Confessions of a Door Holder

[cormac]

My name is Kevin Rhodes, and I am a door holder.

If someone has their hands full, or is otherwise limited in their ability to open a door and maneuver their way through the doorway, I'll open and hold the door for this person. Gender does not enter into it. It's just the right thing to do, and it is second nature for me to do it.

It doesn't stop at door holding. If someone, regardless of gender, is carrying something heavy and cumbersome, I'll offer to help. If the same person is about to fall over from the burden of their load, I'll move to stabilize them. And so on.

This does not make me a rapist.

attack_laurel posted an article inspired by a man who tried to help her with her bags. After she had told him no multiple times, he actually picked up her bags and started putting them into the car. She went on to describe other interactions with men, and stated that in social conversations, men would try to justify or defend such behavior, further elaborating that even worse behavior (rape, in particular) is also defended by men.

I don't know these men, and if I did, I'd not want to associate with them. However, as a door holder, I understand the need to defend the "help" instinct. For longer than I can remember, door holding has been denounced by some feminists as demeaning to women. The same feminists make the same leap that attack_laurel did, from door holding to sexual harassment and rape. attack_laurel took it one step further by lumping in those who try to defend door holding with those who defend rapists.

As I read the article, I felt that bag-guy's initial motivations were pure, and it was only after he didn't take no for an answer that he switched from being a nice guy to being a jerk. Yet I still felt myself defending him, not because of his actions, but because I could see where the story was leading. I have come to the conclusion that if the type of men in her post who would defend bag-guy aren't jerks, then they're probably door holders like me who feel that their own desire to help is under attack by feminists armed with anecdotes.

Yes, there are jerks. Yes, there are a lot of them. Yes, they do all sorts of things, from the unpleasant to the unconscionable. But don't lump me in with the jerks just because I do something that may look superficially like something a jerk did elsewhere. A jerk holding a door isn't a jerk because he's holding a door. He's a jerk because he refuses to listen to the person for whom he's holding the door.

To all my feminist friends: if I hold a door open for you, it is because I'm trying to help. It is not my intention to imply that you are unable to open or hold the door for yourself, nor do I mean to impose centuries of patriarchal social misogyny onto you. I'm not trying to assert my dominance as a male, or rape you. I'm just holding a damn door. If you don't want me to, tell me in a way that won't make me feel like a jerk. And know that if you struggle getting through the door that I'm not holding, I'm going to feel like a jerk anyway.

I heard on the radio while driving in to work today that a local man had intervened when a woman was being molested on the street, and had been stabbed multiple times by the assailants for getting involved. With the exception of the stabbing, I want to be this guy. His courage to step in and help a fellow human being in the face of very real danger is something to be praised forever. Unfortunately, all too many of us door holders are this guy, wounds and all; the stabs come not from the assailants, but from the woman herself.

Comments

[ziactrice.livejournal.com]

Saying "No, I do not want your help." is not even in the same order of magnitude as stabbing the attempted helper, so I dare to say you've stretched the metaphor too far in your eagerness to lay the blame for not allowing women to say no back onto the woman - not that it works. If a woman says no then a man ignores the no, the man is simply behaving badly and in the wrong - and no gentleman would do any such thing. Even more so, no real gentleman would attempt to disguise such a violation of another person's express wishes as a gesture of courtesy.

If you cannot see the logical fallacy involved in this, permit me to venture another metaphor, this one taken from real life. There was an article in a tone of vast disgust written in an Arabic country stating that women were using makeup to make their only visible part - their eyes - too alluring. This makeup was causing the men to have unclean urges, thus the article adovocated that women should ALSO be made to cover their eyes.

The retort was it would be far more effective to cover the eyes of the men. It generally is more effective to control men than women - except the men don't want to be so controlled. After all, it is more advantageous to the men to put all the onus on the women, but retain the power to constantly change or even violate at will any rules for the men. Then you take it the extra step of laying even the blame for the changing of the rules on the woman - or trying to.

I venture the notion that it is far more polite if you don't blame the women for saying no to having any random stranger of a male gender force himself within their personal space, at easy attack and strangle range, in a precise manner of which the end result is being BEHIND THEM, making them quite vulnerable to said attack, but instead accept that they can say no despite what your mores say these women SHOULD do to conform to _your_ sense of what is polite behavior.

