(As we all know) Women are not new to gaming.

[Overusedname]

The thing is that it gets used often in situations where people really couldn't even know if that was the situation or that it would be somewhat ludicrous to assume is the situation. It gets used to just shut down discussion. If you want to call someone who defends women regardless a white knight fine, but people don't go and show that's what someone's doing. They say it to avoid actually addressing what people say.

What about the self satisfaction people hold for them selves for being supposedly supremely moral in a situation, is it not also self-serving making it a form of white knighting?

And yes self-satisfaction is a reward and an incentive.

Uh...so are we still talking about this?

I mean, if you take this theory to much of a further extent, it turns being kind in any situation into a terrible deed that only exists for the purpose of self-satisfaction.

And I'm a little confused. Are you still accusing me of something? I thought you dropped that? Was I wrong in that assumption?

Yes, some people just be nice for self-satisfaction. But people can, in fact, be nice because they want others to be treated decently. It happens, I assure you. As rare as it can sometimes be.

Also, I realize we all hail from different parts of the net, but I don't think the term 'whiteknighting' is generally taken as a term that can be taken seriously. It started on image boards as a way to stop conversations, discredit people and make sexism okay. I'm sure that's not what it means to you and to a lot of people, but that's genuinely where the term came from. And a quick google search will show that White Knighting has a completely different meaning depending on who you ask. One said 'a male mentality that assumes men are better feminists then women are', another 'the habit of young men to feel the need to save damsels in distress'.

So why does that word mean anything?

I mean I love my peeps here on this cite, but what they think of me has only so much effect on my day-to-day life. It doesn't change what my friends and family think of me, and doesn't effect my romantic pursuits in real life. I guess I just don't get the mentality you're referring to.

 

[Imp_Emissary]

snip

I am cursed with a really sexy voice though. xD (apparently)

Stop teasing the boys Butterfly

People have said my best friend has the sexiest male voice they have ever heard too and that we should both host a late night radio show xD.

Just a shame I have a face for radio too

A sexy voice eh? God help me but I'm a sucker for those. However, I will try to resist the the temptation to pursue this topic lest things become....steamy.

Moving on. About the whole why people act different online thing. Remember Tippy(I know I know, sorry), he was chatting with Overusedname about anonymity, and said that people online have full anonymity&thus can do/say what they want without any consequences. This is however not at all true. In fact the reality is that anyone who wants to, and has the ability can not only find out who you are from your online activity but also they can look at all you have done/said. Honestly if the internet has done anything at all to anonymity, it has almost killed it. Granted the number of people who have the actual ability to do this is probably low.

However hiding behind a computer can give people the "feeling" of anonymity, but really the only way to be 100% untraceable on the internet is to not use it. But that won't stop people from believing they are immune from consequences while online.

A lot of politicians don't seem to know this yet either. Know what I mean?

 

[Mylinkay Asdara]

White Knighting is a silly term that men come up with when a person of their own gender calls them out on being sexist. They know they can't come up with a proper argument to defend their behavior.

You are not understanding the actual idea of a white knight, I think.

Admittedly such situation thing is possible, but it is not the only conclusion.

The idea of a white knight is someone who defends women against men under any circumstance no matter if the woman is in the right or the wrong.

A good example is when a woman is attacking a man, for whatever reason. The moment the man fights back he is usually rushed by 20 guys nearby and restrained. You can find many such incidents of this on youtube if you're curious, there's even one where a man screams at the guy being restrained/beaten (couldn't tell) that "You don't ever hit a woman! EVER! It's THE RULES!" (facepalm)

(unless it's a police officer) You won't see them coming to help the man from the aggressive woman... Who was clearly the aggressor.

