Why do SJWs think I'm obligated to kiss their ass?

Post Reply New Topic

Claiming victimhood, shifting the burden of proof, affective fallacies and so forth are not (at least in my mind) very effective means of challenging my viewpoints or at the very least tackling what should be for you a very deflatable OP from Aaendi.

Without wanting to fall into the logical fallacy trap myself, I wish to state you are appealing to emotion rather than reason.

In short, it's fine if you think people who label anyone as SJW's are misogynistic asshats, but sweeping generalisations and poor means of debating them apply to all people.

I tend to strongly support egalitarianism. I find the term 'SJW' to be nonsense, it's merely the worst insult imagined. Instead of complaining about 'SJWs' maybe it'd be fair to call the ones one disagrees with specifically what one believes them to be instead of a blanket term - especially when two 'SJWs' who just agreed on one topic might well be happy to tear into each other on another one. Call them out for misandry, don't just distort the term feminist or you'll sound like the guys who feel gender equality is inherently negative. Call them out for racism, not 'reverse racism', if you can make the case. Call them out for having negative attitudes towards heterosexuality if you feel the case exists, instead of coining absurd analogous terms like 'heterophobia'. (Note, none of those observations are explicitly regarding yourself or Yippy)

If you feel those advocating what they feel is egalitarianism are going too far, it makes more sense to spell that out for them, in the language they use, then to simply adopt the language the people they're actually criticizing use. Unfortunately, this ends up playing into polarization and creating a false dichotomy. If both parties are in favour of egalitarianism, it makes more sense to argue that point than to throw milder versions of the arguments used by those who oppose egalitarianism.

The wording we use often plays a big role in 'tribal identities' and it serves well to speak to people you wish to persuade in 'their language'. I won't pretend I'm always effective at implementing this notion, but I've noticed I'm much more successful when I do then when I fail to.

I can't agree that those intent on preserving privilege even if it means continuing to treat those lacking those forms of privileged as inferior and enforcing their inferiority as equal to being overly zealous in identifying and criticizing it. In this specific context there are a host of legitimate issues for feminists to criticize and if they cause some hurt feelings that's a small trade off if it means those issues are being examined critically.

Picking on feminism for a moment, there's feminists who claim all penetrative heterosexual intercourse is rape because we're socially conditioned to treat it as normal. It's a fair point to raise, but it still strips heterosexual women of their agency - and that's why even the majority of feminists will ultimately disagree. Someone still needs to point it out to force society to consider it and pick it apart as incorrect though. Dismissing it out of hand, insulting the person making the argument, getting offended or responding with violence are all inappropriate responses.

What are you talking about? I responded to a question from CockneyRebel. It had nothing to do with you or Aaendi or your positions. I even quoted CockneyRebel so everyone would know who and what I was addressing.

Thank you.
There are issues both sides of the coin that warrant discussion and addressing, and extremism isn't the solution. It ultimately defeats and goes against the purpose of what the discussions claim they wish to achieve.

@Yippy straws, let them go.

Again, wtf? Why do you persist being rude, when I wasn't even talking to you in the first place?

Unfortunately, even the most timid and mild feminist positions often seem to be labeled as "extremism".

This confuses me. What do you mean??

Comm on guys let's debate the ideas and not people. It is unkind for either of you to name call and single people put.

Lets all chill out and agree to disagree

I think it's a joke. (?)



Very Special Note to Spectrum: I'm talking to Alliekit right now. This post is not about you.

One thing about this debate is.. I don't get why it's L&D material.
If you don't want to date "SJW's" and you don't like them, why would you vent about them in a dating section? Surely the whole thing about SJW's is they take super-political stances. So why isn't this in PPR?

I know I made a thread recently about political leanings in L&D but truth be told your political leanings can leave you very isolated both socially and dating wise depending on your views and where you live.

This on the other hand seems more like a vent rather than about dating.

Speaking of political leanings and dating:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtk4pys5NuE

Note: The following post was written at 2045.

It's either an empty joke or the joke is 'SJWs = Nazis'.




Mostly it seems to be complaining that 'SJWs' don't demonstrate enough empathy over how this affects OP. While I don't sympathize, I can empathize that if you don't believe you're doing anything wrong, or are semi-aware, but unable to detect the behaviour as it occurs and therefore unable to correct it that constantly being told 'you're causing it, stop causing it and things will get better' (possibly with escalating pissing matches growing out of that conversation every time it happens) eventually you will be very resentful towards the people you consider at fault, or at the very least to be dumping salt in the wound when you desire support.

If your dog lacks bowel control or has some other issue causing him to be unable to let you know he needs let out, rubbing his nose in the mess isn't likely to housebreak him but will make both parties frustrated and resentful.

Postscript: Whoever invented captcha needs flayed alive.

SJW's are vile little creatures. Just ignore them until they shrivel up and die, they feed off of attention.

How quaint, the little troll begging for attention is accusing others of being needy for attention. You're sincerely amusing.

Decent people they are most certainly not. Disagree with them, they find out where you live and send death threats. It's not uncommon to see them find the place of employment of dissenters and get their job revoked. I've seen them talk about how making false rape claims and beating up men is justified because, somehow, men run developed society.

They are dangerous. Most people don't understand that because SJWs rally under feminism, which USED to be about equality. And it's not just a few, it's most of them, all as part of a new wave. This third wave is cancerous, and ineffective in the name of equality seeing as they constantly deny that men have bad s**t happen in their lives because they're men (like custody cases, crime and arrest rates, etc.), though I wish not to imply women necessarily have it easy either.

I myself now identify as egalitarian in gender politics (I am by no means a red-piller, MRI, Meninist, etc., they are no better), along with many pissed off men and women like me.

I'm not saying you have to be an egalitarian, but SJWs are dangerous, as anyone with a big enough victim complex falls into the trap.

Last edited by Galymcd on 05 Jul 2016, 12:46 am, edited 1 time in total.

You lose all credibility when you insist feminism "used to be about equality" as though it no longer is. A few radical misandrists try to hide their hate behind feminism, but the majority of feminists criticize those positions. Feminism consists of a number of schools of thought and conflating what a few radical misandrists who self-identify as feminists with what is typical of feminists is either deeply dishonest or deeply ignorant. Take your pick.

As for lack of decency, you seem to ignore actual violence committed by misogynists, homophobes and racists to in order to pretend it's all one sided. Keep playing martyr, eventually someone will indulge you.