Worst of Social Justice

[niam2023]

I confess, it was I. I practiced Hoodoo and placed a hoodoo on these two threads, so as to voodoo this thread into being three times longer with a spell of Hoodoo.

So I hoodwinked you all with hoodoo.

Hoodoo.

[Witchyjoshy]

I confess, it was I. I practiced Hoodoo and placed a hoodoo on these two threads, so as to voodoo this thread into being three times longer with a spell of Hoodoo.

So I hoodwinked you all with hoodoo.

Hoodoo.

Do you have friends on the other side?

[Thejebusfire]

I think it's because discussing the loud vocal (and very crazy) minority is more interesting for some.

Like this shit for example:

[Askold]

I'm still not convinced that these people are the minority in SJW.

[wrightway]

Online they do seem to be the majority. A quick search of tumblr, livejournal, twitter, etc will pull up a lot more crazy than sane.

I'd like to believe that offline the SJA outnumber the SJW.

[Sigmaleph]

I'm still not convinced that these people are the minority in SJW.

"SJW" (Social justice warrior) specifically refers to this kind of people. The general term for people who care about social justice and are not necessarily insane is Social Justice Advocate, or SJA.

That being said, the crazy ones are the minority. Some people might discuss where the line goes from insane to reasonable, but still.

[Art Vandelay]

I'm still not convinced that these people are the minority in SJW.

"SJW" (Social justice warrior) specifically refers to this kind of people. The general term for people who care about social justice and are not necessarily insane is Social Justice Advocate, or SJA.

That being said, the crazy ones are the minority. Some people might discuss where the line goes from insane to reasonable, but still.

I don't know. Even the supposed Sane Majority of the internet social justice crowd have some rather wacky opinions.

[gyeonghwa]

If you look to Reddit as an example of men, you'd think that the majority of the men on the internet were vile creepers who force themselves on women. If you look at any Dawkin's related forums, you'd think the majority of internet atheists were sexists racists scum bags that advocate the obliteration of anyone with a religious mindset. If you look at any radfem sites, you'd think the majority of internet feminist were rabid transphobe incapable of understanding that their concept of gender and sexuality doesn't exist cross-culturally.

But then you'll go into a defensive mode and exclaim "well Reddit doesn't represent all of us", "not all atheist are clueless", and you'd be right. So why is it that you look at tumblr and exclaim "that's the vast majority of social justice activists"? Especially when there's the Best of Social Justice thread showing their idea isn't as unfounded and inane as you preclude it to be.

[QueenofHearts]

If you look to Reddit as an example of men, you'd think that the majority of the men on the internet were vile creepers who force themselves on women. If you look at any Dawkin's related forums, you'd think the majority of internet atheists were sexists racists scum bags that advocate the obliteration of anyone with a religious mindset. If you look at any radfem sites, you'd think the majority of internet feminist were rabid transphobe incapable of understanding that their concept of gender and sexuality doesn't exist cross-culturally.

But then you'll go into a defensive mode and exclaim "well Reddit doesn't represent all of us", "not all atheist are clueless", and you'd be right. So why is it that you look at tumblr and exclaim "that's the vast majority of social justice activists"? Especially when there's the Best of Social Justice thread showing their idea isn't as unfounded and inane as you preclude it to be.

Cause it's fun to poke at minorities

[Sigmaleph]

I'm still not convinced that these people are the minority in SJW.

"SJW" (Social justice warrior) specifically refers to this kind of people. The general term for people who care about social justice and are not necessarily insane is Social Justice Advocate, or SJA.

That being said, the crazy ones are the minority. Some people might discuss where the line goes from insane to reasonable, but still.

I don't know. Even the supposed Sane Majority of the internet social justice crowd have some rather wacky opinions.

I don't agree with everything the self-identified social justice crowd* says, including the sane ones, but I think there's a significant distinction to make between that and the sort of thing quoted above.



*I'm not sure where "social justice advocates" end and "people who are against sexism/racism/etc" begin, I'm using self-identification as a simple line of separation

[Shane for Wax]

If you look to Reddit as an example of men, you'd think that the majority of the men on the internet were vile creepers who force themselves on women. If you look at any Dawkin's related forums, you'd think the majority of internet atheists were sexists racists scum bags that advocate the obliteration of anyone with a religious mindset. If you look at any radfem sites, you'd think the majority of internet feminist were rabid transphobe incapable of understanding that their concept of gender and sexuality doesn't exist cross-culturally.

