Vote for Shaunee

See what happens when parents call their daughter Shaunee!

I must say however that it’s awfully mature of DA/Barcham not to resort to personal abuse in their marathon war of words but I cannot see either conceding so shall we call it a draw gentlemen?

Of course the other more attractive option is a duel at twenty paces..

devils_advocate said :

That’s not what I asked. I asked whether…

[I’ll just shorten this.]

..What is your assessment of your own reaction here?

Alright, I’ll attempt to answer all your questions then.

Firstly no I don’t deny that there must exist some men who will leap to the defence of someone attractive just in the hopes that she’ll notice and think highly of them.

Of course this happens, and probably quite a bit.

However assuming any male speaking up on behalf of a female is doing so for this reason is far from fair, and even if that IS his motivation, a good act is a good act and he probably doesn’t deserve to be mocked because of it.

You are correct in saying I felt no need to comment on or delete the original comments. I agree that making fun of someone’s name isn’t a great thing to do, but I wasn’t so moved by emotion that I felt the need to comment. As you say a few puerile comments are to be expected here, and if I made a habit of starting a debate about each one I’d get no work done. Also I don’t like the idea of censoring people simply because I disagree with them.

You are also correct that it was this particular subject that inspired me to comment. I really dislike dismissive terms and behaviour, and you were lucky enough to make one when I had some free time between reading press releases so I could get stuck in.

Whether it be undermining someone’s point about bad behaviour by calling them a “white knight”, dismissing someone’s concerns about the environment because they’re just some “hippy”, or ignoring a woman’s complaints because she’s just being “hysterical” it’s not important. There are a million different examples of this kind of dismissive behaviour, and personally I find them all to be disgusting.

We mock those who have something to say because it makes it easier to ignore them. Instead of questioning our position, we make an ad hominem attack on the person forcing us to ask the question.

Now I’m sure when you made the comment you weren’t thinking about all of the above. You just made what you thought was a funny comment, largely because you’ve seen this funny comment made a million times before. But by making the comment you did dismiss Alderny, you did suggest that men who stick up for women must only be doing it to get laid, and you did contribute a culture that shames people who decide to speak out.

What’s my assessment of my reaction? Justified. Like I said, I think calling people out of their behaviour is important. Perhaps my “walls of text” are a bit much, but my job is to type words on this website so maybe I get a bit carried away with it. Plus I so rarely get to be involved in the daily arguments that happen here so I’m determined to get the most out of it.

It costs me only a few moments of my time to comment, but maybe it will make someone (even you) think twice before behaving like this in the future. Seems like a fair deal to me.

I’m sorry if you thought I was dodging your questions but hopefully I’ve cleared them up now. Let me know if I have missed any.

Now it’s your turn to stop dodging my question, here I’ll repost it for you.

“So please tell me your hypothesis on why suggesting that someone is a “beta male just trying to impress pretty ladies” doesn’t make you dismissive and presumptuous.”

Now I should warn you I worked in childcare for 6 years, so “because everyone else does it” or “that’s just what you say” won’t fly with me. I’ve heard them far too many times over the years and all they’ll achieve is me directing you to the naughty corner.

So I’ve defended my behaviour, now defend yours.

Barcham said :

You dismissed and belittled this by terming it “white knighting”, turning what was a noble act into a humorous joke where some beta male is trying to look cool for the ladies. This is something I see a lot, and the idea of shaming people for doing the right thing is something I find appalling.

That’s not what I asked. I asked whether, in your mind, these ‘crude pickup attempts’ – or other situations where betas engage in supplication in a vain attempt at achieving one or more social goals – exist. So you have done a marvellous job of dodging that question. But let’s put a pin in that and move onto the more interesting question.

1) Firstly, you are the one to whom the original post is attributed. It’s not exactly a hard news piece, and doesn’t require an unfettered right of reply by the internet in general.
2) If you had any understanding of how the internet works at all (and I submit that in your job you do), you would have known that this article, while blameless in itself, would invite some puerility. Rightly or wrongly, the thread probably demanded closer moderation.
3) I hate hindsight bias as much as the next guy. However the puerile comments that were in fact submitted via the website were entirely predictable (only in that they were puerile – for the most part the focus on the young lady’s name came from left field).
4) Notwithstanding points 3-4, you chose to let those through moderation. Fair enough, that’s your call.
5) in addition to not moderating, you yourself felt no need to comment on the particular comments you consider ‘not nice’.
6) while not taking issue with the originating comments themselves, you promptly proceeded to get massively butthurt on someone else’s behalf when I (and in fact someone else by implication) called out a white knight. It’s a bit weird that this is the point where you specifically decide to take issue.

