3 ms·

I think the difference between white-knighting and not is whether it's about the woman or the person who's behaving badly. "You shouldn't hit a girl!" <-- whit

I think the difference between white-knighting and not is whether it's about the woman or the person who's behaving badly. "You shouldn't hit a girl!" <-- white knighting "You are being violent; if you do not stop we will ban you from this space." <-- insisting on basic, reasonable standards of behavior. It's not about women needing special protection, it is about the community not welcoming people who act like assholes. Of course women can defend themselves, but no one should have to defend themselves against that kind of behavior. And the only reason I believe it is important to talk about gender in this context is because women are being targeted because of their gender and using cultural weapons specific to their gender. Again, it is about the people behaving badly, not their targets.

pekk 14y ago
To clarify, it is white-knighting when the woman doesn't care, when there was no actual offense, and it is really just an opportunity for someone to show off about how chivalrous or sensitive they are. You don't have to be sensitive or show yourself off to shut down misogynists and you definitely don't have to go looking for unclear offenses which the purported victims have no complaint about.
- roguecoder 14y ago
  If the behavior makes me uncomfortable, it doesn't matter what the target thinks of it: I have a right to speak up. Even if the target is bothered by it I don't have a right to speak for her, though I can support her if she does speak up. All I can ever say is, "that behavior bothers me; I don't believe it is acceptable. Please stop." It doesn't matter if the offense is unclear to someone else, because it is about my boundaries, not theirs. You can disagree with my perception, but that doesn't make the behavior any more acceptable to me nor does it change how I feel about it.
  - raganwald 14y ago
    This, a thousand times this. Misogyny, homophobia, racism, even slurs against programmers on the basis of their tool chocies: These are all offensive to me, and I wish to change that for my own reasons. If a man hits his wife, I call the police. If she says, "No, it's ok, I provoked him, I deserve it," do I shrug and say, "Well that's all right then?" Attempting to intimidate me out of speaking up by labelling me a "white knight" and questioning whether my motivation is to seduce women is pretty low and vile, but what I expect from the kind of apologist scum that perpetuate these kinds of social bullying behaviours. "Reg, shut up, you're just trying to sleep with dykes" is not going to work in this or any century.
    - pekk 14y ago
      Whoa, hold up. Is it really necessary to label me as "apologist scum"? This seems in itself a bit of bullying. To be very clear: I haven't labeled you a "white knight," accused you of "trying to sleep with dykes" (!?), said that you shouldn't report men hitting their wife, approved of racial slurs or anything like that. I have simply made an observation about an certain, occasional obnoxious behavior by certain males... I have never said that arguing against misogyny, or speaking out against bullying (etc.) are wrong. I certainly don't think those things. I certainly don't "apologize" for people behaving in a discriminatory way. I simply say that sometimes people aren't doing what they say they're doing. I refuse to give men carte blanche provided only that they claim or pretend to be defending someone weaker than themselves, but this doesn't in any way imply that I reject people trying to defend those weaker than themselves. Why does this seem to be so controversial?

pekk 14y ago

To clarify, it is white-knighting when the woman doesn't care, when there was no actual offense, and it is really just an opportunity for someone to show off about how chivalrous or sensitive they are. You don't have to be sensitive or show yourself off to shut down misogynists and you definitely don't have to go looking for unclear offenses which the purported victims have no complaint about.

roguecoder 14y ago
If the behavior makes me uncomfortable, it doesn't matter what the target thinks of it: I have a right to speak up. Even if the target is bothered by it I don't have a right to speak for her, though I can support her if she does speak up. All I can ever say is, "that behavior bothers me; I don't believe it is acceptable. Please stop." It doesn't matter if the offense is unclear to someone else, because it is about my boundaries, not theirs. You can disagree with my perception, but that doesn't make the behavior any more acceptable to me nor does it change how I feel about it.
- raganwald 14y ago
  This, a thousand times this. Misogyny, homophobia, racism, even slurs against programmers on the basis of their tool chocies: These are all offensive to me, and I wish to change that for my own reasons. If a man hits his wife, I call the police. If she says, "No, it's ok, I provoked him, I deserve it," do I shrug and say, "Well that's all right then?" Attempting to intimidate me out of speaking up by labelling me a "white knight" and questioning whether my motivation is to seduce women is pretty low and vile, but what I expect from the kind of apologist scum that perpetuate these kinds of social bullying behaviours. "Reg, shut up, you're just trying to sleep with dykes" is not going to work in this or any century.
  - pekk 14y ago
    Whoa, hold up. Is it really necessary to label me as "apologist scum"? This seems in itself a bit of bullying. To be very clear: I haven't labeled you a "white knight," accused you of "trying to sleep with dykes" (!?), said that you shouldn't report men hitting their wife, approved of racial slurs or anything like that. I have simply made an observation about an certain, occasional obnoxious behavior by certain males... I have never said that arguing against misogyny, or speaking out against bullying (etc.) are wrong. I certainly don't think those things. I certainly don't "apologize" for people behaving in a discriminatory way. I simply say that sometimes people aren't doing what they say they're doing. I refuse to give men carte blanche provided only that they claim or pretend to be defending someone weaker than themselves, but this doesn't in any way imply that I reject people trying to defend those weaker than themselves. Why does this seem to be so controversial?