When is chivalry chauvinism?

My grandfather is a member of the “Greatest Generation,” a veteran of World War II and has always been my role model. But there are times I wonder if the older-generation values he instilled in me aren’t doing me more harm than good in this crazy, upside-down modern world.

I get the door for my women when entering a building or a car. I’m the crazy husband who will stand in a monsoon until his wife is in the car before running around to the other side and getting in. My wonderful wife, Glenny, doesn’t expect me to do it, but she appreciates it. When we’re walking by a road, I always walk closest to the side of traffic. I never walk ahead of her. So call it noble, chivalrous … whatever. I do it without thinking about it and confess I get a bit embarrassed when somebody points it out.

The problem comes from never knowing how this behavior is going to be taken anymore. Heck, my own mother can’t stand it when I get the door for her and feels that by behaving this way, I’m somehow implying she is incapable of doing it herself. In times past I have been sneered at, laughed at and even ridiculed for it. A time or two I’ve even been scolded for it as though I’m some knuckle-dragging Neanderthal incapable of understanding modern gender roles. I have to wonder; what does the modern young man do while dating these days? I’m so glad this is something I don’t have to worry about anymore! Are the days when this was acceptable over? Am I really a dinosaur? Am I totally out of touch with what is expected of men and women today?

The puzzle grows when I read about the ever-changing dynamics of men and women in the workplace. I’ve been hearing the word “equality” for so long, and yet I’m still at odds with how it’s interpreted. Perhaps because of my Christian upbringing I always assumed it meant that whether it be man, woman, black, white, disabled — we were all of equal value. But I’ve learned that not everybody sees it that way. It seems that the politically correct definition of “equality” is that we are all the same in capability. Frankly, I just can’t grasp the logic of that. It seems obvious to me that we all have different abilities, talents and shortcomings. And isn’t that OK? Why must we be of the same ability to have the same value?

When I joined the U.S. Army, women were already well on their way to being integrated. They were in boot camp learning how to be soldiers. But there were differences in the requirements for how much time they were given to run distances, how much they had to carry, etc. So does that mean that under fire, the enemy will make allowances for our female soldiers? And if equal treatment is the goal, how come they didn’t have to register for the draft as I did? How come their heads weren’t shaved upon arrival for training? More importantly, where were the complaints and arguments from the feminists that high-school girls didn’t have to register with the Selective Service System? How come they didn’t mind that women recruits weren’t being treated the same? Are the calls for gender equality across-the-board or are they cherry-picked?

In Washington, I had the opportunity to observe that women attending training for a fire department were required to carry a smaller load to the top of an extended ladder in a longer period of time. (I have been told this isn’t the case in most fire departments in Alaska. I hope it’s true.) Again, I wondered if this meant that the fire department expected that some firefighters would be on hand to selectively rescue the children and smaller people from a slowly burning building while others would be on hand for the larger people. It just didn’t make sense.

Call me crazy, but it seems that standards should be just that; set requirements. And anybody, no matter what race or gender, who can meet these requirements should be considered up to the task. The natural argument to that, of course, is when it comes to some forms of physical labor a man will usually have an advantage.

Typically, that’s read as an “unfair” advantage, but how is that unfair? This goes back to my question regarding why our natural abilities, which are always going to be different somehow, determine our value? Does this mean Stephen Hawking, one of the most intelligent people on the planet, does not have equal value to the rest of us because he suffers from a severe physical condition? Men and women are born with unique natural gifts and abilities. It seems silly that we now try to alter or change nature to somehow try to make us all the same in such a literal sense.

I don’t mind that there are some tasks I think women are better at than men. But likewise, I think the opposite is a given as well. What’s the harm in that? In fact, doesn’t that make things better and perhaps even more interesting? Who would want to live in a bland world where all men and women are identical?

Meanwhile, most of my sons are teenagers now. I watch them hold the door, open the passenger side door of the car, walk on the traffic side of the sidewalk, offer to carry the heavy items and other such things for women and I wonder if they’re not going to face similar conundrums in the future like I did. Are they going to be called chauvinists by women who somehow think that their manners are meant to imply some sort of incapability? Will they be misunderstood because they believe that equality means that although we are all different, we are all of equal value and worth equal respect? I hope not.

Ben Compton is a Palmer resident and publishes his column under the tagline “Compton’s Corner,” the same title used by his grandmother, Phyllis Compton, a longtime Frontiersman columnist.