Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Manners

Rate this topic


konerko14

Recommended Posts

No, it wouldn't bother me to let my date buy dinner for me if she wants to. However, if she always insists on splitting the bill it might get annoying... If I decide to buy her something I want to use my money for it, not hers. And the same works in reverse. That is, unless we had a shared account, at which time this point would be a little moot.

In case you never bothered to look down while taking a shower, men and women are not the same, so it's absurd to ask that you're treated as if you were.

Before you try to burn me for being a heretic, I am not saying women are somehow inferior. I will never be able to bear children, and you will never be able to have an erection, so let's not pretend that we are exactly the same.

Why is it so strange to treat women differently than men in romantic relationships? Are you saying I should be attracted to men as well, and that if I am only attracted to women I am discriminating?

And like I explained many times above, I hold doors open because it shows I value her, not because she is incapable of doing so herself. If she misconstrues it in any way, that is her problem and not mine. She can always ask me why I do it, and I will happily explain the reasons. And yes, before you ask, I objectify women, and I pursue them like anything else that is of value to me.

*shrugs* I guess I'm a male chauvinist, then...

*edit* After looking up the meaning, I don't think chauvinist is the proper word here because it's far too negative for the concept I am talking about. However, if you take it to mean someone who considers men and women to be different I can live with that. Does anyone know a better term for it?

Edited by Maarten
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 110
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

*edit* After looking up the meaning, I don't think chauvinist is the proper word here because it's far too negative for the concept I am talking about. However, if you take it to mean someone who considers men and women to be different I can live with that. Does anyone know a better term for it?

Romantic? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not tried to claim that men and women are the same. I said 'equal'. And, although I said I do not want to be treated differently, I did specify that to mean neither better nor worse- again, not necessarily exactly the same. Perhaps I should say 'I do not want to be treated with bias due solely to my gender'?

Attraction is not a choice; the way you act is.

Do you not value your fellow man at all? Do you respect a woman as a human who has her own choices and her own rights? Perhaps the fact that you're objectifying women is what we find so annoying. We're humans, not objects to be owned or conquered. I hope I misunderstood your meaning here.

Somehow we got waaayy off topic...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not tried to claim that men and women are the same. I said 'equal'. And, although I said I do not want to be treated differently, I did specify that to mean neither better nor worse- again, not necessarily exactly the same. Perhaps I should say 'I do not want to be treated with bias due solely to my gender'?

Attraction is not a choice; the way you act is.

Yes, I am talking about the way I act. Treating someone a certain way is an action, and if you should not treat them with bias, then how can I justify wanting to sleep with women and not with men? Obviously my actions here are different. What you're saying here is completely absurd...

Do you not value your fellow man at all? Do you respect a woman as a human who has her own choices and her own rights? Perhaps the fact that you're objectifying women is what we find so annoying. We're humans, not objects to be owned or conquered. I hope I misunderstood your meaning here.

Somehow we got waaayy off topic...

Sure I value men, but we are talking about how you act around people in romantic situations, which is obviously different from how you act around people when you work with them, or when you relax after work.

And no, you did not misunderstand me. I meant that quite literally. What is it about being valued that makes you so uncomfortable?

I don't see how you can conclude from this that I don't respect women. I would never, ever want a woman I did not respect, or who was not capable of providing for herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I second Maarten here to show that his view is not along. I will also address miseleigh questions as well.

I have not tried to claim that men and women are the same. I said 'equal'.
Eeeeh, I'm having problems here. When it comes to simple stuff like numbers, it's easy to say that 2 equals 2, and one triangle is like another based on the angles, perimeter, etc.

But when it comes to humans, I find it very hard to figure out if two persons are the same or equal. For example, what does it mean a man and a woman are equal? ... Viewed the same by others? By what kind of people? Those who give you a haircut will not see men and women the same, as they want different kind of hair cuts altogether. So, this kind of approach is out of the question. Should be viewed with the same level of passion by others? Nah, this road is getting slippery real quick. What does it mean that men and women are equal?

Maarten, you seem to have skipped this and didn't address it, what did you think of 'equal'?

