> > Often rightly so? You're dangerously close to making sense here, but I've never heard, nor can relate to, a man holding a door for a woman because he suspects she cannot do so herself.
> >
>
> True, as you go on to explain. It's not really that the man in question has the idea clearly spelled out in his mind: "the woman needs me to open the door for her because she can't do it for herself." But the idea of the less-capable female is somewhere in there, dilute though it may be. It is the covert presence of an unequal estimation of female worth and ability to which the feminist (in its original sense) objects.

But that idea exists only in the mind of the perceiver. If, by my holding the door, I am performing a simple act of courtesy and not thinking for a moment that you are less capable than I of holding a door, yet you assume that I am attacking your door-holding prowess and demeaning the entire female sex (I'm using a hypothetical "you," by the way), then the problem lies not with my action but with your perception. And, though I agree that it is a good idea to avoid antagonizing others, when we begin to abandon courtesy and kindness because some people may misinterpret and be offended by our gestures, then what does that leave us but not to interact with one another at all?