There is also the fact that no matter who is the aggressor in a domestic dispute if it's between a man and a woman the man is ALWAYS the one that get's arrested. (police white knighting)

Of course, why would a man do this? The most popular theory/idea/whatever is that they do it to attract other women or the woman in question, because it makes the seem appear more valuable as a protector or whatever... Which is not entirely untrue from my experience and seeing a good bit of evidence elsewhere. Or their belief that women are weaker and need to be protected from men under all circumstances no matter what. Neither exactly appears to be a very likable character trait and is extremely sexist in itself imo.

And it pisses a lot of people off.

That is all. Agree or disagree, that is as far as I'm going. No quote wars for me.

What is it called when men defend, stick up for, or are otherwise supporting openly women who are clearly in the right? Same thing? Black Knighting? Being reasonable? After hearing the term "White Knighting" and the description for it so very often around here lately, I've become genuinely curious about this question.

 

[Spearmaster]

The thing is that it gets used often in situations where people really couldn't even know if that was the situation or that it would be somewhat ludicrous to assume is the situation. It gets used to just shut down discussion. If you want to call someone who defends women regardless a white knight fine, but people don't go and show that's what someone's doing. They say it to avoid actually addressing what people say.

What about the self satisfaction people hold for them selves for being supposedly supremely moral in a situation, is it not also self-serving making it a form of white knighting?

And yes self-satisfaction is a reward and an incentive.

You're making an assumption that they think they're supposedly supremely moral.

But anyway, even if they did, white knighting is supposedly about gaining approval from women isn't it? Not self-satisfaction.

I don't see why you'd care if someone got self-satisfaction anyway. You can argue they get it from most actions, what's the point in pointing it out except as a red herring?

It speaks to the motives of why someone would run to someones defense, that those motives could be self-serving, much like white knighting, perhaps its ones self image of gaining approval from women even if there is no actual specific woman giving it.

But all this can not actually be known unless someone admits it and most of the time people don't even realize they do it so it may be innocent if that is the case.

Without all facts known, personal life, personal approval from someone in real life perhaps, the OP did claim to have female friends, perhaps the approval comes from them but we don't know.

The OP seems like a good person that wants nothing but the best for everyone so I wish them well, our goals seem to be the same and I will admit that I may have jumped the gun with the white knight comment but the jury is still out IMO

 

[Mylinkay Asdara]

Snip.

Snip

What is it called when men defend, stick up for, or are otherwise supporting openly women who are clearly in the right? Same thing? Black Knighting? Being reasonable? After hearing the term "White Knighting" and the description for it so very often around here lately, I've become genuinely curious about this question.

It's called being a decent person, I would imagine, just like if anyone regardless of gender or race stuck up for anyone regardless of gender or race if they believe them to be in the right.

White knights are just a situationally specific term to call out ulterior motives for actions.

It's the same thing as the term "Gold Digger". Women(on very rare occassions, men too I would imagine) who only marry to divorce and take a large portion of a wealthier man's wealth.

In either situation it's just calling someone out for doing something bad, stating the likely ulterior motive is a reinforcement or something. Not quite sure how to explain it, but I think you get the point.

First, thanks for answering my question. I think others may use it more broadly than it should be, especially in conversations like this one, which has led me to believe it is a silly term - or at least a grossly overused one. I mean, in the examples you used, where the woman is clearly not in a position that should be defended - by anyone, gal or guy - I can see where the one coming to her "rescue" and defense is given a derogatory term that relates to ulterior motives; however I feel like the same term shouldn't be used for people (again gal or guy here, I know we're talking mostly guys but I'm going with the 'people' inclusive term here) who attempt to rescue or defend a person in need of it an in a position that shouldn't disqualify them from assistance - such as being right about a thing or clearly being aggressed against or what have you. Maybe we should coin a different term for that. Something positive sounding... nothing comes to mind but I'll give it some background noise thought and see what cooks up.

 

[Overusedname]

The thing is that it gets used often in situations where people really couldn't even know if that was the situation or that it would be somewhat ludicrous to assume is the situation. It gets used to just shut down discussion. If you want to call someone who defends women regardless a white knight fine, but people don't go and show that's what someone's doing. They say it to avoid actually addressing what people say.

