Gentleman is the opposite of feminist?!?

Sexy Little Ideas – a blog I like – recently made this assertion. But it’s bull shit.

A gentleman IS a feminist.

Herewith, a point-by-point refutation:

A gentleman refers to women as the weaker sex. A feminist refers to women as equals.

Meh. A gentleman understands that women are stronger than men. And smarter.

Gentlemen pay for women’s drinks. Feminists pay women a fair and equal wage for equal work.

Meh. Gentlemen offer to pay for women’s drinks – and gladly do so – but equally gladly allow a woman to buy their own drinks. Or to buy a gentleman a drink. And, pay women fair and equal wages. And contentedly earn the same as, or less than, women. And, work for women.

Gentlemen give women a hand so they don’t slip in their heels. Feminists don’t shoehorn women into wardrobe choices that are objectifying and damaging in the first place.

Meh. Gentlemen give women a hand so they don’t slip in their heels. And accept a hand. And know how to dress a woman who likes to be dressed. And how to objectify a woman who likes to be objectified. Without actually reducing her to an object.

Gentlemen open doors for women. Feminists open their own doors and shatter glass ceilings.

Meh. Gentlemen open doors for everyone. And, shatter glass ceilings whenever they can, from above, laterally, or from below.

A gentleman loans a woman his coat to keep her covered. A feminist frees the nipple.

Meh. A gentleman loans any cold person his coat. And, frees nipples. With consent.

A gentleman always tries to keep a smile on a woman’s face. A feminist understands that women (like men) are creatures of vast emotional depth, a wide and colorful spectrum of feelings, and that they have the judgment-free right to not always be your idea of chipper (or ladylike or attentive or accommodating or upbeat or sexy) at all times.

A gentleman always appreciates a woman’s emotional state. And, when appropriate, can make her smile. Or make her come. Or both.

Gentlemen treat women right. Feminists don’t keep women as pets.

Gentlemen treat women right. And only keep women as pets who wish to be kept as pets.

But if a gentleman keeps a woman as a pet, he makes sure she purrs.

A gentleman tries to protect and shelter his woman. A feminist tries not to use personal possessive pronouns with human beings.

A gentleman tries to protect and shelter anyone he can (while seeking protection and shelter when needed). And, he knows how hot it can be to assert consensual ownership. Which, let’s be honest, isn’t really ownership. But is hot as fuck, nonetheless.

A gentleman believes in defending a woman’s purity and honor. A feminist believes a woman’s body is her property.

What is this purity? What is this honor? A gentleman loves being granted ownership. But never demands it.

A gentleman will fight FOR a woman. A feminist will fight ALONGSIDE a woman.

A gentleman will fight any god damned fight a woman wants him to fight.

Gentlemen let women go first. Feminists don’t feel entitled to the right to ‘let’ women do things.

Gentlemen make women come first.

Gentlemen objectify women.

Whenever women wish. And never, otherwise.

Feminists objectify gentlemen.

Whenever gentlemen wish. And never, otherwise.

A gentleman’s every act is designed as a small, subtle reminder to women that they are weaker, less capable, and inferior to men.

A gentleman’s every act respects that women are stronger, and smarter. (See above.)

A feminist doesn’t try to hold women back or push them ahead or swallow them up in your own definition of what ‘woman’ is.

A gentleman loves a woman who swallows. And, one who doesn’t.

A gentleman is not a well-bred, honorable man who treats women with good graces. A gentleman is a sexist stereotype in disguise. ‘Gentleman’ is the opposite of ‘Feminist.’

Meh. A gentleman is a feminist.



  1. I agree. I love a gentleman. I don’t have a problem letting him pay for my drink if it makes him happy. I don’t think it makes me feel inferior.
    And all those other things you said 🙂

  2. I agree with everything you said. One big problem I have with feminism is that it makes everyone, men and women, too scared to just be mannerly towards each other. So what if a man opens a door for me? I’d do it for him if I was going through first. I like men to buy me drinks, carry my shopping, make lewd comments, objectify me. It makes me feel good. Oh god, does that mean I’m not a feminist? Honestly I don’t care, I’m me, not a label.
    I’ve always thought of a gentleman as someone who has respect for other people regardless of gender.

    1. Just to be clear: I have no problem with feminism. I think there were moments in feminism (second-wave, in particular) that were, in retrospect, not so positive toward, say, desire and sexuality. But I think those moments were necessary steps in bringing feminism to where it is today. And I’m enormously grateful to feminism, and to feminists. And, fwiw, I’m not sure I really want my cock in the mouth of anyone who’s not a feminist.

  3. 🙂 Like!
    The point I was trying to get across in my post was that it’s not an opposite game (Gentlemen DO X thing, and Non-Gentlemen or Feminists DON’T do X thing). It’s a very nuanced and complex subject that has to do a lot with the woman and what place she’s in at that point in her life, as well as the man and what place he’s in. And I think you also did a great job of getting that across.
    Also, I like your brand-new definition of the modern gentleman. As long as we’re all aware that it’s a new definition and that many ‘gentlemen’ in many backwards cultures use their self-defined status to take the moral high ground about their repression of women.
    Still, that being said, I kinda think we’re both on the same side here…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.