I see nothing wrong with a first date being less formal -- coffee, drinks, etc. But dumping courtship wholesale is rather a sad notion, IMO.
Posted by Bella Bee (Member # 7027) on :
quote: After an evening when she exchanged flirtatious glances with a bouncer at a Williamsburg nightclub, the bouncer invited her and her friends back to his apartment for whiskey and boxed macaroni and cheese. When she agreed, he gamely hoisted her over his shoulders, and, she recalled, “carried me home, my girlfriends and his bros in tow, where we danced around a tiny apartment to some MGMT and Ratatat remixes.”
She spent the night at the apartment, which kicked off a cycle of weekly hookups, invariably preceded by a Thursday night text message from him saying, ‘hey babe, what are you up to this weekend?” (It petered out after four months.)
This (bar the text messages) is probably a scenario which could have happened at any time after about 1965. Possibly even long before. It's nothing new at all, and it's not like nobody had any choice in the matter, or that the two of them probably expected anything more serious.
I hate dating with a passion - it's often weird, awkward and most people act like someone else when they're on them, because it's an 'official date'. I wish it would die out. But sadly, it hasn't yet. And the whole hook-up culture thing is way overstated. From my observations, most single people in their mid to late twenties aren't actually doing much of that - they're often having way less sex than they let on.
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
The single people I know are early 30s so I might be too old to see this. The guy paying seems a bit outdated, though the 34 year old male who dates a lot does pay for the woman. I think there is a lot of talk about hookup culture but it isn't what people are doing.
Posted by Swampjedi (Member # 7374) on :
Perhaps I'm really, really old-fashioned, but aren't dating and courtship two distinct concepts? Courtship has a "wedding or bust" feel, whereas dating is less... focused.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
The end of courtship? Did my father give his permission?
Posted by theamazeeaz (Member # 6970) on :
Um, this article is from the NYT Style section. Given the sideways looks and eye rolling any such "trend" piece gets from liberal blogger sites you probably hate even more (like Jezebel), and given that the article cites a TV show, Girls, which I've yet to meet someone who watches outside of the internet review sites who think an HBO show is news (and I'm the same age as the creator), frankly I wouldn't use this article as a harbinger of the end of the world. Or a description of a culture that includes a large swath of America.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Trends! Trends! Get yore trends here, only a dime the dozen! Get 'em while they're trendy!
Next week it'll be the return of arranged marriages in Utah, or of extended families all living in one house in Connecticut, or increased divorce-insurance premiums causing later marriages in the Ghanese-Hindu settlement of lower Florida. The thing about these newspapers is, they have to have an article every week whether or not there's anything worth talking about. Don't take it seriously.
Posted by Destineer (Member # 821) on :
As a friend of mine pointed out, while this article does suck like most NY Times Style articles, it does have this one amazing passage:
quote:Bemoaning an anything-goes dating culture, Ms. Mamet, 24, recalled an encounter with a boyfriend whose idea of a date was lounging in a hotel room while he “Lewis and Clarked” her body, then tried to stick her father, the playwright David Mamet, with the bill, according to a Huffington Post report.
quote:But one [Hatrack's a family site, yo] musician's interaction with a social media manager hardly means that "Women in their 20s these days are lucky to get a last-minute text to tag along.
quote: If Lindsay wanted to stop the "cycle of weekly hookups," why wasn't she like, "let's go sit down and eat some spaghetti in a restaurant sometime," or why didn't she move on? How was the bouncer supposed to know that Lindsay wanted more — and why does he necessarily owe her more — than Annie's Mac and Cheese?
Posted by Swampjedi (Member # 7374) on :
Surprised she didn't somehow cite Barney from How I Met Your Mother.
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
I won't vouch for the accuracy of the entire article, but a lot things discussed in it are a decent window into "dating culture" as I've seen it. I'm now in my early thirties, and about two years ago I became single after getting out of a long term relationship. I'm also back in school and I've been meeting a lot of people younger than me. So I can vouch for a lot aspects of the article both in my personal experience dating, and in stories I've been told by people in their early to mid twenties.
Some women I went out on dates with have told me they haven't been out on a real date in years. Some women were shocked when I actually called them on the phone rather than just texted. Their friends would ask me if I had any single friends, and seemed to be in awe of this odd traditional dating style.
p.s. - in case you were wondering, no I haven't been dating 18 year olds. The women I've been dating have been in their mid to late twenties.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
I'll concur with Strider. It seems out of the norm (and woman are particularly impressed) when a man asks them on a traditional date -- even if it's only dinner. Even more curious is that genteel acts (opening doors, pulling out chairs) is almost anachronistic.
Heck, most girls insist on splitting the check. Though I never let them.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
I'm not so impressed with the death of "traditional" (ie 1950s to 80s) dating. What is inherently superior about milkshakes, movies, the telephone and lookout point? That whole exercise was in itself an expression of shiny new 50's consumer ideals: car, jacket, movie, food, etc. so today we abuse or misuse communication tech to avoid awkwardness. Who is surprised by that? I have to say, while my current relationship didn't start with a series of rigid dates- I think the reason was that it didn't *have* to. When you had a single phone number, you had to set specific plans for an evening because you had no social flexibility. If a date changed, you couldn't adjust your schedule. Today, we can alter plans quickly, and thus don't need to demand high levels of commitment to specify, rigidly defined meetings. That can be good as well. My girlfriend, for instance, threw her back out the day before our second date. In the day of phone only communication, that probably would have ended things right there- but with Facebook, we were able to keep up a correspondence until we could meet again- and not spend hours on the phone.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by theamazeeaz:
quote:But one [Hatrack's a family site, yo] musician's interaction
Um, being a family site means we can't use the word "clueless"?
