Chivalry vs. Feminism

Should chivalry remain dead? Not for this feminist. For the Chuck Colson Center for Christian Worldview, I’m John Stonestreet with The Point.

Listen Now | Download

For decades, some feminist ideologues have condemned men for opening doors, offering seats and maybe even giving up lifeboats for women—as “benevolent sexism” which “perpetuates gender inequality” and demeans women.

But Emily Esfahani Smith recently argued in The Atlantic that if feminists are serious about fostering equality between men and women, they should bring back chivalry, which is really about “….respecting and aggrandizing women, and recognizing that their attention [is] worth seeking, competing for, and holding.”

A function of chivalry, she says, is restraining male incivility and preventing bullying of women—goals feminists should be able to applaud.

And since 2009, an intervarsity group known as Network of Enlightened Women has, by hosting the “Gentlemen’s Showcase,” an annual award ceremony for men who have acted chivalrously toward women on participating campuses.

It’s a step toward recognizing that being created male and female isn't such a bad thing. I’m John Stonestreet.

Latest Broadcast on YouTube

Further Reading

Let's Give Chivalry Another Chance
Emily Esfahani Smith | The Atlantic | December 10, 2012


One thing one must do is not mistake courtesy for polish in either sex. Burghers and yeomenry can have a more courteous relation between the sexes then gentlefolk, if only because they need each other as business partners.
And vice-versa. And so on ad-infinitum. But someone has to start first.
Bring back Ladyhood. If you want him to be more of a gentleman, try being more of a Lady.