I would like to ask if you feel it is contradictionary for chivalry to exist in a world where women push for equality. From a logical point of view a woman is perfectly capable of opening a door for herself and yet it is ingrained into society that men should open doors for women, the explanation for this being that it is polite, shows manners and shows you are a "gentleman". However I feel it is quite the opposite, if anything it promotes the idea that a woman is feeble and incapable of performing something as simple as opening a door. If a person had difficulty or was incapable of opening a door since I am performing for that person, what that person is incapable of. This makes sense. An even more extreme example is the romanticized idea of the man dying for the woman. If both men and women are equal shouldn't it really be every person for themselves in such a situation? Yet a man would be considered "weak" for allowing a woman to die when he could have saved her by sacrificing his own life in place of hers. I agree with the idea of a world where men and women are equal. Equal so far as no person can stop a person from either sex from doing something or thinking a certain way if they please. Men cannot physically have children however this is a genetic limitation, not a social one or one brought on by a member of the opposite sex. I feel as though society has a very warped sense of what equality truly is. If a woman asks to be equal to her male counterpart yet expects the man perform chivalrous deeds for no other reason other than "it is gentlemanly", then that is not equality it's female supremicist ideology.