I missed that memo . . .
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
My wife and I met through Eharmony.com, and we lived about an hour away from each other. After our first date, we agreed that we had a standing date every weekend from then on. And we texted and called (no social networks) a lot. It was the perfect blend of "traditional dating" and using technology to keep in touch. I don't buy for a second that simply being able to contact each other through modern and convenient means, as Orincoro is saying, in any way shape or form is not compatible with "traditional dating". There is no problem with texting someone to let them know your timing, or for a quick hi at work, the problem that the article is describing is a lack of effort, no real attempt to woo. Texting is short hand, it is convenient sure, but it is informal, meant for people you already know and have established a relationship with. The formality of a "traditional date" is a good thing in my book, as it takes a lot of pressure off of both parties, as it provides a structure which holds up the interactions when you are basically trying to get to know and figure out if you like the total stranger sitting across from you.
Posted by theamazeeaz (Member # 6970) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by theamazeeaz:
quote:But one [Hatrack's a family site, yo] musician's interaction
Um, being a family site means we can't use the word "clueless"?
I missed that memo . . .
Someone edited the Jezebel article. The word wasn't clueless when I copy and pasted. You can still see the original word if you Google the rest of the sentence, though that won't be for long. It's not that bad of a word in my opinion, but I figured I'd be on the safer side of the TOS.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by theamazeeaz: Someone edited the Jezebel article. The word wasn't clueless when I copy and pasted.
Actually, I suspected that was the case. Doesn't mean I can't heckle. Posted by theamazeeaz (Member # 6970) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aros: Even more curious is that genteel acts (opening doors, pulling out chairs) is almost anachronistic.
Curious? Not really. Opening a can of worms here, but those "genteel" acts, flatter some women, but just make others really uncomfortable. They *show* her and others that you "care", but in terms of actually making someone happy, they don't do much and come off as patronizing. You do them because you are "supposed to" and you want other people to see you pulling out chairs and opening doors. Whether someone likes that sort of thing depends on to what degree the principals buy into the theater of romance. You'll impress more women by giving your waiter a big tip.
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
Orincoro, I use text and facebook as well for all sorts of communication, both flirtatious and otherwise.
I don't see this as an either/or type of question. It's just that, for a whole generation of people, phone calls and dates are a strange foreign thing. And it seems to be conducive to, though it doesn't necessitate, a hookup culture.
edit - I'm not making any evaluative judgments about hookup culture, but rather a descriptive claim about the conditions that seem to help it thrive.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
quote:Originally posted by theamazeeaz:
quote:Originally posted by Aros: Even more curious is that genteel acts (opening doors, pulling out chairs) is almost anachronistic.
Curious? Not really. Opening a can of worms here, but those "genteel" acts, flatter some women, but just make others really uncomfortable. They *show* her and others that you "care", but in terms of actually making someone happy, they don't do much and come off as patronizing. You do them because you are "supposed to" and you want other people to see you pulling out chairs and opening doors. Whether someone likes that sort of thing depends on to what degree the principals buy into the theater of romance. You'll impress more women by giving your waiter a big tip.
Disagree. It just depends on whether they see it as honest or as a gimmick. My brother still opens the car door after ten years. I open it for my daughter every time -- to the point that she'll stand outside in the cold and wait, if I haven't opened it yet.
I've yet to see a lady who, once she understands real manners and gallantry, is put off by it. Maybe it's the age groups?
And a tip should be discreet. If a lady sees how much a gentleman is tipping, he's either flaunting it, she's being nosy, or she's just happened to glimpse it in passing. Not saying that he should hide the check when he's filling it out, but signing a check isn't something everyone should see.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aros: I've yet to see a lady who, once she understands real manners and gallantry, is put off by it.
Because if she is, she's no lady?
I happen to appreciate it if anyone -- male or female -- holds a door open for me. Less so if they pull out a chair, but I don't mind. But I can see why some people might not appreciate the gesture, and don't think that means they don't "understands real manners and gallantry".
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aros: If a lady sees how much a gentleman is tipping, he's either flaunting it, she's being nosy, or she's just happened to glimpse it in passing.
There is only one possible response to this. Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
quote:Originally posted by Strider: I won't vouch for the accuracy of the entire article, but a lot things discussed in it are a decent window into "dating culture" as I've seen it. I'm now in my early thirties, and about two years ago I became single after getting out of a long term relationship. I'm also back in school and I've been meeting a lot of people younger than me. So I can vouch for a lot aspects of the article both in my personal experience dating, and in stories I've been told by people in their early to mid twenties.
Some women I went out on dates with have told me they haven't been out on a real date in years. Some women were shocked when I actually called them on the phone rather than just texted. Their friends would ask me if I had any single friends, and seemed to be in awe of this odd traditional dating style.
p.s. - in case you were wondering, no I haven't been dating 18 year olds. The women I've been dating have been in their mid to late twenties.
Which makes me wonder if those old fuddy-duddies who used to go out on dates had something.
