White Knights, Black Knights and Noble Men.

There are two concepts that are thrown around on the internet a lot.

The first is the White Knight, the idea of a man who spends his days, online or offline, gallantly racing into situations, even ones that he wasn’t a part of, to rescue a woman in distress, especially from other men. The archetypical White Knight makes no distinctions between whether the woman is in any actual danger or just making noise, whether she is asking for help or just looks a little bothered, whether the problem is not her fault or entirely her own creation. He will just march in and do her homework for her, punch her boyfriend during an argument and troll and doxx anyone who disagrees with her online. He lives to serve womankind by making sure that women never face any hardship, disagreement, troubles or even inconveniences.

A slightly more obscure concept is that of the Black Knight. Named as a witty counterpart to the White Knight, Black Knights also aim to be a witty counterpart to White Knights. He will respond dismissively, sarcastically and even rudely to situations where a woman might be in distress. Rather than boost her ego into the stars, he wants to drive the pedestal out from beneath her. He will call her ugly when asked for an opinion, call her out when she lies, support other people in arguments… basically treat her like another man, but more like a man he has no loyalty to than like a best friend. He lives to try and undo the work of White Knights at any cost and make women realize that they too are people.

Few people live up to one archetype. Generally, unless they’re going out of their way to be one way or the other, someone will display White Knight and Black Knight behaviours based on personal preference. With their girlfriend, mother or female friends they may White Knight, with their ex, their coworkers and bar staff they may Black Knight. And these two identities, both on an individual and a societal level, live in a state of tug of war. At the moment White Knights are in the lead, but they are slowly losing ground and Black Knighting may soon become the norm. And this continual see-sawing balance is good, but not necessarily enjoyable by society or likely to inspire productive behaviour in those on the receiving end of White Knighting and Black Knighting.

This is because the balance is normally reactive. A White Knight is reacting to all the “jerks” he sees upsetting women and overcompensates in an attempt to balance. A Black Knight is reacting to all the “simps” he sees pedestalizing women and overcompensates to balance. A normal person White Knights people they like and Black Knights people they dislike. And all this does is create personal preferences. A woman will avoid a man who Black Knights her and only call on White Knights when she wants their assistance because neither of them are pleasant, just or balanced people to be around.

Instead of reacting to other people, the healthy middle ground is the Noble Man, who reacts to situations. The Noble Man doesn’t Black Knight everyone on principle or Black Knight people he dislikes: he Black Knights when someone is getting uppity. If his sister starts insulting and hitting her boyfriend, the Noble Man will restrain and calm her and probably advise the boyfriend to reconsider the relationship. However he also White Knights, or goes to the defense of the weak and needy, when the situation calls for it. If he sees that a rude waitress is groped by a drunk patron, the Noble Man will support her side to get the patron removed. He won’t treat anyone a specific way forever, rather, he will do what is needed to restabilize the situation.

Not that any of this will change many men’s minds. But at least it will give other women some groundwork from which to evaluate our relationships with the men in our lives.

TTFN and Happy Hunting.

Advertisements

27 thoughts on “White Knights, Black Knights and Noble Men.

  1. Dear Lady,

    Black Knight, White Knight, Red Knight–it matters naught what a knight is called as long as he is slaying dragons, rescuing fair damsels, combatting witches, and behaving according to the standards of chivalry.

    “Honor, Truth, and Flames” Chivalry 2.0

    Liked by 2 people

  2. I had someone bothering me on line and was rescued. The knight never told me how it was done either… to me, that is a gentlemanly code as well…I placed him on a higher plain than most people I ever knew…

    Sometimes, it feels good to be recused. :o) …and is always appreciated!!! (at least for me!)

    Liked by 1 person

  3. A man can be a Black Knight in a subtle way, hitting at hypergamy. If an attractive man makes himself available for attention but unavailable for sex, then women will be frustrated because they can’t have him. If you look at the Song of Solomon, the maidens are all praising the male Lover to the female Lover; he must be available to them somehow–probably for some attention–but not available to them sexually. The women are obsessing about the male Lover. So, they become sexually frustrated.

    I also remember the song that women sang to David, “Saul has slain his thousands and David his tens of thousands.” Women were obsessed with David.

    NB: Polygyny questions

    David had wives and concubines.

    Is there anywhere in the Bible where polygyny is condemned? I realize that it’s not encouraged and is vaguely discouraged.

    The Christian Church had to deal with polygynous families which converted to Christianity, so it couldn’t outlaw polygyny. That’s my view.

    The biggest problem with polygyny is that a lot of men will be incel if polygyny gets much traction, assuming an equal ratio of men to women.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. (snipe) …that might be considered encouragement towards monogamy, but not necessarily.

    I am sure you would not like sharing your wife with other men nor would she enjoy sharing you with other gals. 😉

    This is 26 years of marriage talking, but hey, I could be wrong 🙂 Aug 19, 1989

    Like

    • Women will accept 33% of a hot man before 100% of a workhorse dud.

      Women would like to have their access to a hot man at a 100% level, but 33% access might be their best option available.

      Polyandry is never an option, biblically speaking, nor is it practical. Polygyny, otoh, is quite practical and has some biblical support.

      Why is it that women try to reframe to “How would men like it?” Props for not shaming.

