Is chivalry really dead?

[TylerW]

Feminism killed chivalry if you want the honest truth

Chivalry wasn't killed by feminism.

it was killed by gross men who thought that adhering to a strict code of one-size-fits-all conduct was more important than observing and respecting a woman's boundaries.

 

[bruceflinch]

Chivalry wasn't killed by feminism.

it was killed by gross men who thought that adhering to a strict code of one-size-fits-all conduct was more important than observing and respecting a woman's boundaries.

So was it feminism that killed common courtesy?

 

[HappyHighwayman]

You know it's interesting that we can use data to determine if the crime rate is lower or higher today than the 1960s, but other than anecdotal evidence from each of us, can we demonstrate people have gotten "less polite" than the "old days"?

 

[Climber]

You know it's interesting that we can use data to determine if the crime rate is lower or higher today than the 1960s, but other than anecdotal evidence from each of us, can we demonstrate people have gotten "less polite" than the "old days"?

Do you realize that there were two opposing groups in the 60's with very different perspectives on life and interactions?

There were the people continuing the conservatism of the 50's, then there was the counter-culture that rejected much of the religion/corporate/authoritarian ideals of the 50's part of which was made of with the hippies.

 

[HappyHighwayman]

Do you realize that there were two opposing groups in the 60's with very different perspectives on life and interactions?

There were the people continuing the conservatism of the 50's, then there was the counter-culture that rejected much of the religion/corporate/authoritarian ideals of the 50's part of which was made of with the hippies.

Does that refute my claim that it's difficult to objectively determine how considerate people are today than 40-50 years ago?

 

[Climber]

Does that refute my claim that it's difficult to objectively determine how considerate people are today than 40-50 years ago?

In a sense it does, there were two different paths taken by Americans back then, it really depended on where you went to determine how polite they were, and how polite they were would depend on their perception of the person asking them.

Personally, compared to the 70's, I think people are less polite, at least in the areas that I lived back then and have been to now.

 

[HappyHighwayman]

I feel you and respect your position. I cannot refute it or back up my opinion with any facts.

 

[Holeshot]

Incorrect to a degree. Knights were nobles, and fought, through a very complicated system called feudalism, for their liege lords. In turn they got property, title, and other benefits. And it was complicated. A knight could pledge to a lord, and to the lord's bitterest enemy. Then when there was a battle, the knight could refuse to fight for either, or fight for one or the other, and they did. Often. Kings had very limited control of knights and they were not instruments of war as much as hired guns. Who quit or changed sides quite often. There were many battles where a lord would wait until he saw which way the battle was going before he went to the defense of a liege lord. They also could afford the latest in war high tech, armor, training, proper helms, excellent swords, and horses. Which gave them the ability to kill large numbers of peasants with no armor and a sickle. The advent of the English longbow changed the face of war. A 175 pound bow could penetrate armor easily with a bodkin.

Chivalry as a Platonic ideal is one thing. It never existed. Chivalry in the early middle ages was neither chivalrous, nor often seen. For the most part, it was propaganda.

It also was, very much, a convenient means of keeping women in their place, in the castle, hearth, and home, casting them as weak, subservient and in need of rescue. They were the victims as much as the beneficiaries. The early middle ages were unbelievably atrocious when it came to human behavior.

Well said, Ernie. Hollywood changed the definition of chivalry to what we have now.

So was it feminism that killed common courtesy?

Just the Curtsy.

 

[Karbon]

I feel you and respect your position. I cannot refute it or back up my opinion with any facts.

yep. It bears repeating, statistically we are at the safest, most peaceful and prosperous time in human history.

In any case, language changes and evolves.

Roll with Bill & Ted and, "be excellent to each other".

 

[Climber]

I feel you and respect your position. I cannot refute it or back up my opinion with any facts.

I don't think that a real metric could be applied that would be a valid comparison between two time periods, only our perceptions and that would be limited to the areas we were in during the previous time and where we've been recently.

I think that smart phones have led to people being less polite, in fact dehumanizing the people around someone only paying attention to their phone rather than interacting with those around them.

Now, that's not everybody, but it's part of the equation.

I think for this judgement, we'll each have to rely on our own experiences and for us they may be valid but our experiences could very well be quite different than the experiences of others, especially between two people who grew up in very different regions and a variety of other factors including race, social standing, etc.

Many people who are polite are polite to everybody, other are more subjective with their politeness.

It's an interesting and complex subject that would probably be better discussed among a group around a table than in a forum at a keyboard trying to convey experiences and observations with many factors.

 

[Blankpage]

yep. It bears repeating, statistically we are at the safest, most peaceful and prosperous time in human history.

The calm before the storm perhaps.

Not the case in the ME

 

[littlebeast]

I don't think that a real metric could be applied that would be a valid comparison between two time periods, only our perceptions and that would be limited to the areas we were in during the previous time and where we've been recently.

I think that smart phones have led to people being less polite, in fact dehumanizing the people around someone only paying attention to their phone rather than interacting with those around them.

Now, that's not everybody, but it's part of the equation.

I think for this judgement, we'll each have to rely on our own experiences and for us they may be valid but our experiences could very well be quite different than the experiences of others, especially between two people who grew up in very different regions and a variety of other factors including race, social standing, etc.

Many people who are polite are polite to everybody, other are more subjective with their politeness.

It's an interesting and complex subject that would probably be better discussed among a group around a table than in a forum at a keyboard trying to convey experiences and observations with many factors.

i beg to disagree. if any modern phenomenon is to blame, it is the frenetic pace of life today. we are all flying at hyper speed. we don’t save any space to power down, and to quote an old adage ‘stop and smell the roses’. we trample each other not deliberately, but rather as an artifact of our consumption with just plain keeping up with everything it takes to hold our lives together. we could all do with a large dose of slowing the fuck down.