You might also want to consider that they might want to say no, but that they might very well have previously been attacked for real and true in that precise way. This means your insistence at holding a door is not only unwelcome, your continued insistence and blaming the woman if she denies said unwelcome gesture becomes a threat.

If you cannot understand the quickness of how a gesture of courtesy can become a threat, I guess no man has ever attempted the knuckle-crusher handshake on you. What you are proponing is a knuckle-crusher with guaranteed right to repeat with no right on the part of the injured to stop playing victim. Or at least, closer to that analogy than a woman refusing a courtesy she doesn't want is to actively comitting a violent murder.

Even Miss Manners herself, the only real authority I know of on American politeness, has specifically stated that a woman's personal safety should be allowed to trump politeness at all times.

You may say not every man is planning to attack a woman by said ruse. You would be right. However, the only way to discover if a man is 'safe' or not is a bit on the drastic side of testing, and some of us who have already been burned are no longer willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. This obviously hurts your feelings quite a great deal.

Too bad. My safety trumps your feelings, so I guess you'll just have to settle for a few cries of 'Et tu, Ziactrice?' outside the Forum.

[cormac.livejournal.com]

Congratulations, you missed the point entirely. The stabbing is not saying "I do not want your help." This statement is fine, and I will accept it without question. The stabbing is equating my wanting to hold a door with rape.

Oh, and hi. I'm Kevin. I don't believe we've met.

[magenta513.livejournal.com]

It's such a fine line, though I must admit I am a complete fan of the door holders. As you may recall if I'm feeling particularly feisty I may even wait for the door to be opened for me. But I'm a fan of good old fashion manners.

That said if a stranger offered to help me with anything other than opening a door I'd probably be hesitant. Heck, even if it was a strange woman. Door holding is a wonderfully helpful thing and I will always be appreciative. Offering to carry my bags is great or the perfect opportunity for a robber and if it's a stranger you cannot know for sure what their motivation is. Having not read the article I can only add my two sense (and of course I do have that irrational fear of strangers).

Like I said, it can be a fine line.

[matrygg.livejournal.com]

What bothers me in holding the door is when six or seven people go by and you're kind of just left there. I don't mind doing it, but it used to be we had an etiquette for this sort of thing that our generation only sort-of knows and the millenials simply don't recognize.

As for the larger issue with feminism, my first serious girlfriend would yell at me for holding the door for her, yet had no issue with borrowing my jacket whenever it was cold and leaving me in a t-shirt. I'm still not sure what to make of that.

[penumbren]

I'll second that first bit. I'm female, but I door-hold for people, too, and I always thank anyone who does it for me. However, I'm just old enough to want to be courteous, without being old enough to be cantankerous enough* to let said door slam in the sixth high-schooler's face as they try to cram through.

*Said with love, trust me. My grandparents raised me. XD

That main point, Kevin? I agree. I sympathize. And you're more than welcome to hold a door open for me anytime... especially if I'm busy hauling heraldic tubs. :)

[selenesue.livejournal.com]

I'm perfectly willing to let a guy hold a door or move heavy boxes for me.

The guy who would not take no for an answer worries me more than a little. Gotta wonder about his home life.

[metroid23.livejournal.com]

As a fellow door holder, I feel your plight!

I like to think it has to do with good old fashioned manners. I was taught "Yes, Sir." "No, Ma'am." "Yes, please." "No, thank you." and to hold the door open for others and give your seat up to the elderly. Oh, and complimenting someone's cooking and thanking them for the meal. Also, I usually offer my assistance to others at the store since I am taller than most and can get things from the top shelf easier. :)

That said, if someone asked me not to help, I would probably just move along. ::sigh:: Sad times we live in sometimes. :(

[doll-paparazzi.livejournal.com]

I open doors for everyone. I like it when others do the same. In fact, I get pissed when others drop the door in my face (which has happened a few times in my life).

I think that if someone if POLITE and says no thank you, sure. But I've seen had people get all weird and almost rude to me like, "What do you think I can't open up a freaken door for myself?"

O.O

It's called being freaken polite. Maybe you should learn it.

People now a days are whack.

