"Ladies first"?
 

In other posts I've mentioned that I go to a daily clubhouse for people like me (with emotional disabilites) to build social and work skills, and be rehabbed to go back into the job market. Lunch is provided, and today I overheard a couple of gentlemen being reminded to let the ladies get theirs first. Now, this doesn't affect me. I can eat my lunch any time, since I bring my own. I don't have to wait until it is served. But as a general principle, "ladies first" irks me. Haven't we been trying to show men for *centuries* that we are just as smart and competent as they are? That we deserve equal rights, equal pay, and equal respect? That we can run countries, serve in the military, drive trucks, do something besides fetch them their slippers when they come home from work? Then why turn right around and demand special consideration on the basis of gender? There are some women who want it both ways. I'm not one of them.

How do the rest of you feel about "ladies first" or other social restrictions based on gender?

I think it is just an old-fashioned way of being polite. I don't see any problem with it. Although, I can see that some might be offended? Sometimes you just have to think about things through the other person's eyes - I am sure whoever said that was trying to be polite, not trying to be demeaning in any way. I doubt most people actually think women need special hand-holding these days. Maybe a better thing they could say would just be "Would you like to go first?" .. rather than placing a gender on it.

I like it when a man offers to let me go first.. even if it is just a wave of their hand gesturing for me to go first. I likes me some politeness!! :D

I need to clear something up.

I wasn't suggesting that the man who insisted on "ladies first" was being patronizing or demeaning. I'm sure he meant it as a rule of etiquette. It's the rule itself I question, not a man's intentions when he follows what he's been taught to do all his life. Although I don't demand or especially want it, I'm not going to get angry at a man who lets me go ahead of him, holds the door open for me, or whatever. I know he's just trying to be polite.

I believe the hierarchy should be based not on gender but on age and health. Let the elderly and special needs people go first. It's easier for the younger and healthier to wait longer in line, to stand on a crowded bus, etc. I don't think a man should defer to a woman, *just because* she is a woman, but I do think a young man should offer his seat to an older woman. And the same in reverse--a young woman should offer her seat to an older man.

At least that's the way I see it.

I think it's just polite, but I'm not bothered by guys who don't do it (I am bothered by guys who do it for pretty girls and not older/heavier/less attractive girls). Generally for me, these things are more about being curtious than about gender (ie- if someone is behind you when you open a door, hold it for them- especially for elderly or those with children, but even still you don't let go of the door in the face of a young guy)

All of this is true. However, please take into consideration that there are still some religions that must serve the men and children before they are even "allowed" to sit down to there own meal that they have prepared and even still there are usually a couple of women who stand at attention just in case someone needs something. So, next time u here "Ladies first" maybe u should be thankful and not critical.;)

hmm i think i misunderstood at first- if it was a man saying "ladies first" then i'd just take it as polite- but if someone at your rehab place demanded that a man let the ladies go first- i think that's kinda rude.

Originally Posted by lizziep:
hmm i think i misunderstood at first- if it was a man saying "ladies first" then i'd just take it as polite- but if someone at your rehab place demanded that a man let the ladies go first- i think that's kinda rude.

Well, it *was* a man. A member of the club, telling other men who were members of the club to let the ladies go first.

Nevertheless, I think we're getting close to being on the same page now. It was never the men I was criticizing. They've been taught "ladies first" all their lives. I have a problem with women who demand special treatment because they're women, while at the same time insisting on equality. We can't have it both ways, IMO. And if it has to be a choice between being equally respected, or being catered to because I'm a woman, I'll take the respect instead.

"Ladies first" seems to be the rule when it's lunchtime at the clubhouse. I don't know who made the rule, but I don't like it. Yes, I realize as I mentioned before that I am not affected by the situation. I bring my own lunch, not knowing day to day what they're going to serve, so that I can stick to plan. Therefore I can eat any time. I don't have to wait for everyone else. So I don't have a dog in that fight, but the incident today got me thinking about the entire practice. In general, not just in this specific case, why "ladies first"? Why *should* women go first, just for being women?

