Chivalry is not sexist, it is polite. Acts of chivalry have now evolved into modern society and, although they may have had sexist roots in medieval times, today chivalry can be extended unto others by both men and women. Chivalrous acts today include opening doors and giving up seats for others, there is nothing but respect in these actions; everybody can do them and I argue that anybody can be chivalrous to others today, regardless of gender. Someone who is truly chivalrous would treat everyone with respect and politeness regardless of gender or status, they would not hold the door open for a woman then close it again if there was another man approaching. Because chivalry has been able to adapt to the modern age, it has been able to largely lose the sexist aspects behind its conception in the Medieval period. 'IS CHIVALRY SEXIST?', (https://inretrospectmagazine.com/article/is-chivalry-sexist/)

**TL; DR – While chivalry is not a word that we use often, it is firmly rooted in our everyday lives. This can be seen in the way both women and men interact with each other. Especially when men perform gestures for women such as as opening doors, holding their chairs, rising when they enter or leave a room, etc. However, chivalry is much more than this. It is in fact a subtle form of sexism known as benevolent sexism.** David Molloy (2011) who writes for the Irish Times informs us that a psychological study published in the Psychology of Women Quarterly journal confirmed that traditional chivalry is in fact a subtle form of sexism – despite its “seemingly positive” qualities. Some examples which the study uses to validate that chivalry is indeed a type of sexism are: when using “he” while referring to a person of unknown gender, helping a woman carry her shopping bags, or offering to drive on long-distance journeys. Apparently, the report from the study argues that such acts suggest that a woman is unable to perform these duties without the help of a man. Other examples where benevolent sexism can also be seen is when it comes to paying for dinner, seeing woman home safely, and paternalistic treatment (where women are cherished and protected by men). Furthermore, the study specifically looked at both male and female students in Germany and the United States, respectively. They were each asked to keep a record of events of their lives using a diary. One group was specifically asked about sexist incidents, while the other group was asked about more general social interactions. From here, it was revealed that women do, to some extent, support sexist beliefs because they do not properly focus on and apply themselves to these subtle forms of sexism in their everyday lives – they don't handle it in an appropriate manner when it happens. Additionally, it was also revealed that men are unaware of such incidents and are less likely to see sexist incidents as being discriminatory and possibly harmful for women – they do not recognize it as biased or prejudiced because they don't really pay attention. Consequently, what this study discovered is that despite “its negative implications and consequences,” benevolent sexism is not recognized as a problem. I believe that the main reason for this is because it's not seen as such a blatant and in your face form of sexism. No doubt, due to the fact that chivalry has been romanticized, and both men and women have each been assigned their respective roles (in the home, workplace, etc.) in society already – which plays a part in this perception as well. Molloy confirms this when he notifies us that the authors of this study highlight this as something we need to be aware of as it, “hides the harm benevolent sexism can promote and encourages its endorsement.” Chivalry is 'benevolent sexism' https://www.irishtimes.com/news/chivalry-is-benevolent-sexism-1.878280 [accessed February 9, 2021].

People should just generally try to be nice to each other in general. Part of being nice to each other also includes not expecting or demanding special treatment from one another.

**TL;DR: Chivalry can be used to perpetuate sexist ideals, but the good-natured intentions behind chivalry are not inherently sexist.** I think it depends on your intentions behind actions that are chivalrous. For example, if a man paying for a meal or holding the door open for a woman on a date is to appear masculine and dominant as part of an ego boost, then yes, I'd say that in itself, these actions are slightly sexist. I remember one episode of the ITV show [Love Island] (https://www.glamourmagazine.co.uk/article/love-island-camilla-jonny) when two contestants got into an argument over their preferred way to pay on a first date. The female contestant argued that she would rather 'go halves', and the male contestant remarked that he liked to pay for the whole meal, stating that he would feel emasculated if his date paid half or in full. Using this as an example, chivalrous actions in themselves can sometimes perpetuate sexist ideals. However, I think if someone pays for your meal or delivers acts of chivalry, they aren't immediately a sexist person, more often than not, they're just being nice and polite, which is what you'd expect from anyone. By this standard, can women be chivalrous too? Or is it just a male-orientated ideal? If a woman paid on the first date, would her actions be appreciated, or stand-offish? I think the whole topic is interesting when considering modern dating. Maybe _some_ aspects of chivalry are outdated now?

Original chivalry ([Courtly Love](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courtly_love)) involved putting the Lady on a pedestal and vowing to adore and protect from, mostly, afar. I'm just not sure how much fun that was for everyone involved...

TLDR: I believe chivalry is a subtle form of sexism because of its roots and the gender-based imbalance of work put in to pursue a partner and politeness in society. After learning the historical traditions of chivalry in my Western Literature class last semester, I believe chivalry is somewhat sexist. Chivalry seemed like an exchange system. If a man was interested in a girl, he did everything nice to marry her. She had the choice to reject the man, but she was often seen as too picky if she was turning down an "adequate" guy or her "time" of being an ample, young woman was coming to an end. Modern chivalry is a little different now because the pressures of getting married have considerably decreased. Women also have more active roles in a relationship. I'll also acknowledge that chivalry typically refers to manners in society as opposed to just a romantic relationship (giving up your seat for a woman (or older person), carrying heavier items, etc.) The problem, I believe, is the idea of a man (or even someone who identified as a "masculine" gender) going out of their way to get a partner or to be polite. In my opinion, it's an unfair amount of sacrifice. I also think that it can inspire unrealistic expectations when trying to pursue a partner. An example is an "I did this for you, so you owe me," mentality. If a woman (or someone who identified with a "feminine" gender) were to practice man-like chivalry (carrying a man's bags, giving up a seat for a man, holding a door open for "her" date, etc.), would it be out of place? If so, maybe that's another clue that chivalry, as a practice, needs to be reviewed. This is an edit: I think I might've seemed one-sided in terms of who is pursuing who. I forgot that there are women/people who identify with a feminine gender who believe that they deserve attention from men/people who identify with a masculine gender. Like "I am pretty/beautiful/attractive enough to get attention. Therefore, give me that attention, politeness, etc. because you are a man". I don't want my opinion to sound like men are the only ones that can have the "you owe me" mentality.