Worst of Social Justice

[Even Then]

But out of all the insults he could've used to signify his sincere anger... "cracker"? It almost makes me feel like he's not even sincere.

[Eiki-mun]

Can I be a cracker?

[davedan]

you're all fucking crackers.

[Sylvana]

Penultimate Pissant - it is not a false dichotomy at all. You either want to fight social inequality or you want it entrenched.

Um actually it is a false dichotomy. Those are not the only options or positions available. For example, there is ambivalence, there is a mix of wanting to fight social inequality on some fronts and entrenching it on others. As with everything in life there are areas of grey.

Us humans are inclined to simplify things, it helps us to identify, sort and label concepts. However the world is not that simple. there will always be inequality because nothing is ever truly equal to anything else. The extremes of social justice and the people who seek to entrench social norms both see the world too simplistically and fail to realize the truly staggering degree of nuance and difference that exists. As with so many things, there is a middle ground out there that is best for all, and in the journey to that middle ground the obnoxious shouting of the outliers helps us to remain focused on the boundaries of the problems. One must just remember to not fall into the trap of binary thought.

[davedan]

Hi Sylvana I disagree. Even when you have differing views depending on the issues, you are really for the entrenched position or against it. Most people would only be for the entrenched position when they believed it was not productive of injustice. Apathy and Ambivalence are really being for the entrenched position as they do not seek to change it.

Edit: Also I understand that there may be differing degrees of feeling and that the level of feeling about an issue is deeply nuanced. However that nuance really depends on how strongly for or against you are a particular issue of injustice. As inequalities lessen, people who are against a particular issue may change view. For instance many people would have been against excluding female suffrage. Once female suffrage was obtained, some people would have no longer been concerned about gendered inequality. Despite other inequalities still existing.

Finally I agree that inequality will always exist as it is part of our human experience.

[Svata]

you're all fucking crackers.

Haven't been fucking anyone for over a year now, thank you very much!

[Askold]

The thing is that you can support "Social Justice" and still think that many of the "Social Justice Warriors" are crazy.

We have this thread to highlight the times when bad things are supported in the name of SJW agenda and the other thread for the good things they do.

The link that Davedan posted was an example of things that need to be said and how victims of rape are often blamed as if they deserved it simply because they dressed in some sort of way or have previously been known to have sex... Which is actually thing that happens in Finnish court. The defender will try to use the victims history as a migitating factor by digging up facts to prove that she may have been promiscuous before or gotten drunk at some point of her life which for some reason makes it ok to rape her or something...

But saying that rape is a serious crime and victim blaming must stop and at the same time thinking that this:

Meanwhile in radfem land:

Q:So it's a bad thing to like down right rough sex?

A:you’re not a shitty person for it, but yeah asserting dominance over a woman via sex is rape.

Because a woman enjoying rough sex is totally akin to rape.

...Is over the board and also insults women because it claims that women who like rough sex are being raped but just don't realize (which leads to the concept of "we need to protect [insert group] because they are being oppressed but are too stupid to realize that they are being oppressed. Also kink-shaming.) it is not only wrong but harmful for those who try to fight against real rape victims.

[Ultimate Paragon]

I don't want to hear another peep out of you, loathsome cracker.  You've done quite enough.  Have you no decency?  Have you, at long last, no sense of decency?

Can you not talk like a knight of the fucking round table?

I was talking like Joseph Nye Welch.  You'd think a lawyer would know that.

...cracker? Out of all the words you use to express your sincere disappointment and loathing, you use "cracker"?

It's a pun on his self-appointed title, "Lord Cracker."

[The_Queen]

I don't want to hear another peep out of you, loathsome cracker.  You've done quite enough.  Have you no decency?  Have you, at long last, no sense of decency?

Can you not talk like a knight of the fucking round table?

I was talking like Joseph Nye Welch.  You'd think a lawyer would know that.

Never heard of him, sounds like a wanker

[mellenORL]

He was my grandfather's second cousin. Pompous talk he reserved for chiding Sen. McCarthy during questioning at the commie witch hunt trials.

[ironbite]

.......................................oh my fucking god does UP really think he's.....

Ironbite-where's my whiskey.

[mellenORL]

Of course he thinks like that! What other motivation besides cult-like obsession? His choice of avatar was a big hint from the beginning. Too bad all that energy is wasted on such a silly cause.

[Ultimate Paragon]

.......................................oh my fucking god does UP really think he's.....

Ironbite-where's my whiskey.

No, I just though it sounded good.

[Art Vandelay]

...How dare you.

Dave, I used to respect you.  Hell, for all our disagreements, I used to like you.  I was willing to put up with a lot.  But this?  This is just beyond the pale.

Implying that I would support those atrocities just because of my political views?  You have crossed the line.

I don't want to hear another peep out of you, loathsome cracker.  You've done quite enough.  Have you no decency?  Have you, at long last, no sense of decency?

That's not how this works, Ultington. You're supposed to remove your glove, slap him across the face with it and challenge him to a duel.

OctothorpeActuallyIt'sAboutEthicsInDueling

[Ultimate Paragon]

Let's talk about this somewhere else.  It's sending the thread wildly off the rails.

Here's a kindergarten teacher discriminating against male students because she thinks it'll help gender equality:

http://seattle.cbslocal.com/2015/11/19/kindergarten-teacher-bans-legos-for-boys-citing-gender-equity/

When you have an axe to grind with 5 year old children, it means you shouldn't be allowed near them.