Gender Neutral Civility? Just Another Excuse to Ignore Privilege.

As we discuss the issues of what it means to be a good man or about the obligations of Gentlemen, the generalized comments and reactions from many men present me with a paradox that seems to be in vogue lately: the idea of a gender neutral civility. We talk about being good men, yet want to remove the “obligation of men” when it comes to our relations with women (you know, the other gender). We refuse to see any responsibility towards women based on the idea that there shouldn’t be gender requirements to general civil behavior.

Men, this is a cop-out, a way to have our cake and eat it too.

I know that at this moment I could start talking about unicorns and rainbows because most readers have already shut down their rational capability and left the room to prepare snide remarks and reactions. Then again, they probably shifted into that attitude as soon as they read the title or saw that this was written by the same man who likes to use the word Chivalry every other article. For those few gentlemen and ladies left, let me explain why I make such a drastic conclusion.

The generalized comment from most men, when told they should be gentleman towards women, goes along the lines of “I treat everyone with civility, irrelevant of gender” or “I treat everyone as equals.” Another typical comment mentioned goes along the same lines, “I don’t see gender, I just see people.” That actually sounds like a noble concept, a society where gender is not a factor when determining treatment towards someone. Well, I’m sold. No more Gentlemanly articles from me…

Except I have heard this kind of wording before. You could just replace the word “gender” with color, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, religion, country of origin, economic class, or whatever else you want. You might think you’re being progressive and non-judgmental, but the reality is, the only people who say these phrases tend to be the ones who benefit the most from the way society is currently set up. This concept diminishes the impact of any actual discrimination, inequality, or suffering currently happening to the group mentioned. You might as well be saying “I don’t view it as a problem because it does not affects me.” We need to make changes to the world, not to grant any special benefits for women, but to compensate for the current inequality they endure.

For this discussion, I will only focus on the gender aspect or I would never be able to finish this article within my lifetime if I mentioned any other group.

Men will say that men also suffer from this gender role discrimination, citing attacks from the militant feminists as the most evident examples. They will complain how Stay at Home Dads are viewed by society, how men are shamed because “everything is the guy’s fault,” or how there are groups specifically geared to benefit only women. Instead of attacking or dismissing these situations, shouldn’t we be asking why these situations even exist? Are they not a reaction or result of the prevalent Male Dominated society? We, as men, created the monster and now we complain about how it behaves! So why shouldn’t we man-up and set things right?

On a side note, we see similar movements comparable to the feminists from other marginalized groups fighting for equal treatment. We see social equality movements from Blacks, LGBT community, Latinos and other Immigrants, Muslims, and several other “minorities.” We usually say “we don’t see (insert social difference of the group here), we just see people.” Then we walk away, leaving them to deal alone with a society that reminds them every day with the reality of discrimination.

Men objectify women and expect the ladies to be happy about it. I am not talking about the open crass objectification, but the simple everyday ones. How many images of half-naked women do you see every single day, from your waitress’s uniform to billboards down the street? How many do you see of men?

How do you think you would feel about your own self-image if you were bombarded with images of half-naked teen boys, who have nothing better to do with their day than to workout, telling you that this is how men should look, even when you are past your thirties?

You would probably think it’s unfair if they started firing all the male newscasters and commentators when they grow fat, old, or bald. Then, why do we expect our female newscasters to look like eye candy? Guess when they get too old, we can just fire her. It’s gotten to the point we even determine if a woman is too attractive to become a work hazard. Guess then, we can fire her. For the first time in history we might have a woman as a presidential candidate, yet instead of analyzing her political qualifications, the main attack was that she had “Fat Thighs” and “Small Breasts”! Really? One might say that political campaigns get dirty and she should have to deal with the same attacks as male candidates do. I have yet to see a political attack to a male candidate because he has a big beer belly, is so insecure he needs to do a comb-over, or has a small penis.

Why is it so hard to understand that we help men while helping women? Doesn’t helping one also help the other?

You might wonder why “stay at home dads” are viewed with mixed reactions or why men aren’t viewed as having the same rights as women during custody battles? Because WE made a society where women are told to stay home with the kids while men go out to work. Because WE laugh at every “make me a sandwich” joke we see online. Maybe if we stopped promoting this stupidity (sorry, I meant to say ideology) and actually stopped making it harder for women to make a career, Dads might be viewed with the same importance as Moms. We complain when we are told that our role is one of being a provider, but have no issue with women being paid less for the same work. The same goes to almost all other aspects where we complain about male gender discrimination. We love to spout statistics of how men are at greater safety risks in the work place, but refuse to view the way we actively keep women out of those same jobs. If women were offered the same opportunities as men, maybe the ladies wouldn’t have to create ones specifically catered for them. We have to accept that gender has nothing to do with capabilities.

It’s interesting how most feminists are actually proud of the fact that they are women. They view their gender as something that defines them and empowers them, not as something to be ashamed of or as something that limits them. They, as women, can do everything a man can do, yet don’t have to stop being women to do it. And they are right!

Then why do we, as men, choose to view gender equality only being possible if we minimize the characteristics of our own gender? Why do we feel the need to think that equality comes from lessening the gender differences? Men have shamed themselves out of their own Male Pride. That mentality is just a cosmetic solution to make you feel like you are doing something about the issue at hand. The truth is, it ignores a more profound problem. As long as we think that gender equality comes from not recognizing gender, things will never change.

