(I don’t normally do posts of a direct secular MRA nature on this blog, since the goal of this blog is to both point out the errors in Churchianity, and provide the correct picture of Christianity as it has been handed down in Biblical doctrine by Christ and the apostles through the Holy Spirit. But as much of Churchianity has been influenced by feminism it is only logical to use the common terms in play from other arenas to describe the elements of what has been changed. Language warnings throughout so be warned.)
There might be general confusion on what is meant by the terms “white knight” and “mangina” as they appear in the androsphere with regards to men. While they certainly have common elements in them, there are important differences which make them separate and distinct. This post will make an attempt to define each one clearly and provide proper examples of each one.
The Common Elements
As mentioned, the white knight and mangina have common elements. Both white knights and manginas are feminist men. In other words, they support feminist ideals and feminist practices in whole or in part in full detriment to their own personal interests. Both believe that all women they encounter are either potential victims or helpless, and consequently need their assistance to “remedy” the situation. These definitions have, in the end, become synonymous with one another as feminism has normalized itself within society. This can serve to sow confusion on the difference between the two when it comes to identifying them, but they are both gynocentric creatures, fully supporting feminism in all its respects, including a view of themselves as disposable when it comes to serving the interests of women. Gynocentrism is:
“the practice, conscious or otherwise, of placing female human beings or the feminine point of view at the center of one’s world view. The perceptions, needs, and desires of women have primacy in this system, where the female view is the reference point or lens through which matters are analysed.”
The White Knight (Masculinus Self-Destructus) aka “Captain Save-A-Ho”
As it implies, the White Knight comes from the key characteristic he holds. He is the knight in shining armour, chivalrous to the extreme. He constantly seeks out damsels in distress and desires to ride in to save them. As stated in the article, “Chivalry, or the chivalric code, is the traditional code of conduct associated with the medieval institution of knighthood. It was originally conceived of as an aristocratic warrior code — the term derives from the French term for horseman — involving individual training and service to others.”
While wholly irrelevant today, chivalry has since been re-purposed by women in society, since it has proven very beneficial to them over the centuries, and many men have mostly held to those things since they were ingrained into society at large:
It was also in the Victorian era that chivalry came to be synonymous with everyday ‘gentlemanly’ behaviour and the modern, ‘door-opening’ sense of the word was popularised.
While there are those who claim chivalry to be dead at the hands of feminism, these old rules have served feminists well, both the secular and religious forms. It has enabled them to be successful in passing into wider society a number of things that have been both detrimental and destructive to men. How this has been done is clear on perusing the definition Wikipedia gives of chivalry’s rules:
3. Duties to women: this is probably the most familiar aspect of chivalry. This would contain what is often called courtly love, the idea that the knight is to serve a lady, and after her all other ladies. Most especially in this category is a general gentleness and graciousness to all women.
This attitude has frequently resulted in problems over time and into the present, which has become all too present today. Chivalry has given rise to the attitude that all women are pure, wholesome, sinless, and righteous and deserve treatment accordingly. Much injustice has occurred at the hands of chivalry:
Every report of this fails to address the problem at the base of this event. The gang affiliations of the antagonists are given as the reason for this violent episode. The assailants were indeed members of a gang, but focusing on that misses the point. The moron: Barabara Lee left the bar, recruited the help of her white knights, and came back to direct the knife assault on the two deaf men. Chivalry in defense of a stupid, violent cretin of a woman is the social pathology which directly caused this violence.
Chivalry, in the context of modern gender politics, refers to the protected status of women and the expectation that a man NEVER hit a woman. “A real man never hits a woman” “End violence against women”; these phrases are repeated endlessly in our society, despite the fact that men are the overwhelming majority of murder victims. In fact, in Canada, women are even less likely than children to be murdered. We feel that prioritizing the safety of the demographic that is already the safest is indefensible and tremendously harmful. People are so worked up about defending women from harm that a mere accusation of harming a woman will often be all the evidence that the law and the public need to mete out punishment to the accused, provided the accused is male. If a woman is accused of harming another woman, well, you know; that’s different.
I find this flavor of male feminist the most interesting, since he is most likely to appear in church settings. He is the one that has given women the benefit of the doubt despite anything she does and completely excuses and condones her behavior no matter how destructive her behavior is towards others, and defends the woman against any man who dares bring her to account. This feminist ultimately will destroy himself when the fruits of his labor come back to bite him. When he thinks he will find women supportive of him and willing to date and marry him for being there in this way at every opportunity and being her emotional tampon, he will instead find disrespect, hatred, and disgust from women to the point of the female feminists disavowing them. You will typically find this male feminist on the right-wing, politically.
I find music can be useful to help drive home examples of such things. This song will be very useful to see the modern “white knight” portrayed in a very clear way:
The Mangina (Masculinus Effeminata) aka collaborationist
This kind of feminist is generally labeled with perhaps a most unfortunate term. While the term is meant to be accurate in a derisive sort of way (it’s a contraction of the words “man” and “vagina”), it is probably not the best terminology to use. This feminist is more accurately a gender traitor, or a collaborationist:
More precisely, it signifies one who, by some combination of self-loathing and servility toward women, betrays men or maleness generally.
Gender, as it is defined, is not reflective of the physical characteristics of a person, but their psychological and social characteristics. Seen in the light of that definition, these feminists are self-hating, and self-loathing of themselves for being men. They look in the mirror and despise what they see. They pick this up from the education system or society where they are encouraged to “get in touch with their feminine side”. Regardless:
Feminism encourages women to become more militant and assertive and on the other side attacks men for showing masculine traits. This has the effect of making men more feminine and women more masculine. This destroys the natural attraction that is felt between the sexes.
Also it pushes women to become more dominant whilst men become more submissive, further reducing the sexual attraction.
The mangina’s outlook in this self-hatred of his manhood will result in his desire to be a woman or woman-like, and short of succeeding in that will look to ingratiate himself to, first, a specific woman in Marriage 2.0, and then to all women in general as a lesser being to women. This will result in his desire to add misandric bigotry paralleling his feminist sisters, and masochism to his self-hating and self-loathing:
The mangina, by contrast, feels guilty about his maleness — hence the gynonormativity and overall lack of self-respect. Both white knight and mangina harbor similar ideas about male disposability, but the mangina cravenly hopes that males other than himself (e.g. “MRAs”) will be disposed of, and he will favor proxy violence (by the state) to achieve this.
This flavor of male feminist most likely appears in secular settings. He is the one that has completely given himself over to women as their property. He is a woman-pleasing supplicant, out to emulate her and support her in every way possible. This is the end-goal for a feminist husband. He does not speak up when destructive behavior is done, because he has completely given up his own self-will, self-determination and self-respect. This feminist ultimately will ultimately find himself in a femDOM arrangement, consistent with the goals of his feminist wife, where she will be the master and he will be the slave. When he thinks he will find his proxy femininity in attaining to be like his wife (and other women), he will instead find himself discarded the moment he is not compliant enough, or she gets bored and unhaaaaapy with him. You will typically find this male feminist on the left-wing, politically.
The music, which illustrates this kind of feminist, is quite well known. At this point in time it is hard to settle upon just one as there are many examples:
(now back to your regularly scheduled program of specific religious commmentary)