I'm not sure, if I were to find myself back in the "dating" scene, if I would be able to do it any other way. Which apparently would give me an advantage. Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
quote:I open it for my daughter every time -- to the point that she'll stand outside in the cold and wait, if I haven't opened it yet.
I find it surprising that you consider this a positive example. It's really very silly to sit and wait in the cold so she won't rob you of your opportunity to be gallant.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
quote:Originally posted by scifibum:
quote:I open it for my daughter every time -- to the point that she'll stand outside in the cold and wait, if I haven't opened it yet.
I find it surprising that you consider this a positive example. It's really very silly to sit and wait in the cold so she won't rob you of your opportunity to be gallant.
Yes, it's like she's out there waiting for a half hour.
No, my seven year old daughter assumes that men open doors for women. It's commonplace to her. Is this a Utah thing?
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Strider: Orincoro, I use text and facebook as well for all sorts of communication, both flirtatious and otherwise.
I don't see this as an either/or type of question. It's just that, for a whole generation of people, phone calls and dates are a strange foreign thing. And it seems to be conducive to, though it doesn't necessitate, a hookup culture.
edit - I'm not making any evaluative judgments about hookup culture, but rather a descriptive claim about the conditions that seem to help it thrive.
I just don't buy it. I understand these things are used for hooking up. I never used them for that- but people have sought access to sex in every generation. The phone or the cotillion ball or whatever. I think people dont change that much- just technology gets ahead of social repression. People who hook up today would have 50 years ago. I know having Facebook and SMS and whatever makes me approximately 00% more likely to seek casual sex with acquaintances. It's not something I would do, no matter the ease. For those that use it that way, well, they are more successful at what they would be doing anyway.
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aros:
quote:Originally posted by scifibum:
quote:I open it for my daughter every time -- to the point that she'll stand outside in the cold and wait, if I haven't opened it yet.
I find it surprising that you consider this a positive example. It's really very silly to sit and wait in the cold so she won't rob you of your opportunity to be gallant.
Yes, it's like she's out there waiting for a half hour.
No, my seven year old daughter assumes that men open doors for women. It's commonplace to her. Is this a Utah thing?
I think it's old fashioned, and not a "Utah thing". I live in Utah, and I would prefer that my daughter doesn't pretend to be helpless, particularly when it means that she has to wait for things to happen the prescribed way, instead of the sensible way.
Posted by Bella Bee (Member # 7027) on :
Besides, just because she loves it when her daddy opens doors for her, doesn't mean she'll grow up wanting or expecting a future boyfriend to do the same for her. There's often a big gap between being dad's little princess and teen or twenty in the dating pool.
quote: the article cites a TV show, Girls, which I've yet to meet someone who watches outside of the internet review sites who think an HBO show is news
I tried. I actually did. I watched about four episodes, and then realized that while watching it I felt as if I was punishing myself for something. What a depressing, unfunny, dull show.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by Aros: I've yet to see a lady who, once she understands real manners and gallantry, is put off by it.
Because if she is, she's no lady?
I happen to appreciate it if anyone -- male or female -- holds a door open for me. Less so if they pull out a chair, but I don't mind. But I can see why some people might not appreciate the gesture, and don't think that means they don't "understands real manners and gallantry".
Yeah I'm with Rivka (and scifibum and Bella).
I happily hold doors open for men and women both... When the situation calls for it. And I'm happy when people get a door for me, if that makes sense.
I'm happy to pay for my friends when we get dinner, and I like it when people treat me too. Splitting bills is fine too.
In general, it's nice to be around people who are courteous and thoughtful. And I try to be so, too.
I just don't get why people are so enthusiastic about clinging to impractical traditions based on genitals. What's the point? What value does that bring?
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
The traditions or the genitals?...because one of those answers is easier than the other.
Posted by Shanna (Member # 7900) on :
Personally, I'm more impressed if a man holds the door for strangers than for me.
I hate the practice of a the man choosing the wine or my entree. I am perfectly capable of not only choosing my own food but ordering it from the waiter.
But I am particularly judgmental of men who don't understand how to properly hold a door. Because you don't just pull it open for you companion, you should also continue to hold it open for anyone within a reasonable radius. Its not a huge inconvenience because the first or second party to approach will usually include a gentleman who will wave the original door-holder through and then take up the task for their own group.
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
I didnt get the point of girls either.
Personally, I open doors for people, not just men or just women. Opening car doors seems silly unless you are like in a high truck and the other person needs help getting down. Though in that case they probably should open the door themselves and the other assist. But I believe showing courtesy to everyone regardless of gender is important. And inconveniencing someone for no reason is not courteous.
Posted by Dogbreath (Member # 11879) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bella Bee: From my observations, most single people in their mid to late twenties aren't actually doing much of that - they're often having way less sex than they let on.
This, very much so.
I feel like this article is extremely one sided and overly negative - or rather, takes concepts that are (IMO) actually quite positive and tries to play them as negatively as possible. Take the "hanging out with friends" date, for example.
I met my current girlfriend swing dancing... we ended up dancing for 3 or 4 songs and I really enjoyed talking to her, so I gave her my number. 2 days later (a Saturday night) she sent me a text saying she was with her friends at O'Tools (a local Irish Pub) and wanted me to come down and hang out. I grabbed my buddy Jordan and we went down, sat and had a few drinks, told stories, got to know eachother, laughed, danced, and had a good time. It was an environment where we were both comfortable and relaxed, and I got to see her around her friends. How she interacted with them, the stories they told about her, what they thought of her. In other words - I got to see the person she was when she *wasn't* with me (and trying to impress me) instead of seeing some image she was trying to portray.
