White Knights, the true enemies of sexual equality.

[Lazier Than Thou]

Alright, let me be the sexist jerk, then.

I don't believe men and women should be treated the same. I don't think they'd appreciate being treated the same and, frankly, I think it's selfish to treat all people the same way. I think you should treat people how they want to be treated. Some people want to be treated with courtesy and kindness, other people prefer directness and straight talk. Some like a little crude behavior, some don't. Some prefer the vulgarities, some don't.

I'm not going to call my grandmother a prick just because I call my best friend a prick. He understands it as the statement of defeat it is, while she'll just take offense. I'm also not going to repeat myself or give the "Oprah head nod" to my best friend, I'll argue and debate when I feel like it.

Yes, I'm going to treat people differently based upon their gender. I don't care what you say. I don't care what you think. People are not all the same, they do not all want the same things and I'm not going to fit everyone into the same little compartment and hope they get what they want from a social experience. I will change my dialog and behavior to fit someone else.

 

[marioandsonic]

Personally, I try to be nice to both guys and girls on the internet.

Hey, at least I'm being consistent!

 

[Montezuma's Lawyer]

Who else noticed the original poster is being very hypocritical? He's created a thread defending women in which the message of said thread is "defending people devalues their humanity".

Sorry dude, but you are coming across as a white knight who is trying to convince people he is not a white knight. That just seems a whole lot worse.

You obviously didnt read my post completely, I even made a nice little TLDR and you still failed to read it.

 

[Montezuma's Lawyer]

I will respectfully disagree with the OP.

While certainly there are many instances where women are treated poorly on the internet, the idea that the "white knight" is the worst of it is philosophically problematic. As I illustrated in [a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpZ7-upLkrY"]this[/a] video to popular Youtuber HealthyAddict (sub to her if you like awesome), the problem with blaming or condemning benevolent sexism is that it is impossible to differentiate on a regular basis between those that help women because of belief that women are inherently too weak to defend themselves, which would be harmful, or whether they are doing it out of a sense of social justice not based upon the victim's gender, or even if it is part of an attempt to impress a potential mate, which is not sexist as it could equally be applied to any other gender situation (male impressing another male due to attraction, female to female, male to female, female to male).

To demonize a "white knight" the way the OP does is to attack a significant portion of well-meaning individuals of whom legitimately wish to defend a person based solely off of an objective deduction that the person is being treated unfairly, which could cause people to be less willing to help out those who need it out of fear that they will be misconstrued as sexist.

The idea that rushing to someone's defense on the internet is depriving them of their humanity is dogmatic and demonstrably false. No one gets by on their own, be they men, women, Chuck Norris, or even Kyle Katarn. When you are a lone person being faced down by ten other people screaming obscenities at you, your gender no longer matters; you will require assistance if you are to be anything other than overwhelmed and drowned out.

The OP's point is not entirely without merit. It is wrong to rush to the defense of a woman simply because she's a woman. However little of what the OP says allows for that nuanced interpretation and if they wish to communicate one they must be far more specific. "Women" are not by definition "able to defend themselves" any more than they are by definition "able to somersault". Certainly some can, but it is not innate to who they are, same as a man. Some are able to defend themselves in certain situations, and others can't in that same situation . . but perhaps in others they would be capable while the group that was capable in the first scenario was less so. The point here is that each situation must be judged by its own merit. What is ironic is that unless the OP is willing to admit there are no acceptable situations in which a person can be defended on the internet, they have displayed a great degree of sexism in asserting that women specifically should not be defended.

Overall I feel the OP is overgeneralizing in a dogmatic and simply unrealistic manner that does not allow for any nuance on a topic that demands a great deal of it.

That was a very well reasoned, and well argued point. I have definitely taken it into consideration.

 

[MasochisticAvenger]

Who else noticed the original poster is being very hypocritical? He's created a thread defending women in which the message of said thread is "defending people devalues their humanity".

Sorry dude, but you are coming across as a white knight who is trying to convince people he is not a white knight. That just seems a whole lot worse.

You obviously didnt read my post completely, I even made a nice little TLDR and you still failed to read it.

So because you have no way of countering my argument you opt to simply attack me directly? I stand by what I said: your post was very hypocritical. By making a thread telling us to stop defending women, you were attempting to defend women on a mass scale. By your logic, shouldn't people be able to decide for themselves whether or not they want to be defended without having you decide it for them? What, dare I ask, qualifies you to be the spokesperson for all women?

It's simple really: defend someone to the extent they want to be defended. Let them tell you whether or not they want you to keep defending them, and comply with their wishes.

You know I am legitimately starting to get worried here: it seems like people are starting to call sexism over everything. The really sad part is that it simply devalues the people who have actually fought, and are still fighting, actual battles. The work those people have put in has been overshadowed by loudmouthed people bitching about stuff that really doesn't matter.Let's face it: whenever most people here the word feminist the first thing they picture is a bunch of women blaming men for everything. I can't be the only one bothered by that, can I?

 

[Sperium 3000]

Is this a thing now? Seriously, I know that some guys can be real a-holes to chicks, but aren't there chicks who were also born with a massive case of the bitching? This is the internet, there are trolls and douchebags everywhere, where you most expect it.

Besides, nowadays I can't really believe this talk of "Even today women suffer from sexism, poor women!" when I hear stories of women beating their husbands, female teachers who have sexual relations with their students and get scott free, and talk shows where all the audience ar women -laughing- at the story of a guy who suffered domestic abuse from his wife. There's some men who are sexist? Sure. But nowadays some women are also becoming really sexist against men. Annnd that kind of pisses me off, if it wasn't clear.

