This is one area the 21st century desperately needs a turn back the clock moment.
Feminists don't want men to be chivalrous (and that's the contemporary meaning of the word, i.e. being a gentleman). They don't need men to be chivalrous because they are strong and independent (as you suggest).
All I can say is don't believe all you read or see on the internet. You spend the time talking to real women and you'll soon discover that it's the simple things that can make the difference in what makes a man appealing.
Chivalry for example... wine and dine a lady, don't go clubbing and get ratted together. Be a gentleman... open doors, be kind and compassionate... but don't stop being a man.
Women don't want weedy little skinny jeans wearing male feminists (a growing percentage of the younger male population due to the constant erosion of masculinity by the feminists)... we want men.
And if anyone is offended because I'm not being all inclusive on the gender front, I'm doing it because there are only two genders (anything else is just a complete and utter denial of basic biology - a fact, and facts beat feelings every time)
feminists want all the good stuff and none of the bad stuff, they want /feel entitled to go straight to the position of CEO of a billion £ company as soon as they leave school
Chivalry, or the
chivalric code, is an informal, varying
code of conduct developed between 1170 and 1220, never decided on or summarized in a single document, associated with the
medieval institution of
knighthood; knights' and gentlewomen's behaviours were governed[
when?] by chivalrous social codes.
[1][
better source needed] The ideals of chivalry were popularized in
medieval literature, especially the
Matter of Britain and
Matter of France, the former based on
Geoffrey of Monmouth's
Historia Regum Britanniae which introduced the legend of
King Arthur, which was written in the 1130s.
[2] All of these were taken as historically accurate until the beginnings of modern scholarship.
The code of chivalry that developed in medieval Europe had its roots in earlier centuries. It arose in the
Holy Roman Empire from the idealisation of the cavalryman—involving military bravery, individual training, and service to others—especially in
Francia, among horse soldiers in
Charlemagne's cavalry.
[3][4] The term "chivalry" derives from the
Old French term
chevalerie, which can be translated to "
horse soldiery".
[Note 1] Originally, the term referred only horse mounted man, from the french word for horse, "cheval", but later on it became associated with knightly ideals.
[6]
Over time, its meaning in Europe has been refined to emphasise more general social and moral virtues. The code of chivalry, as it stood by the
Late Middle Ages, was a moral system which combined a
warrior ethos,
knightly piety, and
courtly manners, all conspiring to establish a notion of
honour and
nobility.
[Note 2]
theres literally nothing marriage can offer me , even having a woman live in my house for 6 months somehow gives her a right to own it without paying a penny into it herself, seen it happen thousands of times
i wonder though, why are men still getting married when its a 1 sided contract, it only makes sense for women to get married because it favours them in 90% of cases
