Article: Are There Any Gentlemen Left?

[olde_fashioned]

"They don’t make them like this anymore."

image courtesy of LAF



This is a portion of an article on LAF (Ladies Against Feminism) that I think is really sweet and beautiful. The lady who wrote it shares both an affinity for Austen and an appreciation for that dying breed, the good old-fashioned gentleman. This isn't another single girl's unhappy rant on how bad men are these days, there is actually an uplifting message for those of us who have yet to meet a Prince Charming, a message which I've copied in bold at the bottom in order to share it here.

EXCERPT:

"The first time I saw 'Sense and Sensibility,'"..."To a dramatic thing like me, it was a wonderful story. Love, loss, poetry, Regency dresses...what more could you ask for? And while all of the characters hold places in my memory, as any good story will do, there is one in particular who made an impression on me.

Was there ever such a gentleman as Alan Rickman’s personification of Col. Christopher Brandon? He is the sort of man who makes all of us singletons want to cry. Why don’t they make men like that anymore? How long has it been, we think, since a man could be considerate, kind, respectful, read books, and be at least somewhat handsome in one way or another? It’s enough to drive a girl insane."

"Who for a second would worry about introducing him to her parents? Even with the difference in age that most of us young ladies would be subject to, how long after dinner started would we still be worried about our parent’s opinion? Perhaps five or six minutes, at the most.

Whose heart doesn’t melt the first time Brandon sees Marianne, expression rapt and soft? Which one of us doesn’t need to pull out a fan during the poetry reading? And, let’s face it, every girl, at least privately, wants her own Regency gentleman, complete with boots, who will rescue her if she decides to go walking four miles in the rain."

Keep reading -- this is the best part!

"But in every story I know, true or fiction, that ended happily, the Knight in Shining Armor is rather fickle. He has a tendency to turn up when and where we least expect him. Don’t think that is has to be here, it has to be now. Don’t think that because you’ve been misled, you’ll never find a gentleman. Don’t think that dating everything male will bring you happiness. Slow down.

The only thing we can do is be certain we are ready. Be certain we have open and loving hearts. Be certain we are praying to God to guide our way. Be certain you don’t mistake friendship or attraction for lasting love. And be certain that we don’t get so wrapped up in wild goose chases that we don’t notice a good thing when it appears before us, rather like Marianne Dashwood."

Click here to read the entire article.

Comments

[olde-fashioned.livejournal.com]

I certainly am not advocating desperation in females or drooling over soft eyes and rapt expressions! *shudder* I suspect the girl who wrote the article was trying to be a little Marianne-ish and over the top in an effort to amuse, but I may be wrong. I confess I didn't meditate enough on what she wrote, but now that you bring it up I see that there could be different interpretations on it. Thank you for once again making me think! :-D

I am well aware that I, (as well as any other single female alive), may never marry. And if that is what God has in store for me, then so be it. However, I do think that there must be very few women who would willingly die old maids unless they were nuns, or militant feminists, or had some other reason for disliking marriage or men in general.

I do not want a man to fawn over me, and I certainly do not want to be worshipped! I couldn't expect someone to act like that any more than I would behave that way myself. For someone to "loll" over me, or think I was perfect would mean they must either be lying or terribly deficient in judgment, neither of which would garner very much respect on my side. ;-) I think a true marriage of equals wouldn't have either party throwing themselves at their spouse's feet. Love ought to be a relationship of giving and taking -- with both sides doing the giving as well as the taking. If one side takes all and the other gives all, then eventually there will be nothing left to give and no satisfaction. At least that's just my two cents.

My definition of "gentleman" coincides with yours, except that I would add "a strong (Christian) faith, high moral principles, good discernment and judgment, and a steadfastness of resolve that would allow him to weather a storm alone if necessary," to your otherwise excellent list. ;-)

Now it is my turn to ask you to correct me if I am wrong in my opinions! I hope I haven't come off as a know-it-all or idealistic ignoramus. ;-)

[iane-grey.livejournal.com]

I am glad to have written your response, and to have my own critiqued. The amendment you made to my definition is quite right and welcome - A man must have some personal strength and conviction. I am fervently glad to read what what you have written on the equality of the sexes - that neither men, nor women should be diminished by their marital role. I will always prefer a man who tells me when he thinks I'm wrong, for example, to one who simpers and blindly agrees.

For those few women who desire not to be married: that's their right and there's nothing wrong with it, of course, but you know very well I am not such a woman myself. We may day-dream, and hope - there is nothing wrong with that either (I sincerely hope there is nothing wrong with it). Only, to tell yourself it will happen, or worse that it should happen, is not only wrong, but quite simply a bad idea which will guarantee only disappointment. We are none of us entitled to a gentleman husband, and I'm afraid the note which ran through your LAF essayist smacked too much of expectation for my liking.

