The Case Against “The Case for Chivalry”

It’s been 224 years since Edmund Burke declared, “The age of chivalry is gone…that of sophisters, economists, and calculators has succeeded; and the glory of Europe is extinguished forever.” However, it’s only been a few days since Tola Onasanya exalted one interpretation of modern chivalry via this very bastion of Bubble journalism.

I respectfully disagree with the premises of “The Case for Chivalry” because chivalry is both historically situated and fundamentally sexist, rendering it not fit for use today. What Onasanya suggests is not actually chivalrous, just courteous. I second the call for expressions of honour, courage, and justice – and simply good manners – from Castle Sands to DRA.

The definition of chivalry is misunderstood in “The Case for Chivalry”; which suggests that holding a door open, or pulling out a chair for a woman, is a modern misconception of “chivalrous”, which stems from a Victorian reinterpretation. The concept referred to one class in the feudal period, which has to do with Christian traditions and a military code of conduct between the First Crusade and the Reformation – where it ought to remain. That which we associate with the term today has little to do with the actual context in which chivalry existed. I highly doubt that Geoffrey de Charny would interpret buying another’s hangover cure in Northpoint’s as, “chivalrous”.

The primary issue with Onasanya’s seemingly innocuous suggestion, is to bring chivalry back from the long-dead is the concept’s undeniable sexism. Chivalry is a relic from the period of time when women were assumed to be weak, fragile and generally incompetent. Onasanya implored us to “be brave, be courteous, and help those who can’t help themselves”. However, historical chivalry denoted those that couldn’t help themselves as the “weaker sex”, or females. Chivalrous practice assumes that women must have doors opened and expenses paid for them…by men, as they aren’t able to do so for themselves. Even this modern dilution of “chivalry” is inextricably linked to the perception of females as weaker, which permanently depicts them as victims and strips them of agency and initiative.

While courteous behaviour does not intrinsically constitute chivalry, it does carry with the weight of ambivalent sexism. By promoting such conduct, a step backwards is taken against the worldwide struggle for gender equality. Onasanya believes it “isn’t hard” to hold a door open for someone, and he’s correct. However, being treated with equal consideration and respect in relationships, academia and the workplace, as a female, is still oftentimes hard. We must free ourselves from chivalrous assumptions of weakness and inability, as that could only be damaging. To be treated with courtesy is just that – a courtesy – and not a necessity due to one’s sex.

This is not to reject the conclusion that courtesy should be more common, but colouring them in historically specific and gendered language, is problematic. The debate on whether the revival of chivalry in our dating lives is a moot point. Whether you’re seeking a sugar daddy on OK Cupid or refuse to accept a free coffee from your date at Taste, you have the prerogative to desire whatever behaviour, and date whomever, you’d like.

Instead of appealing to chivalry to promote politesse, remember instead, The Golden Rule, “Do unto others as you would like done unto you,” which demands reciprocity of respect and consideration. Chivalry has much to do with glorifying one’s own qualities, but an appeal to good manners must not be because it is “not hard,” but rather from mutual respect for others. We should be kind and courageous not because others need us to be, but because it is an expression of our care and concern, which goes far beyond our date and their chair.

So, St Andreans, when that library cutie holds open the door for you, say thank you, because those gestures make that four-floor purgatory a nicer place to be. Next time, you hold open the door, pull out the chair or help someone out, do it because no matter of your knighthood status or gender, it is a simple opportunity to be kind.

Image couresty of esquire.com