In a similar program, I once saw the director ask the people to let a certain man go first in the lunch line. He was diabetic and his glucose level was starting to drop, and he needed to eat as soon as possible. I think that's perfectly appropriate.

As for the ideal setup, I'd say it should be based on individual need. In that last case, the man who was diabetic needed to eat first, and people gladly let him go ahead. On a bus, the person least able to stand should be given priority seating. Doors should be opened by the first person who got there, and held open for whoever happens to be near. Or for whoever has their arms full; whatever. :) Hey, I'm all for politeness. I just think it needs to be for everybody to practice, not just for men toward women.

Oh, a couple of things just occurred to me:

Aclai, you're absolutely right. Those men who would extend courtesy to a pretty young girl, but not to an older or heavier or less attractive one, they're just dogs.

And, you can't please everybody. I'm from the South, where I was taught "ma'am" and "sir," and last names instead of first. To me it's politeness. "Yes, ma'am." "Pleased to meet you, Mr. Jones." But there are those who squawk even at that. "How dare you call me ma'am? I'm not that old!" Or, "Mr. Jones is my father. I'm Bob." Or even, "You don't have to give up your seat for me. I may be old, but I'm still strong!" Some might even take those courtesies as an insult. :)

I expect that kind of respect and treatment from men (though, I'm not rude when it's not done, of course). I think it's a common courtesy that any decent man should extend to a woman. I don't think it shows a lack of respect or appreciation or is an insult to women in any way.

I think men should hold doors, offer their seat and, yes, allow women to go before them (through doors or whatever).

It doesn't mean women are lesser than men. It's a show of respect for women that I very much appreciate (and ALWAYS acknowledge with a friendly gesture in return).

And of course (everyone) doing the same for the elderly, infirm etc should go without saying.

Frankly, it bothers me that it "irks" you when it happens to able-bodied women because I think that's part of the reason some men have stopped extending such courtesies to women. And it makes me very sad.

I'm trying, however, to be understanding of that POV. But really, take it for what it is (a kind gesture, not a slap in the face).

Originally Posted by LovebirdsFlying:
Those men who would extend courtesy to a pretty young girl, but not to an older or heavier or less attractive one, they're just dogs.

Agreed!

Originally Posted by LovebirdsFlying:
I'd say it should be based on individual need. In that last case, the man who was diabetic needed to eat first, and people gladly let him go ahead. On a bus, the person least able to stand should be given priority seating. Doors should be opened by the first person who got there, and held open for whoever happens to be near. Or for whoever has their arms full; whatever. Hey, I'm all for politeness. I just think it needs to be for everybody to practice, not just for men toward women.

I agree with this as well. What I don't understand is why it would irk you if it's simply done for you as a common courtesy...and not done at the expense of someone more deserving (elderly or sick)??

ETA: Maybe the issue is that we don't agree on this simple thing - men and women AREN'T the same. Men, generally speaking, are bigger and stronger than women. They are built differently than us. We aren't equal in this regard (again, I'm speaking generally). Does this mean we shouldn't get paid the same for doing the same work? No, of course not! (we should get more, if anything! LOL!).

So yeah, hold the door for me, offer your seat to me, shovel my snow for me. I think that's great! If we are doing the same job/work, however, we should be compensated the same. Two separate issues, IMO.

I don't really see a big problem with it. No matter what age a lady is, they should be first, have the door opened for them, etc. Maybe im a little old fashioned. I grew up that way. My DH is that way. I enjoy it, it is nice. I don't get offended if a man doesn't do it tho. It has nothing to do with equal rights, in my opinion.

This is a good topic and I'll be following it. Personally, I see "Ladies First" as a sign of courtesy and respect, particularly as it came as a reminder from a man. These days I see too much decline of all of these small social graces and I think it just adds to a degradation of society as a whole. Our boys were taught at an early age to respect women and their elders. That means "Yes Ma'am", "Please", "Thank You", opening doors and pulling out chairs. My pet peeve is dining in a restaurant with boys/men who do not remove their caps/hats. It probably never occurs to them because they were never taught it. It all seems like such small things, but it adds up to such huge things such as trouble at school with teachers (no respect for elders)and physical/emotional abuse toward women later in life (no respect for women). I see no diminshment of myself as a person when these small courtesies are extended to me and they are always graciously acknowledged.