Just because I recognize the difference between genders, acknowledge the reality and struggles that women have to endure, and promote true social justice between us, does not mean I have to be any less of a Man! So why would I think that by saying “I don’t see gender, I see people” when dealing with a woman, I’m helping true gender equality in any way?

As you may have noticed, I did not start my article with a quote as usual. Instead, I felt this time I should close with one. I leave you with Ms. Jane Elliot’s presentation of “The Angry Eye”. Although her chat is about recognizing race past the “I only see people, not skin color” mentality, it applies to any marginalized group:

You do not have the right to say to a person I do not see you as you are, I see you as I am more comfortable seeing you…We all live in different realities, but when you deny what this person is going through or what that person is going through, you are denying their reality….People, don’t deny differences! Accept them, appreciate them, recognize them, and cherish them.

Gentlemen, cherish the women around you.  

(Previously posted on Good Men Project)

 

 

 

The Tactical Gentleman, when Chivalry is about survival

You follow the rules of war for you -- not your enemy. You fight by rules to keep your humanity.

Lt. Franz Stigler, German WWII Ace, explained why he didn’t shoot down a damaged Allied bomber.

As I continue with my crusade for a redefined code for the Modern Gentleman, I am confronted constantly with comments about equating Gentlemanly behavior to manners and about gender neutral civility trumps chivalry. Something about those comments just didn’t seem to relate to my own experience with Chivalry and my own upbringing. I used to think it was simply another Culture or Age Gap, but then why was it that I found so many like-minded individuals, especially with martial artists and military men. Maybe it’s that most Traditional Martial Artists and Soldiers still follow codes very similar to Chivalry. What was the link between these martial men and my own upbringing?

And as it usually happens, it was a random comment from a random person that made it all make sense. The dance instructor I mentioned in another article said an interesting comment. “Men here in the U.S. have no idea how to be Gentlemen. None of them open doors to women or offer a seat in the bus. Back home, this was something ever man would do naturally, but here? They either don’t do it or think they have to be applauded when they do.” Keep in mind that she is not Latina, but actually is from Thailand. 

Then as if a cartoon bulb went off, it all made sense. Being a Gentleman, as I have mentioned before, is about offering protection and having self-discipline. I have also mentioned how Chivalry, manners, and most other ethical codes developed as a way to create order. Understand that what we view as manners today where actually developed by the military class as a way to control social chaos. So the common thread was Violence, or more so how to combat violence!

I have noticed Chivalry and Gentlemanly acts tend to be almost automatic in men raised in countries where violence in city streets is an everyday occurrence. I am not talking about simply a mugging in the park or the generalized obsession about the possibility that you might be the victim of a crime, any crime. The world I am talking about is one that most people in the US have never experienced. It is living in a place where you keep a tally of murders per day, were kidnappings happen in broad daylight, and where people have accepted this as a fact of life. I am talking about cities where part of your experiences growing up is to be robbed at gunpoint several times and to have at least one friend become a random casualty from gun violence in the streets. As you grow up in this environment, you develop a “healthy degree of Paranoia” and an understanding of the local criminal elements.

I am not going to go into what causes a society spiral out of control, as it would distract from the discussion at hand. What I will discuss is how this forges you as a man. You tend to develop a tactical mentality, where every time you walk into a place and look for possible threats and exit strategies. Your ethics, your actions, and your behavior are what separate you from the less than savory element of the city. As a man, you understand that might be beaten or even killed, if caught unprepared. You also understand that women, besides enduring the same threats as men, have the additional threat of being raped. So becoming a “Better Man”, a Gentleman in this kind of society, is not just about having manners, but about rising above the scum of society. That is why in these social environments, being a Gentleman is not about how much money you have, but about how much of a man you are. That is why initiatives such as Man-Up focus on men challenging men who commit violence against women. That is why I am still amazed how some men find it offensive that initiative to curb violence against women in college campuses, focus on a call to men stepping up to the plate.

Most old-school martial arts where developed in countries were similar social violence was common, so they focus on being able to defend yourself and those around you without becoming what you are defending against. Most of them expect the practitioners to develop self-discipline and a strict moral code. Martial Artists accept their role as defenders, and focus on not becoming what they fight against.

This is also common among most soldiers, who train to confront similar situations to the ones already described. For military men, it goes even further. The U.S. Army’s Laws of Land Warfare (FM 27-10) establish that soldiers must always conduct themselves “with regard for the principles of chivalry and humanity.” Unfortunately, we see more and more people who think that honorable behavior should only be given to honorable opponents. This is completely unacceptable. There is something worse than death, and it is to completely lose your humanity.

So with that in mind I want you to re-evaluate some of Chivalries traditional acts. Stop viewing them from a “manners” point of view. Realize you are a deterrent between the social predators and the rest of society.

Now suddenly you realize that why you might think about opening your car door to a lady. It gives you an opportunity to glance your surroundings for possible threats. Now you understand how walking a woman to her car isn’t about being a nice guy, but about making sure she makes it safe without some creep getting any ideas. You start walking on the street side of the sidewalk, not to protect her from being splashed by a car, but to keep her safe from kidnappings. You offer your seat in a crowded bus because it’s easier to react if you are standing up.

It’s funny, these things become second nature. But every time I hear about some girl being assaulted at night on a collage campus, I don’t think about what she could have done to stop it. I ask myself where the hell where her male friends. I ask myself how any of them could have simply walked her home, just because they are her friend, how the guy who went after her might have thought about it twice if he saw her accompanied. And then I think of men who think it’s not their problem.