Is Chivalry Dead? Or Does It Depend on Why You're Doing It?
A journalist recently asked me about chivalry. She wanted to know whether the old dating rituals like opening doors, paying the bill, walking on the street side of the sidewalk, are romantic gestures or relics of a time when women needed men to take care of them. It's a question worth taking seriously, because the answer matters for real relationships. Read her article here
Here's what the research, and years of clinical work with couples, has taught me:
chivalry isn't inherently good or bad. What matters enormously is the intent behind it.
The Science Has a Name for This
Researchers call the protective, "ladies first" dimension of traditional masculinity benevolent sexism; a term coined by social psychologists Peter Glick and Susan Fiske in the 1990s. Unlike hostile sexism (which is openly negative toward women), benevolent sexism looks and feels warm. It says: I want to take care of you. You are precious. Let me carry that.
The paradox researchers keep finding is that many women genuinely enjoy these gestures, even women who hold strong egalitarian values. That isn't hypocrisy or confusion. It's pointing at something real and important.
What Chivalry Is Really Signaling
Emotionally Focused Therapy (EFT), developed by Dr. Sue Johnson and rooted in decades of attachment science, helps us understand why. Humans are hardwired for emotional bonding. At the deepest level, what we're looking for in a partner is a reliable answer to the question: Are you there for me? Will you protect me? Do I matter to you?
A 2022 study found that women who feel less secure in their relationships are significantly more attracted to partners who display chivalrous behavior. This makes perfect sense through an attachment lens: when we feel anxious about our bond, traditional gestures of provision and protection register as safety signals. The open door isn't just a door — it's a small act that whispers, I see you. I've got you.
The problem isn't the gesture. The problem is when the gesture is coming from a belief that women need to be taken care of — that they are, fundamentally, less capable. That's a very different thing, and partners can usually feel the difference even when they can't articulate it.
What John Gottman Would Say
Dr. John Gottman's research on what makes relationships thrive offers another useful frame. In his landmark studies at the "Love Lab," Gottman found that happy, stable couples build what he calls a culture of appreciation and fondness. These are a steady accumulation of small acts of care, attentiveness, and turning toward each other. These moments of connection, however minor they seem, build what Gottman calls positive sentiment override: a reservoir of goodwill that helps partners weather conflict and see each other generously.
Chivalrous gestures, when they're genuine, are exactly this kind of deposit. They say: You are worth my attention. I want to make your life a little easier. That builds intimacy.
But Gottman's research is also clear that contempt (the sense that your partner is beneath you) is the single greatest predictor of relationship failure. An act of "chivalry" that carries an undercurrent of you can't handle this yourself is closer to contempt than to care. It erodes the equality that healthy love requires.
A Surprising Research Finding
Here's something that should make us all think: studies on gender and helping behavior show that men's chivalrous helping increases dramatically when they have an audience. When no one is watching, the gender gap in helping behavior nearly disappears. This suggests that for some people, chivalry is at least partly about performing masculinity. Looking like "a good man", rather than genuinely caring for their partner.
That's not an indictment of all chivalry. But it's worth asking: Do I do this when no one's watching?
For Couples: The Conversation Worth Having
In our clinical work, we often encourage couples to talk openly about what gestures of care mean to each of them and what they'd like more of. Some people feel most loved through acts of service (a filled gas tank, a cleared plate). Others experience care through words, touch, or quality time. Chivalry lands differently depending on the person receiving it.
The deeper question isn't who opens the door but do we both feel genuinely cared for, respected, and seen? In relationships where the answer is yes, the door-opening tends to take care of itself.
The Bottom Line
Chivalry, like most things in relationships, is morally neutral as an act. Its meaning is made by the intention behind it and the way it's received. Genuine care strengthens relationships. Obligation rooted in the belief that one partner needs to be protected because they're less capable quietly undermines them.
The question isn't whether to open the door. It's why and whether the person you're opening it for feels honored, or handled.
-
AARP & National Alliance for Caregiving. (2025). Caregiving in the U.S. 2025. Washington, DC: AARP. https://www.aarp.org/pri/topics/ltss/family-caregiving/caregiving-in-the-us-2025/ (Released July 24, 2025. Nationally representative probability-based online panel, 6,858 caregivers surveyed.)
Daminger, A. (2019). The cognitive dimension of household labor. American Sociological Review, 84(4), 609–633. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122419859007 (Qualitative study, 70 in-depth interviews with 35 couples.)
Suls, J., Green, P., Rose, G., Lounsbury, P., & Gordon, E. (1997). Hiding worries from one's spouse: Associations between coping via protective buffering and distress in male post-myocardial infarction patients and their wives. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 20(4), 333–349. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025513029605 (43 married male MI survivors and their wives, assessed at 4 weeks and 6 months post-discharge.)
Helgeson, V. S., Jakubiak, B., Van Vleet, M., & Zajdel, M. (2018). Communal coping and adjustment to chronic illness: Theory update and evidence. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 22(2), 170–195. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868317735767 (Theoretical review and evidence synthesis.)
Rohrbaugh, M. J., Mehl, M. R., Shoham, V., Reilly, E. S., & Ewy, G. A. (2008). Prognostic significance of spouse we talk in couples coping with heart failure. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 76(5), 781–789. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013238
Carrère, S., & Gottman, J. M. (1999). Predicting divorce among newlyweds from the first three minutes of a marital conflict discussion. Family Process, 38(3), 293–301. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1545-5300.1999.00293.x (124 newlywed couples followed six years; 17 divorced.)
Gottman, J. M., & DeClaire, J. (2001). The Relationship Cure: A 5-Step Guide to Strengthening Your Marriage, Family, and Friendships. New York: Crown.
Gottman, J. M., & Silver, N. (1999). The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work. New York: Crown.