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

Post Reply New Topic

Was wondering when you'd show up.

The problem with your statement is that the definition of "extremist" among a lot of people who unironically use the term "SJW" seems broad enough to cover pretty much the entire social justice movement.

So it's still basically useless and has the characteristics of a dog-whistle term.

It's the best I've got, and like I said, I'm making a good faith effort to separate the objectionable element from the group as a whole, which is more than can be said for most. Really, you and yours should be more concerned than anyone about the rise of militant social justice, it drives people away from your ideology in droves and robs you of any moral high ground you may have once had. You're officially on the side of the segregationists and the censors now, I'd think that would concern you more.

Where are you finding all these social justice warriors?

In my life I don't encounter very many of them.

You'll find people with strong opinions online but they aren't necessarily SJW's. I'm not an SJW. And I don't think I've ever met one in my life. I can be opinionated but I'm not an SJW.

SJW is one of the biggest recent jokes. It's like people think they are worse than the Nazis or something, lol.

L_Holmes,

You keep bringing up this no true Scotsman thing. Well if you want I could ask you to explain all the nasty things people who use the term "SJW" as a slur do. Check out some white supremacist sites, they use the term as a blanket statement for anyone is isn't practically a nazi. Then there's gamergate when a whole host of people rallied around that term to harass women, threaten them to the point where they left their homes out of fear, forced to cancel a talk at a college because of threats and doxxing people they don't like.

That fallacy doesn't work with such large groups of people. The people in theses social movements usually come to the same conclusions without direct contact with each other so there is no way to vet someone or even control who associates with that movement. So any nut job can claim affiliations to any movement they want.

Yes there are a**holes who give these movements a bad name but they are few and far between when you take in the size of the groups they claim to represent.

And as someone mentioned, there is no real definition for that term. Ask 10 different people and you'll get 10 different answers. So with all these people using the term "SJW" to represent anyone who isn't a complete racist, how should I go about determining what definition someone is using when confronted with that term?

It seems you triggered SJWs

Good for you

Here's a less biased account of the situation L_Holmes was describing.

I find it a rather useful term, folks who throw it around as an insult identify where their sympathies lay. The term is rarely used in that way by people sympathetic to various social justice causes. That's not to say everyone who uses it in that way is sympathetic to causes that are explicitly opposed to furthering social justice causes - but if someone addresses others as comrade you can be forgiven for assuming they're a Marxist even if they're not.

If one adopts a specific tribal identifier they should accept that they will be identified with said tribe. Since adopting the identifier is voluntary, one can choose to disassociate from it as well.

@Dox47 - Pointing out excesses as though they happen in a vacuum isn't really taking into account the whole picture. Yes, there's a few folks who are overzealous - but their degree of over-zealousness has yet to match that of some of their opponents. Pretending the two are equal or that the causes are equal is misleading and creates an appearance of sinister motives regardless of what one's genuine motives are. Maybe it's just naively giving cover, maybe it's intentional because one is sympathetic. Considering how many bigots go out of their way to conceal those opinions in 'polite company' it's not entirely an unfair assumption.

The way I see it, the modern SJW movement is basically a more rabid version of the political correctness movement, and the worst thing about it is the way they've appropriated the cause of "social justice" when in fact they often promote the very opposite. I've never cared for the political correctness movement, and that goes for its modern incarnation too.

The Manic Street Preachers wrote this great song called "P.C.P." way back in 1994 which spoke out about the hypocrisy of the PC movement, and over 20 years later I think it still applies. What's interesting is that on the very same album it's from, "The Holy Bible", they speak out against all kinds of social injustice, but they never do so in a "PC" fashion. In fact it is a very "un-PC" album, containing opinions that even I find challenging, and I give it kudos for this.

http://genius.com/Manic-street-preachers-pcp-lyrics

When I think of "social justice warrior" (Yes, I haven't heard the term at all until about a year), I think of somebody who seeks to change the status-quo social dynamic.

I find that a laudable goal, if one is not bombastic about it.

Sometimes, I find that people who are politicized in this way get offended over things which, objectively, are not offensive to many people.

I suppose not everything needs to change.

I agree. Some things should remain the same, in my opinion.

