[Ansteorra] In defense of courtesy (was: Re:Courtesy challenge)
Chris Zakes
dontivar at gmail.com
Sat Oct 7 14:05:54 PDT 2006
At 02:50 PM 10/7/2006, you wrote:
>Salut cozyns,
>
>In response to my
>
>> > Some
>> > have argued that many of the outlandish extremes of feminine fashion were
>> > ideologically designed as a reinforcement of the concept of women as
>> > chattel. A woman who can't go through doors on her own, feed herself, run,
>> > undress without assistance, ride a horse, or
>> get into a cart or carriage on
>> > her own is decidedly dependent upon the good graces of her lord.
>> >
>
>Don Christian Doré says:
>
>>Not at all. Being unable to do things for yourself was a method of
>>showing wealth and applied to men as well as women.
>
>I've heard this argument, but I don't see much
>support for it. Men of the same era could
>accomplish most of these things without support.
>Armoring and some (not all and not in all times)
>clothing are exceptions, but I don't believe the
>reason for those items requiring support had
>anything to do with conspicuous consumption.
>Armor required assistance because of
>complications arising from concerns for safety
>and for presenting the best possible appearance
>(buckles in the back of a cuirass, for example).
>
>lo vostre per vos servir
>Meser Lyonel
I'm not so sure about Europe, but I've been told
that in China, the rich would grow their
fingernails to ridiculous lengths as a
demonstration of the fact that they *didn't* have
to do any sort of manual labor.
-Tivar Moondragon
More information about the Ansteorra
mailing list