Does "equal" mean that men and women don't feel that like they are less than another? And that they don't feel like an inferior of another? This is really complicated.

@miseleigh, could you clarify what you mean by 'equal'?

Perhaps I should say 'I do not want to be treated with bias due solely to my gender'?
Yeah, this is kind of unsure as well. And I think you felt it, so you put 'perhaps' there. This kind of wish causes all sorts of problems. Here's what a man might find himself thinking: "Well, today's a special day, b/c it's X(whatever it might be, some holiday, some milestone, etc.) Should I buy some flowers? Well, it would be treating her like a woman, I wouldn't buy my buddy flowers. How about some chocolate? Nah, doesn't work either. Am I supposed to find something that is both feminine and non-feminine? Geez, this is hard."

Here's a problem that a man doesn't treat a woman as a woman, then as whom is he treating her? As a man? That could prove costly. How about a mixture? Aaah. This just sounds weird, I got no idea. Just as a person? That's easy to say, but hard to implement. I'm thinking about these non-gender biased treats, and they all seem to be very impersonal. Here's what I'm doing right now: thinking of things that I would do for both men and women.

I wouldn't even say "Hi" the same way. To a buddy I would say "What's up lazy ass?" or "How's going ladies?" to a group of guys I know. Here, it's alright and fun, b/c men "insult" each other on regular basis. Women however don't do that. So, I can't do that. I could say "Hi" or "Hi, <nice reference here like "honey/darling/etc.">!" I don't have anything in between really. The only thing I got are some cold replies and answers that can indeed be said to both men and women. But getting cold replies is not women want, right?

Now, saying "Hi!" is a simple case, but already I don't see a logical way to not treat women based on their gender. Now, if a woman actually enjoys getting stuff like "What's up lazy ass?" it could work, but then you have a problem where this can be seen as a remark of having fat ass or something. A guy wouldn't think that and even if he did he wouldn't care. Women and men have different set of values, and this makes it really hard to treat them with no gender bias.

Do you not value your fellow man at all?
We do, but we value them by a different set of rules. This means that men want from men other things that they want from women.

Do you respect a woman as a human who has her own choices and her own rights?
Now, I don't think Maarten meant that at all. In fact, he does value woman's choice highly.

Perhaps the fact that you're objectifying women is what we find so annoying. We're humans, not objects to be owned or conquered.
Btw, is this true? Do women really don't want to be liked for their assets?

I'm a guy, but I like this kind of view. I would like to be seen as a valuable object for women. And objectivism goes along nicely with that. If I have green eyes, I want women to like that. If I'm good at my job, I want women to like that, etc.

Here is where the problem lies. If you don't want to liked as woman, then as whom? As a man? I doubt. As just a person? If so, it's hard to find values here. For example: being out-going and happy is a good personal trait. So, one should be treated on such things, right? No, the problem is that those qualities are different between men and women. Out-going and happy guy has a different sets of traits then a women, and vice versa. The problem here is that the same positive trait has a different precise meaning for sexes, and is valued differently by sexes.

Sure I value men, but we are talking about how you act around people in romantic situations, which is obviously different from how you act around people when you work with them, or when you relax after work.
Yep, this is where different set of values comes into play.

And no, you did not misunderstand me. I meant that quite literally. What is it about being valued that makes you so uncomfortable?
Being valued is part of Objectivism philosophy.

@ miseleigh : Can you tell us if you feel that being valued as an object is a bad approach? Maybe, you are saying being ONLY an object is a bad thing? We need clarifications here.

I don't see how you can conclude from this that I don't respect women. I would never, ever want a woman I did not respect, or who was not capable of providing for herself.
Agreed (as a guy).

/---- My own part goes next. ---\

Now, if you were to ask guy, how he would like to be treated: as a man or as a person?

Men would say that want to be treated as men (with the exception with trans-sexuals but I don't think they count here). And men don't have problem with this.

How come women have problem with being treated as women?

