 600 or more years ago, well, yes, it's very much dead. Along with other such charming relics of that bygone age as feudalism, witch burnings, and the Black Plague.

 

Do you mean

the highly-romanticized (and historically inaccurate) resuscitated neo-gothic version of the 19th and 20th centuries? The one built upon entirely unrealistic expectations about the relations between men of a certain socio-economic status, and the women of their peer group? Well . . . mostly the class to which that applied (a gentrified middle class with pretensions and aristocracy) are dead and gone now too.

.

Or by chivalry do you mean

basic courtesy, politeness, and kindness?

 

I don't think that THAT is dead at all. In fact, I like to think that I practice it!

Am I allowed to be chivalrous if I am (just) a woman? And an oversensitive feminist too?

---

Yes, that's what I mean, Lassie. 

And no, you are not allowed. . .  because of the reason you gave.

 

 

---

So, wait. A woman can't be courteous, polite, or kind?

 

I think I may have met your cousin, btw. You know . . . Mr. Vu.

[DejaHo]

---

LaskyaClaren wrote:

---

DejaHo wrote:

---

LaskyaClaren wrote:

 

Am I allowed to be chivalrous if I am (just) a woman? And an oversensitive feminist too?

---

Yes, that's what I mean, Lassie. 

And no, you are not allowed. . .  because of the reason you gave.

 

 

---

So, wait. A woman can't be courteous, polite, or kind?

 

I think I may have met your cousin, btw. You know . . . Mr. Vu.

---

A woman can be courteous, polite, and kind (although perhaps not at the same time) however have you ever met an oversensitive feminist?  I have, and no they can't.