Does your husband order for you?

[Evangelina]

Nobody is answering WHY it's considered good manners.

I suspect that traditionally, ordering for a woman was considered good manners for a couple of reasons:

- public serving staff were typically at least a couple of rungs below the woman dining... ordering for her protected her from the ordeal of speaking with those of inferior class
- women of the upper classes were expected to be shy and possibly (depending on time period) wearing a tight corset... the combination would make ordering in a loud restaurant quite an ordeal in and of itself.

 

[Mskedi]

In general, no.

In Thai restaurants, he'll order for me (in Thai) because if I order it they won't make it as spicy no matter how much I beg for extra extra extra spicy.

But that's a different situation entirely.

 

[sparassidae]

But I guess when you look at it, most of the 'chivalry' type things are pretty darn useless apart from making a couple feel good about each other....... Hmmm... maybe the women who want to be treated chivalrously see it more as a romantic move than a functional one?

To your first point- yes they are useless, but is making a couple feel good about each other a bad thing?

To your second point- yes definitely. I am fully capable of ordering for myself, but it is a sweet, romantic way that he shows his love. He's happy with it and I'm happy with it so all is good!

 

[RedheadedPrincess]

We both decide what we want and order our own food ourselves. The only way we order something for each other is if someone goes to the restroom and tells the other what they want. The only thing I do for my dh is to tell the waiter/waitress if something is missing from one of our plates when they bring the order, etc. I only do that because dh is blind and it might take him a few minutes to realize that his potatoes are missing, etc.

I would be disgusted if my dh even told them what I wanted while I am sitting there, because I have a mouth and can speak my mind. I know my dh would feel the same way if I did that to him.

 

[Evangelina]

To your first point- yes they are useless, but is making a couple feel good about each other a bad thing?

Context! The statement I was answering had to do with women wanting chivalry from men, but not wanting to have any similar obligation to men. So I was pointing out that chivalry these days is more to do with making both people feel good than any functional benefit.

 

[sparassidae]

Context! The statement I was answering had to do with women wanting chivalry from men, but not wanting to have any similar obligation to men. So I was pointing out that chivalry these days is more to do with making both people feel good than any functional benefit.

Fair enough

 

[jwwells]

People! In making a political analysis I can ONLY make an analysis using the politically active people! Read what the newspapers say, read what the women's political action groups say. The analysis stands as correct and would be supported by almost all political commentators.

Now, what Jane Average wants is a different matter! I cannot speak for Jane Average as I do not know what she wants.

Chivalry as a code is the source of most of our traditional manners. Your response to my comments show the problem we have --and it is a whopper!-- in understanding changes in manners. Almost all public discussion of manners aims to get men to behave in a certain way to women: The reverse is rare and mild.

Men who DARE to challenge this are openly called misogynists. That is the problem, it defines the problem, thus your response shows that I am right.

This is a problem we see throughout gender. It is transitory.

 

[purplecloth]

well people in the REAL world are not politically active people...

we are talking about the real world... normal people... every day people...

we ARE talking about Jane Average...

but you sure tend to do a good job of assuming what Jane Average thinks...

 

[Mskedi]

People! In making a political analysis I can ONLY make an analysis using the politically active people! Read what the newspapers say, read what the women's political action groups say. The analysis stands as correct and would be supported by almost all political commentators.

Now, what Jane Average wants is a different matter! I cannot speak for Jane Average as I do not know what she wants.

Chivalry as a code is the source of most of our traditional manners. Your response to my comments show the problem we have --and it is a whopper!-- in understanding changes in manners. Almost all public discussion of manners aims to get men to behave in a certain way to women: The reverse is rare and mild.

Men who DARE to challenge this are openly called misogynists. That is the problem, it defines the problem, thus your response shows that I am right.

This is a problem we see throughout gender. It is transitory.

I really hope you're kidding because if you think the way women behave towards men hasn't changed in the past 150 years or so you're completely off. And what's expected us in the workplace, in the home, as a parent... it's different than it was. And what's expected of men is different than it was.

People are changing in reaction to one another. I don't think it's imbalanced as a whole movement, though in certain relationships where the individuals are at different stages of this change there will be evidence of conflict.

 

[DonaldOrwinRenKern]

People! In making a political analysis I can ONLY make an analysis using the politically active people! Read what the newspapers say, read what the women's political action groups say. The analysis stands as correct and would be supported by almost all political commentators.

Now, what Jane Average wants is a different matter! I cannot speak for Jane Average as I do not know what she wants.

Chivalry as a code is the source of most of our traditional manners. Your response to my comments show the problem we have --and it is a whopper!-- in understanding changes in manners. Almost all public discussion of manners aims to get men to behave in a certain way to women: The reverse is rare and mild.

Men who DARE to challenge this are openly called misogynists. That is the problem, it defines the problem, thus your response shows that I am right.

This is a problem we see throughout gender. It is transitory.

Ok seriously, the question is-Does your husband order for you? No history lesson on chilvalry was asked for or needed. I also don't believe men that DARE (lol)challenge the chivalry code are considered women haters.

The problem here is not about gender, although it seems that when certain guys get involved in the discussion we have to pull out the history, sociology or theological text and reasoning to make a point.

This problem is not a whopper (that's a tasty burger) listen, my wife holds the door for people. I get to the door first I'm opening it and holding it... no big deal... If I know what she wants I'll order, or she'll order... or we'll order our own... seriously what is the big deal... I just don't see this as another excuse to go into the gender bashing thing... let's give it a break.

Let's do things because we love each other, not because we are gender oriented...

 

[purplecloth]

WOOT WOOT!!!!

GO DONALD!!!!!!

*does a cheerleader dance for donald*

 

[Lilium]

No, my husband has never ordered for me as in picking my meal. There are times when he'll tell the waiter/waitress what I want after I've decided and told him.

i remember being out with a male friend once and i wanted a pint, and he ordered me a 'more femine drink' cos he didnt like to be out with women who drank pints...

I would have downed the "ladylike drink" and then ordered myself a pint

 

[DonaldOrwinRenKern]

I would have downed the "ladylike drink" and then ordered myself a pint

THAT'S GREAT!!!!! lol!!!