Originally Posted by LovebirdsFlying:
And, you can't please everybody. I'm from the South, where I was taught "ma'am" and "sir," and last names instead of first. To me it's politeness. "Yes, ma'am." "Pleased to meet you, Mr. Jones." But there are those who squawk even at that. "How dare you call me ma'am? I'm not that old!" Or, "Mr. Jones is my father. I'm Bob." Or even, "You don't have to give up your seat for me. I may be old, but I'm still strong!" Some might even take those courtesies as an insult. :)

I'm from Texas, and hate, hate HATE when a teenager calls me ma'am! I'm only 29....not "ma'am" yet!

Also, and maybe this is just a country thing, but in my husband's family, especially at his granny's house, the kids eat first, then the men get their plates. The women don't serve them by any means, but she just believes the men should go first, so we all follow her beliefs when we're there.

The thing that cracks me up is if you go into a restaurant and the waitress calls you things like darling and honey. First time I encountered that I was like what?!

My husband (mid 30s) is a ladies first type of guy. He tries to be polite and considerate and that is part of it for him. He also thinks women are strong and independent. He respects women in business and yes even in business situations, he feels women should come first.

As for me, I really don't care either way. I like to think of others first, no matter what their sex or age.

Hey what's wrong with a little extra niceties for women? We work, we cook, clean, wash clothes, raise the kids (i.e. shape the future on a daily basis). I for one have too much on my mind and am too tired to open the door myself.
Also, remember that the first woman is a man's life is his mother, then his sister, aunts etc and then presumably his wife. Hopefully those women have shown him that we are strong and capable and have earned some special courtesy. Yeah, special. I like being special. Who wants to be commonplace?

My grandmother was born and raised in Oklahoma. They came out to Washington when my dad was a little boy of 8 years old, but the customs and courtesies came with her. Once when we were getting ready to eat buffet-style at my parents' home, she saw people getting their plates and exclaimed, "Shouldn't we serve the menfolk first?" I don't think it's got anything to do with who is better or weaker or whatever; for her, I am guessing it's a holdover courtesy from days when the men had spent long hours working outside in the field or the orchards and were tired and hungry.

Of course we are equal. But I enjoy the little courtesies that men and women extend to one another. The guys at my office always open the door for women when we are going through together, and some of these guys are under 30. But if he's carrying something and I get there first, then I will hold the door for him. It's just courtesy.

Well, obviously I'm in the minority opinion by far. I'm not upset about that, and I'm enjoying reading the various points of view. I still don't get the logic, though, in claiming equality and yet expecting special treatment. Not that I'm going to protest when a man does extend courtesy.

I think Cali Doll explained it best, though. We *are* physically different. But "let the women eat first, just because they are women" makes no sense to me. Now, "sir," "ma'am," "Mr. Jones," "Mrs. Roberts," that kind of stuff ought to make a major comeback. (Oh, and Mindi--in my way of thinking, any adult is a "sir" or "ma'am." :D )

I have to say, when a guy goes out of his way to be a gentleman it makes me uncomfortable. Taking two steps ahead of you to open the door for you, okay that's fine. But when a guy opens your car door lets you get in and closes it for you before going to his side of the car, that makes me really uncomfortable. Likewise, I don't like when guys pull out your chair for you to sit down. I'm all for the stuff that's common courtesy, but when they go above and beyond I find it super akward. I think because it's too formal for me. If we can't be casual, I can't be comfortable.