What about the self satisfaction people hold for them selves for being supposedly supremely moral in a situation, is it not also self-serving making it a form of white knighting?

And yes self-satisfaction is a reward and an incentive.

You're making an assumption that they think they're supposedly supremely moral.

But anyway, even if they did, white knighting is supposedly about gaining approval from women isn't it? Not self-satisfaction.

I don't see why you'd care if someone got self-satisfaction anyway. You can argue they get it from most actions, what's the point in pointing it out except as a red herring?

It speaks to the motives of why someone would run to someones defense, that those motives could be self-serving, much like white knighting, perhaps its ones self image of gaining approval from women even if there is no actual specific woman giving it.

But all this can not actually be known unless someone admits it and most of the time people don't even realize they do it so it may be innocent if that is the case.

Without all facts known, personal life, personal approval from someone in real life perhaps, the OP did claim to have female friends, perhaps the approval comes from them but we don't know.

The OP seems like a good person that wants nothing but the best for everyone so I wish them well, our goals seem to be the same and I will admit that I may have jumped the gun with the white knight comment but the jury is still out IMO

Lol okay. Yeesh.

I'm not sure what the whole 'female approval' thing is implying. I guess you mean the fact that there are women I know who like me? Um, yeah, both family and friends, dates, one of my closest friends is a girl, blah blah. And as cheesy as it is, my mother is a huge inspiration to me (in art, business, etc.)

The lack of a healthy relationship with real women is probably what inspires the behavior you associate with 'White Knighting'.

Maybe I never should have stated my gender. I thought my gender was the one that could be open about it. XD

 

[Spearmaster]

The thing is that it gets used often in situations where people really couldn't even know if that was the situation or that it would be somewhat ludicrous to assume is the situation. It gets used to just shut down discussion. If you want to call someone who defends women regardless a white knight fine, but people don't go and show that's what someone's doing. They say it to avoid actually addressing what people say.

What about the self satisfaction people hold for them selves for being supposedly supremely moral in a situation, is it not also self-serving making it a form of white knighting?

And yes self-satisfaction is a reward and an incentive.

Uh...so are we still talking about this?

I mean, if you take this theory to much of a further extent, it turns being kind in any situation into a terrible deed that only exists for the purpose of self-satisfaction.

And I'm a little confused. Are you still accusing me of something? I thought you dropped that? Was I wrong in that assumption?

Yes, some people just be nice for self-satisfaction. But people can, in fact, be nice because they want others to be treated decently. It happens, I assure you. As rare as it can sometimes be.

Also, I realize we all hail from different parts of the net, but I don't think the term 'whiteknighting' is generally taken as a term that can be taken seriously. It started on image boards as a way to stop conversations, discredit people and make sexism okay. I'm sure that's not what it means to you and to a lot of people, but that's genuinely where the term came from. And a quick google search will show that White Knighting has a completely different meaning depending on who you ask. One said 'a male mentality that assumes men are better feminists then women are', another 'the habit of young men to feel the need to save damsels in distress'.

So why does that word mean anything?

I mean I love my peeps here on this cite, but what they think of me has only so much effect on my day-to-day life. It doesn't change what my friends and family think of me, and doesn't effect my romantic pursuits in real life. I guess I just don't get the mentality you're referring to.

I'm not accusing you of anything, I will drop the term white knighting, on looking around the net it is a term used in such broad sweeping generalization that it has no place in personal discussion really, so I apologize for that one.

That said this is the internet so I hope for the best and expect the worst from people, I was merely trying to draw question to possible motive for defending women from a YouTube video on a completely separate thread, for me a separate thread for the same issue is just for the poster of the new thread to draw more direct attention to them selves, there is not anything on here you couldn't have posted on the original thread with the video so I found it suspect.

"But people can, in fact, be nice because they want others to be treated decently."
"I guess I just don't get the mentality you're referring to."

