i am not a victim.

i saw this column online this morning. it supports the idea of chivalry. and, i think it's total bunk.

the article defines:

"Chivalry. The idea that part of being a man (and certainly part of being a gentleman) is to sacrifice willingly to protect those who are more vulnerable."

part of being a man? i'm suspicious of any code or practice that refers to something as part of being a man, or part of being a woman. the people who try to support chivalry nowadays say it's a matter of respect, respect that men should have for the more vulnerable.

that presupposes the idea that women are, by nature, more vulnerable than men, and i refuse to buy into a code or custom that presupposes this. yes, i do understand that on a physiological level, men are generally stronger than women. but, i don't think that translates to vulnerability, vulnerability of the type that makes a man a bad man for not opening a door or giving up his seat. men who offer these gestures are either consciously or unconsciously buying into the idea of woman as weak, woman as in need of the chivalrous gestures--and women who accept them are buying into it as well. i refuse.

do i get offended whenever a man opens a door for me? if a man happens to be ahead of me, about to walk through a door, it's cool if he holds it open for me. just like, i'd hold it open for him if i happen to be ahead of him. that's not chivalry. that's common decency, that's happenstance, that's being human.

but, if a man rushes from behind me to open the door for me, i'm inclined to either laugh a bit at his unnecessary gesture of overtaking me, or be insulted if i let myself think back to the institution of chivalry. if a man offers to get up from a chair to let me sit down, i decline. first politely, then more forcefully. if a man offers me his jacket so i'll be warm at his expense, i decline as well. i don't need anyone to do that kind of stuff for me.

is it nice? maybe they intend it to be that way. but, it's not necessary. i don't need it. i don't need someone overtaking me so i don't have to pull open a door. i don't need a chair or a coat or anything any more than the guy who happens to have the chair or the coat in the first place. i don't want to perpetuate the pressure that men may feel under chivalry to give them up. a man is no less of a human if he's in the chair and i'm standing. i am less of a human for taking it.

i refuse to be a victim of chivalry.

(no subject)

well, finally got a human voice at Leona's.

they never sent it to my new address, they kept sending it to my old and it got returned.

*headdesk*

at least they're sending it my way so i can finally do the tax thing.

thank God for extensions.

common courtesy, or the lack thereof

so, i finally got my ding letter from the public defender's office in the mail this past weekend.

that is inexcusable, in that i had that interview a full two and a half months ago. it's not as if it was lost in the mail--the letter in the envelope was dated April 13, 2006. they just didn't bother to send me a ding letter for two and a half months.

i assumed i wasn't going to be hired. i assumed that from the scared looks on my interviewers' faces the day i went in. but, they could have told me sooner that i was not going to be hired. i think i'm going to send their human resources department a stern letter...i wouldn't have begrudged them a month, or even a month and a half (since i was told i'd hear back by early march, and my interview was right at the beginning of february)...but two and a half months is just un-called-for.

(no subject)

procrastinate. i dare you.

(no subject)

as of tonight, adult swim is running reruns of saved by the bell.

i don't know what to say.