Several years ago, a friend pointed out how cultural perspectives of chivalry differ.  Hailing from South Africa he noted how the cultural approach to chivalry among the Zulu was not “ladies first” but “men first”.  This was not because the men were selfish, but because if any danger lay ahead, the men ought to meet it first.  How different from the mainly western mindset of letting the woman go first.  More importantly questions are raised as to the definitions of chivalry and how it is perceived by the women to whom it is directed.  Chivalry however, is about and should be centered on the women and what they want; otherwise it ends up being disrespectful towards them

Until the advent of postmodernism, certain ways of thinking were accepted as the norm without the consideration of how certain very particular cultural mindsets defined those norms.  Postmodernism, in one way was a rejection of simply seeing things through the lenses of some of those accepted ways of thinking.  What that means for the subject of chivalry today is that while it was long considered the appropriate behavior for decent young men in particular, certain aspects of the mindset or perspectives which lie behind the practices of chivalry actually undermine its purposes and objectives.  A dictionary definition of chivalry notes that it is a “combination of qualities” which include, “courage, honor, loyalty, and consideration for others, especially women”[1].  The focus of chivalry is the woman and according to this definition, it may be surmised that there should something holistic about the demonstration of chivalry towards women.

In order to clear up some of the wrong ideas behind chivalry, it is important to consider a few other perspectives.  First is the question of what the woman wants.  Women everywhere are different—culturally, intellectually, individually.  To give no consideration for this because of some pre-determined rules of what constitutes how they should be treated would not be proper.  Exploring the definition of chivalry further, considerate and courteous behavior is also an integral part of chivalry.  This means taking into account how a woman would like to be treated.  It is no wonder a woman feels disrespected when she is treated in a manner she does not appreciate.  Since the focus of chivalry is the woman, it cannot ignore what the woman wants. 

Then there is the matter of culture.  Our world today is increasingly forcing us to learn to look at things through the eyes of others.  What this means for the notion of chivalry is that it cannot be defined merely in the medieval sense or its modifications over the centuries.  The notion of chivalry hails from a very particular culture—medieval European male culture.  When other cultures come into the picture however, the standards for chivalry must become a little more fluid else they’ll risk being disrespectful towards women of other cultural backgrounds.  Zulu women for example, if approached with a “ladies first” mentality, would at the very least be puzzled because their cultural expectations.  It might even be downright disrespectful to ask them to go first.  Chivalry then, unless its boundaries expand to fit the diverse cultural landscape of our world can only end up being disrespectful to women of other cultures. 

According to current understandings, when a man opens the door for a woman to let her into the car, he is displaying chivalry.  When he pulls out the chair for her to sit down before taking his seat, he is applauded for being chivalrous.  However, if the same man is unwilling to do the laundry for his wife, is he being chivalrous?  If he is unwilling to grab the broom and mop and help clean the house would that qualify him for the accolades of chivalry?   Would a chivalrous man be willing to practice the conventions of chivalry with the house help, the cook, or a woman of another race?  Now if he is unwilling to do these things, it is impossible to escape the question why.  Yet in the answer to that question is the answer to the question of why chivalry is sometimes disrespectful to women.

When men sometimes put on the show of chivalry towards women, their underlying thoughts are not that women deserve to be honored for their person and their work.  Instead the mind is one of chauvinism.  It is one that says, “I am the man.  Because I am superior, let me show the woman some graciousness so that I may be extolled for my superiority.”  The attitude behind that is selfish and thus disrespectful to women.  Chivalry is meant to focus on the woman, to honor her and her place in society and humanity.  When it is reduced to anything less than this, it has lost its purpose and because it still feigns honor to the woman, becomes disrespectful to her. 

If chivalry is to avoid the dis-reputation of being disrespectful to women, then men have to be willing to demonstrate to the women that they believe wholeheartedly that their value extends beyond what men might get from them.  They must be sensitive to what women want as well as to their cultural and individual differences.  Women must be valued because they are human beings with qualities which this world could not exist without. It has been said that discipline is not something you do to a child but for a child.  The same could be said for chivalry.   If it is not done for the woman, then it is disrespectful.  If the focus of chivalry is truly and wholeheartedly the woman, the chivalry will not be considered disrespectful towards women. 

[1] Microsoft® Encarta® 2009. © 1993-2008 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved