Doesn't mean the comment is wrong.

As for my opinion - the socialization of boys and girls is one of the biggest sources of our poisonous gender system. What this parent is lamenting is the otherization of girls in a four year old boy. What some people call simply respecting them, she recognizes for what it is - treating them as different, somehow needing a special kind of behavior.

Far better simply to treat them like human beings. It starts so early. Cooties and all that. But hopefully step by step we may one day live in a world where little boys and girls just hang out and play with each other and think nothing of it.

Lack of empathy for women among men is a huge problem, and although things like this seem harmless, they are in a certain sense contributors to it.

"Many women see gallantry as one of the benefits of their sex; I see it as one of its consolations."

QFT

"Doesn't mean the comment is wrong."

Are you attempting to defend misogyny right now dude?

If there is actually a difference, then I don't see the harm in acting differently.

For instance, letting the girls go to the bathroom first actually makes a lot of sense, as preschool boys are likely to piss all over the place.

The article is right, in that a gentleman is defined by how one treats all people, not just women. Holding doors, being polite, all that shit, should apply to everyone, but I would have liked to see more examples of this so-called chauvinistic behavior other than one that I think makes perfect sense.

Misogyny as a belief is wrong. I'm saying the fact that a misogynist would agree with me on some of my opinions here doesn't make me wrong or a misogynist. I'll have time later this afternoon to post details about what I think.

It might make sense, but calling it being a "gentleman" is obviously infusing it with decade upon decade of chauvinist tradition.

Let the girls go to the bathroom first, why? Because boys should learn to be gentlemen, not because there is a practical reason.

It's obvious that whoever the teacher was that told this to that kid thinks it's good and desirable for boys to be raised to act "gentlemanly", a word which, whatever our best intentions, is in fact infused with a kind of ridiculous chivalry.

The mother's attempt to redefine the word is precisely that: an attempt. I agree with her - I wish boys were just taught to be kind and share, the idea of being a "gentleman" is something I think we can leave with the Victorians in their graves, along with considering sodomy immoral.

Well, y2k, my original post was meant to imply that because you seem to think feminism has gone too far, you are in fact a misogynist.

A bit harsh, I'll grant you, but no less true. Feminism has not gone too far until gender equality is reality. If you are going to proceed to attempt to argue that gender equality has been achieved, well then I'll try not to spit out my drink in derision.

"It might make sense, but calling it being a "gentleman" is obviously infusing it with decade upon decade of chauvinist tradition."

Only if the previous generation fucks it up, as they are wont to do.

If you trained children that being a gentle(wo)ma/woman meant treating everyone with respect and being kind then you know what the word gentle(wo)man would mean? A person who treats everyone with respect and is kind to others. None of that other BS would exist for them.

"being a "gentleman" is obviously infusing it with decade upon decade of chauvinist tradition. "

Just wanted to pop in with a linguistic perspective here. Words only have as much meaning as we assign them. Arguing that a word means something in particular to everyone is usually (usually) a fool's errand. Take "single" for example. Forty years ago, "single" meant "not married," but today it means "not dating/ engaged/ married." Words change their meaning. Sometimes quickly, sometimes not. "Gay" certainly isn't what it was fifty years ago when the Flintstones were still fine using the term in their theme song. Is it bad that single or gay have changed meaning? Not at all. The change isn't good either, it just is.

Arguing that we shouldn't use a word is ridiculous. If you want a word to change, change the connotations behind it, don't ban it from the vernacular.

And for what it's worth, Thucy, a "gentleman," historically speaking, did treat everyone with respect, not just women (or ladies, as the stock counterpart goes).

Carry on.

I would 100% agree that feminism has gone to far. I knew thucy would disagree, I said as much in the women in the army thread.

Since when does treating someone "different" automatically imply negative judgement? A girl is treated differently than a boy?!?! GASP!!! How atrocious!!

REALITY CHECK: Boys are different than girls. Girls are different from boys. Different BUT EQUAL...what is so hard to grasp about that concept.

Here's another insight...I have two daughters and <double gasp!!!> I treat them DIFFERENT FROM EACH OTHER because they are unique individuals. I suppose I am abusing my children now, huh?

Anyone that thinks boys and girls should be treated exactly equal ought to pick up a biochemistry book start. Bottom line, the chemical make-up of boys and girls is different, and <surprise surprise> brain function is operated on <guess...> chemistry.

This is not to say that driving specific gender roles is a good thing...but to suggest that all children regardless of gender learn the same, play the same, have the same emotional responses, etc it simply to suggest that you have no knowledge or real-life experience with children, let alone humanity in general.

"The article is right, in that a gentleman is defined by how one treats all people, not just women. Holding doors, being polite, all that shit, should apply to everyone"

QFT to the max!

I was raised to hold the door for anyone coming up behind me at a reasonable distance, not just close it in their face. I was raised to respect the elderly and the infirm across the street. I was taught to offer help to people carrying boxes or books regardless of gender, age, or physical ability. *That* is what it means to be a gentleman.

100% agree with Krellin

I also agree with Draug. Being a gentleman isn't just helping women, its helping people who need help.

Not to say when I offer the elderly or a women on the bus my seat that they need the help. Its just the right thing to do.

Exactly, Fasces! It's the *right* thing to do. Offering someone my seat is *always* the right thing.

Funny but true story... Back during the holiday shopping season, my mom-in-law, wife, and I went out to eat then do some shopping at the mall. As we went into the restaurant, I dropped my kin off at the door and went to park and this 30 something white man (nothing gentle about him) cut right in front of my mother in law and then just let the door close on her. She's 85 years old! He's maybe 35 or so! What a fucking tool! Later, when we were at the mall, this young black man (late teens or early 20s) stood and held the door for me until I got up there to catch it. Just goes to show that being a gentleman has nothing to do with age or color and everything to do with upbringing. Privileged white asshole 30 something versus polite young black man whose parent(s) taught him to respect everyone. The next day, we went into O'Charleys and another young man (also in his teens) held the door for us letting me get in to catch the inner door while he continued to hold it for my mother in law and wife.