As far as ma'am and sir, well, my Mom's side of the family is very casual and my Dad's side is very formal. So we manage to fall in between. When I'm working in the service industry I call all female customers ma'am and males sir. I never say miss, even though I know it's more acurate for younger women and female children. For some reason saying miss feels odd to me. As far as with family, I never address my parents as ma'am and sir. When I was younger I addressed my aunts and uncles on my Dad's side as ma'am and sir mainly because that's how my cousin's addressed my parents. But in the same regard, I never felt as close and comfortable with my family on my Dad's side as I did my Mom's. More recently, since I'm now an adult in the family and most of my cousins are as well, I feel like I'm closer to my Dad's side of the family than I used to be. But we're all a lot less formal now too. (To give you an idea of the formality on my Dad's side when I was younger, many parents say to their kids "You wouldn't do that if you were dining with the Queen of England, would you?"... my parents said "You wouldn't do that if you were eating at Aunt Barbara's house, would you?")

Call me old fashioned, but I think everything you said in your original post is something I don't mind. I know there are women out there who think that they should be as equal as men and so on. I think in the respect that we (a man and a woman) are both people, that's true, we should be equal people. But, I like when a man holds the door for me, when he says ladies first, when my husband can make enough to take care of both of us so I can stay home and have children, when he comes home from work and I can dote on him, when he's had a hard day and I can be his comfort without the stress of my own job (not that children aren't stressful at times)... The list goes on... I know that I'm an old/young person at the age of 25... I'm all for women who want to be in power positions, but in my experience they don't handle it as well as a man.

Keep in mind these are all our own opinions. Ok, commence the attack...

I think you can't always instantly mentally abolish something that is so ingrained. I have no problem with a man using traditional manners, and I also don't care a great deal if our interactions are more eqalitarian.

However, I hate if someone has to make a point of how they are using "manners" or make a point of how they are treating me "equal." Just do it, or don't. They make it so self-conscious and awkward, and *that* is really off-putting. It just shows that whatever you're choosing, you're not confident or comfortable with it.

Overall, I think many men do not respect women and that there are a lot of crimes and discrimination against women still in this day and age. It would be nice to be treated as an equal and obviously women have come a long away but it will take a lot to get to a point where we are treated as equals in all things.

I would also say that I am fine with whatever women decide within their own family. There are women that want to be stay at home wives/mothers. For me, it is the last thing I'd ever want. Even though financially we could do it, I like working, like persuing academic endeavors and like having my own life outside of my husband. We are closely bound together though more so than I ever thought I would be with another person. We don't have children and most likely won't have children because it is not part of our future plans but if we did my husband said he would like for one of us to stay home if we did and I said well it wouldn't be me so there is that :)

Also, women can be successful in politics, business and whatever endeavors although it is somewhat of a doublestandard because they are often accused of acting like a man when they are in a business mindset. I work in a company where a lot of our higher up executives are women and they do a great job.

I am a techie though and have no aspirations at management :)

My wife washes her own car...

she pumps her own gas...

she knows how to mow the grass (if the gardener can't come)...

she can put out and bring in the trash cans if I am out of town or she beats me to it...

she can change a headlight...

on the other hand.....

I open her car door if I reach it first...

I place her in front of me as we go up for communion...

I open doors for her AND FOR ALL WOMEN OR ELDERLY....

I think the key word in all of this is R-E-S-P-E-C-T :)

I teach my students respect, both the girls and boys. I hold open the door for them and most students (we have 960) hold open the door if I'm behind them or they see me coming.
I think it's a beautiful thing :D

:dizzy: The majority opinion may be absolutely right.

Today I caught myself about to say, "Please, there are ladies present," to a man whose language was less than tasteful. Then I realized, if I'm going to take a stand against special treatment on the basis of gender, I'd be a hypocrite if I said that.

As for stay-at-home moms, I was one for the longest time. Only recently have I seriously embarked on the career path. My first husband was very quick to remind me that he earned money and I did not, therefore he supposedly had control over all major household decisions. (My father had been the same way. I didn't know any better.) My children are raised now, and I'm a grandmother. I've enjoyed being a homemaker, now that I have a husband who respects homemakers. But let me tell you, I'd be the first one to yell if someone were to tell me I have no other option but to be a homemaker, simply because I am a woman. The days of "a woman's place is in the home," and "no wife of mine is going to work!" went out with Fred Flintstone, I think.