I believe its a product of me being an existential realist and studying philosophy of ethics in college all those years ago, It might be part of Kantian moral theory but I cant remember for sure. It doesn't say self serving acts of kindness are immoral because they are still acts of kindness just less moral than acts of kindness done from a sense of duty.

If you felt truly duty bound to speak up against the video than I have nothing against you, I agree with your post I just questioned motive.

 

[Spearmaster]

But someone's motives aren't relevant to their argument. To focus on that instead of their argument is fallacious.

I agreed with the original post I just questioned motive, I never said the argument was invalid due to motives, it makes no difference.

 

[Overusedname]

I'm not accusing you of anything, I will drop the term white knighting, on looking around the net it is a term used in such broad sweeping generalization that it has no place in personal discussion really, so I apologize for that one.

...there is not anything on here you couldn't have posted on the original thread with the video so I found it suspect.

If you felt truly duty bound to speak up against the video than I have nothing against you, I agree with your post I just questioned motive.

In that case, I guess I can state my motive:

1.) I don't think many people would have noticed my post in a thread that was already filled with so many quote wars, general bile, and fights.

2.) I think this data and my personal experience add a different perspective on the same topic that people may or may not relate to, and I wanted to make a calmer place to discuss the topic. I wanted to provide some new facts that would be less likely to go unnoticed. But this is the part I think you agree with.

3.) I felt like I had to say something, as that video and the people who agreed with all of it bothered me. In a sense, yes, I felt morally required to say something, as I was introduced to gaming by women and have female friends who enjoy the hobby. I acknowledge some women play games to manipulate men, but none of the ones I've met do so, and the generalization hit close to home. I wouldn't be okay with myself if I stayed quiet.

Whether I should've been quiet or not is up for debate, as is always the case with forum threads. But I only wanted to show a different side of the story and- in an awkward, indirect way- defend some friends. Because they'd do the same for me.

 

[Spearmaster]

The thing is that it gets used often in situations where people really couldn't even know if that was the situation or that it would be somewhat ludicrous to assume is the situation. It gets used to just shut down discussion. If you want to call someone who defends women regardless a white knight fine, but people don't go and show that's what someone's doing. They say it to avoid actually addressing what people say.

What about the self satisfaction people hold for them selves for being supposedly supremely moral in a situation, is it not also self-serving making it a form of white knighting?

And yes self-satisfaction is a reward and an incentive.

Uh...so are we still talking about this?

I mean, if you take this theory to much of a further extent, it turns being kind in any situation into a terrible deed that only exists for the purpose of self-satisfaction.

And I'm a little confused. Are you still accusing me of something? I thought you dropped that? Was I wrong in that assumption?

Yes, some people just be nice for self-satisfaction. But people can, in fact, be nice because they want others to be treated decently. It happens, I assure you. As rare as it can sometimes be.

Also, I realize we all hail from different parts of the net, but I don't think the term 'whiteknighting' is generally taken as a term that can be taken seriously. It started on image boards as a way to stop conversations, discredit people and make sexism okay. I'm sure that's not what it means to you and to a lot of people, but that's genuinely where the term came from. And a quick google search will show that White Knighting has a completely different meaning depending on who you ask. One said 'a male mentality that assumes men are better feminists then women are', another 'the habit of young men to feel the need to save damsels in distress'.

So why does that word mean anything?

I mean I love my peeps here on this cite, but what they think of me has only so much effect on my day-to-day life. It doesn't change what my friends and family think of me, and doesn't effect my romantic pursuits in real life. I guess I just don't get the mentality you're referring to.

I'm not accusing you of anything, I will drop the term white knighting, on looking around the net it is a term used in such broad sweeping generalization that it has no place in personal discussion really, so I apologize for that one.

...there is not anything on here you couldn't have posted on the original thread with the video so I found it suspect.

If you felt truly duty bound to speak up against the video than I have nothing against you, I agree with your post I just questioned motive.

