I am a Flaming Liberal about Gentlemanliness

"You better 'splain!"

Yes, I had planned on it, thanks. But it will take a couple of minutes.

I learned some interesting things recently. Going back a few hundred years, the gentleman was a kind of lower-level nobility. He had good "birth" or family background and was reasonably wealthy. One of the main criteria is that he did not have to do actual work for a living, relying on inheritance, real estate or whatever.

"One mustn't mix with the working classes! That is shameful. We must set examples and hope that they learn from their betters. Noblesse oblige." The snooty idea of nobility and social rank that equates wealth with quality of character rankles me to no end. Sorry, Zeke, I do not recognize your authority or judgment. In this regard, I do not stand for conserving the standards, I am a liberal.

Fortunately, that system faded. The distinction began slipping over the years, and things like the Reform Act of 1832 in England damaged the class of gentleman even further; it became wider. The middle class grew over the years. Gentlemen's Clubs were created (and not in the silly euphemistic way that Americans have for "strip joints"). Clubs grew phenomenally in the 1880s because more men felt that they could belong to something. The concept of Gentlemen's Clubs found its way in many corners of the world. Gentlemen fit very nicely into the ever-widening middle class.

"Why is anyone called a gentleman today, Cowboy Bob?"

| Rewind a bit. The classes required distinction, and so manners were created. Gentlemen and ladies had their code of conduct. When you are glared at for slurping your soup (rightfully so), you are violating a class distinction. Echoes of the old days when it was said, "We do not act like the commoners." Social class warfare was encouraged. As if it was not enough to be distinct by having hands that were unscarred from doing honest labor, the code of conduct further distanced the classes.

Most of the class warfare distinctions are gone when it comes to using the term "gentleman". After all, we have a far greater equalizer than Sam Colt gave us. My equalizer is green, folded and stuffed into my diamond-studded money clip. If you can pay, you can get respect. For the most part, anyway. Money is another nail in the coffin of class distinction, because you are not excluded from shops if you can pay.

These days, being a gentleman is something to which we aspire. And that means character and manners more than anything else. Sure, you can dress like a gentleman based on some current fashion trends. But the outward adornment does not define the inner character or spirit. Of course, if you have enough spare change and can afford finer clothes and such, it is nice to both look and act the part of a gentleman. But as far as my liberal attitude on this is concerned, the bricklayer can be as much a gentleman as the head of a Fortune 500 company.

Views: 38

Comment

You need to be a member of Art of Manliness to add comments!

Join Art of Manliness

Comment by James Murphy on October 22, 2009 at 2:46pm
Thanks for sharing, I agree 100%, and I liked your joke to.
Comment by Cowboy Bob Sorensen on October 21, 2009 at 4:19pm
"ALMOST" enough... lol. Man, some of the replies I got were better than the joke itself. Glad you liked the post, hope it made sense, I didn't feel like I had the right rhythm.
Comment by asa c mcguire on October 21, 2009 at 4:16pm
Well put bob. This is almost enough to make up for the stalker joke. My head still hurts :-)

Latest Activity

Clinton R. Ausmus replied to Portnoy's discussion History in the group The Great Debate
"Yeah, I have not been able to find that footage. But just like the "Counter Protestors" who brought sticks with them. Not all counter protestors brought sticks to start some shit.After covering a few protests/marches, you can kind of look…"
45 minutes ago
Sir replied to Portnoy's discussion History in the group The Great Debate
"An aside, but I saw the video of "some good people." He specifically distinguished the some good people from white supremacists. I was concerned until I heard his actual words."
55 minutes ago
Clinton R. Ausmus replied to Portnoy's discussion History in the group The Great Debate
"That kind of irks me a little too. All we are seeing of the footage the night before is from the Vice piece, which you have to admit is quite disturbing, but I'm quite sure that there had to be some people there who had no association with that…"
56 minutes ago
Pale Horse replied to Portnoy's discussion History in the group The Great Debate
"Nope, they were all 100% racist, fascist, neo-confederates. Quit defending the Nazis."
1 hour ago
Pale Horse replied to Portnoy's discussion History in the group The Great Debate
"Who made you Minister of Art?"
1 hour ago
Shane replied to Portnoy's discussion History in the group The Great Debate
"The people who want statues removed are not just a radicalized fringe. Do not marginalize them like that. Remember your words the next time you start believing the commentary about Trump defending White Nationalists by saying "some good people…"
1 hour ago
Dominic replied to Portnoy's discussion History in the group The Great Debate
"None of these statues are innovative or important pieces of art for the development of sculpture. They aren't quite historical as most, if not all, of them are long removed from the time of the Civil War. In fact, many went up during times of…"
2 hours ago
Dominic replied to Portnoy's discussion History in the group The Great Debate
"Sir, it's not the same activity. Not all old objects need to be preserved nor displayed. And we already know a great deal about the statues being removed--from their manufacture to their historical context. These are discussions that happen in…"
2 hours ago

© 2017   Created by Brett McKay.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service