Clearly there’s a whole other raw nerve that exists with the very concept of betas and white knighting in general that I won’t go into, save to ask:

What is your assessment of your own reaction here?

Vote 1 Shaunee. (Performing name, like a dancer)
She has gone further than the Raiders this year, she will be seeing finals action.
Barcham and Devils, keep going, you two know stuff that I don’t.
Perfume Box Raiderette……… the visual.
Imagine the Perfume Box Raiders…when they have the women in league round…the Pink Perfume Box Raiders

Barcham said :

Accusations of “white knighting” is how the selfish rationalise the kindness of others. They personally can’t imagine showing any kind of compassion towards anyone else without a clear idea of a reward, so when they see someone standing up for someone or something that doesn’t obviously benefit that person they wonder “What’s their angle?”

It’s rather sad in a way.

In their world view, decent people must just not exist.

Well said that man.

poetix said :

Which is exactly why I will continue to criticise you for starting so many threads in which women feature only or primarily as sex objects, even if you are far too concerned with appearing zany and interesting to change your behaviour. It’s a weird hobby, but someone has to do it.

Of course I agree that calling vulnerable people horrible things, or being cruel about a particular person’s name, is unacceptable in a different way.

I will state in my defence that I did not pick this story, it was handed to me. I care not for sports in general, and cheerleading is no exception. However it does fit the bill of a local interest story, thus it gets run.

You may object to the treatment or idea of cheerleaders in general, and you would not be alone, but that’s a whole other discussion. However I will state that I do find the idea of a cheerleading popularity contest like this to be a bit ridiculous.

I thought I demonstrated my thoughts on the absurdity of a cheerleader contest that doesn’t actually involve cheerleading quite well. That bit about the site listing her love of Goodberrys and a YouTube clip of someone laughing way too much while playing Call of Juarez, I mean what does that have to do with cheerleading?

Perhaps I’m too subtle in my fun making.

I wasn’t joking about feeling competitive about random things though.

I want Shaunee to win, and hopefully this story throws a few votes her way.

What other threads have I started that treat women like objects?

devils_advocate said :

One point I am now confused about, though: Do you actually dispute the existence of white knighting behaviour? Or is it the term you object to?

I object to belittling the behaviour of people trying to do noble things via terms like “white knighting”. I object to the fact that the term is a way for people to dismiss the opinions and actions of others by perverting them and making them into crude pick up attempts.

Here we have someone who is standing up against bullying for no personal gain, and seemingly for no reason other than it’s the right thing to do.

That kind of behaviour is to be respected.

You dismissed and belittled this by terming it “white knighting”, turning what was a noble act into a humorous joke where some beta male is trying to look cool for the ladies. This is something I see a lot, and the idea of shaming people for doing the right thing is something I find appalling.

Barcham said :

….

I think it’s always worth calling out bad behaviour when we see it, even if it will rarely change the behaviour of the person you are calling out.

….

Which is exactly why I will continue to criticise you for starting so many threads in which women feature only or primarily as sex objects, even if you are far too concerned with appearing zany and interesting to change your behaviour. It’s a weird hobby, but someone has to do it.

Of course I agree that calling vulnerable people horrible things, or being cruel about a particular person’s name, is unacceptable in a different way.

Barcham said :

Maybe when this is blown over and you are no longer on the defensive, you’ll stop and think about what you’re actually saying when you call someone a white knight, and maybe you’ll agree that it’s not a nice thing to say, and that it’s representative of a larger problem with the way people in society view each other and their actions.

Probably not, but maybe.

As a rule, I don’t usually tend to deal in normative statements. My statements were positive, in the sense I was merely pointing out what I observed. As for whether white-knighting itself – or calling someone out on it – is “nice”, well I don’t have a strong view on that. It is fairly clear you do, given by the sheer walls of text you seem prepared to write on the topic.

One point I am now confused about, though: Do you actually dispute the existence of white knighting behaviour? Or is it the term you object to?

devils_advocate said :

Barcham said :

Derpderpderp

Assumptions aren’t the same as generalisations.

My observation was specific to the context. To illustrate by counterexample, I wouldn’t accuse sisters of the Missionaries of Charity of whiteknighting.

The extent to which jimmies have been rustled ITT is at least consistent with my hypothesis, if not directly probative.

Again you miss the point and fail to defend your actions.

Yes, I do understand the context. I spoke generally yes, I know that. Move on. It doesn’t make what I said inaccurate nor inapplicable to your behaviour. My point was clearly made, you are deliberately avoiding addressing it because you know you can’t actually justify why you thought name calling was an alright thing to do.

