Slate’s Katy Waldman posted a
short piece Thursday commenting on an Advocate article by Neal
Broverman which raised a question about gay men and chivalry. The gay Broverman
described an incident in which a trio of apparently straight men held an
elevator door open for him to exit first, and it prompted him to wonder if he
were being treated like a lady by these knights because of his sexual
orientation. Was this seemingly polite gesture “closer to a backhanded slap?”
This led Waldman to propose a “new
world order” of “pan-chivalry” that knows no boundaries, and in which we are
all – male and female, straight and gay – both knight and lady in the equation.
Sounds great, except that what she’s describing is simple courtesy, which is
not chivalry, although the former arose from the latter.
Chivalry has come under fire in
recent decades, decried as an outmoded, sexist relic of the medieval knightly
class. Today’s “liberated” women – and unfortunately, “liberated” too often refers
to women who are merely emulating the worst qualities of men – resent chivalry’s
implication that they are what used to be called the “weaker sex.” Even a courteous
gesture like opening a door for them is viewed as a condescending, gender power
play. Waldman herself writes
that such acts of politeness like what Broverman experienced were “harder to
swallow when you remember they’re predicated on your supposed weakness.”
It’s revealing that whenever
chivalry is discussed today, holding a door for a woman is always the example that leaps to mind, as if that is chivalry’s
quintessential expression. Sadly, that is what the ideal has been reduced to in
our soft, civilized, and – dare I say it – emasculated twenty-first century
America.
Chivalry was once considered the
expression of the noblest and most honorable qualities of the ideal knight. It was the epitome of manhood:
courage, honor, courtesy, justice,
and a readiness to defend the “weak.” For Edmund Burke, it was the
“nurse of manly sentiment and heroick enterprise”; for Irish writer Kenelm
Digby, the “spirit which disposes men to heroic and generous actions.”
That sentiment includes an
unapologetically gallant, respectful deference toward women and a devotion to
protect them if necessary, because that is a duty of men, regardless of whether
women can protect themselves.
(Considering that leaping to the
defense of a strange woman these days can very likely lead to a lawsuit, a
prison sentence, a wheelchair, or a combination thereof, there is some debate
among men as to whether inflicting that on your own family is worth it; but
that’s a topic for another day.)
If some women today consider that protectiveness
sexist, so be it. Their misconception of it or contempt for it should have no
bearing on whether or not men embrace the qualities and responsibilities of
their nature. The alternative for those women is: it’s every man for himself, and
you’re on your own. No woman I know considers that a preferable state of
affairs.
Waldman didn’t condemn the notion
altogether; instead she suggests that, “Rather than do away with chivalry as
the relic of a sexist epoch, let’s make it universal… That social
development—human beings showing kindness to other human beings, not worrying
about power dynamics, sexual preference, or gender—would be the real
revolution.” She foresees a time when we will all pick up the check at a
restaurant, share umbrellas, and open doors for each other.
Again, all that polite coexistence
sounds great, but being chivalrous isn’t limited to being nice. And it isn’t an
act of class/gender oppression. It’s about embracing the duties and highest
qualities of manhood. It is intrinsic to exemplary masculine character, which
is something greatly to be encouraged in our morally confused times.
Back to chivalry and gay men. Broverman,
Waldman writes, “wants to know whether gay men count as knights or ladies.” Are
gay men “the weaker sex”? Well, the gay men I know need no help defending
themselves. The answer is that chivalry is about aspiring to the worthiest qualities
and ideals of manhood, and being gay is no barrier to that.
(This article originally appeared here on Acculturated, 9/13/13)