Later, I asked her out on a more traditional date. I bought her flowers, took her to dinner, we walked along the beach, kissed, went on a few more dates, and started going out. We're not completely traditional, though. For one thing, a lot of the time we're together, we're with our friends because, you know, it gets boring sometimes when it's just the 2 of you doing things. We like our friends, we like being with other people, we like doing interesting things.
Also, she often times takes *me* out to dinner, buys me little things to let me know she likes me, holds the car door for me if she's driving, and asks me out on dates. Not as often, since I make roughly twice as much money as her, I pay for about twice as much stuff, but it's pretty balanced.
What's interesting, though, is that for as much as the person writing this article assumes it's all about hooking up for sex, a lot of these "casual dates" don't even end in a kiss - it's about getting to know someone in a relaxed environment. OTOH, on really formal, fancy dates, with one person paying for a lot of stuff, there's a much higher expectation for some sort of physical intimacy at the end (whether that's a kiss, making out, sex, or whatever) and a much higher chance for resentment and disappointment if it doesn't happen.
In my case, even if my girlfriend and I didn't end up liking eachother, we each would still have had a great time - me hanging out with my buddy Jordan and meeting some new girls (and maybe snagging one or two numbers), her hanging out with her girlfriends and having a fun night. I also feel it gave the relationship a chance to develop more organically. If she had, say, invited me out on a really formal date after we had only actually met each other once, it would have been really awkward and put a lot of pressure on both of us to put on a show. So to speak.
I guess my thing is, there's certainly still a place for courtship and romance, and it definitely happens... but not on the first date, anymore. It doesn't actually mean people are being more promiscuous.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
Great post Db, I hadn't thought about it like that.
Posted by Parkour (Member # 12078) on :
If we're sending our anecdotes out for mock duels: people are really being more "promiscuous". Casual dating and hookup culture is growing to prominence. People who are fortunate enough not to have to date don't really date because it is such a yesterday thing.
quote:Originally posted by Aros: It's commonplace to her. Is this a Utah thing?
No. It too is a yesterday thing. Old outmoded chauvinistic attitudes about how we are supposed to treat ladies and how they are supposed to appreciate us treating them that way.
It is a good thing it is going away because it is a bad thing if you don't understand why your statement about women and tipping and how you gallantly refuse to let them split the check really gets a "..........wow" out of people.
Posted by Dogbreath (Member # 11879) on :
Oh balony. People who want to hook up for sex are going to hook up for sex, regardless of how tight or loose the social mores governing dating are. I've been surrounded by the one night stand glorifying culture portrayed in our media for many years and it hasn't made me any more desirous of having a random hookup. There's simply less backlash, socially, for those who do desire such things. I don't really see why it's my place to stop them.
It's like saying the recent (past 30 yearsish) social acceptance of homosexuality has caused significantly more men to become gay, like it's somehow catching. It's just shoddy logic.
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
A few years ago, an LDS leader bemoaned the "hang-out" culture he saw developing among young people (specifically, young members of the Church). His problem was that so many people would hang-out, but then never progress from there. This article seems to decry the very means of getting together at all. Even the LDS Church would shy away from saying you should never hang-out, rather asking that at some point you progress to dating.
What were they trying to say exactly? Was it give a few examples of people with poor social skills (my information says they’ve been around for some time)? Was it to say technology has ruined dating (that doesn’t seem likely, and they certainly didn’t make a strong case for it)? The article suggests that they were trying to somehow show that courting is over but the text of the article implied that ever forming into couples is over and that’s demonstrably not true.
Hobbes Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
quote: I open it for my daughter every time -- to the point that she'll stand outside in the cold and wait, if I haven't opened it yet.
For reference, this is to me both bizarre and abhorrent, although mildly so for both.
I hold doors for people behind me or people who are carrying heavy things. I teaach children to hold doors for each other. I never teach boys to treat girls differently than they should treat other boys, or vice versa. What would be the point in that? Exactly what would I be trying to show to one gender or the other? That girls get precedence? That it's up to boys to "allow" girls to go through doors or sit down in chairs? That boys cannot engage with girls normally and must put on a performance of kindness rather than genuinely demonstrating, to all, that they think about others?
+1 to rivka's response.
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
The article itself is pretty mind-numbing. I don't think we should take it seriously in the slightest.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
Agreed.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
quote:Originally posted by Teshi:
quote: I open it for my daughter every time -- to the point that she'll stand outside in the cold and wait, if I haven't opened it yet.
For reference, this is to me both bizarre and abhorrent, although mildly so for both.
I hold doors for people behind me or people who are carrying heavy things. I teaach children to hold doors for each other. I never teach boys to treat girls differently than they should treat other boys, or vice versa. What would be the point in that? Exactly what would I be trying to show to one gender or the other? That girls get precedence? That it's up to boys to "allow" girls to go through doors or sit down in chairs? That boys cannot engage with girls normally and must put on a performance of kindness rather than genuinely demonstrating, to all, that they think about others?
+1 to rivka's response.
I obviously don't express myself well. For my daughter to wait a few moments, smile on her face, for her father to open her door . . . is not bizarre. It's sweet.