I have discovered something which will either repulse or amuse you: the teacher that marked my paper on Beowulf is herself a writer. Would you like a peek at what she has written?

Here Comes the Bride: Women, Weddings, and the Marriage Mystique.

The reviews really make me want to scratch myself. (http://www.amazon.com/Here-Comes-Bride-Weddings-Marriage/dp/1568581939/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2/002-5819521-8276857?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1191816503&sr=1-2) ()

[olde-fashioned.livejournal.com]

I'm tickled you agree with my "amendment", as you put it. Sometimes I think my list is a tall order! ;-) Did you really think that I was one of those subservient women doormats that would "Yes, dear, whatever you say, dear," a man and rub his feet every night after work??

"I will always prefer a man who tells me when he thinks I'm wrong, for example, to one who simpers and blindly agrees."

AMEN to that!!! :-D *coughMr.Knightleycough*

Always rational, always practical, and yet romantic beneath all of it! I love it! ;-D Again, I agree with you completely about not daydreaming/hoping too much. I used to read on a Christian girls' message board (I hardly ever posted for many reasons, but that's beside the point and a long story). This topic was one of the (many) things I wasn't comfortable with how the moderators handled it. Discussions of "dreaming of a husband one day" were strongly discouraged, and hope chests, which most of the girls had and actively contributed to, became taboo subjects. Romantic novels were also "wrong" because they encouraged discontentedness, and longing for the future, i.e. neglecting the present. Now, IMVHO, instead of stamping "SINFUL" on all of these inherently natural, and therefore God-given womanly desires for a home and family, moderation should be taught, and the potential evils of setting yourself up for disappointment. Crossing into either extreme is not good, IMVHO. It's a fine line between realism and bitterness, and hopeful thinking and naivete.

As for smacking of expectation, I'd wager the girl who wrote it is no older than you or I. She said that her mother first found S&S in a video store when she was "about ten." Now, she could have found it years after it was released in 1995, but that at least gives us an idea. Most of the articles like that on LAF written by older women who are still single mention the fact that their friends are already married

Thank you for the link, and it both irritated and amused me, as you predicted. ;-P Firstly, I pity you all the more for having such a teacher. (you have my sympathies) Also, did you see the comment on her writing abilities? "the writing style is clunky at best" Ha. Ha. HA!!! (I knew it! She's jealous of you! Your writing is not at all clunky!) Secondly, she sounds like a rabid feministic intellectual who's impressed with herself and her own abilities. And lastly, do I smell sour grapes...?

[iane-grey.livejournal.com]

"Hope chests"? I'm afraid I don't know what those are :( I would, however, think that discouraging hope is one of the last things a good Christian would want to do, but then I don't profess to understand extremists on either side.

The authoress' youth does not excuse her high expectations, though it does explain them. I hope she is very soon enlightened as to the true state of mankind without losing hope; shortly, I will make a post expanding upon this.

My teacher is proving pretty awful - her latest stunt was to ask the importance of the red cross on the chest of the Knight of Holiness in Spencer's The Faerie Queene, only to tell us all afterward that there was not importance - apparently that was her point. *taps her own temple* She's a special one to be sure.

[olde-fashioned.livejournal.com]

A hope chest is exactly what it sounds like. Young girls are usually given the wooden trunk by their families, and it is set aside for the "hope" of a home of their own some day. Girls would fill it with household linens, tea towels, wooden spoons, cookbooks, doilies, fancy curtains, you name it. A lot of them sew things for it, and a rare few even went so far as to include baby things in their trunks. The idea was that if you got married some day, you would have all these things for your house, and if you remained single, towels and cookware would still be useful. You could call it a sort of domestic dowry, if you wanted. I see nothing wrong with the appliances/cookbooks/linens part of it, but the baby clothes are a little....presumptuous? I'm not sure if that's the right word, but many married women never have children. It's setting one's self up for heartache and disapointment, IMO.

I think it's a fine line between educating girls in the feminine and domestic arts, and grooming them to become wives. If a girl's sole aim is marriage, then being single later in life is going to induce something akin to panic!

I shall look forward to reading your post, only I hope you haven't experienced any negative encounters? :-/

*headdesk* That sounds an awful lot like trickery to me...is she endeavoring to eliminate her students' self esteem? I should think a red cross would be indicative of a Crusader, or at the very least a Christian knight, but there we go again with anti-Christian sentiments. But maybe you can write a book on your sufferings someday -- entitled The Evils of having an Egotistically Maniacal Professor. ;-P