Benevolent sexism - should men hold doors open?!

[RedHotPokers]

Just heard an interesting discussion on R4 about 'benevolent sexism'. Did a quick search and foundthis article which is rather less measured than the R4 discussion.

Interested to know what people think.
First post on Feminism topic so hope I haven't repeated a previous topic or put my foot in it!

Alice - "...if you do that for any guest, what has that got to do with sexism and romance?"

That is the point I was making. The article and thread seems to be labelling things (eg holding doors, waiting for someone else to sit down) as benevolent sexism when they are just politeness. Just because a man is polite to a woman doesn't mean he is a sexist. On the other hand, a man showing politeness and respect to a woman might be a good starting point for a romance.

If a man does them to a women but not to men, it is sexist.

If a man does that to anyone regardless of their genitals, it is polite.

The point of the article was not 'bloody people opening doors for others, the cheek, how dare they be polite to others'.

Alice - I didn't put that very well.

Imagine you don't know me at all but we go out for a business lunch. Just you and me. I hold the door open for you (not the underarm thing), I help take your coat, I ask if you would like the seat facing the wall or looking out into the restaurant and wait for you to sit down.

Not knowing how I treat men, how do you feel? Do you think 'sexist git'? What if I offered to pay? At what point does politeness between a man and woman get mistaken for sexism?

After keeping a diary, the volunteers were asked to look back at their records and decide which incidents they thought were very, moderately or not at all sexist. Having done that both men and women were then much more aware of subtle forms of sexism that occurred on a daily basis.

This is why I referred to the DM article (I know, I know, sorry). No one has put a spin on this. The participants of the study were asked to decide if they felt a behaviour was sexist, and the participants included men as well as women. I'd say that if most of them felt opening a door was sexist, which I presume they must have done for it to be the leading 'fact' taken from the study, then they probably felt that it was sexist rather than just politeness. I know I'd interpret it very differently depending on what I felt about the man opening the door. Most people - men and women - opening a door for me I just take as politeness, but there are the odd one or two that are definitely doing it for 'chivalrous' (benevolent sexism) reasons.

Yep, I'd think you were sexist. When you go out for a business lunch with a man, do you do all those things to him?

I have a male colleague I spend lots of time with. He sometimes opens the door for me, I sometimes open it for him. He'll pick up the trays at lunch, I'll get the cutlery. He'll buy me a cuppa, and I rarely reciprocate because we both know he has more money than me. We both do nice polite things for each other. If we went for lunch and he tried to do all that for me, without the opportunity to reciprocate I would feel undermined and belittled. You like to do polite things for others, great. So why do you think that women don't get to do polite things for you in return? Imagine for a moment if someone who was more powerful than you in your workplace took you out and did all those things to you. How would you feel? Powerful? Important? Like an equal?

To answer your question, politeness gets mistaken for is sexism when it is not reciprocal.

X posts there MoreBeta. I think that's a fair point you're making.

It's difficult to tell from this study because both the Telegraph and the DM have deliberately failed to give any details about it; they've just latched on to the sensational headline angle. However, from what I can interpet the volunteers were just recording interactions with people they would normally see on a daily basis. I think that's relevant. If you were take me out to a restaurant like you describe, I'd still be making up my mind about you and would need to see more of your behaviour to put it into context. If I knew you already though, I'd already have that context IYSWIM.

I've got to admit though that if you asked to take my coat for me I'd be a bit Everything else I could see as politeness as I have often done those things to people I've gone out to dinner with.

Alice/sunshine - both of your last posts are very interesting because it seems there is a very fine line here.

To some extent, it seems to partly depend on how you feel about the man, your previous experience of him, etc. Friendly, less well paid, well known male colleague opening door is just polite. Male boss, better paid, unknown to you opening a door may be being somewhat sexist.

Not knowing me, or how I behave towards men, you say you might well feel I was behaving in a sexist way. Really and truthfully, I genuinely do all those things when I go to a restaurant no matter what sex and I would feel happy if you reciprocated.

I am playing devils advocate here a bit because I do really know the sort of annoying things you are talking about. Its just a shame that genuine politeness between men and women might also be mistaken for sexism.

I had a very nice colleague once - with whom I worked on terms of total equality - who commented that he wasn't opening the door because I was a lady but because he was a gentleman.

That's all right in my book.

