Is chivalry good?

[The Orson Empire]

If that was true, listening to Mozart would be sexist because it originated in a sexist time.

...what are you on about? Mozart has nothing to do with chivalry or feminism.

Also, unmarried women could own property.

In some societies perhaps, but that didn't mean women were ever considered legally equal to men.

The specific aspect of the code I’m referencing here is protectiveness of women which Islam societies, which allowed women to own property, also practised.

This "protectiveness" you keep referring to means domination or control of women by men.

[Privateer Stockholm]

Is chilvary good?
By chivalry,
here I mean the protectiveness by men and boys towards women and girls.
So please avoid discussions of other aspects of the code of medieval knighthood

This is like asking if puppies are good for cuddling and then clarifiing that by puppies you mean those many legged shelled things you find on the beach.

No it isn’t. It’s like asking if puppies are good and you mean slush puppies, there is more than one definition of a word.

...what are you on about? Mozart has nothing to do with chivalry or feminism.

Mozart was a composer during a very sexist time when women were not legally equal. If your logic is that anything from a sexist time is sexist then all of Mozart’s music is sexist too.

Also, unmarried women could own property.

In some societies perhaps, but that didn't mean women were ever considered legally equal to men.

So what, in Mozart’s time, women couldn’t vote.
Does that mean listening to Mozart is sexist?

If not, then why does the time chivalry “originated” in inherently make chivalry itself sexist.
The specific aspect of the code I’m referencing here is protectiveness of women which Islam societies, which allowed women to own property, also practised.

This "protectiveness" you keep referring to means domination or control of women by men.

You are advocating for the control of women by other women, if a woman wants men to be chivalrous to her, or, like most women, prefers to date chivalrous or “benevolent sexist” men, would you disapprove of her?

Some on our own Council would have us surrender now and send our children to them as hostages. Have you seen the proposal for Dragon Queen Story Time

LOL.

[Floofybit]

We'll be overrun by dragons if we aren't careful.

Some on our own Council would have us surrender now and send our children to them as hostages. Have you seen the proposal for Dragon Queen Story Time?

We'll gladly take your children as *slurp* hostages *drool*

[Privateer Stockholm]

Some on our own Council would have us surrender now and send our children to them as hostages. Have you seen the proposal for Dragon Queen Story Time?

We'll gladly take your children as *slurp* hostages *drool*

Least sinister poster to answer “no” on “is sex outside marriage wrong?”

[El Lazaro]

We are in the age of feminism now. It is not the time for romantic poetry, it is the time for pillow forts. It is not the time for holding open doors, it is the time for barricading them shut and protecting what's left of the castle from the enemy at the gates.

Are you saying women are categorically “the enemy”?

I think she’s a woman, but it can be hard to tell when DI is being serious, although the safest assumption is no.

[Floofybit]

We'll gladly take your children as *slurp* hostages *drool*

Least sinister poster to answer “no” on “is sex outside marriage wrong?”

[The Orson Empire]

This is like asking if puppies are good for cuddling and then clarifiing that by puppies you mean those many legged shelled things you find on the beach.

No it isn’t. It’s like asking if puppies are good and you mean slush puppies, there is more than one definition of a word.

...what are you on about? Mozart has nothing to do with chivalry or feminism.

Mozart was a composer during a very sexist time when women were not legally equal. If your logic is that anything from a sexist time is sexist then all of Mozart’s music is sexist too.

Also, unmarried women could own property.

In some societies perhaps, but that didn't mean women were ever considered legally equal to men.

So what, in Mozart’s time, women couldn’t vote.
Does that mean listening to Mozart is sexist?

If not, then why does the time chivalry “originated” in inherently make chivalry itself sexist.
The specific aspect of the code I’m referencing here is protectiveness of women which Islam societies, which allowed women to own property, also practised.

This "protectiveness" you keep referring to means domination or control of women by men.

You are advocating for the control of women by other women, if a woman wants men to be chivalrous to her, or, like most women, prefers to date chivalrous or “benevolent sexist” men, would you disapprove of her?

Some on our own Council would have us surrender now and send our children to them as hostages. Have you seen the proposal for Dragon Queen Story Time

LOL.

You're creating a strawman. At no point did I say everything from a sexist time is sexist, or that I want women to control other women. Ideally, no person would be "controlled" by anything else.

What I actually said was "you cannot divorce chivalry from the context it originated in", meaning the context of social relations between men and women at the time, as chivalry is explicitly governing those relations. Mozart is irrelevant, as there is nothing inherently sexist about it.