I suppose one could say that in the old days such treatment had many negative sides to it, so that's why. But nowadays aren't those days, and women have the same rights as men do (except for some really psycho places like Middle East, but let's limit our discussion to civil countries, like USA, Europe, etc.). So negative treatment is out of the question. If so, then what's the problem?

P.S. I don't think we are off topic, as the most hitted problems with manners are between men and women. So, I see this as a correct path of analysis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there is no better alternative available to you, then what is the use in complaining about [costs]?
Agreed. But acknowledging that something is an ordeal isn't necessarily the same as complaining about it.

I think you're misusing the word [ordeal]here, as it is completely inappropriate for the type of actions we are discussing.
If the existence of more difficult experiences is the differentiator between ordeals and non-ordeals, then it's silly to consider anything to be an ordeal. But in what other manner can "ordeal" be inappropriate in regard to manners?

I ... don't want someone to treat me differently just because of my gender. Is that so much to ask?
Let's test those waters a bit.
I have no problems with a man opening a door for me- as long as he isn't doing it just because I'm female. Try being polite (to everyone) instead of chivalrous (to females).
Would you have a problem with a guy who opens car doors or pulls out chairs at the dining table for women, but not for men?
But the offer [from the guy to pay on a date] is nice- I like to know that he values my company enough that he is willing to buy me dinner, even if I would rather pay my own way.
Or a guy who would pay for a male best friend's meal only in an emergency (and even then with great reluctance and annoyance) - but is positively willing to buy your dinner without complaint or hesitation?

In a somewhat related note (directed to anyone with input,) is observing social conventions/manners solely to score points with a potential significant other a legitimate reason to be mannerly?

Somehow we got waaayy off topic...
:) That happens a lot around here.

Oh, and welcome to the forum.

Edited by hunterrose
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is everyone tearing apart miseleigh's posts like this? She has expressed the fact of how she would want to be treated and ya'll are telling her she's wrong. Why is she wrong for finding it nice when people hold a door for her because she's a person not a female? Why is she wrong for not wanting to be objectified? Why is she wrong for wanting to be treated as an equal, neither superior or inferior? You ask her questions like

Would you have a problem with a guy who opens car doors or pulls out chairs at the dining table for women, but not for men?
when you should be asking questions like "Would you have a problem with a guy who opens car doors or pulls out chairs at the dining table for you because your a woman?". Your questions have nothing to do with what she said. It's like me saying I don't like chocolate and you asking me if I have an issue with a woman who likes chocolate.

In a somewhat related note (directed to anyone with input,) is observing social conventions/manners solely to score points with a potential significant other a legitimate reason to be mannerly?

Is there ever a legitimate reason to doing something under false pretenses to get something out of someone else who has not done you harm?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Equality for me, in this issue, is mainly related to that I think women and men should have the same rights, and that in all situations you shouldn't look at gender instead of ability; except in the romantic area where the gender goes from not-so important to extremely important (at least for most people).

And the reason I am picking apart her posts, like you say, is because they do not make sense to me and I am trying to find out if she is simply using careless wording here, or if her ideas are just plain silly.

(If that was mainly directed towards others, I apologize, it's a little unclear from your post)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, yes, Lathanar, I suppose that was efffective. Your unmannerly post, obviously with no intention of "scoring points", does suggest that there are reasons beyond scoring points for being mannerly ;)

"Tearing apart?" I thought I was being quite chivalrous :P And I never said she was wrong.

Your questions have nothing to do with what she said.
You mean you didn't understand my point, or you know my questions were pointless? It'd have been mannerly to ask in the former.

It might be interpreted that guys should offer to pay for meals not because their companion is female, but **because they also do it for their male friends whose company they value.**

The problem being, (virtually) no (straight) guys do this. miseleigh, would you thus find it a problem if a male companion was offering to pay for your meal, but never did so for his male best friends? And wouldn't this mean that you really wouldn't want a guy to offer to pay?

Is there ever a legitimate reason to doing something under false pretenses to get something out of someone else who has not done you harm?
One can be mannerly in order to show their feelings, or in order to get something (or both.) Suppose I open doors for ladies under certain conditions. Say I do it solely to get a thank-you (without any particular intent of showing appreciation of women), and won't open doors for a particular woman who I believe won't thank me. Barring me outright lying to a woman about my MO, what's false here?

