I’m not sure I entirely understand. I gather that one of the situations was the steps involved in exiting a streetcar. What was the other one?
They didn’t? What were they asking for, then? In the OP, they explicitly ask “What are your opinions on this issue?” and “Again, your thoughts?”, without any indication that they are asking about something else other than our opinion on the situation.
As I said in the OP, it involved exiting another streetcar. A different one at a different location, as I clarified on various occasions.
That’s precisely why I don’t accept the “Ask once, and if she declines, accept that she doesn’t ever want your help for the rest of that day” approach. Situations change. This one did.
How was the second streetcar materially different from the first?
Shouldn’t you have asked that question first before getting on my case? It sounds to me that you were perfectly willing to assume that the conditions and dimensions of the car were not different, that the condition of the ground was not different, that this person was not feeling more fatigued, and so forth, and so on. This, despite the fact that I repeatedly reminded you that we were talking about different situations in different locations and different times of the day.
Ah, but it can’t possibly have been the case. No, the only possible answer must have been that these situations were exactly the same and that a snarky and condescending answer was therefore in order.
JThunder, have you ever felt so tired that you couldn’t climb out of a streetcar?
Again, the same misconstruals. It wasn’t help “to go down stairs.” It’s offering to help a woman off some steps. And the interaction was not “in short order,” as I’ve taken great pains to emphasize.
I think I made these things perfectly clear in the OP; indeed, most of the early respondents to this thread appear to have grasped these distinctions. In the later postings though, a good number of you appear to have embraced the notion that this involved repeatedly badgering a woman into accepting assistance, then walking her down a long flight of stairs. That is not at all what the situation was like, as I’ve emphasized a number of times already.
Personally? No, but I think that’s ultimately a petty distinction. We’re not talking about situations where somebody is so exhausted that he or she simply cannot muster the strength to remove themselves from a vehicle. We’re talking about situations where someone may or may not appreciate a little bit of extra assistance… perhaps after a night of partying and insufficient sleep, such as what we had been doing.
But for the sake of argument, let’s agree to reject the fatigue issue. Does this justify the repeated assumption that these two situations were entirely equivalent? I had already emphasized (more than once) that these were two separate incidents that occured at different points in the day. Either this distinction was deliberately and repeatedly ignored or it had already been decided that there was no conceivable difference between the two incidents.
Regarding the general topic, given that I have a bung ankle, chances are I’d have taken up the assistance down from odd steps. But if I said no once, I’d mean it to be taken as ‘no’, not ‘ask again later.’ If I needed help after refusing it the first time, I’m perfectly capable of speaking up and asking.
On the slight swing away from topic toward chairs, yes, that’s just plain awkward and I always feel remarkably silly trying to scoot in while they push. Maybe restaurant chairs need wheels, then we could end the evening with wild drunken chair races.
But they were both on the same day, right? Unless circumstances changed quite dramatically in the intervening hours, and I have a hard time imagining what that would entail, had I been the woman in question, your offer would have made me uncomfortable. Just sayin’.
Since you’d all been partying and getting insufficient sleep, independently of gender, did any of the men offer such assistance to other men, or women to men, or women to all the other women?
I’m still curious when and how you started on this practice.
Some people follow a rule of etiquette that states they should offer to help a woman down from a high step, or similar. Not to do so would be rude and inconsiderate.
Other people follow a rule that says not to offer to help women unless they ask for it, and/or clearly need it, and/or are known to you personally, and/or you would help a man in the same situation, and/or maybe some other considerations. Otherwise you would be chauvinistic and demeaning.
It is not possible to always follow both these rules. Therefore, no matter what you do, you will be breaking some rule of etiquette. Hence, damned if you do and damned if you don’t.
You’re only damned to the extent that you will suffer any negative consequences for failing to follow one of these rules. But it’s fairly clear that one does not suffer significant negative consequences for failing to follow the first “rule” you’ve given, given that most do not adhere to it as a rule and yet very few report having its breaches held against them. Thus, it seems silly to claim that you are “damned if you don’t”.