I think that there is a fine line between being polite and courteous (which is nice) and being over the top (which can be very uncomfortable). I think that politeness should be a background thing, it's when it is ever so overt that it becomes a problem for me. I agree that reciprocity is a big part of it - someone opening the door for me, nice, someone who just can't cope with me opening the door for them, well arse really.

many years ago when i first had to work in london, i was amazed that men didn't stand up and let women have the seats.

i decided to wear comfy shoes instead

on the train - not any old seats willy nilly

As plenty of people before me have said it comes down to intent and context.

I have to admit when I first started my current job colleagues (who are nearly all male) would try and get the door every time. Once I had forced my way to opening it and letting them through first they soon started following the concept of the door getter/holder is the person it makes the most logistical sense. We always thank each other despite the fact we often reciprocate straight away as there are two door into the lab

Same for me and DH, the person holding the luggage depends on the situation. Generally he holds the heavier stuff as lugging as I appreciate the break from lugging my stuff to work (which gives me a sore back). When faced with the London Underground however I end up taking everything as he struggles to keep up follows me like he's in a strange foreign country with exotic customs

I think it is important to bring up these 'little things' as they happen and strive to do so.

A single incident of opening a door can't be labelled as sexist or not because you can't tell if the person doing it would do exactly the same if you were XY rather than XX.

A pattern, however, can certainly be labelled as gender-blind politeness or "benevolent" sexism.

Morebeta - you've headed just where I hoped you might. I introduced the power element in the form of pay to make a link to sexism that might be less apparent if you don't experience it.

You talk about the less well paid man opening the door being polite whereas the well paid man opening the door being sexist. No, that would not be my experience. Living in a world where men (as a group) are more powerful than women (as a group) any man doing things to me because I am a woman introduces that power relationship into the situation. And I don't really want to be reminded of that every time I walk through a door.

Of course in personal relationships there are whole bunch of other rules, signals, cues etc. that render that element less meaningful. Of course my husband does all sorts of things that if a random man did them would come across differently. But it's not personal relationships that are important in this discussion.

But to neuter the mundane activities that perpetuate the world we live in as meaningless, as if they are in a bubble that has no link to the world as a whole, does not work.

Alice - I confess to being unsure what you want me to do now. Hold the door open for you or deliberatley hang back in the hope you get to the door first.

Custardo - I wouldn't stand up and offer my seat to a random woman on the train/bus unless she was pregnant.

Simple rules of door opening.
If one person is encumbered, other person gets door.
If door is excessively heavy and one person is obviously stronger, strong person gets door.
Otherwise, whoever gets there first opens door.

Does that cover it?

Yep Grimma. Pretty straightforward really.

..... but PurpleStrawberry complained up the thread about a man helping her to open a heavy door in a store.

I hold doors open for men and women alike and expect the same courtesy. I have sometimes encountered men who won't shake hands with me but want to frigging kiss my cheek instead...now that pee's me off!

Ah well, you need some judgement as to whether the door is excessively heavy/stiff. The rule is primarily to cover small children and the infirm, but - as a small person of limited upper body strength - I've been glad at times for a strapping lad (or lass) to shove a door for me. In general, assume an adult female can manage a door, by all means lend a hand to anyone who is struggling!

I think there is a difference between going ahead to open a door and allow someone to go through before you, and holding a door for someone behind you. I think the first is traditionally what men did for women and older people whereas the second is what generally done by people of any gender these days out of politeness.

I open the door if I get to it first, and despite being a woman and younger than most of my male colleagues I was often in a senior position to them, just to make it all more complicated. On an ageist note though, teenagers are always surprised when I hold a door open if they are behind me, sadly I think they are often the one group people dont feel the need to be courteous to.

And to throw another example into the mix, if we had to travel to visit the client I would hire and drive the car with my male colleagues in the passenger/back seats. They never presumed that they would drive just because they were men.

mumbling aargh, I hate the whole cheek kissing thing, especially for people I barely know. I kiss my husband, son and dog. I'm really not bothered about anyone else!

What I find deeply confusing is how insulted some men get when they realize we don't necessarily want the door held open/ them to stand up/held with our coats ... surely if they really wanted to be courteous they wouldn't mind if we said no?

I used to have a class with a very old-fashioned guy. First lesson, halfway through, our female supervisor walked in to get something so (as per usual) we ignored her and continued to concentrate. The old guy gave the men in the room a big talking-to about standing up for a lady when she enters the room, etc., and predictably the female supervisor cut in to say actually she didn't need that and would prefer we concentrated on the lesson. His response? 'It's not about what you would prefer, it's about good manners.