In addition to getting off topic, we also enjoy our infighting, miseleigh. Boys will be boys ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hunter: But don't you agree that an ordeal refers to more serious things than what we are discussing? If someone were to tell me they thought it was an ordeal to get up in the morning, or reach for that cup of coffee that was 1 foot away from them I would also think it ridiculous to call it that. The same holds true for opening doors, or spending an hour or two beautifying yourself before a date.

I may sound a little presumptious here, but I really have trouble seeing something that takes so little effort as an ordeal...

Edited by Maarten
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you, Lathanar, for listening to what I'm trying to say.

The way you treat someone you have a romantic interest in will be different than the way you treat friends. On the same note, the way you treat friends will be different from the way you treat total strangers. I hadn't clarified this earlier because I felt it was an obvious point that didn't really need clearing up. Viewpoints expressed here all seem to agree on how to treat a date and who pays, etc.

It's the opening doors thing that's bugging me. I am not talking about opening doors for people you know. I am talking about opening a door for a woman you've never met, based solely on the fact that she's female, rather than opening a door for any stranger simply to be polite. You mean you honestly can't see why that would be annoying and possibly viewed as disrespectful?

Maarten, I like your definition of equality. Would you kindly explain to me how opening doors for women and not opening them for men demonstrates it?

Would you have a problem with a guy who opens car doors or pulls out chairs at the dining table for women, but not for men?
Yes, I would. Now, if he pulled out chairs for little old ladies because they need the help, fine. Hopefully he would do the same for little old men who also need the help. And again, this is excluding the romantic interest thing- if you want to open a car door for your girlfriend, I'm sure she'll appreciate it. Hopefully you'll have the good grace to appreciate it if she wants to do the same for you.

Or a guy who would pay for a male best friend's meal only in an emergency (and even then with great reluctance and annoyance) - but is positively willing to buy your dinner without complaint or hesitation?

Best friend vs. romantic interest? Not the issue. Why would a guy pay for my dinner if we're just friends unless he has intentions in another direction?

Yeah, this is kind of unsure as well. And I think you felt it, so you put 'perhaps' there. This kind of wish causes all sorts of problems. Here's what a man might find himself thinking: "Well, today's a special day, b/c it's X(whatever it might be, some holiday, some milestone, etc.) Should I buy some flowers? Well, it would be treating her like a woman, I wouldn't buy my buddy flowers. How about some chocolate? Nah, doesn't work either. Am I supposed to find something that is both feminine and non-feminine? Geez, this is hard."

Try books or cds. And actually, I would rather recieve a book that someone had put some thought into than something as impersonal and overdone as flowers or chocolate. Would you buy a woman flowers for her birthday if she is just a friend of yours and not someone you're dating? Maybe your male friend likes chocolate.

To a buddy I would say "What's up lazy ass?" or "How's going ladies?" to a group of guys I know. Here, it's alright and fun, b/c men "insult" each other on regular basis. Women however don't do that.
Some of us do....

Being valued is part of Objectivism philosophy.

@ miseleigh : Can you tell us if you feel that being valued as an object is a bad approach? Maybe, you are saying being ONLY an object is a bad thing? We need clarifications here.

I don't have a problem being valued. I DO have a problem if a guy appears to value me based solely on the fact that I'm female and for no other reason. If he values me for other (more legitimate) reasons, I greatly appreciate and enjoy it.

And yes, I am saying that being viewed/valued only as an object is a bad thing. It's like saying I'm not human.

I don't see how you can conclude from this that I don't respect women. I would never, ever want a woman I did not respect, or who was not capable of providing for herself.
I would hope so... otherwise, why would you be on this forum? ;)

How come women have problem with being treated as women?

I suppose one could say that in the old days such treatment had many negative sides to it, so that's why. But nowadays aren't those days, and women have the same rights as men do (except for some really psycho places like Middle East, but let's limit our discussion to civil countries, like USA, Europe, etc.). So negative treatment is out of the question. If so, then what's the problem?

