Let me set the scene: a man and a woman are on a date, they decide to go to a restaurant where the man, let's call him Jim, has made a prior reservation. They arrive a little early, so they are forced to stand outside in the slightly chilly night air. Jim, being a gentleman, offers the woman, let's call her Pam (I just finished watching The Office for the second time, I'm extremely sentimental, just let me have this), his coat. Jim will then go on to pay for dinner and anything else they might do in the course of the date (a movie, drinks, bowling). Now, from the point of view of classic dating "rules," Jim is being a perfect gentleman, which has an extremely positive connotation, but in reality, what is happening in this scenario?
When Jim offers Pam his coat, in his mind, he is simply looking out for the woman he loves (yes, he loved her long before their first date), but in societal terms, he is perpetuating the stereotype that men are more powerful than women and can therefore withstand the cold more easily. When Jim pays for dinner, he is probably happy to do so because he knows that the man is "supposed" to pay, but in societal terms he is perpetuating the idea that men should work more than women and therefore earn more money. This basically implies that women are worse workers which then implies a whole other heap of negative things about women.
In this scenario, Jim is practicing chivalry. An idea that came about in the medieval period when only men were allowed to fight and women did just about everything else (maybe an exaggeration, but this is about gender issues not historical facts, so hush) but were looked down upon as clearly lesser. Is a medieval notion something we really want to base our entire search for love on? I don't want that personally. But there may be many who look at this scenario and say, "Jim is just being a gentleman, he is just being nice, you can't fault him for that." And they would have a point, but this is how I would respond.
There is nothing wrong with being nice to your date, the issue stems from the fact that it is only the man who is allowed to do these things. If it was a 50-50 split over who offered their jacket, not because of some outdated gender split, but because one or the other person were actually cold, then it would be okay. If it was a 50-50 split over who paid for dinner based on who has the most ability to pay or who payed last time, then it would be fine. But only then would I agree that whomever is doing the coat offering or the dinner paying is a perfect gentlewoman or gentleman.
And to answer your final question, yes, it does matter. To have true equality in this country (I'm from the U.S. and I have no idea how this applies to other countries, if you have insight on that, please comment to enlighten me) every aspect of gender roles must be examined. There is no sexist ideal too small and in my opinion, the way we approach dating is not a small issue at all.
Thanks for reading, I would love to hear what you have to say, whether you agree or disagree, what you would like me to write about next, anything you want to say, please just comment. I'm getting desperate. :) :'(
Stop reading now,
Kellen