“derpderpderp”

Wonderful way to counter accusations of childish behaviour.

Look I know you’re not going to turn around in this argument and actually think about what you said and what the implications are. You’re stuck on the defensive trying to prove me wrong about something has no bearing to what my point is.

You obviously will not (or can not) listen to me, and I really wasn’t expecting you too.

I think it’s always worth calling out bad behaviour when we see it, even if it will rarely change the behaviour of the person you are calling out.

However the words I’ve said here are not just for you. They are also for other people. People who aren’t stuck on the defensive, so maybe they’ll listen and think twice before using terms like “white knight” in the future in a dismissive way.

Maybe when this is blown over and you are no longer on the defensive, you’ll stop and think about what you’re actually saying when you call someone a white knight, and maybe you’ll agree that it’s not a nice thing to say, and that it’s representative of a larger problem with the way people in society view each other and their actions.

Probably not, but maybe.

Wow. All I did was to indicate my disapproval of school yard name calling, but I enjoyed the segway.

For the record, I’m not trying to get in her knickers. She’s seems attractive enough but not really my type at all; besides I’m happily married and have no desire to put my relatively comfortably life in jeopardy over a young lass. I’m sure I would have seen her at the footy, although my 5 yr old son likes the ‘shaky girls’.

As for beta male. It’s all relative isn’t it? I’m sure I’d be alpha to a large percentage of males (252 A Grade rugby league games) yet beta to a smaller percentage, but I’m not going to get into a discussion about hegemonic masculinity.

I stand by my accusation that it says more about those who stoop to derision of the lass over her name than the lass herself.

Barcham said :

Derpderpderp

Assumptions aren’t the same as generalisations.

My observation was specific to the context. To illustrate by counterexample, I wouldn’t accuse sisters of the Missionaries of Charity of whiteknighting.

The extent to which jimmies have been rustled ITT is at least consistent with my hypothesis, if not directly probative.

Aeek said :

devils_advocate said :

beta

In the modern software world (what else is there?) alpha is barely functional release, beta is somewhat more mature but still inclined to crashing and other undesirable outcomes. Josh Ferguson is clearly a beta when in the presence of his alpha Todd Carney.

So women should wait for the LTS release male?

Is she running for a senate seat?

If so I’ll vote for her…

I’ll second that coz those bloody senators are a very dreary lot and some booty shakin’ complete with pom poms will liven the place up..

amusing to note that the discussion was originally about voting for a young lass who is up for the gong of cheerleader of the year, but ended up as an education session regarding occams razor, which I had to look up.

Barcham has valid points, considering that shaunee didn’t choose her name and that there are worse names out there like “apple”.

Barcham said :

devils_advocate said :

You’ve attributed to me a generalisation which I did not make. I made a context-specific observation.

Have you heard of ockham’s razor?

Ockham’s razor?

You want to start talking about assumptions?

Really?

This all started because you suggested someone was white knighting with no evidence of their intentions, and now you play a “don’t just assume things about me!” card?

Maybe rethink your line argument here buddy…

Ahh well if you insist.

Firstly Ockham’s Razor as a principal is a suggestion not a hard and fast rule of logic making it a poor trump card in an argument, and secondly it would only apply if you’d offered up a rival suggestion that calling someone a beta male white knight wasn’t a disgusting thing to do.

Ockham’s razor suggests that the hypothesis that uses the least assumptions is more likely to be the correct one. So where’s your rival hypothesis that makes less assumptions that mine?

I stand by my hypothesis that making fun of someone for doing something nice speaks more poorly of you than it does them. Hell I also stand by my “generalisation” that assuming someone is doing something just to impress a pretty girl when there is no evidence to suggest that, means that you yourself would be unlikely to do anything kind unless there was a pretty girl or some other incentive in it for you.

So please tell me your hypothesis on why suggesting that someone is a “beta male just trying to impress pretty ladies” doesn’t make you dismissive and presumptuous.

Ockham’s razor indeed.

Have any other internet argument trump cards up your sleeve? Want to throw out a “burden of proof’ or an accusation of a ‘straw man’ while you’re blindly swinging around logic theory terms in an attempt to defend your childish behaviour?

At least my assumptions about you are based on your behaviour, what about Alderney’s behaviour made you assume he was a beta male who behaves subserviently to pretty women?

Was it that he called people out on their behaviour?

Well I’m calling you out on yours so tell me, who am I “engaging in obsequious behaviour towards”?

Am I trying to impress a someone, or am I just doing it because I think your behaviour and attitude are a bit crap?