Actually, women are still paid less than men are (in the same field and with the same qualifications, in the US). And I don't think that most of us have a problem with being treated as women- it's being treated solely as women that some of us find offensive. Say a female friend of yours bought you a hammer for your birthday without bothering to find out first if you were actually into carpentry, instead just assuming that because you're male, you like hitting things? (One of my favorite gifts that I've gotten was actually a small electric screwdriver, but I would be surprised if any man who opens doors for women just because they're women would have thought to get me something like that.)

I do not want a man to open a door for me just because I'm a woman. If he opens a door for me because we're dating, or because I'm carrying something, or because he's being polite and it's something he'd do for anyone, I have no issues with it.

I think what bothers me most is that the whole idea of chivalry is supposed to apply whether you know the woman or not. If you're chivalrous to a woman you've never met, you can only value her in one way- because she's female. You know nothing about her intelligence or wit, and nothing about her own moral code; yet somehow, you still value her more than you value a man you've never met. Do you have more legitimate reasons for valuing her?

The same holds true for opening doors, or spending an hour or two beautifying yourself before a date.

I may sound a little presumptious here, but I really have trouble seeing something that takes so little effort as an ordeal...

Beautifying yourself takes more effort than you seem to think, but it's not an ordeal. I've never thought that anything you choose to do could be an 'ordeal'. Well, maybe if you chose to climb Mount Everest...

And boys aren't the only ones who like fighting ;)

And can someone tell me how to put someone's name in their quote?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maarten, I like your definition of equality. Would you kindly explain to me how opening doors for women and not opening them for men demonstrates it?

We were discussing these things in the context of romantic situations, initially. So it would have helped if you had been clearer about this. What I am talking about most certainly does not apply to all women; that would completely null the reasons I have for doing it in the first place. Just like I can't love the whole world, I can't treat them as if I value them when I do not.

Therefore, my comments did not apply to situations where there is no romantic context. However, I cannot just deactivate my sexuality, so if I am interacting with a beautiful woman I will treat her as one, at least partially. As I said numerous times, if she chooses to take that the wrong way that is her problem, not mine. I do not intend it as a disparagement towards her, and it should not be taken as such.

And yes, to me beauty is a value to a certain extent, and it is enough reason to justify doing some extra things I would not do for a woman I considered to be downright ugly, or for a man. The situation changes of course should they need the assistance, but I do not hold doors open for the sake of holding doors open.

So I do not treat her differently because she's a woman, but because she's an attractive woman and therefore a (small) value to me. I do not need to know her complete philosophy before I can judge her as attractive, and even though this initial assessment may change at a later time it's enough to act upon.

I don't mean that attractive women are always more valuable to me than unattractive ones, but all other things being equal I would choose the attractive one every time.

Edited by Maarten
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright, I think we need a short list of things tha we disagree and agree on.

I will summarise now: (Maarten/Olex versus miseleigh)

Disagree:

1. Not OK for a man to open/hold door for a woman whom man doesn't know, but sees her as attractive if a man wouldn't hold doors for man whom he doesn't know.

Agree:

1. OK for men to open/hold door for women in case of romantic relationship.

I encourage to check this so that we are clear where we stand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My last post was about when you did not know the woman at all, by the way. Just to avoid confusion ;)

Perhaps a good way to say it is that in dealing with reality in general, men and women act as man qua human being, and only when dealing with each other in a romantic context does this orientation change. Then women act as women, and men act as men, rather than as humans.

In most cases exactly the same things are good for a woman. She should be just as independent, productive and rational as any man in her everyday life.

Edited by Maarten
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never met a hat that impeded communication; although I suppose if the hat were like this

jester-11495.jpg

it might be distracting enough to impede communication. If you find that you can't talk to people with hats on, like this guy

steed1.jpg

wouldn't you also find it rude for a person to wear a hat outdoors, at least if they were speaking to you?

