Finally an honest column about the reason why men are reticent to show the usual kindness towards women:
Offering a seat to a pregnant woman on the Tube (or elsewhere in life) is too often confused with "sexism" – as equalities minister Jo Swinson unhelpfully reminded us earlier this year when she said it would have been sexist for her male colleagues in Parliament to offer her a seat, heavily pregnant, because they thought she 'needed' it. Equally, holding a door open for a woman can be wrongfully seen by some sexist behaviour: 'how dare the man think I'm the weaker sex and do this for me; as if I need it, I'm independent ... blah blah'.
We've forgotten the art of manners in this country. It's got nothing to do with sexism; it's often just the right thing to do to hold a door or offer a seat to someone who may need it more than you. Or forget *need* and admit it's just a nice, polite, lovely thing to do, to be kind to your fellow citizens whom you otherwise will probably never see again.
Men are so afraid of being accused of being sexist pigs they give up. Plenty of my male friends have openly admitted they don't even sit down in an empty seat on the Tube anymore for fear of a pregnant woman getting on at the next stop and having the awkward 'do you want my seat/ No, I don't/ I really don't mind/ I don't need it' tussle where both parties end up feeling silly. They'd rather leave it vacant for another man to deal with the inevitable.
The reason men are no longer as polite as they used to be? They're scared of getting it wrong, on the whole. There's also the argument that traditional acts of chivalry are frowned upon as "suspicious". Men are nervous their acts of kindness will be taken the wrong way – or send the wrong signal (either that he thinks he's better than her, or that he wants to date her, or both).
At my age, there is no cause for confusion on the last point, so I can just offer a motherly smile and hearty thank you for every chivalrous action. (I can also give the hairy eyeball to those who neglect me -- I've even just stood there to allow them a second chance!) Perhaps this would make a good new year's resolution -- the next generation of women will benefit tremendously from thoughtful men.
Comments
“People have realized that the complete removal of the feminine element from the Christian message is a shortcoming from an anthropological viewpoint. It is theologically and anthropologically important for woman to be at the center of Christianity."
This is just another of the unintended consequences of the cultural acceptance of contraception and abortion! Men's sexuality has been robbed of its creative essence. It is now viewed as something that imposes a burden on women (when conception happens to occur), something used to control women or something that is purely recreational. Why would men bother?? In taking away their responsibility, we've also robbed them of their significance! In the big picture of humanity, men have been made into nothing more than a nuisance women have to figure out how to control in order to bring about the next generation. Men don't see it as their task to protect the vulnerable because they see themselves as the vulnerable ones. A few well preserved vials of sperm would make men entirely obsolete in the world's ethos today!!
That is astounding Robin, and good for you for standing up. At the heart of that matter, I think, is even worse than a gender mixing message. There is an increased sharper and sharper focus on the "self." Solid Catholic teaching returns our focus away from ourselves to Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The original sin, Eve denied her womanhood when she desired to be like "gods." Since the only god she knew was the Father. Where was Adam? He stood impotent... in other words, they were divorced. There's a young girl at Robin's son's high school who was just told that she is the center of the universe and it's a tragic disservice to her.
Ditto what Mary said! A lot of high schools have very poor math and science depts, for boys and girls. I also am educated as a chemical engineer, but chose to teach the two years before we had children because its hours were more suited to spending time with children. (I was looking ahead). When it came time and I was pregnant with our first, I realized that I did not want to leave him with someone else, and was able to stay home full time. I am not sure it would have been that easy if we were used to another engineering income and not just a private school teacher income. Also some of my first job offers were out on oil rigs - I had no interest in that at all even though I enjoyed my engineering classes and did well in them. No one discouraged me from an engineering job, on the contrary I got a lot of flack for my decision not to pursue an engineering career.
I've been lurking, but this is one that irritates me. Beats the heck out of me what these "barriers" are. I was educated as a chemical engineer, where 1/3 of our class was women. However, in electrical engineering, only 1 or 2 out of 30 were women. Is it possible that women are Just Not Interested in some areas? Nah, it must be The Man keeping us down so we must legislate (and, I agree -- when they say "legistlate", I hear "quota"). And actually, I have a friend that was also a chemical engineer. When she lost her job, she decided not to go back into engineering and started working from home so she could spend more time with her 3 kids. Also, if nothing else, there are all kinds of incentives for women to enter science and engineering -- scholarships not available to men, guaranteed housing on campuses that do not guarantee housing to the general population, etc. I think you hit the nail on the head when you said that schools in general are not preparing students for the hard sciences. It is truly a sad state of affairs, the lack of science education these days.