Quite some impressive jousting going on although it would appear that the white knight has knocked the black knight off his mount and ridden off with the fair maiden..

devils_advocate said :

beta

In the modern software world (what else is there?) alpha is barely functional release, beta is somewhat more mature but still inclined to crashing and other undesirable outcomes. Josh Ferguson is clearly a beta when in the presence of his alpha Todd Carney.

devils_advocate said :

You’ve attributed to me a generalisation which I did not make. I made a context-specific observation.

Have you heard of ockham’s razor?

Ockham’s razor?

You want to start talking about assumptions?

Really?

This all started because you suggested someone was white knighting with no evidence of their intentions, and now you play a “don’t just assume things about me!” card?

Maybe rethink your line argument here buddy…

Ahh well if you insist.

Firstly Ockham’s Razor as a principal is a suggestion not a hard and fast rule of logic making it a poor trump card in an argument, and secondly it would only apply if you’d offered up a rival suggestion that calling someone a beta male white knight wasn’t a disgusting thing to do.

Ockham’s razor suggests that the hypothesis that uses the least assumptions is more likely to be the correct one. So where’s your rival hypothesis that makes less assumptions that mine?

I stand by my hypothesis that making fun of someone for doing something nice speaks more poorly of you than it does them. Hell I also stand by my “generalisation” that assuming someone is doing something just to impress a pretty girl when there is no evidence to suggest that, means that you yourself would be unlikely to do anything kind unless there was a pretty girl or some other incentive in it for you.

So please tell me your hypothesis on why suggesting that someone is a “beta male just trying to impress pretty ladies” doesn’t make you dismissive and presumptuous.

Ockham’s razor indeed.

Have any other internet argument trump cards up your sleeve? Want to throw out a “burden of proof’ or an accusation of a ‘straw man’ while you’re blindly swinging around logic theory terms in an attempt to defend your childish behaviour?

At least my assumptions about you are based on your behaviour, what about Alderney’s behaviour made you assume he was a beta male who behaves subserviently to pretty women?

Was it that he called people out on their behaviour?

Well I’m calling you out on yours so tell me, who am I “engaging in obsequious behaviour towards”?

Am I trying to impress a someone, or am I just doing it because I think your behaviour and attitude are a bit crap?

Barcham said :

devils_advocate said :

Barcham said :

devils_advocate said :

Alderney said :

Bloody hell lads, she didn’t choose her name.

Abuse of the lowest order and totally unwarranted.

Strong white knighting is strong.

Accusations of “white knighting” is how the selfish rationalise the kindness of others. They personally can’t imagine showing any kind of compassion towards anyone else without a clear idea of a reward, so when they see someone standing up for someone or something that doesn’t obviously benefit that person they wonder “What’s their angle?”

It’s rather sad in a way.

In their world view, decent people must just not exist.

Incorrect. White knighting is much more specific. It refers to beta males engaging in obsequious behaviour towards attractive females to no end. You will rarely see white knighting used to describe other charitable acts outside this context.

But thanks for trying.

I know what a white night is.

The fact that it is only used used in specific circumstances changes nothing about what I said.

It’s based on the assumption that the “white knight” is only being kind because he is attracted to the woman and wants to seem heroic/kind/cool. It’s the assumption that people must be looking for something when they do something that doesn’t immediately benefit themselves.

Again, it speaks volumes to about the accusers understanding of why people may choose be kind to another, or stand up and say that they find something inappropriate.

Alderney may be speaking up because he/she was made fun of for their name? Maybe they know someone called Shaunee so they feel like they should defend the name? Or maybe.. just maybe… they have no ulterior motive and they simply don’t think it’s cool to make fun of someone for something they can’t really help.

Calling them a white night is dismissive and presumptuous… and I won’t even start on calling someone a “beta male”.

My point stands.

Also, you’re welcome.

You’ve attributed to me a generalisation which I did not make. I made a context-specific observation.

Have you heard of ockham’s razor?

devils_advocate said :

Barcham said :

devils_advocate said :

Alderney said :

Bloody hell lads, she didn’t choose her name.

Abuse of the lowest order and totally unwarranted.

Strong white knighting is strong.

Accusations of “white knighting” is how the selfish rationalise the kindness of others. They personally can’t imagine showing any kind of compassion towards anyone else without a clear idea of a reward, so when they see someone standing up for someone or something that doesn’t obviously benefit that person they wonder “What’s their angle?”

It’s rather sad in a way.

In their world view, decent people must just not exist.

Incorrect. White knighting is much more specific. It refers to beta males engaging in obsequious behaviour towards attractive females to no end. You will rarely see white knighting used to describe other charitable acts outside this context.