[jillaw.livejournal.com]

As someone who has actually been sexually assulted, I m DEEPLY offended to have that equated with someone wanting to hold the door open for me. Even someone who doesn't get it when I say "no, thank you."

I have all kinds of baggage that I will never get over because of that night when I was 22. The appreciation of genuine politeness is not something I lost.

[cormac.livejournal.com]

And for your appreciation of genuine politeness I am forever grateful.

[lady_songsmith]

I'm a door holder, and a heavy-load carrier -- though the latter only with people I know or in contexts where I have some tie to them even if we aren't truly acquainted (for example, at a school or sca event), because what magenta513 says about it providing a perfect opportunity for theft is quite true.

That said, I understand the way that a woman can jump to extreme thinking on the subject, because as ziactrice said before she (I assume) blew past the point, women do get blamed for problems that originate from male lack of self-control, and I can see how someone who's been burned by that repeatedly would start jumping to the worst possible conclusion immediately.

That said, I submit that while attack_laurel has exaggerated the comparison you have also jumped the gun. As I read her post, guys who hold doors are not being equated with rapists. Guys who don't hear "no" are being equated with rapists. Her major issue here is that she's taken the fear of that legitimate and wide-spread problem and turned it into a situation where no one is being given the opportunity to hear "no" and stop.

[cormac.livejournal.com]

I suppose I did jump the gun somewhat, but then I have also been burned repeatedly. attack_laurel writes: "Men will really never know what it's like when I feel my entire body tense up because a man is pressing into my personal space, grabbing my shopping, refusing to hear that I am saying "no" over and over again. If I yell at him for invading my space and not listening to me, I'm a bitch and a ballbuster, and if I'm polite, I'm not listened to. I can't win either way, so I may as well make a scene."

In far too many instances has this "fight or polite" dichotomy turned into vicious and public attacks for us door holders. "No, thanks" is one thing. "Get away from me, you pervert" is another altogether. And the latter gets phrased just-so...why?

Because literature that rails against door holders frequently makes the emotional connection of a socially-scripted public action with a typically private and intimate action. Even if the distinction is made (i.e. non-consentual door holding, non-consentual sex) which completely changes the meaning and social context of each, the stigma of the latter (consentual) action and its intimate nature is emotionally tied to the former public action (consentual or not). Women are thus reacting to the subconscious connection, treating door holders as if they are approaching them for sex.

blessed are the door holders

[hagerson.livejournal.com]

From Allesaundra: Dear, dear Cormac! Blessed are the door holders, the ones who offer to help, not only helping the Pretty Young Things, but the old, the fat, the ugly, the injured, and overburdened. (And those that are all 5). There's nothing like struggling to open a door when your functional hand is full, and the other _can't_ do anything, only to hear some lout behind you snigger, "Whats a matter wit'ya, yer arm broken?" And then turning and saying, "Why yes, IT IS." and seeing their nasty face fall, realizing they didn't get to zing a fat/ugly/clutz. Keep opening doors, and I for one, will bless you all your days. In light of so-called liberation, I do reserve the right to open doors for anyone else, regardless of gender. Hugs, Allesaundra

[just4bonk.livejournal.com]

The emotional issues of a few should not impact the non-harmful actions and gestures of the many. Many things can act as triggers, reminding people of things ranging from rape to bad break-ups. There is no serious basis for saying that all possible reminders of a trauma should be removed from society. A simple "no thank you" is the recourse available to anyone who does not wish for a door to be held.
The broader issue is misogyny. I will file this under the "but for" test. When you describe someone you met, do you describe them as "black" or "white" in the context of the story you're relating? Ask yourself, "but for the particular colour of their skin, would I use race as a descriptor?" There are cases where colour is a valid and useful descriptor. Now for the doors...
"But for the gender of the person following me, would I hold the door open?" If you are an equal-opportunity door holder (I know you are, Cormac), then it's nothing more than a very small simple gesture of consideration.
Those who are reminded of assaults or social injustice have my empathy, but not my sympathy. Such reactions are dysfunctional and pathological, warranting compassion and professional help. I submit for the consideration of the various readers, what if the rapist had been wearing a black baseball cap? Should all future men remove such caps in the victim's presence? Reductio ad absurdum, I know, but it warrants consideration.

And I hate black ball caps, especially when worn at fashionable angles. =)