At the same time, though, there have been certain better concepts associated with being a gentleman.  One is guardianship, or looking out for the well-being of those charged to your care.  Also, the gentleman was thoughtful and courteous, and we need more of this today.

Looking to the East also helps us gain a more authentic understanding of this ideal archetype.  For instance, Confucius called being a gentleman chun-tzu.  Such a man is “distressed by his own lack of capacity,” but he is never distressed at the failure of others to recognize his merits.  He will be “slow in word but diligent in action,” indeed he is “ashamed to let his words outrun his deeds.”  He remains “unperturbed when not appreciated by others.”  Like you, I would be more than happy to spend time with this kind of man.

Conservative feminist Katherine Kersten has said well what an ideal man should be:

True manhood means accepting responsibility for others, and making their welfare a primary focus of life.  It means developing a capacity for judgment, courage, honesty, generosity, determination, public-spiritedness, and self-denial in pursuit of a larger good.

Manliness, Kersten says, embraces both tough and gentle virtues.

All in all, it’s important to understand that amid the shifting historical definitions, in large measure we men are expected to be more conformed to the image of Mr. Gentleman than to that of Jesus Christ.  Nevertheless, we likewise must realize this: Mr. Gentleman doesn’t have the last say regarding what it means to be a man among men.

Mr. Gentleman is a compilation of both helpful and hindering impulses and desires.  Eh wasn’t brought to us from Mount Sinai, but from human fickleness, some of which is drenched in ugly tradition.  And as scholar Brad Miner has pointed out in The Compleat Gentleman, “A true gentleman—a chivalrous man—is just a bit more savage than most people imagine…A man who is not roused to combat evil is no gentleman.”