One more point: I am a Christian, and as such I follow where the Bible tells the wife to submit to the husband. Here again, my father and my ex-husband were alike in abusing that passage of scripture. In any disagreement, they would trot it out and play it like a trump card. "It doesn't matter what you want. The Bible says I'm the head of the household, so I get my way." My current and forever wonderful hubby does not do that. In the years since I've been out from under the control of first my father and then my ex, I've learned:

1. "Submit" doesn't mean "be still and let him walk on you."
2. That's "wife" to "husband," not "all women" to "all men."
3. "Head of the household" does not mean the almighty dictator.
4. The verse directly following "submit" tells men to treat their wives with love and honor.
5. Nothing about "submission" leads logically to the notion that women should stay home, or be mere appendages to their men.

I often say I'm not a feminist; I'm an egalitarian. I believe equality works both ways, and I also firmly insist that one doesn't have to bash men in order to affirm women. Not that anyone here is doing that. I'm just making an observation in general, having seen a lot of the "men are dogs" attitude associated with women's rights.

Stepping down off the soapbox for now. I'm going to bed early tonight.

this conversation is getting more and more interesting! I think that it is definitely a double edged sword- women fought and fought to be treated equal to men, yet many still hold on to older traditions that in effect would make them unequal. We haven't have it both ways.

Do I like it if someone holds a door open for me? Sure- but that's because I always hold doors open for other people. PEOPLE. not men, women, the elderly. I also let people with two items go ahead of me in the store when I have a cart full. And I make sure to move out of the front seats on the bus if someone looks like they need those seats. I would be pleasantly surprised if someone did it for me. I certainly don't expect it though.

What I think is interesting about the bible passage regarding wives submitting to husbands is that it's followed by advise to the husbands generally in many translations using words to the effect of "husbands likewise love and cherish your wives."

To use the word "likewise" it has to be referring to a similar action. It would make no sense to say, "Wife sit down, husband likewise stand up," because likewise means that the actions have to be similar (it's the definition of likewise).

The "submitting" and the "cherrishing" have to be more similar than not or the "likewise" part makes absolutely no sense (so that loving and cherishing probably is supposed to entail listening to and respecting wife's opinions and not pushing her into choices she has no imput in making).


As to courtesy - it's all societal convention. In no society are all individuals treated exactly the same. Children, men, women, elderly, rich, poor, garbage collectors, kings....

There are few if any "polite" actions that wouldn't be considered rude, taboo or at the very least, odd in some other culture.

In cultures where the men eat first, it would be considered odd if not rude for the women or children to eat first, and vise versa.

To a large degree etiquette is always at least partially arbitrary. Why is "giving someone the finger" a rude gesture? The "ok" hand gesture (making an o with your thumb and pointer finger while the rest of your fingers are held upright) is an extrememly rude gesture in some countries.

Etiquette in most modern societies is also always changing, so what is polite and common courtesy today, could be rude or meaningless tomorrow.

I find it all interesting, but not particular irritating. I am fascinated by other cultures, so I love learning about the customs of other cultures. The more cultures you learn about, the more interesting it is - and the more tolerant you become to even customs that would seem bizarre, meaningless or even rude to you.

I often thought about these things, too, also in terms of dangerous situations in films: "Ladies and children first!" Remember this poor bloke in Titanic who even clutched someone elses toddler in order to get into some of the boats? I actually felt sorry for him, even though he was portrayed as mean and selfish in the film.

It`s assumed that men are more brave and hardy but they are not always. "Women and children first" is politeness and sometimes even heroism, but it is also fvouritism.

There are many instances where women and children should go first merely because of their physical limitations. In the Haiti relief efforts food rations are not given to men. Only women are allowed to collect the food. They made this rule because when the food was given out at first men beat the crowds with sticks to take the food first, and then they sold it on the black market. In this case they trusted that women were more likely to take the food back to their families. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...ryId=123202099

I wish there was more courtesy. I can't tell you how many times I enter a subway train and see men sitting with their legs sprawled out taking up 3 seats. I can't tell you how many times I've entered the train holding bags and nobody would let me sit. I can't tell you how many times I see elderly women, pregnant women, or mothers with babies standing while these men sit with their laptops or sleeping. It is infuriating because I myself give my seat to anyone who needs it more than I do.