 

[lam@barf]

are you saying that that sort of behavior was considered a war crime in the middle ages?

Not at all, it's barely dealt with as war crimes today. The post I responded to was general and did not indicate it's content was limited to the behavior of the middle ages.

i beg to disagree. if any modern phenomenon is to blame, it is the frenetic pace of life today. we are all flying at hyper speed. we don’t save any space to power down, and to quote an old adage ‘stop and smell the roses’. we trample each other not deliberately, but rather as an artifact of our consumption with just plain keeping up with everything it takes to hold our lives together. we could all do with a large dose of slowing the fuck down.

^^ This ^^

Last time I had to travel coast to coast I went by train. Everyone I spoke with told me how much time I was wasting but I found the time wasn't wasted at all. The 'buffer' of travel time meant that I could arrive without the 'baggage' of one coast being dragged to the other.

.

 

[ontherearwheel]

i beg to disagree. if any modern phenomenon is to blame, it is the frenetic pace of life today. we are all flying at hyper speed. we don’t save any space to power down, and to quote an old adage ‘stop and smell the roses’. we trample each other not deliberately, but rather as an artifact of our consumption with just plain keeping up with everything it takes to hold our lives together. we could all do with a large dose of slowing the fuck down.

Whenever I read a statement that uses the word “ we” like this, I am reminded of the time the Lone Ranger and Tonto were surrounded by Indians.

Lone Ranger says to Tonto....”Looks like we are surrounded”

Tonto says to Lone Ranger.......”What you mean we White Man”

I am not flying around at hyper speed, even if you are.

I have plenty of space to power down, even if you don’t.

I trample no one, even if you you can’t control when you do.

I slowed down along time ago.

Your statement would be more accurate if the word “we” was replaced by “I” cause that is who you only can speak for, cause you sure don’t speak for me and everybody else in the world which you did by using the word “we”.

 

[afm199]

i beg to disagree. if any modern phenomenon is to blame, it is the frenetic pace of life today. we are all flying at hyper speed. we don’t save any space to power down, and to quote an old adage ‘stop and smell the roses’. we trample each other not deliberately, but rather as an artifact of our consumption with just plain keeping up with everything it takes to hold our lives together. we could all do with a large dose of slowing the fuck down.

This is an excellent point, and also has its roots in today's social patterns.

In the early 20th century America, or Europe, one grew up in a neighborhood and lived there all their life. You got along with people because you knew that tomorrow, when you sobered up, you'd still bump into them after calling them an asshole. In small towns it was very obvious. You were polite to everyone. Actions have consequence.

In today's America we don't work in the neighborhood, often seldom walk there, don't know many people there, and may be moving in six months. It's different. Jobs last 3 years, not 35.

 

[littlebeast]

Whenever I read a statement that uses the word “ we” like this, I am reminded of the time the Lone Ranger and Tonto were surrounded by Indians.

Lone Ranger says to Tonto....”Looks like we are surrounded”

Tonto says to Lone Ranger.......”What you mean we White Man”

I am not flying around at hyper speed, even if you are.

I have plenty of space to power down, even if you don’t.

I trample no one, even if you you can’t control when you do.

I slowed down along time ago.

Your statement would be more accurate if the word “we” was replaced by “I” cause that is who you only can speak for, cause you sure don’t speak for me and everybody else in the world which you did by using the word “we”.

lol - this whole thread is based on a generalization. WRT to mine, it either resonates with a person or it doesn't. just like rudeness - it's pretty binary; a person either is or they aren't, and if they are, it could be because they are under stress (my recent point), but it could also be for any number of other reasons (e.g. maybe they are just a nasty person with a sour personality).

 

[Enchanter]

^^^ great reply

 

[Holeshot]

Whenever I read a statement that uses the word “ we” like this, I am reminded of the time the Lone Ranger and Tonto were surrounded by Indians.

Lone Ranger says to Tonto....”Looks like we are surrounded”

Tonto says to Lone Ranger.......”What you mean we White Man”

lol - this whole thread is based on a generalization. WRT to mine, it either resonates with a person or it doesn't. just like rudeness - it's pretty binary; a person either is or they aren't, and if they are, it could be because they are under stress (my recent point), but it could also be for any number of other reasons (e.g. maybe they are just a nasty person with a sour personality).

True, but his quote and relational wordsmithing was pretty damn funny!

 

[littlebeast]

True, but his quote and relational wordsmithing was pretty damn funny!

apologies for my lack of humor, but i don’t find that shit amusing.

it was a non-starter for me. and a total threadjack. caricature of some radically racially insensitive shit that was popular in fairly recent history. comedy? perhaps. but in the hollywood version of the series, does anyone actually think tonto would have abandoned the lone ranger? he was the loyal sidekick. and loyal sidekicks don’t do that sort of thing. it’s written in the script. in spite of being a mohawk, jay silverheals (aka harold preston smith) read it as it was written. and played the ‘me tonto’ part he was paid for. as far as i’m concerned, dark times in our past.

 

[nbean16]

apologies for my lack of humor, but i don’t find that shit amusing.

it was a non-starter for me. and a total threadjack. caricature of some radically racially insensitive shit that was popular in fairly recent history. comedy? perhaps. but in the hollywood version of the series, does anyone actually think tonto would have abandoned the lone ranger? he was the loyal sidekick. and loyal sidekicks don’t do that sort of thing. it’s written in the script. in spite of being a mohawk, jay silverheals (aka harold preston smith) read it as it was written. and played the ‘me tonto’ part he was paid for. as far as i’m concerned, dark times in our past.

Good lord. Lack of humor is understating it.