But then you'll go into a defensive mode and exclaim "well Reddit doesn't represent all of us", "not all atheist are clueless", and you'd be right. So why is it that you look at tumblr and exclaim "that's the vast majority of social justice activists"? Especially when there's the Best of Social Justice thread showing their idea isn't as unfounded and inane as you preclude it to be.

It has never not bothered me that apparently people are able to (usually) separate radfems from your average feminist, as well as atheists like Dawkins from your average atheist, and MRA Redditors from your average redditor but once you hit a point where people are fighting for more than just "gay marriage" people find it almost impossible to find a line of separation between SJW and SJA. Even with the firm evidence on these forums that it is indeed a vocal minority same as fundies are of Christianity and Islam.

Someone please explain to me all this shit I’m seeing putting down allies.. Idek what to call it… Ally shaming?

You're missing a word 'shitty'. People are calling out shitty allies.

[Witchyjoshy]

I'm still not convinced that these people are the minority in SJW.

"SJW" (Social justice warrior) specifically refers to this kind of people. The general term for people who care about social justice and are not necessarily insane is Social Justice Advocate, or SJA.

That being said, the crazy ones are the minority. Some people might discuss where the line goes from insane to reasonable, but still.

I don't know. Even the supposed Sane Majority of the internet social justice crowd have some rather wacky opinions.

I guess it's pretty easy to sit here and condemn other people for stuff that you have no personal involvement in, right?

[Art Vandelay]

If you look to Reddit as an example of men, you'd think that the majority of the men on the internet were vile creepers who force themselves on women. If you look at any Dawkin's related forums, you'd think the majority of internet atheists were sexists racists scum bags that advocate the obliteration of anyone with a religious mindset. If you look at any radfem sites, you'd think the majority of internet feminist were rabid transphobe incapable of understanding that their concept of gender and sexuality doesn't exist cross-culturally.

But then you'll go into a defensive mode and exclaim "well Reddit doesn't represent all of us", "not all atheist are clueless", and you'd be right. So why is it that you look at tumblr and exclaim "that's the vast majority of social justice activists"? Especially when there's the Best of Social Justice thread showing their idea isn't as unfounded and inane as you preclude it to be.

It's been proven time and time again that ideas like "only whites can be racist" and "'cultural appropriation' is bad" are indeed both majority opinions in that particular crowd. Just because some are not loud and hysterical about it doesn't mean that these views are any less irrational.

[gyeonghwa]

If you look to Reddit as an example of men, you'd think that the majority of the men on the internet were vile creepers who force themselves on women. If you look at any Dawkin's related forums, you'd think the majority of internet atheists were sexists racists scum bags that advocate the obliteration of anyone with a religious mindset. If you look at any radfem sites, you'd think the majority of internet feminist were rabid transphobe incapable of understanding that their concept of gender and sexuality doesn't exist cross-culturally.

But then you'll go into a defensive mode and exclaim "well Reddit doesn't represent all of us", "not all atheist are clueless", and you'd be right. So why is it that you look at tumblr and exclaim "that's the vast majority of social justice activists"? Especially when there's the Best of Social Justice thread showing their idea isn't as unfounded and inane as you preclude it to be.

It's been proven time and time again that ideas like "only whites can be racist" and "'cultural appropriation' is bad" are indeed both majority opinions in that particular crowd. Just because some are not loud and hysterical about it doesn't mean that these views are any less irrational.

Oh? Show me where that's the majority opinion. And also, it sounds like you're just looking for a reason to make yourself superior to these people. Talk about a pathetic attempt at boosting your own ego.

Also we've already had the discussion about different views of what racism means that didn't rely on what people like Riley thinks it means, but I guess we're gonna just write that off as irrational right? Political incorrectness gone mad, I tells ya.

[Art Vandelay]

Oh? Show me where that's the majority opinion.

I suppose I can dig up Smurfette's old Tumblr thread if you want. Or perhaps one of those Flame and Burn threads in which you yourself were quite vehemently pushing that idea.

Also we've already had the discussion about different views of what racism means that didn't rely on what people like Riley thinks it means, but I guess we're gonna just write that off as irrational right? Political incorrectness gone mad, I tells ya.

The thing is, language doesn't work that way. Words have commonly accepted definitions which, believe it or not, you can't just arbitrarily redefine them to suit your own views and still expect to be taken seriously.