Chivalry
Women, even when held to be inferior to men in most respects (as in historical Europe, when and where the codes of chivalry were established), have always held a general "special place" in culture and spirituality. Most of the earliest spiritual traditions were, naturally (no pun intended), nature-focused, and they typically attributed femininity to the Earth. We are all born of women, as was----such being important to Christian tradition----the son of God Himself, born of a virgin (read: "pure woman," undiluted by man), according to Christian doctrine. While the codes of chivalry, when followed at all (which was rare) were frequently twisted and abused, the original idea was in fact that women were of such importance to our existence that they deserved special treatment, even a certain degree of general veneration. Hence also the concept of 'courtly love,' whereby a knight might fight for the honor of a woman, wed or otherwise beholden to another, whom he loved (and was fated to love) platonically. The ideal was actually that there was a sort of "noble suffering" in the knight's lack of complete, physical fulfillment from the "relationship," which was typically with a noble or royal patron (or the wife, sister, daughter, etc. thereof); this lack of physical fulfillment was seen as actually being an expeditor (sp, sorry) or encouragement towards spiritual fulfillment; one was conditioning one's soul to love a distant God by first practicing restraint in the loving of a "distant" woman. In the (Frenchified) version of King Arthur's story, for example, Lancelot is seen as a traitor... not for loving Guinevere, as this would in fact have been held (by the ideals which the Arthurian tales are meant to exemplify) as utterly true and noble, but by giving in to his less platonic, earthier urges.
Sadly, during most of the periods and in most (Western, at least) societies where women were held as second-class citizens by men who wished to be in charge of everything, this innate high regard for women and womanhood was twisted and convoluted to reflect an inferiority; it is now (speaking figuratively, not actually meaning "now") proper to hold a door open for a woman, not because it's polite or convenient or respectful, but because it just might be a little difficult for her to do it herself. The original ideals of chivalry more or less fell by the wayside, in favor of the inferior-gender explanation for everything that once had a much more virtuous reason behind it.
It can sometimes be difficult to separate what was, or is still, done, out of veneration, from that which is done out of a notion of masculine necessity or superiority in one form or another (I do not say that such exists, only that certain people hold the notion that it does). Certain women are either very insecure in themselves, thus vulnerable to the implication made by a man that they are somehow inferior or unable to perform the offered tasks themselves (whether or not this implication was meant to be made by the man in question) or else very untrusting of a man who attempts such actions, believing----not in her own inferiority----but, rather, in the idea that the man is making a statement regarding such. Despite certain theories to the contrary, I don't believe the two rationalities are necessarily linked 100% of the time. But, that could just be me.
In summary...
I think that the original purpose behind these gestures was a token of respect for the importance of women in our lives, and that they were nothing to be taken lightly, taken insultingly, or sneezed at, but that centuries of abuse and misuse since chivalry arose have resulted in suspicion towards the motives and true feelings of one who would step so out of place from current societal norms as to perform such functions as opening doors, pulling out chairs, etc.. Now, we're at the flip side of the coin from the original state of chivalric affairs; it's so difficult, re: the fear of being publicly taken to task for doing it, to bring oneself to do these things (in many instances) that when they are done they are usually done out of an honest good intention, but such is no longer necessarily seen or believed in readily.
...With me?
