the rebuttal to chivalry’s buttal

A good chunk of what I believe in response to Mumta’s entry about chivalry is summed up in the responses below.

danifuentes on March 24, 2009 said:

it depends on the woman really.

hardcore feminists balk at the idea of chivalry because they see it as a man sensing a woman’s weakness. for example, a man offers to carry a feminist’s bag for her and her response would be, “i’m strong enough to carry my own bags, thank you very much.” they may even be offended by such a gesture.

however, there are still women (admittedly, myself included) who sees chivalry as a gesture of romance. but it extends only so far. for example, i would not be offended if my man offered to carry my bags or open the door for me or extend a helping hand when going up the stairs. in fact, it would probably warm my heart (just a little ). because in my mind, i think, “he’s doing these things because he loves and cares and respects me.”

BUT, there are certain things i would not be able to abide by. for example, a man making decisions for both of us without consulting me first. or a man who offers aforementioned gestures because he sincerely thinks women are somehow inferior therefore you MUST open the door for them, carry their bags, etc…

furthermore, if you look at the definition of the word “required,” (at least the most popular definition) then yes, mumta’s right. chivalry is not REQUIRED. but like i said, it really depends on the woman.

stillinkleft on March 25, 2009 said:

what if the intuition is, inherently, chivalric?

One thing still puzzles me.  What makes Steve Harvey a guru of interpersonal relationships all of a sudden?