In that case, I guess I can state my motive:

1.) I don't think many people would have noticed my post in a thread that was already filled with so many quote wars and fights.

2.) I think this data and my personal experience add a different perspective on the same topic that people may or may not relate to, and I wanted to make a calmer place to discuss the topic. I wanted to provide some new facts that would be less likely to go unnoticed. But this is the part I think you agree with.

3.) I felt like I had to say something, as that video and the people who agreed with all of it bothered me. In a sense, yes, I felt morally required to say something, as I was introduced to gaming by women and have female friends who enjoy the hobby. I acknowledge some women play games to manipulate men, but none of the ones I've met do so, and the generalization hit close to home. I wouldn't be okay with myself if I stayed quiet.

Whether I should've been quiet or not is up for debate, as is always the case with forum threads. But I only wanted to show a different side of the story and in an awkward, indirect way, defend some friends. Because they'd do the same for me.

In that case I agree with you on the subject and your motives are moral so I can agree with your motives as well. Generalizations are horrible, especially when some attempt to use them to rally one side to exclude the other, we have seen it done in life to many times and it has no place, not even in a hobby like gaming.

Judging motives in real life is something that takes time knowing someone, trying to judge them on the internet is hard from a few posts when you don't know someone and they may be lying outright. So I am sorry if I misjudged you.

 

[Overusedname]

Judging motives in real life is something that takes time knowing someone, trying to judge them on the internet is hard form a few posts when you don't know someone and they may be lying outright. So I am sorry if I misjudged you.

It's all good bro. Don't worry.

Thanks for keeping it classy.

 

[False Nobility]

Thanks, man. That's all I really gotta say XD Thanks.

No problem.

Glad (and surprised) to see that things calmed down around here. Interesting little thread.

...well, not so little.

 

[renegade7]

Women don't play videogames. They also don't poop, and only pretend to like sex so their boyfriends will shut up.

Duh.

OT: I am actually getting tired of the whole "Women/girl gamers" issue. It's made to big an issue of...either it's "WE NEED MORE WIMMIN IN GAEMS!!" or "GET BACK IN TEH KITCHEN!!1!". Seriously, get over it. They're women...and they like games. If the gaming community would stop making a big deal of it, maybe more women would want to share the hobby with men.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

snip

The thing is though that people use it when women (and the guys defending them) are in the right such as in this case. It just seems to be an annoying way to dismiss disapproval from your peers.

In my experience I have never seen the term white knight used in a situation where a woman is in the wrong. Just when the sexist guy can't come up with an argument and is confused that a guy calls him out for his outdated views.

 

[Nemu]

The only time my gender mattered when i started gaming was when i first started playing online.

I'm in my 30's now, have been gaming since I was in 1st grade and my parents bought me an Atari 2600 for getting good grades. My father and I played games almost every night (before dinner), ever since then I've been a fairly hardcore gamer. In school it was never a big deal whether folks gamed or not, at least not until we were teenagers, at that point, I hung out with other folks who gamed on occasion, and some of my close friends played casually.

When I first started playing DAoC and Ragnarok is when it started going downhill (especially Rag, when we were still testing it, I have flashbacks to being harassed by Thai players-no joke). Once Ventrillo and TeamSpeak came into the equation, and folks found out I was a woman, it occasionally got awkward, but for the most part guys were cool with gaming with me.

I have stuck with favoring RPGs above all games (FF on NES was an early fave), but my gf, who is also a gamer, loves all types.

 

[Vault101]

I will also add that irl I do get strange reactions from people, mostly women who refuse to talk to me ever again after finding out that I (/gasp) enjoy games! More than one who've gone as far as saying I'm gender confused(yeah, don't ask).

dude thats...thats really fucked up

not you or your story but [i/]that[/i] in particular..I mena I don;t even

and we are in the same country too...I would bt so bothered if you were like in southern America or somthing but..jesus 0_0