Chivalry Vs Equality

Adding to the confusion of the modern male is the practice of the chivalry. So much so that it has almost become a forgotten art. There is an astonished look when displays of this old practice are evoked and some find it a point to criticize. A common mantra is that “Chivalry is dead” but what is this old lost art and why is it seen as a character attribute especially when the literal meaning of the word has nothing to do with the implied meaning.

The root of the word, “Chivalry”, is a French derivative of the Latten word “cabbalus”, which means horse (especially riding and pack horses). The French used the word, “Chivalry”, to describe the art of horse training, more aptly, the art of working with horses. It was an art taught to the nobility at the time and widely used by military and knights of the 14th Century. Hence a group of armored knights became known as chivalries.

So where does the literal meaning intersect with the popular meaning? It could be argued that it with knights and nobility showing graciousness to an animal, that the display of such traits on the battle field and to those considered as lesser s or subordinates saw the development to the popular meaning of today. The rank of knight was only superseded by Lord, regent or king / queen. To these they were to show courtesies but if they showed theses to a subordinate it was considered a chivalrous act.

While writing this peace I hear on the radio that there is a topic going to be discussed “Is chivalry necessary?” which is quite peculiar. I am then reminded of the modern day meaning of chivalry and how it in no way reflects its literal meaning or its derivative. It seems that the modern day meaning is the display of man honoring a woman by subjecting himself before her by acting as her servant and bodyguard, catering to her safety and comfort while still remaining strong. Chivalry it seems to have reversed its meaning. While the original meaning’s derivative was to show graciousness to a subordinate, today it seems that he must be a subordinate.
It is true that when meaning of this word became the domain to Knightly acts, it was a trait attributed mainly to men. Today it is considered to be a male trait, the ability to show a softer side to ones character while still possessing popular male traits. It is an open acknowledgement by males of the importance they place on the female species without compromising their masculinity.

With the inception of the ideals of equality, both sexes are considered of equal social status. The act of chivalry, in such an environment, can only be considered an act of patronization. There is no perceived subordinate class as there was in times of old. So to show graciousness to an equal, not a subordinate, can be seen as a mocking act. To this there is a division among women. Women want to be considered equals among men while still holding their powers of femininity over men. The want to be treated in the same manner as knight would treat a queen while holding the same position as him.

Chivalry has always been a way for masculine men to display their softer side by the way of deed rather than word. It has been a tool to show the revere in which men hold women. While it is a conundrum to act strong and soft at the same time it also a conundrum to show this old attitude in modern environment of political correctness.