this post was submitted on 21 May 2026
13 points (100.0% liked)
WomensStuff
1105 readers
351 users here now
Women only trans inclusive This is an inclusive community for all things women. Whether you're here for make up tips, feminism or just friendly chit chat, we've got you covered.
Rules…
- Women only… trans women are women, and transphobic or gender critical talk isn’t allowed. Anyone under the trans umbrella (e.g. non-binary, bigender, agender) is free to decide whether a women's community is a good fit for them.
- Don’t be a dick. No personal attacks, no aggression, play nice.
- Don’t hate on groups, hatefilled talk about groups is not allowed. Ever.
- No governmental politics, so no talk of Trump actions etc. We recommend Feminism@beehaw.org for that, but here is an escape from it.
- New accounts or users with few comments may have their posts removed to prevent spam and bad-faith participation.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Lets?
Choose a word that I can use instead of lets that has a similar meaning but doesn’t go down the direction you’re trying to take this, because that wasn’t the intention.
I understood what you originally meant, for what it's worth.
Maybe "When a man is comfortable enough in his own masculinity that his partner being the breadwinner isn't an issue." or something like that.
How can we do it without subtle jabs to masculinity? Everyone should be equal
Oh I didn't think that was a jab at masculinity. Masculinity can be positive and men and women can express masculinity.
Well, using the word chivalry in 2026 is pretty sexist imo. The definition is more knightly in origin, with another example being men courteous to women. Clearly from another time. I think we can just retire this word—o😚OP seems to be asking for a semantic shift to an already established word. 🤷♂️
Absolutely agree on the word chivalry being outdated.
Word evolution and etymology are always interesting topics to banter about. Chivalry clearly has a different modern definition than it's origins. Maybe we could help redefine it further? Or come up with another way of expressing something similar.
Like, I think women can be chivalrous. Does that inherently balance the definition or is chivalry always considered a male trait?
I don’t think the modern definition is clear at all. Which is why we are here.
I think the word should be decommissioned, as well as the concept of any gender treating any other gender differently than they would treat their own.
If someone asks, “how should a man treat a woman?” The answer should always be, “like a man would treat a man.”
Maybe I’m just too damn chivalrous. ;)
I just said the modern version is clearly different, not that the definition itself is clear.
....Do you think I'm arguing with you?
I don't agree that being chivalrous inherently means treating different genders differently.
I didn’t mean to sound as if this was an argument.
Ok cool, just checking. It's hard to read tone in text and sometimes I misjudge it!