One or Two Checks?
Chivalry and modern gender roles
By Laine Bottemiller, Culture Editorial Assistant
Usually, first dates are awkward, but I’m killing this. I’ve managed to eat three Belair tacos without spilling a crumb; where’s my gold medal?
“Will that be one or two checks?”
Oh god.
Well, I can pay for my own meal. But will he think that means I didn’t think this went well? Should I offer to Venmo him? I’m starting to sweat.
Fortunately, my knight in shining armor swoops in: “I got it.”
My date wasn’t actually wearing armor, but nonetheless, chivalry dictates what respect looks like in a relationship. Despite chivalry developing in 11th and 12th century France and England, expectations of chivalry still guide romantic interactions between men and women (New World Encyclopedia, n.d.). The code of chivalry emerged as a moral guide for knights in medieval Europe, instructing them to serve the sick, oppressed, widowed and disadvantaged with valor, justice and loyalty to God and their feudal lord (Gayre, 2007). Chivalry arrived alongside the concept of courtly love. Courtly love is when a knight falls passionately in love with a queen, who is unattainable as she is married to someone else, and must win her heart through valoric, honorable adventures (Mark, 2019).
Despite the “ultimate” power the queen holds over the knight pining after her, the knight is the only one in the relationship with agency: the knight is desiring and pursuing while the queen is just the subject of these desires and pursuits (Burns, 2001). Chivalry obliges the rescue of the helpless disadvantaged. Paying the check, opening a door and making the first move equates to poverty, weakness and timidness. These chivalrous acts assume a fault and insert a power dynamic to remedy it.
Now, don’t get me wrong, my date covers the bill to be respectful, not because he thinks I can’t (at least I hope not), but where does chivalry fit in the modern era of gender equality?
Gender equality in the workforce has increased immensely: today, women make up 47% of the labor force, as compared to only 30% in 1950 (Geiger & Parker, 2018). Despite this, gender equality in romantic relationships is particularly stagnant as gender roles promote different behaviors for men and women in relationships (Lever et al., 2015). A 2013 survey done on heterosexual relationships at New York University found that on a recent date, 63% of respondents reported the man paying, 19% reported both paying, 16% reported no money spent and 2% reported the woman paying (Lever et al., 2015).
The prevalence of gender roles is unmistakable; however many individuals aren’t satisfied with these expectations. According to research done in 2015, 57% of women asserted they “always offer to help pay even on a first date,” yet 44% of women responded they feel bothered “when men expect [the woman] to help pay for dates.” Forty percent of women described being bothered when men won’t accept the woman’s offer to help pay, yet 39% of women reported being bothered when a man does accept their offer to pay, preferring he rejects their offer (Lever et al., 2015).
The same inconclusivity appears with men; 44% of men reported they would “stop dating a woman who never offers to pay for any of [the couple’s] expenses,” although 76% of men expressed feeling guilty if they don’t pay the bill on a date (Lever et al., 2015).
Gay relationships don’t evade gender roles either. In a Guardian article, Arwa Mahdawi explores gender roles in gay relationships. One of her interviewees elaborates on the persistent pressure of gender roles and says: “When I’ve dated girly girls I find myself feeling more masculine, inclined to hold the door, pick up the check more, etc” (Mahdawi, 2017). Similarly, Jeanne Marecek, Stephen E. Finn and Mona Cardell, doctors of psychology, found traditional gender roles to be associated with “diminished satisfaction” in gay and lesbian relationships (Marecek, 1982).
When chivalry associates the performance of gender roles with respect, the violation of gender roles implies disrespect. When gender roles are violated for the sake of equality, isn't that respecting a woman’s agency? Gender roles are so absolute that we are forced to decide between respect and equality.
If I cover the check, I emasculate him. If he covers the check, he assumes I can’t pay for it. If we split the check, that means the date didn’t go well. If I offer to Venmo him, it seems obligatory. If I don’t offer to Venmo him, I’m a free-rider.
Will that be one or two checks?
I don’t know. I give up. Flip a coin. Perhaps an eight-sided die is more fitting.
I’ll never forget one of my first dates when I asked “Do you want me to Venmo you?,” he responded, “It’s fine, I probably have more money than you.” I wish I was kidding. Chivalric, yet shockingly insulting.
Perhaps the answer lies in intention: a man pays for dinner, not because he thinks he has to or because I can’t, but rather because he cares enough about me to prioritize my comfort over his own.
Selflessness. I can respect that.
Sources:
New World Encyclopedia. (2017). Courtly Love. New World Encyclopedia.
Gayre, R. (2007, March 9). Chivalry and Courtly Love. Chivalry and Courtly Love.pdf.
Mark, J. J. (2019, April 3). Courtly Love. World History Encyclopedia.
Burns, E. Jane. “Courtly Love: Who Needs It? Recent Feminist Work in the Medieval French Tradition.” Signs, vol. 27, no. 1, University of Chicago Press, 2001, pp. 23–57.
Geiger, A. W., & Parker, K. (2018, March 15). For Women's History Month, a look at gender gains – and gaps – in the U.S. Pew Research Center.
Lever, J., Frederick, D. A., & Hertz, R. (2015). Who Pays for Dates? Following Versus Challenging Gender Norms. SAGE Open.
Mahdawi, A. (2016, August 23). 'Who's the man?' Why the gender divide in same-sex relationships is a farce. The Guardian.
Jeanne Marecek, Stephen E. Finn & Mona Cardell (1982) Gender Roles in the Relationships of Lesbians and Gay Men, Journal of Homosexuality, 8:2, 45-49.