[El Lazaro]

Some on our own Council would have us surrender now and send our children to them as hostages. Have you seen the proposal for Dragon Queen Story Time?

We'll gladly take your children as *slurp* hostages *drool*

In any other context, this is probably not PG-13

[Floofybit]

We'll gladly take your children as *slurp* hostages *drool*

In any other context, this is probably not PG-13

Yeah, I just thought dragons tended to eat people. But idk, cause I'm not a dragonologist

[Privateer Stockholm]

No it isn’t. It’s like asking if puppies are good and you mean slush puppies, there is more than one definition of a word.


Mozart was a composer during a very sexist time when women were not legally equal. If your logic is that anything from a sexist time is sexist then all of Mozart’s music is sexist too.


So what, in Mozart’s time, women couldn’t vote.
Does that mean listening to Mozart is sexist?

You are advocating for the control of women by other women, if a woman wants men to be chivalrous to her, or, like most women, prefers to date chivalrous or “benevolent sexist” men, would you disapprove of her?

LOL.

You're creating a strawman. At no point did I say everything from a sexist time is sexist, or that I want women to control other women. Ideally, no person would be "controlled" by anything else.

What I actually said was "you cannot divorce chivalry from the context it originated in", meaning the context of social relations between men and women at the time, as chivalry is explicitly governing those relations. Mozart is irrelevant, as there is nothing inherently sexist about it.

Can you answer my question about whether or not people you would disapprove of her?
Also, just because women were oppressed back then that doesn’t mean that everything men did regarding women was oppressive to them .
In England, under Oliver Cromwell, men were punished for beating their wives, that was not oppressive.
However, in the same time and place, there were no female MPs,
that was oppressive.

Yeah, I just thought dragons tended to eat people. But idk, cause I'm not a dragonologist.

Yeah,
LOL

[Socalist Republic Of Mercenaries]

To an extent, being polite is a great thing, but chivalry is often either turned into 2 things at either extreme. One extreme being “Simping” and the other being a sexist incel.

What defines "simping" I mean sometimes being ever so slightly chivalorous, someone is bound to call someone a simp. what... is simping?

[Kerwa]

Good horsemanship and a latent capacity for great violence is the mark of a gentlemen.

It is, however, the modern age and therefore women’s problems are entirely their own.

[Floofybit]

You're creating a strawman. At no point did I say everything from a sexist time is sexist, or that I want women to control other women. Ideally, no person would be "controlled" by anything else.

What I actually said was "you cannot divorce chivalry from the context it originated in", meaning the context of social relations between men and women at the time, as chivalry is explicitly governing those relations. Mozart is irrelevant, as there is nothing inherently sexist about it.

Can you answer my question about whether or not people you would disapprove of her?
Also, just because women were oppressed back then that doesn’t mean that everything men did regarding women was oppressive to them .
In England, under Oliver Cromwell, men were punished for beating their wives, that was not oppressive.
However, in the same time and place, there were no female MPs,
that was oppressive.

Yeah, I just thought dragons tended to eat people. But idk, cause I'm not a dragonologist.

Yeah,
LOL

No female MPs is not oppressive. The fact that they couldn't run is. If they could run, it's not oppresive

[Ifreann]

All of us need the protection and assistance of our communities at some point, but the proposition that it is a universal good to always give special protection to women and girls, regardless of the realities on the ground, is inescapably misogynist.

[The Orson Empire]

Can you answer my question about whether or not people you would disapprove of her?

Whatever someone does in their personal relationship is not my business. Women have the right to date any other consenting adult, regardless if they're a good person or not.

Also, just because women were oppressed back then that doesn’t mean that everything men did regarding women was oppressive to them.
In England, under Oliver Cromwell, men were punished for beating their wives, that was not oppressive.
However, in the same time and place, there were no female MPs,
that was oppressive.

What point are you trying to make?

[Privateer Stockholm]

Can you answer my question about whether or not people you would disapprove of her?

Whatever someone does in their personal relationship is not my business. Women have the right to date any other consenting adult, regardless if they're a good person or not.

Also, just because women were oppressed back then that doesn’t mean that everything men did regarding women was oppressive to them.
In England, under Oliver Cromwell, men were punished for beating their wives, that was not oppressive.
However, in the same time and place, there were no female MPs,
that was oppressive.

What point are you trying to make?

I’m saying not everything men did in relation to women was automatically oppressive to women just because it was a sexist time, otherwise it was also oppressive for Oliver Cromwell’s government to punish wife-beaters.

Whatever someone does in their personal relationship is not my business. Women have the right to date any other consenting adult, regardless if they're a good person or not.