The whole point of bringing up the no true Scotsman fallacy is exactly BECAUSE it is a large group of people. So therefore one cannot claim that these are not true feminists, social justice advocates etc., because there are many differing opinions within the groups that identify as such, and even different definitions for the words themselves. The fact is that a large group of the people who call themselves social justice advocates are extremists, who believe that any action is justified so long as it's in the name of equality. You could argue that they are not a majority; in my opinion that's not true, but I'll admit I'm not sure of that (I don't know how you would even determine their numbers). But they are still a large group with influence (a lot more than any Neo Nazi/white supremacist group has, certainly).

These are the people I'm referring to when I say SJW, because that is the most common term for them and it is often used exclusively for those people. I don't really care how Neo Nazis use it because I don't use their definition, assuming they even have one. Their use of it is totally irrelevant. I'm referring to a very specific kind of person when I say it, and I think that should be clear by now. The way I see it, there are really only two accurate and commonly used definitions: 1. a person who advocates and is an activist for social justice. 2. a person involved with the more radical, extremist social justice groups. I use the second, since I have seen it used a lot more often with that meaning. There are also people who just throw it around as an insult, but I am not one of them, so bringing it up in the context of this discussion is just another red herring.

Also, the things you say are being done by white racists, Gamergate etc. are also things that I could easily find many examples of SJWs doing. I don't doubt that I could find more. Milo Yiannopoulos has faced tons of people trying to censor him and prevent him from simply speaking to people at universities that gave him permission to be there. Go watch any of his videos, and you'll see SJWs shouting and shrieking over him, even though he always allows questions at the end. People have even run up on stage and threatened him with physical violence. In one such case at DePaul University, BLM protesters ran on stage, took the mic, and threatened to punch Milo in the face. He tried to keep the event going, but the security guards (ones that DePaul forced Milo to pay for) refused to remove them, despite that being the reason they were paid to be there.

Or there's the case of Melissa Click at Mizzou, who bullied a journalist out of a public space by encouraging protesters to physically remove him. He was simply trying to cover the protest, but Concerned Student 1950 claimed this was their "safe space" and that no journalists are allowed. It was all caught on video, and she was subsequently fired and charged with 3rd degree assault. Though that hasn't stopped the activists from rallying around her and treating her as if she's some sort of martyr.

The list goes on.

It's useful, because I know I can immediately dismiss the author as a moron.

It doesn't matter if you don't encounter very many in your life. That's anecdotal. For all we know you live in the woods or something. Besides, they are growing in numbers at universities much more than anywhere else (which should be cause for great concern, not dismissal), so if you aren't in a university it's unlikely you'd see them.

I live in a college town, and I for one actually did witness a probable SJW at Walgreens just a couple months ago. She was getting emotional and repeatedly calling her male coworker sexist. He simply asked how he is sexist, and she responded by calling him sexist again. That's anecdotal too, but it's an example of an SJW in real life (as if the internet doesn't influence the real world ).

I work with women who are lawyers and judges.

I rarely encounter SJW-type opinions--especially of the type where they get offended by a man opening a door for her or something.

I do encounter Feminists---but rarely of the "second-wave/third-wave" type. More the type that wants equal opportunity/results for women. They don't shove their beliefs down your throat. They'll express them in discussion, but in a reasoned, objective manner.

L_Holmes

If you don't care what definition of "SJW" that white supremacists use than why should I care what nut jobs say the definition of feminism is?

Which by the way is pretty clear:
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/defin ... h/feminism



http://time.com/3934980/right-wing-extr ... dangerous/

Find me a group of "SJW's" who can rival the threat caused by these other groups. The numbers are out the and white supremacists cause quantifiably more harm than these so called "SJW's"

To all the people claiming the term "SJW" is somehow meaningless, or that its use is grounds for dismissing someone rather than considering or refuting their argument: which term do you prefer? Regressive left? PC police? Something else? I don't care which term is used, as long as the meaning is understood.

But I know you aren't actually confused by what we mean, otherwise you'd simply ask, or realize that I and others here have already explained what we mean by it. Some people use words in stupid, unspecific or inaccurate ways, and some people don't. Just because some people out there use a term differently than I do does not mean I'm beholden to their definition, or that I have to remove the word from my vocabulary.

And holy s**t, how many times do I need to say RED HERRING? Regardless of whether there truly was confusion at first, the term has already been explained in the context of this thread several times, and you simply ignore both this and the actual topic of discussion. You're trying to force us into a corner where we can't even mention them, because we're not allowed to use any terms that describe them without you changing the subject to the term itself. That's dishonest and demonstrates your inability to form a coherent argument.