Chivalry is a concept I have often struggled with. While the
vast majority of times, I see women eyeing the ‘gentlemen’ qualities in a man admirably,
a notion creep up at the back of my head to contaminate the hunky dory features
of an otherwise commendable phenomena. Fast disappearing in certain parts of
the world, you still manage to glimpse men volunteering to vacate their seats
for their women counterparts, either refrain from or immediately apologise, if
apprehended at expressing profanities in a lady’s presence, unwilling to share
certain kind of jokes, only considered appropriate out of the ranges of a
lady’s earshot. This is an act widely in practice, without the interference of
any other disparity such as age or physical location, solely based on gender
differences. It is avoidance in fear of ruffling a fragile female façade. It is
an epidemic.
It all goes back to the medieval times, a more chivalrous
era so to speak, where this code of conduct evolved partly from knighthood and
partly from the trend and ideals of courtly love and based on my readings so far
had been established with the noblest of intentions – to respect the honour of
women! But just like all other ancient customs, the viability of such a
tradition in today’s world and perspective is debatable. It poses an important
question of whether or not an idea of this nature should be entertained by a
group of modern women striving for sexual equality.
In my last post, I have hinted slightly about my sardonic
sense of humour being quite un-ladylike and hence widely unpopular. While most
often it draws a chuckle or an entertained gasp from the male sector, it almost
always draws a frown of annoyance from my women audience. This is solely
because it is considered to pertain certain crudeness, unexpected and
unsolicited from females. This takes me back to the 3 F’s – fragile female
façade – and how the emotional status of a woman is often confused with her
physical abilities and there seems to be a need to protect the women psyche as
well. Does it remind anyone about any other scenario, where often we resort to
using euphemism so not to offend a particular group? Yes, you are right, the
only other group is children!
Without further ado, allow me to make my point: in a world
where we are so caught up with empowering women and fighting for their rights
(quite rightly so), is not there a part of us that neglect the fact that
progress can only actualise when all the relatable wheels are in motion
together, i.e. empowerment of women alone would not suffice until or unless we
spend time trying to understand the male psyche as well.
See, bluntly put, men are the sperm bearers. They are
equipped with the biological responsibility to impregnate and as a result quite
naturally their sexual drive would be much more active and rash compared to
that of females. Why should we hold it against them? If women are not held
responsible for their ability to fall pregnant ‘easily’, why should men be
humiliated for their natural need to procreate? A man’s more pressing sexual
needs is a fact and finding it offensive or denying it is the same as crying
over how, as women, are stuck with the childbearing duties! These are natural
phenomena and instead of having a war with nature, we should accept what has
been given to us, and look to achieve a mutually beneficial balance.
I am a firm believer in the practicalities of human nature.
There are certain traits that make us human and surpass time, age and eras –
love is still love, hate is still hate and greed is still greed. Generations
have had no effect on these traits and they have outlived all others. So when a
person is caught lying, he is only acting on the impulses he was genetically
manufactured with – where is the surprise element – he is just being human, with
warts and all. We spend all our lives in a dilemma, killing ourselves over
thwarting the evil in us – an evil whose presence is as prevalent and
tantamount as the goodness. Thus, let us not beat ourselves over a slip and
accept that we can never become the perfect person because in truth, each of us
are already perfect – it is our flaws that make us perfect human beings.
Beginning of this year, when the Delhi rape created
headlines all around the world, I remember having an argument with an older
female relative of mine, over the popular meme shared on facebook that showed a
woman holding a banner that read ‘Do not teach us what to wear. Teach your sons
not to rape.’ Her argument against the meme was that we as women could not shun
the responsibility of dressing decently. In fact it was vital to ensure we do
not attract the wrong kind of attention and to follow it up she said ‘offering
a fresh stack of meat in front of a lion and expecting it to walk away
responsibly is an act of foolishness.’ I found this comment, especially coming
from a female, extremely derogatory (to say the least) and disillusioned merely
because our men are not lions and I would like to think we are more than just a
stack of meat. Our men will always be expected to exercise restraint from an
act of coerciveness because they are not animals – they are human. I think men
are misunderstood here, and given a label through incorrect social messages to
appear more like an ape - still stuck in phase 1 of evolution. Through such
messages from women, we are not only further deteriorating harmony between the
two sexes, but also endorsing something heinous as violence. This is what I mean when I say there is
a need for an increased interest into the male psyche from us females before we
can hope to achieve a drastic development in this area.
I mentioned in my last post on women power about never wishing to come back to this world as a
male and I meant it for more than one reason. Firstly, because of the lack of
romanticism in not being the natural hero but also because of the pressure of
expectation every man is born with! From the moment they are conceived
expectations are embedded into their system: the immense pressure of displaying
physical strength – if you are weak you get bullied in school – followed by an
inherited form of responsibility whereby the fathers set a certain standard
that the successor is expected to equal, if not exceed, as part of carrying the
name forward. The pressure just keeps building on – once they are done proving themselves
to their families, then comes the wife and children and the expectation mongers
constantly cheering or booing in the background – there is never a moment of
peace. Women on the other hand, mostly in the South Asian societies, are
completely exempt from these responsibilities. This is a form of male
discrimination, whereby they experience a sensation of living inside a pressure
cooker, both from family and society to prove themselves in terms of being
successful and earning a truckload of money and women in our society to a
certain extent contribute towards creating that pressure, by taking the
nonchalant or borderline flippant role in their responsibilities toward the
earnings of a household. The absence of the peer pressure on females
automatically adds to the men’s burden! And consequently contributes toward
shaping their perception of women in general.
Back in my university years, I remember a female friend
blatantly putting forward that she could never ever settle for an unsuccessful
man. My question to her was simply this- why was it important? Her response was
quite simple too – it was disgraceful for a man not to be successful! The
memory of that conversation always make me wonder if some of us are not, after
all, a little childlike deep down and perhaps mentally disabled too in certain
leadership areas which allow us only to accept successful and powerful men into
our lives. But men are expected to look at our 3 F’s (fragile female façade)
and accept us for better and for worse. It is perhaps not chivalry then that
has survived in the form of displaying honour, but this eyelash-batting,
helpless dame-in-distress attitude that still make men vacate and offer that
seat to us.
No comments:
Post a Comment