So have hope, y'all. Manners are making a come back. They just skipped the boomers kids for some gawd-awful reason.

There's a fine line between chivalry and sexism. I am a firm believer in the former. The guy opens the doors, the guy pays for dinner, etc.

I'm all for equal pay and shit like that, but feminists have been acting like they are an entitled minority.

Gender roles exist for a reason. There are some jobs that men cannot do well and there are other jobs that women cannot do well. While gender should not be an automatic disqualification, we can all agree that the average woman can't work on a construction crew or on a fishing boat with the same efficiency and productivity of a man. Similarly, the average man cannot care for children as effectively as the average women. Obviously, there are exceptions, but you're never going to have the same number of men and women on construction sites or in daycare centers.

Diversity is a foolish, pointless pursuit. Whoever is best suited for the job should get the job. Leave politics out of the workplace.

Men and women are different. Segregation due to race is bad because it attempts to separate people based on solely a physical attribute that serves no practical purpose in society other than mildly altering appearance. Gender differences are mostly physiological and cannot be separated from identity and who someone is. Women can get pregnant. Men are prone to more strength and muscle than women are. The medical issues facing men and women, while rooted in similar biological needs, are vastly different in nature. Feminism going too far turns a blind eye to this fact. If I wanted to hire a personal bodyguard, I would probably hire a man over the woman because I would assume the man to be stronger and more capable in the event of needing to protect me. Obviously that's not unanimously true, but that's how we are made in general. Weak example I know, but the point is there.

Back to more of what the article is addressing, I don't see anything wrong with small things over the course of a child's upbringing that subtly remind him or her that women and men are different. Equal in the eyes of society and the law, but different nonetheless. That's fact. Feminism is good to put women on equal footing with men in society, but sometimes it tries to blind us from how human and mammal life works.

Holding the door is probably the most common of the polite acts. Here at university more often then not if I am right behind someone that person will hold the door for me.

I agree with the comments presented in that article. Being a gentlemen is about treating other people well -- not about treating women like they did back in 1850.

re: Holding the door.

Dateline 1988, Place Michigan State University. An young male who was raised to be polite and hole the door for anyone - not just women - makes the foolish mistake of holding that door open for a radical feminist, who proceed to chew my ass out because she can hold her own door. FUCK her and all her feminist friend for participating in attempted destruction of civil society. She was exactly what is wrong with feminism.

Amen krellin. Didn't think up until now I would ever say that.

@krellin

Should have given her a nice punch, just like you would have if a man yelled at you for holding the door open : )

@abge - Let's all be thankful he didn't. That would have been assault and a very bad thing. What I would have done, however, is said "Fine, next time I'll make an extra effort to close it shut behind me and keep the air/heat in the building and the waste of DNA out!"

I would take my child out of that school - actually taking a child out of school is pretty harsh on the child - so fisrt it would become necessary to take the issue up with the teacher (blatant anti-male sexism here, i'd give this teacher a piece of my mind) then push to the head and board if necessary. Oh and perhaps legal action, most public bodies have a legal responcibility to avoid sexism, and that is what this is.

All of the 'differences' between men and women are just smoke - yes they are different, but we have more in common than our differences (at least biologically) the biggest differences are cultural, and sexism like this helps perpetuate these differences.

What i'm saying is, yes men tend to be stronger than women (testosterone makes it easier to build muscle, i think) but there are women who happen to be stronger than a majority of men (they are mostly weight-lifters) and there are men who are weaker than the majority of women.

Same with height, maybe it is more obviously with height, men tend to be taller, but you can SEE the cross over in height any time you sort a group of human by height. JUST like between black and white skinned humans, there is more in common, more cross-over than there are differences.

The assumption is like making a bet that some 5'10" person is a particular gender based only on their height - this doesn't define them.

The only defining quality that is predictive is number of penises, and that doesn't even work for inter-sex or trans-gendered people. (because GUESS WHAT - the idea that there are two genders, male and female, is a first order approximation, it is a flawed assumption, it is the most basic way of looking at gender...)

Okay, let's not jump Thucy's case too badly now. It's obvious that many of us here at webdip were raised to be gentlemen of the fashion Thucy says should exist but not by the label gentlemen. We are clearly part of a disconnect of generations (or perhaps cultural areas of the country) much like the example of "single" I offered earlier.

Oh, and you may imagine this whole thing is unimportant or overblown.

But the research all shows that teachers attitudes has a big effect on kids; back in the 80s it was found that men were better at maths than women (in the top 1% of people based on mathematical ability there were 13 times the number of men/boys as women/girls - yet when the research was repeated in norway/sweden and in the US more recently, you get a different number - this shows that it is not the biology which determines mathematical ability but culture, the new figures for the US are very encouraging, only 3 times the number of women, that means teachers are now encouraging girls to do maths far more than they used probably because women have now got a chance of being employed in a job where maths is needed.

Things have gotten better, but if i were king of the world i would probably execute this teacher as an example to others.

"Many women see gallantry as one of the benefits of their sex; I see it as one of its consolations."

This was the best line of the article, and I think it sees pretty deeply. There is nothing wrong with a little gallantry towards women, as long as we men truly aren't offering that as a consolation prize. I think that's the key to this article, and maybe the author didn't make that quite clear enough.

The article is complete drivel, and nicely captures much of what is wrong with young progressive society. At least her four year old gets it. It will probably be another 10-12 years before she is able to train him to be as silly as she is.