Not to say that all women are hypocrites, no. Just that when someone preaches about sexual equality, it must be TRUE equality. If you just tip the balance to the other side then you're being a douchebag and I should smack you in the face.

 

[JakDRipa]

A simple thought experiment:

Rapists
Executives who refuse women equal pay
People who throw acid in the faces of literate women
People who insist that women should be subservient to their husbands
People who defend someone who is being treated unfairly on the internet

One of these things is not like the others, one of these things just doesn't belong.

 

[Kinguendo]

While you do make the distinction in some parts you dont make the distinction in a very crucial part where you say "By rushing to the defense of someone on the internet, and fighting their battles for them, you deprive them of their humanity"... Now I have a problem with this, I would rather help and my help not be needed than not help and that person go on being tormented. Call me whatever you want if it makes you feel better about your apathetic enabling... the only defining trait a person has that I rush to their aid (on the internet, mind) is age, it doesnt matter how you slice it. Thats a kid, still a human but going to get (verbally or otherwise) knocked six ways from sunday by an adult.

 

[Fieldy409_v1legacy]

So, Im not allowed to tell the guys who scream 'tits or gtfo' on every womans youtube channel that they are sad losers?

If i want to tell someone they are a wanker I have every right to.

 

[Kahunaburger]

So, Im not allowed to tell the guys who scream 'tits or gtfo' on every womans youtube channel that they are sad losers?

If i want to tell someone they are a wanker I have every right to.

This. Although I don't think anyone (except for the wankers in question) would consider that "white knighting." I've yet to see an actual example of that on any forum other than BSN.

 

[rayen020]

Dont misunderstand the last sentence, I do not mean that women should be treated the same as men, but that ALL PEOPLE shall be treated equally, regardless of accidents of birth.

I hate this sentence... This is the worst BS i have ever heard in my life and hear all the time. "Do not treat them the same, but treat them same." WHAT? explain this to me. I'm all for women's rights and all that good stuff, i have never treated anyone different because of their gender. usually that trait doesn't even compute for me. But you can't treat everyone the same if you don't treat everyone the same. I can either treat men like men and women like women or you can treat everyone the same as everyone else.

 

[Weentastic]

Wow, there are quite a few things wrong with this. Perhaps the premise isn't wrong, but the approach to it seems to be. First, Chivalry was a lot of things, not just pulling chairs out for all the girlies. It was also about honor and fairness, something you actually seem to want on the internet. Sadly, that is a very unrealistic pining. Second, hyperbole is the hallmark of a poorly thought out argument. Sexism can be way fucking more pervasive and damaging than thinking a woman might be in need of a little help on the internet. What about the glass ceiling in the work place, the military, pornography, or beauty standards? Are those less damaging compared to a guy who assumes a girl struggling with a piece of furniture might want some help?

Third, and this is connected to the second, saying that helping a woman because she is a woman is like saying helping the Haitians after the earthquake was dehumanizing them. I would think its a bit more dehumanizing to blast a woman's thoughts simply on the basis of her gender. How the fuck is a guy supposed to help a woman at all without you second guessing his motives? The truth is, if the reason you are getting attacked is because of your gender, then the reason you will be getting rescued will because of your gender. That's the freaking nature of your situation. A girl gets blasted because she's a girl, and guy rescues her because he knows it's an unfair world for girls. Yes, you are a human, but that's not why you are in the pickle that you find yourself in, so that's not going to occlude the real reason you are in said pickle.

Finally, try not to be so cute when you write your poorly reasoned posts. It's dehumanizing to those who like to read things in a respectable manner.

I get that you don't want to be patronized, but refusing help for the reasons you state will end up creating a lot more sexists than there were before. Being pissy about charity is a good way to be left alone, but I suppose if you want a world that thinks all WOMEN are ungrateful bitches with inferiority complexes, then continue to second guess any support you receive in the future.

 

[Kanova]

I think the reason they are treated like shit is because the majority of them are fucking attention whores. Whores, whores for attention. LOL I AM A GIRL GAMER DEAL WITH IT LOL. That pisses me off, so I am fine with treating them like shit if they do that.

 

[Weentastic]

Ok, lets try this reply again. I read your post after posting mine. I think your argument is much more well reasoned and supported than the OP's. It also looks like you took a bit more time formulating your argument than I did, and seem to have taken a bit more of a moderate route. I appreciate reading posts such as your's rather than the usual one or two liners.

 

[Weentastic]

Ok, lets try this reply again. I read your post after posting mine. I think your argument is much more well reasoned and supported than the OP's. It also looks like you took a bit more time formulating your argument than I did, and seem to have taken a bit more of a moderate route. I appreciate reading posts such as your's rather than the usual one or two liners.

 

[Weentastic]

Ok, lets try this reply again. I read your post after posting mine. I think your argument is much more well reasoned and supported than the OP's. It also looks like you took a bit more time formulating your argument than I did, and seem to have taken a bit more of a moderate route. I appreciate reading posts such as your's rather than the usual one or two liners.

 

[Hipster Chick]

I'll be blunt for a second: the original post has a definite tint of misogyny, at least from where I'm standing. What defines who's a "worse" sexist? Someone who treats women like shit, which, despite your claims that they're hated all across the Internet, seem to be pretty damn common to me? Or someone who takes an activist stance against what they perceive as discrimination? Do a lot of them do it for misguided reasons? Yes. Do plenty of them do it imagining sex as the inevitable outcome? Probably. Does that make them the greatest "enemies of sexual equality"? No. It sounds like a troll trying to make himself seem less like a troll by bashing other trolls.

And to be blunter, when they call the meeting to determine Internet sexism, tits or GTFO.