I don't dispute that you have a right to set whatever rules you want, I just find some of these conventions rather arbitrary and, of course, quite mutable over time. It is simply wrong to conclude that wearing a hat indoors is automatically rude, just as you cannot automatically conclude that a person is rude for wearing a hat indoors: however, wearing a hat indoors after having learned that the host prefers you to take your hat off is rude.

HAHA touche! You're right I really don't have a rational reason for not liking hats on except that it's a social convention which I like. So my comments about wearing hats were somehat less than intellectual and I appreciate the humor. When I find a rational basis for not wearing harts I'll let you know ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maarten, thank you for clearing up your viewpoint on this one ;) I can understand valuing physical beauty, at least to a small extent. I just think that someone should not be valued higher than another based solely on gender, without any other factors involved.

Just because I'm curious, if you go into a building before someone else, will you hold the door open behind you or let it close?

Personally, I'll hold it open (unless they're a good distance away) simply because I take pleasure from being polite.

Agree:

1. OK for person to open/hold door for partner in case of romantic relationship.

2. OK for person to open/hold door for someone else who is struggling with it.

3. OK for person to open/hold door for someone with some small value to them (greater than just gender)

4. above?

How's that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I'll hold it open (unless they're a good distance away) simply because I take pleasure from being polite.
Yeah, I do the same actually. For some reason, I get pleasure from that as well. Though, another part might be that the other person is thankful for it. B/c if a person is not thankful, then I want to slam the door back.

Agree:

1. OK for person to open/hold door for partner in case of romantic relationship.

2. OK for person to open/hold door for someone else who is struggling with it.

3. OK for person to open/hold door for someone with some small value to them (greater than just gender)

4. above?

Looks good to me, I agree on all 4. How about disagreement?

Disagree:

1. Not OK for a man to open/hold door for a woman whom man doesn't know, but sees her as attractive if a man wouldn't hold doors for man whom he doesn't know.

You've kind of agreed with that:
I can understand valuing physical beauty, at least to a small extent. I just think that someone should not be valued higher than another based solely on gender, without any other factors involved.
Now, about those other factors. Me and Maarten were talking about the case where we don't know a person at all. So, physical beauty would be the only factor available to us when we have to decide if we are to hold the door or not. So, there isn't a choice here. Later on, if we get more infromation, we will acquire more factors to consider. So, we will later consider them as well. (Maarten, answer if you disagree, though I doubt you do)

So, I think we all agree on that Disagree #1. It's just that we place different value on physical beauty. I would think that this is just fine, just a personal variance among us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I can agree with that. Gender is not a value in itself, but beauty is, so that would be a valid reason for me :)

And of course, friends would qualify as having value, so that would be enough reason to do nice things to them, because their happiness matters to me. It depends a little on context on what specifically I would do to show them this, though. Which is where considering their particular values comes into the equation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you typically have an approximate range on how close the person has to be to you to hold the door for them? Is it 5ft, 20ft, 50ft, etc? And does that range increase when you see a person you are attracted to?

I only hold doors for people if they are pretty much right next to me, considering how easy it is to open a door. However, if I see an attractive girl behind me, I'll wait a little bit to hold it for her so we can make eye contact and also to give her pleasure(like sex).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 ft is how I usually judge it. I might increase it, if it's someone I know, though attractiveness doesn't play a role here. I tend to go the opposite way and don't allow myself to be influenced by attractiveness.

However, if I see an attractive girl behind me, I'll wait a little bit to hold it for her so we can make eye contact and also to give her pleasure(like sex).
Huh?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I'm going to be waiting at the door for more than 2 seconds I wouldn't continue to hold it, unless he's hot.

I once had a guy (at a club, never met before) tell me 'looking in your eyes is better than sex with another girl'... that relationship never started. I'm sorry, but sex is sex and eyes are eyes, and it's not like he knew anything about me. If he couldn't understand that, forget the whole A=A thing....

The hat thing interests me. Let's see what Google brings up...