I think the feminist movement has backfired on us ladies. We still don't have what we need (jobs that pay as much as men's) and now we don't have what we want (common courtesy).

Originally Posted by Wannabeskinny:

I wish there was more courtesy. I can't tell you how many times I enter a subway train and see men sitting with their legs sprawled out taking up 3 seats.

LOL, although there are many times I can be shy when I shouldn't, that one would not stop me. That is one thing I have no patience for! I do not volunteer to use up only half of the already tiny space in a public chair. Actually, this happens plenty in private spaces too. Acquaintances, friends and even family do this too.

But generally, I find most people are pretty accomodating and helpful to others.

Originally Posted by LovebirdsFlying:
:dizzy: The majority opinion may be absolutely right.

I wouldn't say you were "not right". ;) It's your opinion and I see what you're saying. I think you feel that some women want it all, equal rights and being treated like a lady (different) too. I get that. Double standards suck.

But I'm in the majority on this one. I'm all for equal rights for females, but if I can birth the baby, my husband can open my door. LOL! It's just nice and it makes me feel special. I love it when a man opens a door for me. I am actually teaching my sons to do it, because though their father leads by example, he's never actually said, "Pssst....open the door for you mother." So I ask. "Son, will you please hold the door for me?" And I ask him to do it at restaurants for others as well.

Originally Posted by Eliana:
But I'm in the majority on this one. I'm all for equal rights for females, but if I can birth the baby, my husband can open my door. LOL! It's just nice and it makes me feel special. I love it when a man opens a door for me. I am actually teaching my sons to do it, because though their father leads by example, he's never actually said, "Pssst....open the door for you mother." So I ask. "Son, will you please hold the door for me?" And I ask him to do it at restaurants for others as well.

Awww, I totally and completely love this. You are raising wonderful guys. :-))

Originally Posted by kaplods:

I find it all interesting, but not particular irritating. I am fascinated by other cultures, so I love learning about the customs of other cultures. The more cultures you learn about, the more interesting it is - and the more tolerant you become to even customs that would seem bizarre, meaningless or even rude to you.

Nothing irks me more than when people make fun of other people's custom's because they don't understand them...I think it's just sad. Just because I may think it's odd doesn't mean it's worthy of criticism...That doesn't apply to anything here I'm just saying;)


As far as men holding doors for me, I'm OK with it, but I'm OK if they don't as well. I do think it's common courtesy to look around and see if anyone is coming behind you and then hold the door open for them..man..women...or whatever. I do get a bit miff if I'm walking RIGHT behind someone and they don't bother to hold the door open while they pass through.

I am beginning to think either viewpoint can be taken to an undesirable extreme.

If we single women out for special courtesy, it can get ridiculous. "Always walk on the outside edge of the sidewalk." No longer applies. It used to be so, to protect the ladies from being splattered by mud from the street. I've heard it said nowadays that it's actually better for the man to walk on the inside edge, in case some thug jumps out from an alley way. "Always stand when a lady approaches or leaves." Now THIS one makes no sense! What is the reason for it? "Always tip your hat to a lady." I'm actually trying to research the reason for that one, and I can't seem to find one. And the practice of gentlemen helping ladies with their coats, seating ladies at the table, or (when smoking was fashionable) lighting her cigarette for her certainly, to me, seems to imply that she cannot do those things herself.

It's not that I don't believe in good manners. But I definitely don't believe in rules existing just to exist. When I was a child and asked why I must do this or that, "because I said so" only left me seething with resentment. I still don't like that answer. If a "why" cannot be answered with a practical, logical reason, I question the need for the rule. And in my mind, such answers as "it's just common courtesy," "that's the way things are done," or "that's policy" show the same kind of thinking as "because I said so."