But thanks for trying.

I know what a white night is.

The fact that it is only used used in specific circumstances changes nothing about what I said.

It’s based on the assumption that the “white knight” is only being kind because he is attracted to the woman and wants to seem heroic/kind/cool. It’s the assumption that people must be looking for something when they do something that doesn’t immediately benefit themselves.

Again, it speaks volumes to about the accusers understanding of why people may choose be kind to another, or stand up and say that they find something inappropriate.

Alderney may be speaking up because he/she was made fun of for their name? Maybe they know someone called Shaunee so they feel like they should defend the name? Or maybe.. just maybe… they have no ulterior motive and they simply don’t think it’s cool to make fun of someone for something they can’t really help.

Calling them a white night is dismissive and presumptuous… and I won’t even start on calling someone a “beta male”.

My point stands.

Also, you’re welcome.

Barcham said :

devils_advocate said :

Alderney said :

Bloody hell lads, she didn’t choose her name.

Abuse of the lowest order and totally unwarranted.

Strong white knighting is strong.

Accusations of “white knighting” is how the selfish rationalise the kindness of others. They personally can’t imagine showing any kind of compassion towards anyone else without a clear idea of a reward, so when they see someone standing up for someone or something that doesn’t obviously benefit that person they wonder “What’s their angle?”

It’s rather sad in a way.

In their world view, decent people must just not exist.

Incorrect. White knighting is much more specific. It refers to beta males engaging in obsequious behaviour towards attractive females to no end. You will rarely see white knighting used to describe other charitable acts outside this context.

But thanks for trying.

Click on the link and sheck out the other names.

devils_advocate said :

Alderney said :

Bloody hell lads, she didn’t choose her name.

Abuse of the lowest order and totally unwarranted.

Strong white knighting is strong.

Accusations of “white knighting” is how the selfish rationalise the kindness of others. They personally can’t imagine showing any kind of compassion towards anyone else without a clear idea of a reward, so when they see someone standing up for someone or something that doesn’t obviously benefit that person they wonder “What’s their angle?”

It’s rather sad in a way.

In their world view, decent people must just not exist.

Shaunee?

I wonder if her parents come from New Zealand?

Alderney said :

Bloody hell lads, she didn’t choose her name.

Abuse of the lowest order and totally unwarranted.

Strong white knighting is strong.

ScienceRules said :

Henry82 said :

Alderney said :

Abuse of the lowest order

You must be new to the internet if you think this is ‘abuse’

+1

Sorry Alderney but stereotypes exist for a reason. I’ve no doubt she’s a lovely person but her parents should be flogged. By choosing a name like this they’ve condemned her to a life as either a check out chick or Raiders cheerleader.

That may be so, but to actually articulate it is lowbrow.

Thoughts are free, but actions come with a cost.

I’d suggest that to make such a statement says more about the person who is making it than the person to whom it is directed.

Henry82 said :

Alderney said :

Abuse of the lowest order

You must be new to the internet if you think this is ‘abuse’

+1

Sorry Alderney but stereotypes exist for a reason. I’ve no doubt she’s a lovely person but her parents should be flogged. By choosing a name like this they’ve condemned her to a life as either a check out chick or Raiders cheerleader.

Alderney said :

Abuse of the lowest order

You must be new to the internet if you think this is ‘abuse’

Alderney said :

Bloody hell lads, she didn’t choose her name.

Abuse of the lowest order and totally unwarranted.

Ya in like Flynn now.

Bloody hell lads, she didn’t choose her name.

Abuse of the lowest order and totally unwarranted.

Pork Hunt said :

bundah said :

Apparently Shaunee is a derivative of Shawna(English) and pronounced sore knee in Chinese..

Any relation to Sum Ting Wong?

Nah she related to Nat Ting Wong..

bundah said :

Apparently Shaunee is a derivative of Shawna(English) and pronounced sore knee in Chinese..

Any relation to Sum Ting Wong?

Apparently Shaunee is a derivative of Shawna(English) and pronounced sore knee in Chinese..

doesn’t vote rigging require nudes?

Solidarity said :

Voted because I feel sorry for her, who in their right mind would call their kid Shaunee?

Oh bloody hell, I’m so glad someone said it. Thought it was just me for a moment…

Perfume Box Raiderette Shaunee….

Corporate sponsor naming rights, or inappropriate comment on personal hygiene?

I’d give her one, ( a vote that is.)

Voted because I feel sorry for her, who in their right mind would call their kid Shaunee?

Can anyone else recall the bleak days before Barcham added gravitas to this site?