I guess I'm used to being on the losing side of an argument. I was raised old fashioned, on a farm in Utah, with old fashioned values. For a man to open a lady's car door . . . to pull out her chair . . . to scrape the ice off her car windows . . . to carry the groceries. I don't see how these are bad things. And I've been back on the dating market for over a year -- I've only gotten positive reactions.
So . . . it's a good thing to throw out traditional manners? To keep the positive aspects of traditional gender roles? I agree with throwing out the negative ones, equality and all. But there's something to be said for tradition. Bah. I'll let you kids have your casual sex culture. I still believe in the ideal of a gentleman.
I guess I should just keep my coat, rather than offer it to a lady, if she forgets hers. Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
Your ideal of a gentleman is chauvinistic, so don't get too comfortable on your high horse.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
I'm not much of a dater but I am a member of the millennial generation in question. I've lurked on this but here is my position on these things.
Pulling out her chair seems really forced, I would be afraid she thinks I am trying too hard.
Same thing about the car door. I can't see how it isn't awkward to make her wait so I can open the door for her instead of going to driver side.
I prefer to pay for dinner and those kinds of date things. Without loan or lien mind you. If I'm spending time with anyone it is because I enjoy their company and find them interesting, paying for a meal or access to a show is just my way of saying that I appreciate them. I have also had a girlfriend take me out for the night, I took it in the spirit it was given.
I open doors for women. I open doors for men. I even open doors for complete strangers who I'm not trying to bone. Opening doors is just good manners, regardless of any particular genitalia.
I'm not a fan of texting, the awkward silences are annoying and the conversations so limited. I would be hesitant to ask someone out via keyboard of any kind, it isn't something to be done impersonally.
I have no problem offering my coat when it is cold, I'm a big guy and I don't care about the weather often but most of my coats are heavy and warm.
If my date wants to go dutch, open the door for me and offer me her coat? I would wonder why her coat can fit me. Not much else. Gender equality has some funny outcomes.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dogbreath: I've been surrounded by the one night stand glorifying culture portrayed in our media for many years and it hasn't made me any more desirous of having a random hookup
Heh. I would say, if anything, it makes me *less* desirous of a random hookup.
Notice though, if you will, the shift on what is "edgy," in pop art today moving *away* from the image of the man being defined by his ability to screw anything that moves.
For instance: Jason Bourne is in one long term relationship. When his girlfriend dies, he doesn't jump on the next thing out of grief.
James Bond also doesn't have casual sex with just anyone (at least not for the first two movies), and Batman also doesn't get laid for 2 films, until he does get laid, and it turns out to have been a bad misjudgment.
Really, do you think such films would have been so discerning about male sexuality 20 years ago? I find that a positive change.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by AchillesHeel:
If my date wants to go dutch, open the door for me and offer me her coat? I would wonder why her coat can fit me. Not much else. Gender equality has some funny outcomes.
I don't know- I still have an ego problem about size. I'm big and very strong. I once had a date with a girl who was (no kidding) about 6' 8" and outweighed me by a few pounds (not fat though). I couldn't get over it. My current girlfriend is a hair taller than me at 6'2" and that's hard enough. Maybe I'm a chauvinist, sure, I don't know.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
quote:Originally posted by El JT de Spang: Your ideal of a gentleman is chauvinistic, so don't get too comfortable on your high horse.
I'm pretty flabbergasted by the popular opinion here. So, the argument is that men shouldn't open doors, pull out chairs, walk on the road side of the sidewalk, etc, because it's misogynistic or chauvinistic.
quote:Originally posted by El JT de Spang: Your ideal of a gentleman is chauvinistic, so don't get too comfortable on your high horse.
Bah, being kind to people isn't chauvinist...men have more muscle, generate more heat, it makes perfect sense to offer someone your coat if they are cold and you fine. As to opening doors, I open the door for anyone who needs it.
Carrying groceries for women folk also makes sense, as again, men folk generally have more muscle and are larger.
As to paying for checks...who cares? If someone is more comfortable (both emotionally or financially) flipping the bill, then great, if dutch, fine. It's just a traditional way of letting someone know you like them.
As to having a man order for the woman...yuck! I've always liked girls who know what they like, have a brain in their heads and are not afraid to voice their opinions.
As to pulling out a chair...I've only ever done it at very formal situations, like weddings, where more ceremonial manners are called for.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
Aros: Bubble of evil, really? That's too much dude.
The site you linked to has some good tips, but this one I disagree with:
quote:Remove Your Hat Indoors Yes, this is an old one, but a good one. If you’re going someplace and you’ll be staying a while, take your hat off. It just shows a little respect for the establishment you’re entering. Don’t want to because your hair will get messed up? Too bad -- in that case, you shouldn’t have worn a hat. This isn’t the 1950s, and a hat is no longer a de facto part of a man’s wardrobe. If it’s the dead of winter and you’re wearing a beanie or ski cap for warmth, don’t worry about it. Everyone else’s hair will look just as bad.
"It's just good manners" is not a great reason, a lot of things we do are purely for the feelings of others, but putting effort into being aware of people's emotions is different then placating some odd ritual that is meaningless and mostly extinct anyway.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
I'd reckon that it's the opposite of chauvinism. Traditional Southern etiquette isn't about putting women down . . . it's about elevating them.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
My family has always required hats removed indoors and at the dinner table. I never thought it was odd.
