Dappered Classics: The Gentleman Paradox

I think a gentleman would sooner refer to himself as such than he would go around calling people “douchebags” and “tools.”

I agree with the above. You’re right, though, it’s funny how that word is EVERYWHERE these days.

My favorite is how Police Depts use the term. “The two gentlemen we arrested for assault and robbery…”

Being a gentleman means continually striving for a higher standard, and no one with designs on being a gentleman would be so tacky as to claim they were without room for improvement.

What if you like to dress nice, but your friends make fun of you for it? I try to wear nice clothes (dress shirts/slacks/blazers) and my friends all wear ripped jeans and metal t-shirts. I was in the military and have been a civilian for a short period of my adult life and I figured at some point people would have some etiquette.
Instead I don’t see what I consider “Gentlemen”. Not that I think I’m better than others. I have made some mistakes in the past. We all have flaws but now I would like to meet people who don’t smell like beer all the time. Especially ladies.

Well, actually, the origins of the word “gentleman” are actually tied to a more ancient use of the words “gentle” and “gentility.” “Gentle” actually refers to the quality of one’s family and breeding, and particularly whether you came from a family of wealth and title. Only in our modern-day usage has the word taken on any meaning in regard to personality and temperament.

Personally, I don’t use the word “gentleman” in my everyday vocabulary. In part because it’s a dated word whose meaning has obviously been muddled over time, and in part because many of the best men I know could not be called “gentleman” by any definition of the term.

It’s not that he wouldn’t refer to himself as a gentleman, he wouldn’t need to refer to himself as a gentleman.

a gentleman is confident enough to not care whether you think he should refer to himself as a gentleman or not.

Like many such monikers people aim for one can only strive constantly to be a gentleman. Just as the true genius understands there is always more to know, there is always a way in which we could better ourselves, to become closer to the ideal of the true gentleman. Whether it be taking a bit more time to talk to your friend who called upset whilst you were busy with work, or to wait patiently with open door in hand for the person behind you to pass through even thought you’re in a world of hurry, one can always look back on a day and think “I could have done that better”. In no way does this mean we should give up. Instead we should find contentment in the knowledge that a quest to be a true gentleman will never be complete until written in a eulogy

who has to say something everyone knows, did Jordan walk around saying he was the greatest ever, did …i find it funny when people look at me funny when i go out of my way to open the car door for my wife, and she reaches open to prop my door, i just look at them and smile…its a union lol…

As others have said, a man should not have to refer to himself as a gentleman. It should be evident by his actions.

However, there are occasions when a man’s honor or standards will keep him from taking part in certain activities or behavior. Every once in a while, an explanation will be requested. I believe it is then acceptable to reply with “Because I consider myself a gentleman, I choose not to (activity/behavior).”

I think the men who are making fun of you for dressing nice are actually unsure of themselves and don’t feel comfortable taking care of themselves.  They feel better by fitting in by wearing the same thing as the next guy.  It truly is a bit of a leap to decide to invest in your wardrobe and put some serious time and thought into your look.

You are leading by exampe.  Don’t stop til the top buddy.

While it’s accurate to say that in another time and place (England, circa 1900), referring to one as a gentleman primarily denoted circumstances at birth.  In this country of meritocracy, a gentleman is one who is mindful of the rights and feelings others and, moreover, protects the rights of those unable to protect themselves.  Such a man would find it unseemly to proclaim his status as a gentleman.

Just like how a real gangsta never says he’s gangsta… haha

Just want to clear a couple things up here.

A lot of posts are noting examples of men who aren’t gentlemen, but claim to be — and this standard is being applied to anyone who claims gentlemanliness (yep, just created that word). It is definitely true that men like this exist, and are using the word to boost the way they’re perceived by others (something which a true gentleman probably cares little for, or if they do care, it’s in a different way).

However, simply because a true gentleman acknowledges his gentlemanliness, does not revoke him of it. Let’s picture the perfect gentleman. He reflects upon himself, his demeanor, his actions, etc., and compares them to the criteria of the perfect gentleman. Upon reflection, he comes to the rational conclusion: “I am a gentleman.” Surely he is no less gentlemanly because of such a statement. If asked by another: “Do you consider yourself a gentleman?”, he may answer “I suppose so,” but definitely not “Of course I am!” Is the bachelor who thinks to himself “I am an unmarried male”, and concludes “I am a bachelor”, no longer a bachelor in virtue of his conclusion?

How can we be justified in saying that the gentleman can deem others gentlemen, but not himself? Isn’t it a quality of a gentleman that he holds himself to the same standards as he does others, and judges himself in the same way he would others?

A true gentleman would never BOAST about his gentlemanliness in the way that the un-gentleman I first noted would. He merely acknowledges that he is living in accordance with gentlemanly criteria.

The paradox comes into play when the “gentleman” begins to defy some of these criteria. If upon reflection of his gentlemanliness, the man’s ego becomes inflated to the point that he feels better than others due to his demeanor, then he is no longer a gentleman, since he has lost an essential condition of gentlemanliness. The same goes for boasting.

Thus, there really is no paradox, but a kind of process of self-reflection by which one could potentially become unworthy of the title of a gentleman. The paradox is non-existent since if a gentleman is boasting about his gentlmanliness, then he cannot be a gentleman, since he is boasting. Plain and simple, it is a matter of past and present. He WAS a gentleman, before boasting. If he exhibits all the criteria of gentlemanliness, but boasts, then he is not a gentleman, as it is a necessary condition to gentlemanliness that he not boast (or feel better than others, etc.).

One thing I’m debating myself with, however, is the style of a gentleman. If we return to the example of the perfect gentleman, we immediately consider him as well-dressed. However, what if he were more like the masses — consider if he dressed average (clothes just one size too large, possibly wears running shoes casually, etc.) Would he be unworthy of being a gentleman? I’m inclined to say no. BUT, consider him presenting himself as an absolute slob — showers 2-3 times a week, always wearing sweats or pajama pants, etc., but in EVERY other way he is gentlemanly. I don’t think this would be a “gentleman” but merely a “nice guy”.

Is dressing well really a criterion for gentlemanliness? Or is it a certain degree of dress which counts towards appearing presentable to others?

Like saying, “I am humble.”

As one who has cleared the sixth decade, I have observed gentlemen, aspiring gentlemen and boors. The boor thinks it is all about “HIM”.  Boors take themselves too seriously. The gentleman thinks it is not about “HIM” but rather the person or people he is interacting with.  The aspiring gentleman is growing from a boor to a gentleman.

How a gentleman dresses depends not as much on impressing others but by how much he wants the people around him to be comfortable. 

No he wouldn’t. And in the same vane, which I was raised on, a person with (ahem, excuse me) “class” would never use the words ‘class’ or ‘classy’ period.