On the other hand, taking women's equality to extremes can get stupid. I certainly don't plan to change the spelling of "woman" so that the letters m-a-n aren't in there. "Man" is not a dirty word! I gladly call myself Mrs. Brady, and I'm proud to be my husband's wife. Yet some feminists object to a woman taking her husband's last name. I remember the "Ms." movement from the 1970's. They thought it was unfair that a woman's title, Miss or Mrs., shows her marital status, while a man being called Mr. does not. Some even object to the word "lady," although I don't understand that one. Likewise, I don't care if my husband's name comes first, or mine does. Marriage makes us one, anyway, so what's the difference?

I agree with Lovebirdsflying.

Sometimes, these "unconscious acts", acts which are ingrained in our culture, do perpetuate inequality.

Women fought very very hard, particularly in the 60's and 70's, for political freedom - this act seems to be ignoring all of that hard work.

I could see how it would be irksome to experience someone saying "Let's let the women go first" - still fundamentally implying that there is a DIFFERENCE between men and women (they need help from the men, they are not equals). And yes, this exact behavior does find itself mirrored in the more important, political arena. That is where it REALLY hurts women.

Of course though, it is not the man himself that bothers me - he is most likely unaware of his actions. What is bothersome, is the fact that this 'old-fashioned behavior' - a behavior that may be unconscious, but is also quite powerful - upholds a bifurcation of gender roles.

Small, seemingly unimportant actions can have large implications.

Thanks, Bonnie. :D

Women and men *are* different, but not in a way that women should need special assistance from the men. Their (traditional) roles in the family are different but of equal importance, and one should not belittle the other's role.

I find it interesting that those who advocate special consideration for women call it "showing respect," while those who advocate absolute equality also call it "showing respect." And I think the fact that we all have respect as our motive is the reason this conversation, though full of disagreement, has been civil. (And I'm glad for that.)

One note on equality though: "Equal" and "identical" don't mean the same thing. Four quarters equal a dollar and have the same buying power, but they aren't made the same, and don't look the same. Likewise, by saying that men and women are equal and that neither should have preferential treatment over the other, I am not saying that men and women are the same.

ETA: Some people, of both sexes, think feminism is about women trying to be men. I disagree. I think what women have fought for so valiantly is the equal importance. The right to *choose* whether she wants to get married, have a career, or do both. The right to vote, either with or against her husband or father. The right to own property, which used to be considered her father's until she got married, when it became her husband's. The fight is NOT to beat men into submission, or to "prove" we don't need them. We want to be equal, not better. Where radical feminism goes wrong is in 1.) refusing to be feminine, 2.) bashing men in order to uphold women, and 3.) refusing to acknowledge any gender differences other than reproductive.

Hmm... I am NOT a feminist, and I DO think women should get preferential treatment, all the little things included. I think women are very special, and frankly physically weaker, so it is a good idea to teach young men to respect and deffer to them before they grow up to a size where they could harm a woman with their stupidity.

I am a stay-at-home spouse and I stick to very traditional roles, but I have odd views on it. I think MOST women MOST of the time stick to their stereotype, not because they must, but because honestly, stereotypes are there for a reason. Typically people conform to them. Does this mean a woman can't do a man's job (or a man a woman's)? Of course not! For instance, in the military, they do not let women in the special forces. I think this is wrong. If a woman can meet the physical requirements (nearly impossible) she should be allowed to do the job.

On the other side, women are not expected to meet the same requirements as men in the military at large. This is also wrong. If a man has to do 35 push-ups to do the job in their opinion, a woman should also. In the non-physical aspects, the question of stay-at-home dads might come up. Do I think that there isn't the occasional dad out there who could do the job admirably and help the kids thrive? No, of course not! That being said, most men (nor every woman) do not have that level of nurturing instinct, and would be very stressed.

Basically what it boils down to is women are better (typically) than men at some things and vice-versa, but if someone comes along who cannot/will not conform to the stereotype, they should be able to do what ever makes them happy without ANYONE giving it a second thought, and in general, the stronger should care for the weaker, whatever that strength or weakness may be.

(Edit: I was obviously born WAY after women had all the basic rights, so I suppose I am taking them for granted. When I say I am NOT a feminist, I am referring to the radical man-bashing types.)