“Basically, hats are removed when going indoors as a measure of respect. Therefore, caps and hats should be removed when entering a home (which includes while eating at the table), when entering a place of religion, or when going to a restaurant. When entering a store or other “public area” like a train station, the hat or cap may remain on. This applies to baseball caps worn by men or women. Hats and caps are always removed for the Pledge of Allegiance or the National Anthem.” (see Feb. 9th, 2004)

Ok, so there's a bunch of 'rules' regarding hats. Following these shows respect for those around you. I found one theory that claimed it began when a gentleman was in the presence of a higher authority; the hat symbolized the measure of authority, and the man in the lower position would take his off to avoid challenging that authority (ie: a lord in the presence of his king.) I have no idea about the reliability of the source for this, coming through secondary sources, (I didn't find the original source) but it's interesting.

No matter where it came from, it shows respect to remove your hat when you go inside, especially into a private home. Now, the benefits of following this tradition, senseless as it may seem, include retaining the goodwill of your host. The deficits could include loss of a fashion accessory, possibly getting colder, or showing your hat hair.

Retaining the goodwill (and respect) of your host may not seem like something that should be valued, especially if they're so particular about hats. But consider the following: first, you likely enjoy this person's company. Why else would you be in his house? Second, having the respect of someone, no matter what your own opinion of them is, cannot hurt you, and will often present some benefit to you. At some point in the future they could help you find a better job, introduce you to other people who's company you value, or give a glowing review to your new landlord.

One error that I find many people make is the assumption that there is no value in having the respect of someone you don't agree with, dislike, or are completely ambivalent towards. I may greatly dislike one of my fellow coworkers, but as long as I don't go out of my way to antagonize her, she may still hold some respect for me. Because of this, if a promotion became available and I was one of the candidates (assuming she isn't) I would be more likely to get the position because one of my coworkers likes the way I work, and will probably mention that to the boss.

This does not mean I will go far out of my way to make everyone like me; it simply means that I will not go out of my way to make them dislike me, and if there is something that is simple to do, does not go against my values, and will increase someone's respect for me, I will do it regardless of what I think of them. For me, removing my hat would be one of those. It causes me no great harm, and could provide enormous benefit.

The removal of hats in particular probably rarely applies. If you are not sure if you host cares about hats, just ask. There are plenty of other small actions, though, that cause no harm to follow and can provide great value. Just because something seems to have no reason other than 'it's polite' doesn't mean it's worthwhile to ignore it. Do you say please and thank you when it's expected? Why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, yes, Lathanar, I suppose that was efffective. Your unmannerly post, obviously with no intention of "scoring points", does suggest that there are reasons beyond scoring points for being mannerly :)

Hahaha, I hope you did in fact get my point rather than be offended. It was too good a setup to pass.

One can be mannerly in order to show their feelings, or in order to get something (or both.) Suppose I open doors for ladies under certain conditions. Say I do it solely to get a thank-you (without any particular intent of showing appreciation of women), and won't open doors for a particular woman who I believe won't thank me. Barring me outright lying to a woman about my MO, what's false here?

If your opening doors only for women that you know will show signs of appreciation for it, and the appreciation is all you hope to get, your simply doing things for people you know will value what you did for them. If your doing all the nice things, pulling out chairs, opening doors, etc not because you really want to, will you continue to do so the entire relationship? Or will you stop once you've obtained what you've gotten? What exactly are you scoring points for, a relationship or a one night stand?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he's doing things for people, then obviously it's what he wants to do....

He wants to do these things because he likes the gratitude he recieves. This shows that he likes the pleasure he gives these people, and likes the pleasure he gets by pleasing them. Thus, he will only stop when he no longer cares about giving the other person pleasure, or when it is obvious that they take no pleasure from it. Did that make sense, or is it muddled?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or will you stop once you've obtained what you've gotten? What exactly are you scoring points for, a relationship or a one night stand?
If this is not another setup fo yours then you are pushing way too far.

Thus, he will only stop when he no longer cares about giving the other person pleasure, or when it is obvious that they take no pleasure from it.
You got it right. This would be the reasoning for door manners.

P.S. I think we've come to a certain conclusion here. Most if not all points have been addressed. Overall, our reasoning behind our manners weren't clear to each other, so here we got 3 pages of posts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...