"Chivalry is dead!"
I've heard it, you've heard it, we have all heard the call. My generation knows nothing of how to treat a lady, on how to use manners, on romance or all sorts of other codes of conduct that have apparently been written in stone since the beginning of time. We have all heard that chivalry is dead.
I grew up in a small southern town. I come from a long line of southerners, and the concept of Southern Hospitality played a big role in my childhood. I therefore have heard every kind of accusation about how "kids these days" have forgotten how to be polite or how to show good manners - and, of course, it boils down to being chivalrous. For a long time, I assumed that the adults who made these claims were right, and therefore I worked especially hard to make sure that I spoke to authoritative figures in a formal tone, and even to my peers I would use "sir", "ma'am", and other such good manners.
As I got older and was exposed to more people, however, I realized that most kids my age had manners just as good as my own. Of course, while we hung out with one another, the pretense of formality is stripped away and we talk much more formally, but that is besides the point. The point is that we do have good manners, often displaying them with far more poise then that of our older counterparts.
If most of the people in my generation display good manners, then what are the older generations referring to when they say that chivalry is dead? It was my thought that in order to understand this question, I had to ask what they meant by "chivalry"? What exactly had died? In order to figure out this side of the question, I asked some of my older co-workers (ranging in age from twenty-seven to over sixty) how they might define chivalry.
I found that chivalry seems to have all manners of definitions, from holding open the doors for those behind you to letting a lady go before you in a line to offering your assistance when you see someone struggling. What chivalry seems to boil down to is to simply treat those around you - particularly those with less power - with respect, even when you are in a position in which you could be rude or otherwise harm the other party. Respecting and often caring for those who are too weak to fend or care for themselves - that is what an act of chivalry is.
Upon this conclusion, I realized that I was now faced with another dilemma, because it seems to me that standing up for the little guy is actually becoming more popular. So now, the question is not, "Why are we not protecting the little guy?" but rather, "Which little guy are we supposed to be protecting?"
The general answer to this question is that we are supposed to give two groups in particular special treatment; these two groups have for centuries been considered the weak and the invalid, and they therefore need more help. These two groups are the poor and - wait for it - women. While the poor are still in need of support and assistance from those with greater means and resources, the fact of the matter is that women - while still an oppressed group fighting for equity - no longer are considered weaker than men.
The world, when the concept of chivalry was initially created, was ruled by men because it was ruled by brute strength. Today, brute strength is no longer the sole source of power, and women are therefore more able to participate in the events of the world. They no longer have to be treated as delicate, breakable flowers. Most women, if you ask them, do not want to be treated this way. We are capable, and strong, and just as powerful as men. And it isn't as if we have just gained this strength. We have always been capable; the difference is that we are now demanding that capability to be recognized and acknowledged.
My generation does not treat women as fragile flowers needing to be shielded from the world and kept from "over-exerting ourselves". So what? We still hold doors open - for everyone. We still offer assistance to those in need - to all genders. We still feel a pang in our chest when we see a homeless person. We still donate money to charities when we can afford to - and sometimes even when we can't afford to.
In fact, the Millennials and Generation Z are statistically more likely to be accepting and supportive of those under oppression. Rallies and marches consist of higher percentages of Millenials and Gen Zs than any other generations. There are more marches and greater participation and coverage of those marches than ever before, and we are calling for the recognition of the need for basic human rights for everyone. Even the youngest of us are stepping up, as intolerance and awareness of bullying is on the rise. Statistics talk, and they say that, contrary to popular belief, my generation is more supportive and encouraging of the so-called little guy than any generation before us.
We still respect and stand up for the little guy. The difference is that the "little guy" does not mean the same thing that it did half a century ago. Today, the little guy is the one living under the poverty line, who works full time and still can't afford to feed their family. The little guy is the member of a minority race who knows that their resume is just as good as the white man's, but they still won't get hired. The little guy is the muslim whose hijab is ripped from her head, exposing her and violating her. The little guy is the woman who said "Me Too" and got written off as an attention whore. The little guy is the boy who got jumped in the restroom because he dared to hold hands with his boyfriend.
Chivalry hasn't died; if anything, it is more alive than ever. The only thing that is dying is the notion that only certain people deserve to be treated with chivalry.
That's a good thing.