So people being chivalrous in their personal reality is not your business? If so why are the men “not good people”?
Are the women “not good” if they ask their respective men to be chivalrous?

[The Orson Empire]

I’m saying not everything men did in relation to women was automatically oppressive to women just because it was a sexist time, otherwise it was also oppressive for Oliver Cromwell’s government to punish wife-beaters.

So what? That doesn't mean the entire patriarchal system keeping women down wasn't malicious and discriminatory.

So people being chivalrous in their personal reality is not your business? If so why are the men “not good people”?
Are the women “not good” if they ask their respective men to be chivalrous?

If chivalry means "dominate and oppress women", then my reasons for hating it are obvious. Regardless, I may not like the concept of chivalry, but I can't force someone else to breakup with their partner.

[Privateer Stockholm]

If chivalry means "dominate and oppress women", then my reasons for hating it are obvious

Well yes, if chivalry means “oppress women” but I’ll look in the dictionary,
1. the combination of qualities expected of an ideal knight, namely courage, honour, courtesy, justice, and a readiness to help the weak.

2.courteous behaviour, especially that of a man towards women.
I’m not sure oppressing women would be courteous.

Referring to the other part of your definition, many women like to be dominated. Is that wrong?

[Aquanatia]

Chivalry is alright, in the sense of simply holding a door open for someone, with no ulterior motives or dismissal of the other's capabilities. I believe that, at its core, chivalry is good, but does not really function well in modern society. Also, I don't think that it needs to be necessarily limited to gender specific roles, and more in simple acts of respect for another human being.

Please keep in mind that all of these ideas came from my very limited worldview and in no way are 100% technically or morally correct.

[Haganham]

This is like asking if puppies are good for cuddling and then clarifying that by puppies you mean those many legged shelled things you find on the beach.

No it isn’t. It’s like asking if puppies are good and you mean slush puppies, there is more than one definition of a word.

And slush puppies aren't puppies, and aren't what any reasonable person will be refering to when they say puppy.

Chivalry covers four broad topics:
Rules of warfare and treatment of prisoners,
Behaver in social settings (literally courtesy)
Treatment of those under your authority
Behaviour of those unable to protect themselves

[The Dodo Republic]

I personally dont see a problem with it for the most part

[The Orson Empire]

If chivalry means "dominate and oppress women", then my reasons for hating it are obvious

Well yes, if chivalry means “oppress women” but I’ll look in the dictionary,
1. the combination of qualities expected of an ideal knight, namely courage, honour, courtesy, justice, and a readiness to help the weak.

2.courteous behaviour, especially that of a man towards women.
I’m not sure oppressing women would be courteous.

Referring to the other part of your definition, many women like to be dominated. Is that wrong?

We aren't talking about either of those definitions, according to the opening post.

And you and I both know we're not talking about someone's domination fetish.

[Privateer Stockholm]

No it isn’t. It’s like asking if puppies are good and you mean slush puppies, there is more than one definition of a word.

And slush puppies aren't puppies, and aren't what any reasonable person will be refering to when they say puppy.

Chivalry covers four broad topics:
Rules of warfare and treatment of prisoners,
Behaver in social settings (literally courtesy)
Treatment of those under your authority
Behaviour of those unable to protect themselves

Source that the rules of chivalry didn’t include treatment of women?

“Thou Sir Launcelot, there thou liest, that thou were never matched of earthly knight's hand. And thou were the courteoust knight that ever bare shield. And thou were the truest friend to thy lover that ever bestrad horse. And thou were the truest lover of a sinful man that ever loved woman. And thou were the kindest man that ever struck with sword. And thou were the goodliest person that ever came among press of knights. And thou were the meekest man and the gentlest that ever ate in hall among ladies.”
- Sir Thomas Malory

We aren't talking about either of those definitions, according to the opening post.

Neither are we talking about oppression. Is King Charles oppressed by his bodyguards?

And you and I both know we're not talking about someone's domination fetish.

What exactly are we talking about? Someone locking a woman in their house and allow letting them out for church/mosque?

[HISPIDA]

Its modern iterations are no different.

Hence why Virginia hasn’t executed a woman (of any race or class) in over 12 years.

virginia hasn't executed anyone in over a decade. the death penalty itself was abolished in 2021 by then-governor mcauliffe.

[Dimetrodon Empire]

Chivalry is this bizarre thing that both feminists and conservatives love.

Feminists love it because it tends to serve women's interests and conservatives love it because it is "traditional."

I think chivalry is outdated to put it charitably.