The concept of honor bothered me as well (although I also thought Elliot’s summary was excellent) — maybe as a layer between your comments and his? Even though it is a beneficial idea if, as you both point out, it leads to the right outcome, it has a scent of paternalism to it. It’s as if by pure dint of physical ability to overpower, the man must walk through this thought process that includes something like, ‘I am superior to this female, I could just take what I want, but I am better than that’ — i.e., the place where you then land and debate, Anna. I’m not suggesting that most men would in fact dig that deeply and I’m sure Elliot isn’t either, just noting that there is a little bit of a double-edged sword to the concept of honor. I would rather that, as you describe, everyone just ‘be good for goodness’ sake.’ (Which I think is actually the reality of where most men land!)

I’ve really enjoyed this discussion, the thoughtful comments like Elliot’s and the unpacking of the terms. Words do matter! But, I can see the benefit of $5 and tea, as well. :-)