Now, if you want to make an internal project of following both rules, you will indeed fail and thus perhaps disappoint yourself. To which all that can be said is, don’t make an internal project of following both rules.
I don’t think it’s hard to imagine at all. Some vehicles have higher steps, for example. Others can have steps that are not quite as sturdy (speaking hypothetically). It’s also not unreasonable to sugggest that someone would become more tired as the day progresses.
Heck, as I pointed out earlier, one co-worker emphasized that some women might initially decline out of shyness, but then decide to accept later on. I know that some of you would disagree, but I think this demonstrates that people do NOT all think alike on this issue.
We could discuss these hypotheticals all day long, but frankly, I don’t see how that justifies the insistence that these two situations must necessarily be treated in exactly the same way. Over and over again, I’ve pointed out that these were separate incidents, and over and over again, this has been greeted with the response of “Doesn’t matter. If she declines once, this means that all future offers will also be declined,” regardless of circumstances. And that’s where I think that some people are being needlessly rigid with this rule, especially since not all people agree.
And that’s a perfectly reasonable thing to say. I fully acknowledge that different people can have different reactions.
If anything, that’s exactly why I think that some of you folks are being overly rigid and insistent with your rules. It’s why I think that it’s more important to adopt an attitude of tolerance and understanding rather than saying, “Follow these specific rules, darn it!”
How do you know there are no significant negative consequences for following the first rule? Someone could feel they were letting themselves down, by failing to live up to their own standards of politeness. Some person watching them might find their manners lacking, and think less of them. They may fail to enjoy the benefits of being considered a gentleman by women who do appreciate their help. How do you determine that none of those things could possibly be significant, especially to someone like JThunder, who has indicated that these kinds of things do weigh on him?
Alright, he may feel disappointed in himself. Like I said above, if he sets conflicting standards for himself, it can indeed be impossible to meet them all. But this doesn’t illustrate that society has foisted a no-win scenario upon men; it illustrates that men shouldn’t set such conflicting standards for themselves. And by and large they don’t, choosing instead to forgo your first rule. And by and large they don’t particularly suffer for this, and go on living happy lives.
I don’t know how to help JThunder reach the point where he doesn’t set such standards for himself as that he’d no longer feel disappointed if he couldn’t follow the first rule. But perhaps the conversation in this thread will help.
Er, I overnegated that penultimate sentence. But you know what I mean.
This is why I would have refused politely the first time. I would have been tolerant of your attempt at politeness. I would have been annoyed at the second, I have already nicely declined your assistance - unless something had drastically changed between the first and second occasion and I actually needed help. As a reasonably fit, under 40 person, I assume I could have managed getting off multiple buses. Just like your male friends.
I didn’t ask earlier because I knew she was getting off a streetcar in both cases and that the conditions on the ground weren’t actually different. However, since you keep bringing it up I thought maybe we could hear how you thought they were different and get past what, even if true, would be an irrelevant distraction.
The real issue is whether or not you can trust a woman when she says she doesn`t want your help.
Since you decided to ramble for 2 paragraphs instead of explaining why the second streetcar was any different from the first can we finally all agree they were the same situation and you just didnt believe her when she said she didnt want help?
Thanks. It was meant to induce giggles. 
JThunder follows a rule of “etiquette” that states he should continue to offer his assistance even after it has been politely declined until he is either snapped at or is rebuked often enough for a pattern to develop and it becomes sufficiently clear to him that the woman means what she said the first time.
His problem is simply that other people consider that rude. You can’t just create your own “rules of etiquette” and when they fly in the face of actual etiquette claim you are “damned if you do and damned if you don’t”.
What if I follow a rule of etiquette that states that it’s polite to slap a woman on the ass when you meet her. Not to do so would be rude and inconsiderate.
Am I in a no win situation because other people consider that rude?
Yes, if you care about what they think, but don’t want to change your standards. I doubt you actually think that is polite, though. JThunder’s problem is that not only does he think his behaviour is reasonable, there are actually other people who agree with him, as well as those who don’t.
It frustrates me that you insist so strongly that your way is the right way, and that if someone follows different standards of behaviour they are just wrong. There can be differences in age or culture or upbringing or even just personality.