A new study (yay evidence!) has found that chivalry is sexist. Huh! You don't say! Tell me more:
A new study out of Northeastern University in Boston says there are two types of sexists out there. Acts of so-called chivalry, like paying for dinner, offering up jackets and calling a women 'love' or 'dear' can be signs of "benevolent sexists," according to psychologist Jin Goh, while "hostile sexists" are those who specifically leave housework to wives and girlfriends, or wolf whistle at women walking down the street.Yes, well, if treats other human beings around him with courtesy because that's just the decent thing to do, that isn't chivalry. So, yeah, actually: We can (and should) do away with chivalry altogether.
...The study, which paired 27 men with women between the ages of 18 and 22, encouraged the individuals to take a quiz and get to know each other. Rating their agreement on statements like "a good woman should be set on a pedestal by her man" and "women are too easily offended" helped differentiate between the two types of sexists.
So does that mean we should do away with chivalry altogether? Not necessarily. As Australia's News.com points out, if a man is carrying out these actions because he believes a woman is fragile, and thus requires protection, then he's being sexist. But if he's doing it to be kind? That's just being polite.
Which is, ahh, something that feminists have been saying for a very long time. But at least now SCIENCE HAS PROVED IT.
Shakesville is run as a safe space. First-time commenters: Please read Shakesville's Commenting Policy and Feminism 101 Section before commenting. We also do lots of in-thread moderation, so we ask that everyone read the entirety of any thread before commenting, to ensure compliance with any in-thread moderation. Thank you.
blog comments powered by Disqus