      Like

      • Dear Sir,

        My remark was not meant to shame, sir. I was just looking at both side. I maybe a simple homemaker but from I understand is when it comes to men sharing *their* woman, it does not go over well. Include ex husbands in which a friend of mine can attest. I do however understand that there are women in which want a double standard. I will agree with that comment. The same women that rock the cradle and want fairness but demand equality pounding on the kitchen table. I say to them, good luck with that… I don’t think this site promotes such thinking nor other sites in which I visit. You might want to take a look at What Women Never Hear. You might enjoy this older gentleman’s writing. 🙂

        Polygyny having biblical support? Not if we begin in Genesis. To much jealousy. Does a man really want to deal with more drama in his life? I would believe not. Did you happen to peruse the article that answered your question? I believe men want peace and quiet when they get home, somewhere to thrown his things, and retrieve the clicker. 🙂

        The way in which I see it, it is a lose, lose for the one wife. She feels threaten with her little brood, subjected to being left. That was all I was trying to say. You can hold on to your own believe system. I am not attacking it, I am just looking at my side for 26 years of marriage to *one* man which my husband and I have spoken on this same topic. Perhaps as you and your better half have spoken on as well? 🙂

        Like

      • Surfer, Darlin’, I gave you props for NOT shaming. However, you did reframe.

        Remember that men and women aren’t congruent physically or emotionally.

        Women need to be liked and men need to be respected. So, if a man disrespects a woman, that isn’t the same as a woman disrespecting a man. If a woman disrespects a man, that is very bad manners and very serious. If a man disrespects a woman, that isn’t much of a problem. Similarly, if a woman dislikes a man, that is much less serious than a man disliking a woman and showing it. However, women often say that what’s sauce for the goose is sauce for that gander. That’s so wrong!

        There are ways to make polygynous inheritance equitable so that all the kids and wives are taken care of. Polygyny isn’t practical on a large scale, but it might work for a few families.

        I’ve already answered your Genesis argument.

        A dominant man can minimize drama, even in a polygynous household. Think of Saul and David.

        Mrs. Gamer and I have barely spoken about polygyny. She is still a very attractive woman and sexual frequency and sexual performance aren’t issues. Don’t need another woman because of sex. Married 30+ years. Still, if polygyny meant a better lifestyle for both of us with more disposable income…the women’s demand for sex might exhaust me, though.

        Let’s suppose that the wife is given a choice between either being kicked out or having to share her hot man with another woman. Sure, having to share a hot man might not be her ideal, but do you seriously think that both of her options are equally distasteful?

        Certainly, the Bible doesn’t condemn polygyny. The Church has, of course.

        Like

  5. This is around and round the mulberry bush….a dog chase it’s tail… you claim to know male dominance but say you and your wife has barely spoke on it…. I wonder would she would say?

    I treat you with respect, yet your tone is belittling towards women and that’s sad. Sorry, you are so unhappy in your marriage that this new way for you is your religion. Just because you have been doing it so long, does not mean you have been doing it right….. I will pray for you both.

    I find it so sad that you troll here but won’t on another sites like: What Women Never Hear or It’s Not the Men it’s the Women. Put your comments there if you want to get a wide range of thought (honestly, to be fair) I believe you might be scared of places like those mention above… couldn’t hold your ground so you have to pick a fight here… (shakes head) that is sad.

    IF you can’t speak nicely to people, stay in your own playground. Now, please have a nice day.

    Like

      • I am simple and Machiavellian, all at the same time, lol. I play with my cards exposed and can see other players’ cards that are supposedly hidden. I simply outplay them.

        These women on your site know that their mates have some serious deficiencies, but aren’t sure how to go about fixing them. Blue Pill assumptions. These women want to maintain pedestalization while at the same time giving their men higher status. They want fried ice.

        Liked by 1 person

      • I don’t think many women actually want to be pedestalized. I think most women actually just want obsession, which is different. Pedestalization is a choice out of no choices, an offer he can’t refuse. Obsession is his body overwhelming all other choices. Sure, there are other options and he can refuse the offer, but it is far more pleasurable to accept it.

        In short, pedestalization is for her pleasure in hopes she will give some back. Obsession is for his pleasure with perhaps a hope she will also enjoy it. And most women are happier with obsession than pedestalization.

        Like

      • And yet when you are the only thing a man desires, above and before his own wellbeing, the worry arises that this desire isn’t worth anything, that it would be as freely given to anyone who would have it, as freely given to a pet terrapin as to us.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Absolutely. Though the ways of showing you have options are far more nuanced than some elements of the manosphere would suggest. For example, simply mentioning female coworkers by name can be enough to throw some women off. As long as the man is actually pretty decent and working on improving himself, it takes remarkably little to remind a woman of his options. His effort and number of overt displays both go up as his actual status descends. Possibly the reason that the overt display is the newbie’s first LTR lesson: the average newbie is an average man.

        Like

    • Tinder offers two things:

      -quick, no questions hookups
      -privacy

      Single women don’t need the privacy and women in shorter term relationships don’t need as much either, as they have little riding on it. Single women can’t “get caught”. Women with less invested can just move on.

      Men don’t really get the benefits of no questions asked unless they’re very physically attractive. An average man’s sexual appeal rides on more than just looks. And if they’re very physically attractive, they don’t need to go online to get nqa sex.

      Therefore, even if women were vastly less likely to cheat (which we’re not), married, engaged and 5+ year LTR women would be most likely to successfully cheat on tinder.

      Liked by 1 person

Comments Always Appreciated. :)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s