Posted by Parkour (Member # 12078) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aros: I'd reckon that it's the opposite of chauvinism. Traditional Southern etiquette isn't about putting women down . . . it's about elevating them.
When that really conservative catholic school told another school that they could not field a girl, then the other school fielded the girl anyway, then they dropped out from playing them, they used the same logic. They said that they elevate women, and "respect" them in a way where the poor little dearies must never play sports. It is the same result, and the same issue with behavior that you tell yourself is to "elevate".
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aros: I'd reckon that it's the opposite of chauvinism. Traditional Southern etiquette isn't about putting women down . . . it's about elevating them.
Not to be rude, but...why are you talking about Southern etiquette? Utah ain't the South, man.
However, coming from the rural South, I can definitely say that women/girls are generally off-limits for teasing/etc. (by anyone other than their family members). There was a lot of stuff that my wife and her friends, growing up in a school NOT filled with rural Southerners, had to put up with. I find the stories amazing. We didn't tease girls, hit them, mock them, etc.. We also didn't flirt with our female teachers.
I've read that the South is an informal "gynocracy" of sorts, and I suspect that started right after the Civil War, when so many men simply didn't survive. It's not an issue of treating women like they're stupid or incompetent. Teenage girls play sports in the rural South, they are often the valedictorians, they have jobs, drive cars, etc.. Granted, some men have some fairly antiquated attitudes about gender roles, but that's mainly the older generation. It's pretty much an undisputed fact that the women run the community social life of the rural South, in my experience.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aros: I'd reckon that it's the opposite of chauvinism. Traditional Southern etiquette isn't about putting women down . . . it's about elevating them.
Elevating them... because they are weak, delicate flowers that need a strong man to protect them.
Posted by stilesbn (Member # 11809) on :
quote:Originally posted by Parkour:
quote:Originally posted by Aros: I'd reckon that it's the opposite of chauvinism. Traditional Southern etiquette isn't about putting women down . . . it's about elevating them.
When that really conservative catholic school told another school that they could not field a girl, then the other school fielded the girl anyway, then they dropped out from playing them, they used the same logic. They said that they elevate women, and "respect" them in a way where the poor little dearies must never play sports. It is the same result, and the same issue with behavior that you tell yourself is to "elevate".
It seems that you are making quite the leap in your argument. Going from a few simple acts of gentry to banning women from sports.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
No kidding. The only real reason we don't think of the idea of a person behaving towards another as though they need all sorts of incidental, trivial things done for them (not one of which, by the way, would cost them much effort to do themselves nor cost the one doing them much effort either) because of their gender is, well, because we're taught that it's not somehow.
But none of the customs being lauded as 'gentlemanly'* were birthed in a time where the decision was 'let's do small, helpful things for our fellow human beings just because it's the nice thing to do'. They are directly tied to little 'don't worry your pretty little head' bits as well, unfortunately.
*Unless I'm in an big hurry, I'll hold a door for someone behind or in front of me pretty much as a matter of course. Not quite sure why. An easy way to feel friendly, and besides, the extra 'effort' in holding open a door is minimal compared to opening the door at all. I don't know. Something I've done since I was a kid, really.
Even when I was young, though, I couldn't rationalize-even when I was being taught it was the gentlemanly thing to do-that the man would pay for meals and outings as a rule, pull out chairs or open car doors, or decide entrees. That last one especially struck me as bizarre. Even when I was a child, the most anyone told me what I'd be eating at a restaurant was 'he'll have a salad'.
I think the truth is, much of this behavior ends up being about making ourselves feel better as it is about helping other human beings. Unless she's loaded down with stuff, have I really done anything meaningful for her by opening a door? Unless he's got a bad back, have I done much by pulling a chair for him? Not really.
I think it might be different for a kid, though-doing small little things they think are fun because it makes 'em grin. Tying them to gender is silly and anachronistic, though.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
When you start with what is proper behavior for males towards females it isn't far from what isn't proper for women to do in general.
Posted by theamazeeaz (Member # 6970) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aros:
quote:Originally posted by El JT de Spang: Your ideal of a gentleman is chauvinistic, so don't get too comfortable on your high horse.
I'm pretty flabbergasted by the popular opinion here. So, the argument is that men shouldn't open doors, pull out chairs, walk on the road side of the sidewalk, etc, because it's misogynistic or chauvinistic.
Misogynistic is the wrong word. My dictionary gives no other definition than "reflecting or inspired by a hatred of women ".
The word you are looking for is patronizing or "treat with an apparent kindness that betrays a feeling of superiority". The door and the chair thing comes off as patronizing. Everyone agrees you should not drop doors in people's faces*, it's just that such a superficial gesture of human decency gets too far elevated. You are also taking away her ability to do the same for you.
quote:Originally posted by Aros: I'd reckon that it's the opposite of chauvinism. Traditional Southern etiquette isn't about putting women down . . . it's about elevating them.
It's still sexism. It's very hard to convince people that positive stereotypes, while much less evil than the negative ones, still hurt because someone is making a snap judgment about that person, or their abilities. The most obvious example is saying all Asians are good at math. While it's nice to assume someone is automatically talented, I'd like to leave it as an exercise to the next posters to give reasons why the person the receiving end would feel uncomfortable. Cover the case where it's both true and not true.
*unless it's locked door with card access. I have too many friends with stalkers, so don't try this with me.
[ January 15, 2013, 04:00 PM: Message edited by: theamazeeaz ]
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Elevating them right out of, say, having jobs...
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
Stone Wolf, here's an easy litmus test: would you offer your coat, carry groceries, etc. for a smaller, weaker man? What about for a woman who was bigger and stronger than you?
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
This is stupid. It's not a "don't worry your pretty head" about it issue.
Is it wrong for a guy to take the "dirty jobs" around the house? I'm all for job equality, pay equality, etc., but should a man not take out the garbage? Change a tire on the side of the road? It's not about the man being better than the woman.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aros: This is stupid. It's not a "don't worry your pretty head" about it issue.
Is it wrong for a guy to take the "dirty jobs" around the house? I'm all for job equality, pay equality, etc., but should a man not take out the garbage? Change a tire on the side of the road? It's not about the man being better than the woman.
Then what's it about? Is it about the man being worse? That's not an improvement!
Fewer and fewer people know how to change a tire these days. I've stopped and helped men and women both. Same way I've held doors open for both, and bought dinner for both, and even given my coat to both!
I'm not arguing against common decency and treating others with respect. But why base it on their genitals?
People should do the jobs that they know how to do. And they should do the jobs they want to do.
What's the argument for doing it any other way?
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
It's about men and women being different! For God's sake!
If I was with a person regardless of gender who was mechanically inclined (as I am, not my whole gender) and we got a flat while they was driving, I would offer to -help- with the tire. If I was driving with some who was not, I would offer to fix the flat myself.
I -have- offered to help men with carrying things, and offered my coat to a male friend who was obviously cold when I was fine.
Men and women are different, there are common traits, such as size, strength, etc which are more often to be present with one gender then the other.
Insisting that men and women be treated exactly the same is as silly as insisting that one gender is better or worse than the other. We are different. On average. The hugely vast majority of things that a man can do, a woman can, and vice versa.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
All my kids, male and female alike, are expected to take out the garbage. They frequently claim I had kids for the free slave labor.
They're right, of course, except about the "free" part.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_: It's about men and women being different! For God's sake!
If I was with a person regardless of gender who was mechanically inclined (as I am, not my whole gender) and we got a flat while they was driving, I would offer to -help- with the tire. If I was driving with some who was not, I would offer to fix the flat myself.
I -have- offered to help men with carrying things, and offered my coat to a male friend who was obviously cold when I was fine.
Men and women are different, there are common traits, such as size, strength, etc which are more often to be present with one gender then the other.
Insisting that men and women be treated exactly the same is as silly as insisting that one gender is better or worse than the other. We are different. On average. The hugely vast majority of things that a man can do, a woman can, and vice versa.
I'm not insisting on people being treated exactly the same. On the contrary, I advocate treating people as individuals based on their exact individual situation and preferences.
Their gender doesn't dictate that, though. And I'm against assuming attitudes based on gender.
Posted by theamazeeaz (Member # 6970) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: All my kids, male and female alike, are expected to take out the garbage. They frequently claim I had kids for the free slave labor.
They're right, of course, except about the "free" part.
My mother told me frequently throughout my childhood that the only reason she had children was so she could have slaves.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank: I'm not insisting on people being treated exactly the same. On the contrary, I advocate treating people as individuals based on their exact individual situation and preferences.
Their gender doesn't dictate that, though. And I'm against assuming attitudes based on gender.
That's fine, but there are some traits which are common to both genders and not being aware of them puts you at a disadvantage.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_:
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank: I'm not insisting on people being treated exactly the same. On the contrary, I advocate treating people as individuals based on their exact individual situation and preferences.
Their gender doesn't dictate that, though. And I'm against assuming attitudes based on gender.
That's fine, but there are some traits which are common to both genders and not being aware of them puts you at a disadvantage.
What are you talking about?
Bearing in mind everything I said in the post you quoted, can you explain what this disadvantage might be?
Posted by Parkour (Member # 12078) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_: It's about men and women being different! For God's sake!
Are women different in a way in which they need have the man's tipping habits concealed from them, or expect doors be opened for them by males?
Posted by stilesbn (Member # 11809) on :
No one has argued that it is courteous for men to conceal their tipping habits. No one has argued that women should expect doors to be opened for them by males.
So the answer to your question is no.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
quote:Originally posted by stilesbn: No one has argued that it is courteous for men to conceal their tipping habits. No one has argued that women should expect doors to be opened for them by males.
So the answer to your question is no.
I did argue that it was poor form to flaunt your tipping habits. It is generally recognized that one should be discrete and not show everyone the check.
Also, it would be poor form for someone to open up a check someone else paid to find out how much they tipped.
And my daughter DOES expect me to open her door. But this is part of the relationship between her and I, and there's nothing wrong with that.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
Our brains make sense of the world by compiling facts into stories that make sense, even if the story is entirely fictional.
By attempting to (I doubt your brain is fooled) remove all gender norms from your predictions on what is about to happen, you are just denying the story your brain is already telling you. *shrug*
It is great (no sarcasm at all) to treat people as individuals and not lump them in with any other group, and it should be done when dealing with people, but regardless of how you treat others, your amygdala is predicting what you will be facing long before your conscious mind ever gets a single at bat.
Aros: Concealment and discretion are not the same, though they can seem similar. And your daughter having a special bond with you is miles away from all women everywhere rightly expecting for all men to treat them predominantly. Parkour's is a throw away question and stilesbn's response is appropriate.
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
quote:And my daughter DOES expect me to open her door. But this is part of the relationship between her and I, and there's nothing wrong with that.
I do think it's sweet that you treat your daughter with so much kindness, just to clarify.
But I think it would be good to reflect on what you are teaching her about her place in the world, too.
Is she actually more deserving of this special treatment than your son would be? (If you have a son, what does he conclude from this?) If she (or he) doesn't conclude that she has somehow earned special treatment as a reward for being female, what other conclusions may be drawn? (Possibly: that girls are less capable of helping themselves and others in this particular way than boys are?)
If you intend for your daughter to plan her life around such ideas, then I suppose you should carry on. When I consciously avoid such lessons*, it's not because I don't think my daughter is special or deserving of kindness, it's because I don't want to falsely convince her of fundamental differences between her and boys. If the differences are truly fundamental, I suppose that they will be expressed despite my failure to deliberately reinforce them. (And, to be sure, she learns these lessons from the culture around her. Without isolating her, I can't prevent it entirely, nor do I want to prevent it entirely. I think finding a comfortable fit with the culture around her is important; that may include some gender-based roles and behaviors. The important thing to me is to help her keep her options somewhat open, so she will be [more] free to figure this out for herself, based on what makes her happy.)
I hope that whoever my daughter spends her life with treats her the way she wants to be treated. I'm aiming for her to determine how she wants to be treated by experiencing being helped and helping others, being deferred to and deferring to others, leading and following and cooperating. I don't think it's necessary to impose rules predicated on her sex for how she should expect to interact with others.**
*...This is not always. I was certainly brought up with some of the same behaviors and beliefs and habits, and they are still there, and they come through in various ways, I'm sure. I try to avoid passing on the things that don't make sense or that contribute to rigid social customs that I think can be harmful.
**Same goes for my boys.
Posted by Parkour (Member # 12078) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_: Parkour's is a throw away question and stilesbn's response is appropriate.
I think on some level having you in particular decry my questions as "throw away" validates them in some way, because of your tendencies here as a "debater".
While this could be a throw-out insult, it's not in this case, you just really are constantly impervious to what people are trying to tell you and then you accuse them of playing some sort of runaround game and saying things like this, so stop. It's not them. It's you.
quote:Originally posted by stilesbn: No one has argued that it is courteous for men to conceal their tipping habits. No one has argued that women should expect doors to be opened for them by males.
So the answer to your question is no.
Okay. If the idea here is not courtesy then what is it.
quote:Originally posted by Aros: And a tip should be discreet. If a lady sees how much a gentleman is tipping, he's either flaunting it, she's being nosy, or she's just happened to glimpse it in passing. Not saying that he should hide the check when he's filling it out, but signing a check isn't something everyone should see.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote: Originally posted by Aros: I'd reckon that it's the opposite of chauvinism. Traditional Southern etiquette isn't about putting women down . . . it's about elevating them.
Not really. It's about putting them on a pedestal- there are various implications regarding the woman's place in society when the goal is to place her out of reach of normal social engagement. "Elevating" women is not that much different from degrading them. The object is to distance the person from the image of the "lady." [
Posted by stilesbn (Member # 11809) on :
quote:Originally posted by stilesbn:
quote:Originally posted by Aros: And a tip should be discreet. If a lady sees how much a gentleman is tipping, he's either flaunting it, she's being nosy, or she's just happened to glimpse it in passing. Not saying that he should hide the check when he's filling it out, but signing a check isn't something everyone should see.
Parkour, I guess we're Aros differently here. I read this as saying, "You shouldn't flaunt your check. If someone sees the tip, no big deal but don't flaunt it." This is more in line with how Americans deal with money and keeping how much they make a private matter (I believe this was discussed sometime last year in a thread). I don't think it has much to do with chivalry and that to be courteous you must hide the amount you tip like a paranoid Gollum.
So like SW said, "Concealment and discretion are not the same."
Edit: UBB Error.
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
Moved to the Chivlry thread, 'cause I didn't notice it was there before posting here.
[ January 16, 2013, 12:58 PM: Message edited by: ElJay ]
Posted by Tuukka (Member # 12124) on :
Things are just more varied nowadays. Back in the old days there was a more rigid "system" to dating. There were steps you were more or less expected to take. Now it's more loose, and the system of dating varies a lot, depending on what kind of a person you are. It's just one more sign of cultural fragmentation that has happened in the last couple of generations. And it's going to get even more fragmented in the future.
Old-fashioned courtship hasn't disappeared anywhere. Taking a girl to a cup of coffee, or a dinner, or movies, is still probably the most common way. There are just more alternatives, and more people use them.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
quote:Originally posted by Parkour: I think on some level having you in particular decry my questions as "throw away" validates them in some way, because of your tendencies here as a "debater".
While this could be a throw-out insult, it's not in this case, you just really are constantly impervious to what people are trying to tell you and then you accuse them of playing some sort of runaround game and saying things like this, so stop. It's not them. It's you.
I'm being lectured by the king of the drive by snipe...LoL!
I am a debater, and proud of it. I actually get in and discuss things, not just sit back and make snide comments. And I am open to being convinced, as proven by the many times I have acknowledged that the other side made fair points and changed my opinion. Two things I have never seen you do...change your mind or engage in meaningful discussion.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)